# [Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock



## zhrooms

*Welcome* to the *Daily Memory Overclock* thread for *DDR4* memory on the *Z690* and *Z790* Chipset (*LGA1700*).

*Z690 Tools*
ASRock *Timing Configurator* (4.0.13)
ASUS *MemTweakIt* (20210910)
MSI *Dragon Ball* (1.0.0.08)
MSI *Dragon Power* (1.0.0.6)


----------



## Falkentyne

Already created. *Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Hmm, it seems nobody has tested DRR4 on Z690 and compared to DDR5. This could be VERY fun…


----------



## JoeRambo

cstkl1 said:


> lol.
> 
> think u havent seen tight high clock ddr5 1T daily


What is ironic, we haven't seen DDR4 RKL GEAR2 high clock dailies either. Wasn't that cause they were beaten by GEAR1 3600 ?


----------



## cstkl1

JoeRambo said:


> What is ironic, we haven't seen DDR4 RKL GEAR2 high clock dailies either. Wasn't that cause they were beaten by GEAR1 3600 ?


since when? it took 3866c14 1T to beat 5kc17 1T in everything. even 2t 3866 wasnt conclusive. but 4k 2t caught up.

how many ppl u know of is dailying either of those clocks. 3866c13 1T daily stable only one person afaik. 5kc16-17 less than 5 afaik actually daily stable. 4kc13 or c14 DR
i only know of two person.


beside the point. some ppl here seem to think adl imc same like rkl

no harm for a short-lived thread. continue on gents.


----------



## JoeRambo

cstkl1 said:


> since when? it took 3866c14 1T to beat 5kc17 1T in everything. even 2t 3866 wasnt conclusive. but 4k 2t caught up.


How many were running 5kc17 tho? And at what price of the kit. 3600-3733 was where the action was, not some 5000 nonsense with gear2.

The same will repeat with ADL, at least with ADL there is hope that soon proper DDR5 kits will appear, not that 60ns latency @6400 nonsense.


----------



## cstkl1

JoeRambo said:


> How many were running 5kc17 tho? And at what price of the kit. 3600-3733 was where the action was, not some 5000 nonsense with gear2.
> 
> The same will repeat with ADL, at least with ADL there is hope that soon proper DDR5 kits will appear, not that 60ns latency @6400 nonsense.


this is ocn. i remind u. not reddit .

so if latency is so true. why is zen cpu smacking intel?

also have u seen a ddr5 1T?

so why are u so sure of something like this.. ?? 
anyway dont see the harm, carry on.,


----------



## zhrooms

cstkl1 said:


> so if latency is so true. why is zen cpu smacking intel?


Rocket Lake and Zen3 trade blows, Rocket Lake has faster memory (~12ns lower) but Zen3 has twice the L3 cache, 2 to 4MB per core. So they even out, that's really it, not more complicated than that. Zen3 gains a few % over Rocket Lake in some titles (mainly from increased core count on 5900X and 5950X) and in others the roles are reversed, Rocket Lake on top by a few %.

Alder Lake with Rocket Lake memory is where the magic will happen, looking at roughly ~20-25% higher performance. Coffee/Comet to Rocket Lake we saw 20% IPC improvement from 25% larger cores, double L2 cache and more, now we're seeing the same plus a little more from more than double L2 cache and close to double L3 cache.

We saw a 1.5ns memory penalty from Coffee/Comet to Rocket Lake, and should see slightly more on Alder, but we'll have to wait and see, regardless we should still be able to hit very close to 40ns, meanwhile on DDR5 you'd be lucky to get even remotely close to 50ns, that'd take new ICs that can do 8000 MT/s CL30, fastest DDR5 overclock I've seen is 8000 MT/s at CL50, we're maybe a year away from decent DDR5 latency. And bandwidth is completely irrelevant, games don't benefit from the increased bandwidth offered by DDR5, but you can't downclock DDR5 either, since it's Gear 2 so you'd cripple IMC frequency, hence latency takes a big hit.

But, we'll see.. I'm going to test both Z690I AORUS Ultra (DDR4) and Z690 AORUS Pro (DDR4) as soon as they're available, already ordered a 12900K and got water cooling ready for both.


----------



## Glottis

I'm having internal debate about DDR4 vs DDR5 because I upgrade CPU/Mobo only once very 5-6 years. DDR4 is cheaper initially and might be slightly faster day1, but it feels a bit meh buying dying tech. DDR5 has huge potential and there will probably be big gains to be had in games in a couple of years once better sticks are out along with new graphics cards.

DDR4 mobo = locked into same memory performance for the next 5 years.
DDR5 mobo = possibility of great performance gains simply by upgrading RAM sticks in a couple of years.

What do you all think? Can't wait to see these RAM benchmarks, as well as Win10 vs Win11.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

I think it´s interesting how good ADL performed with DDR4, the second is the most "oc people" will use DDR5 and have no ear for DDR4 optimise.
And it gives enough people who want save money and no highend equip.
Some changes in DDR5 like the refresh in a same Bank and the double of the Burst length, make it unpossible to compare the latency each other.

Asus has said in the in the most cases DDR5 is faster, perhap´s it´s also possible to reach really good result´s with "high end" DDR4.


----------



## firewrath9

you know, SDR has lower latency than ddr, we ought to switch to that.


----------



## ENTERPRISE

Guys, keep it civil and on topic, otherwise do not post and walk on by. This is the only warning that will be issued.


----------



## zhrooms

Finished the motherboard roundup for now, just missing a few PWM Controllers, but it's very clear that the *Gigabyte* boards stand out from the rest!

They *all* have the MultiKey function, same as FlexKey on ASUS, but ASUS keeps FlexKey only on their ROG Maximus boards (Hero, Apex, Formula and Extreme), which means their cheapest Z690 with a safe boot button (or function) is: $650 pre-tax, meanwhile the same function is offered on the entire line-up of Gigabyte boards, including the cheapest UD non-WiFi board that starts at $195, now that's impressive! And not only is it offered through the on-board button, it's also offered through your own external 2-pin switch (see image below), so you can use it with a closed case, which you can't on the ASUS boards, so even more impressive!








*MultiKey*
_- Multiple function set by BIOS (*Reset* or *RGB Switch* or *Direct to BIOS* or *Safe Mode*)_

As for the VRM, even their cheapest $195 board appears to be using the same *12-Phase RAA229131* PWM Controller as the ($699 pre-tax) ROG Maximus Apex board, it's featured on the Elite AX ($250 pre-tax) that use the same 8-Phase configuration, and since the Gaming X ($210 pre-tax) share PCB with the Elite AX (just missing the Wi-Fi module and 60A stages down from 70A), it's rather safe to say it's using the same PWM Controller, since it's still _8-Phase 16 Stage 960A_! And even if it isn't, it's confirmed that the Elite AX at $250 does, so just a cool $450 less than an Apex (and sure we haven't discussed the stages, but nonetheless, not often we see such high end controllers on such cheap boards).

I would definitely recommend the Gaming X ($210 pre-tax) over the Elite AX if it wasn't for the fact that Gaming X isn't included in the AORUS line, raises some concerns about the BIOS specifically, but once the board is out we'd learn quick if the BIOS is the same or not, from the specs and images the PCB is identical, other than the 60A stages down from 70A and missing Wi-Fi module. And as for the 60A vs 70A stages, they almost surely don't matter, what most people don't know is that the VRM, starting on Z490 boards (because of 10900K 10C/20T), is *severely overkill*, and the culprit of the boards costing so much more than earlier chipset boards, people really need to understand that boards like 'ROG Maximus X Apex' (Z370) ran with only *8x 50A* stages (400A) and didn't have the slightest issue powering a 9900K *8C/16T at 5.3GHz 1.4V+ *(it could even do 7GHz on LN2, all core Cinebench), the heatsink barely crossed 50°C with no active cooling (5.3/1.4V+), especially when gaming as you never really hit above 50% total CPU usage, on average in an intensely (processor/memory) bottlenecked game like Battlefield, Grand Theft Auto V, Warzone or World of Warcraft, it's pulling at most 150W (roughly 50% usage), a 11700K 8C/16T at 5.1GHz 1.4V pulls 160-165W, so a bit more (for several reasons), and even if you were to push the CPU in AVX and saw a 250W power consumption, still wouldn't be enough to warrant active cooling. So all of these 16 to 18 stage '_budget'_ 70-90A boards are just *insanely strong*, the 16x 60A (960A) $195 pre-tax *UD* board has enough juice to get a 12900K to 6GHz *with ease*.. that's where we are at right now, so if you are a casual gamer or overclocker, who just wants a 12900K to 5.0-5.2GHz or TVB 5.3GHz+, then it really does not matter which board you get, they are all capable of it (except for the lower end ASRock boards), but as long as it's 12-16 stage, it's seriously overkill. And if you're purely a gamer it's been shown to be beneficial to completely disable the E-cores, meaning it would never even get close to 200W in gaming, likely possible to run it on the lower end ASRock boards at that point, without breaking a sweat.

So yeah, that's the main reason I'd recommend the Gaming X, it's definitely a nicer board than the UD (both are overkill), for almost the same cost, so why the hell not. And if you were to ask me, what about ASUS? I'd say they are all worse than even the UD.


390*Strix A*ATX45333ASP210016x 80AParallel4*Both*❌1 + 3*🔌**🔌*🟢❌❌✅200*UD AX*ATX45333RAA22913116x 60AParallel3*Both*❌2 + 2❌*🔌**🔌**🔌*❌✅

*Strix
+* 20A on the Power Stages (next to completely irrelevant, 960A on the UD is already insane and the stage characteristics shouldn't matter at around 5GHz)
*+* 1 more M.2 slot (that you're likely never going to use, 3 is plenty, I personally can't see myself ever using more than 2)
*+* 1 more ARGB (the two on UD are already enough, since you'd likely use serial connections or splitters)
*+* 1 temperature sensor (can be useful depending on what cooling you have, but if you really need it you already own an Aqua Computer module with four sensor headers)
*-* 1 less RGB (no loss but depends on if you use RGB strips or older components)
*-* No Safe Boot (massive loss, safe boot keeps you sane by saving you an enormous amount of hassle and *time*)
(You are paying $190 more, for the above)

That's about it, it's very likely the two motherboards would overclock the same, on both CPU and RAM. So paying for a Strix Z690 motherboard is just madness, don't get me wrong I like everything about them except for the *price* and *lack of safe boot*, the Maximus boards has Safe Boot at least and are truly incredible overall, but they're *not *$650 (and above) incredible.

I could make a very similar comparison to the MSI Edge and Tomahawk boards, but they are far more expensive too ($100 more than Gigabyte for again, almost identical features), and although featuring safe boot, it's not nearly as fast as MultiKey. So the choice is pretty obvious I'd say, I think the safest bet right now would be the Elite AX, since it's guaranteed to feature AORUS BIOS and more. I would like to recommend the Aero board but same problem as the Gaming X, it's not an AORUS board, you do get quite a few things for an extra $20, so only time will tell on that one.

It's obvious that the AORUS Ultra ITX will perform the best, it should be 10x 105A *direct* stages with *Dual DIMM*, that's incredible, only issue is the lack of other features, such as Debug LED and more;

Lacking 1 ARGB, means you still have one though, you could use let's say an EK 6-Way splitter, then you'd surely have enough (don't know exactly how many LEDs one header supports but should be enough).
Lacking 1 RGB, again, still has one, if using a splitter it's fine, or simply only use ARGB.
Lacking Temperature Sensor Headers, not the end of the world for most people, including me that owns an Aqua Computer module that connects through the USB 2.0 header, offering 4 sensor headers (but can't adjust motherboard connected fans through those sensors, only through Aqua Suite that requires more modules).
Lacking Optical Audio, I like to use it from my DAC, completely eliminates any software from being used, using TOSLINK you can run the bare Windows pre-installed essential driver for it to work flawlessly, so no software or drivers needed, but my DAC does have USB, it then installs driver software only which is technically fine as well, it's mostly an issue for me because I use the DAC for more than one device, so I have to pick which gets USB and which gets TOSLINK.
.. so none are _that_ problematic, they can be solved, except for the missing Debug LED (2 digit display), it's super helpful when overclocking memory, but you can live without it since you have regular Status LEDs, green for pass and red for fail (CPU/MEM/VGA and so on), then you can instantly press the safe boot button if memory indicates a problem during boot.

Then lastly we have the Elite Pro, still unknown price because I haven't seen it released anywhere in the world yet, it's an incredible board to say the least, close to flawless, it really has everything you could possibly want, except for an HDMI, but only useful if you'd want to use two extra monitors powered through the iGPU, if you even have a K model in the first place that is, personally I have more than one PC so the gaming PC does not run extra monitors, and thus I'd be fine without an iGPU in my processor, but I like to pay for the K model since it's usually $20 more and you get it back when selling it, or most of it. Anyhow, the Elite Pro is clearly a marvel to use, it has considerably stronger stages (even though it's not needed), not one but two temperature sensor headers, a dedicated on-board power button, safe boot button and Debug LED (2 digit display). These features makes it so easy to work with, especially with an open test bench, but it can be used with external 2-Pin power buttons/switches as well. So to work with, this board is clearly the best option, the features match the $650 (pre-tax) ROG Maximus Hero board, but for *half* the price.

As a conclusion I would almost say I'd personally want an AORUS Elite Pro to overclock with, but after finding a stable overclock I'd want to switch over to an AORUS Ultra ITX, and fine tune that overclock. For the average gamer I'd definitely recommend the UD or Elite AX (both has Bluetooth for gaming controller), and for the average overclocker I'd say the AORUS Elite AX or AORUS Elite Pro, but it'll (Pro) probably cost at least $50 more because of the more expensive power stages, still cheaper than both ASUS and MSI though, and for the serious overclocker I'd say the AORUS Ultra ITX, because of the superior VRM and enhanced Dual DIMM overclocking, also not as big of a deal overclocking without a Debug LED (2 digit display) for the experienced overclocker.

Personally, I still haven't decided what to get, neither the Ultra ITX or Elite Pro is for sale in my area of the world, so for now I can't say, but worst case I'll get the Elite AX for the release date.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

I want the Auros Ultra ITX but I’m concerned it will be a complete downgrade from my ASRock Z590 OC Formula.


----------



## zhrooms

I've ordered these four boards, all in stock ready to ship for the release on November 4th. The AORUS Elite Pro and AORUS Ultra ITX are not yet listed for sale here, either of those two boards are what I really want. But these will have to do for now.


390*Strix A*ATX45333ASP210016x 80AParallel4*Both*❌1 + 3*🔌**🔌*🟢❌❌✅315*TUF Plus*ATX45333ASP210014x 80AParallel4*Both*✅1 + 3❌*🔌**🔌*❌❌✅


250*AORUS Elite AX*ATX45333RAA22913116x 70AParallel4*Both*✅2 + 2❌*🔌**🔌**🔌*❌✅210*Gaming X*ATX45333❔16x 60AParallel4*Both*✅2 + 2❌*🔌**🔌**🔌*❌❌

I would have liked to try the MPG Edge as well, but it doesn't appear to be available yet, it's listed but not in stock anywhere, meaning it won't ship for the 4th.


345*MPG Edge*ATX45200RAA22913116x 75AParallel4*Both*✅1 + 3❌*🔌**🔌**🔌*❌✅

So with those four boards I ordered, I am able to verify if the Gaming X has the same BIOS as the Elite AX, as well as confirm which PWM Controller it has, and if the 60A power stages has a negative effect on overclocking (highly unlikely), I definitely believe the Gaming X is all you need for a 12900K and 4000 MT/s DDR4, but someone has to confirm it.

As for the ASUS boards, I mainly wanted to test the Strix A just to show everyone how terrible of a board it is, *for what it costs* (it's surely a great board but should not be more than $249). And I wanted to do the same with TUF Plus, directly compare it to the Strix A, see if it holds up in overclocking, which I definitely think it will, that'd mean if you really wanted an ASUS board, TUF Plus would be a viable option for almost $100 less than the Strix A, but they might have different BIOSes so we'll have to see about that. Like, we already know that the Gaming X for $210 is a better board than the $390 Strix A, question is _how much_ better exactly, can't wait to find out. I will be pushing a 12900K to its limits on all of the boards, we're talking 5.3-5.4GHz by brute forcing voltage since I have a large water cooling loop, combined with fall temperatures here in Scandinavia (0°C during the nights) which means a water temperature of no more than 5°C. The same goes for the RAM sticks I got, water cooled 2x 16GB Dual Rank Samsung B-die, should do 4000 MT/s CL14 with ease. So these boards really have a challenge ahead of them.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Thank you for going out of your way to buy and test 4 boards! I can’t wait to see your results.


----------



## Sonac

I'm quite set on getting the Elite AX but we'll see. Definitely going to be running DDR4 though. DDR5 ain't worth it until faster kits are released.


----------



## zhrooms

We have some good data coming from a Chinese reviewer;
*12900K* with a *DDR4-3600 CL16-16-16 XMP* kit against a *DDR5-4800 CL40-40-40 XMP* kit.

*Rainbow Six Siege:* DDR4 +*4.5*% faster than DDR5
*Tomb Raider:* DDR4 +*4.3*% faster than DDR5
*Far Cry 6:* DDR4 +*4.5*% faster than DDR5
So about ~4.5% faster for the DDR4-3600 kit, and if we look back at DDR4, we can see that an increase of 600 MT/s (IMC +300 MHz) improves performance by roughly 5.5% (3000 CL16 to 3600 CL16), but that's with.. such a big IMC frequency increase, which we only see half of on DDR5 since it's running in Gear 2. But based on all of this information, old and new, with a 400MT/s (IMC +100MHz) and CL40 drop to CL38 (4800 CL40 to 5200 CL38), it would be safe to say, that DDR4-3600 CL16 XMP should be roughly (±1-2%) above/below of a DDR5-5200 CL38 kit, _basically the same_.

So what does this mean? Well it doesn't tell us anything new, we've known this information for many weeks now, what we didn't know was how difficult it would be to overclock DDR5, because that's what it needs, and in the past few days we've learned a lot about just that, and it turns out to be harder than anticipated, and there are far fewer high frequency kits coming.

But let's just get past the value question, from this information above, it'd be unwise to recommend a DDR5 system for gamers, because the increased bandwidth from around 60GB/s to about ~90GB/s won't benefit you in any way (in gaming). So as of this moment, the cheapest 2x16GB DDR5-5200 CL38 kit I can find is $279 and the cheapest 2x16GB DDR4-3600 CL16 kit is $199, and they perform the same in gaming, so that's a 40% higher price for a ~30GB/s bandwidth increase on DDR5, that won't get you anything in gaming (it will in certain work loads). If we look at 8GB sticks things are getting dramatic, you get a 2x8GB DDR4-3600 CL16 kit for as little as $79, while for the cheapest 2x8GB DDR5-4800 CL40 kit I can find, you have to pay $140, so that's +75% and the DDR4 kit will be ~4.5% faster. And if you want something faster, we have the G.Skill 2x16GB DDR5-5600 CL36 for $380, if I had to take a guess that XMP would be around the performance of DDR4 at 3800 CL16, it's still uncertain how high DDR4 can go on the new IMC featured in Alder Lake, but rumours are as high as 4200, but I won't comment further than that, we'll have it confirmed very soon. And for DDR5 we have confirmation of between 8000 to 8300 MT/s, so about the same IMC frequency as for DDR4.

Conclusion on value? It's definitely more expensive for the same performance, in between 40 to 75%.

Now, a bit more info on the IMC, this will explain the challenge that DDR5 faces.

IMC (Integrated Memory Controller) on the Coffee Lake (9900K) and Comet Lake (10700K) processors was strong enough to get DDR4 frequencies all the way up to 4600 with ease, and on these architectures, Gear 1 and 2 wasn't a thing, so it always ran a 1:1 ratio, DRAM Frequency x IMC Frequency, so a 4000 MT/s speed meant a true frequency of 2000 MHz, and in a 1:1 ratio that meant IMC Frequency was also 2000 MHz, so the 9900K-10700K had no issues reaching a 4600 MT/s, that tells us the IMC was strong enough to go up to 2300 MHz and above.
But this changed on Rocket Lake (11700K), with a new IMC and Intel introducing Gears (Ratio Control between the DRAM and IMC Frequency), in preparation for DDR5, we saw a significant reduction in possible IMC frequencies, it was now difficult to reach even DDR4-3866 (1933 MHz IMC), and why does this matter? Well, it's significantly slower, from the above comparison it'd be a 16% reduction in IMC Frequency, and why does frequency matter on the IMC you might ask?

That leads us to what actually matters, for gamers.. speed! But there are different kinds of speed.

So, what sets games and work loads apart, a work load is typically storing or using a large amount of data, that gets chewed through over time by the processor. While a game, typically stores small amounts of data, that needs to be replaced and processed very fast, this can be demonstrated using storage drives very well;
Many, many years ago, almost a decade now, we had SSDs introduced to our gaming machines, and games loaded a lot faster, but why? So, old hard drive disks had a very slow access/seek time, because it had to use the actuator arm to find the data it needed, on spinning disks (large surface). As for the bandwidth, if you had a very large file, you could reach a sequential read MB/s of up to 150MB/s through the SATA interface, and if you put two disks in a striped RAID, you could double it to 300MB/s, but what did that mean for game loading times? It was faster, but it was still nowhere near the earliest SSDs on the market, that completely skipped the mechanical (moving) parts, because bandwidth was never the issue, being able to reach a high sequential read speed is next to completely irrelevant for gaming. This can be very easily seen through modern M.2 SSDs, like, on the SATA3 interface we had a theoretical bandwidth of up to 600MB/s, but after removing some overhead and such, we saw a typical max read speed of around 550MB/s, this is up to 4 times higher than a traditional HDD, but again, if you put two of these SSDs in a striped RAID, that doubled the sequential read speed to 1.1GB/s, games saw next to none, or no increase at all in loading times. Because again, bandwidth _doesn't matter_, it's all about latency (accessing a file as fast as possible), that's how games operate, we're talking anything in between 5 to 300 MB large files usually. The true demonstration to really get my point across is M.2 SSDs as mentioned earlier, we went from SATA 2 300MB/s to SATA 3 600MB/s, to M.2 PCIe 3.0 3500MB/s, to 7000MB/s today on PCie 4.0 M.2s, and what can we observe? Well.. _nothing_, literally. Since the game files are so small, having a game installed on a 7000MB/s 1TB M.2 for $200 is barely going to improve loading times, we're talking between 0.1 to 1 second faster on a several second long loading screen, _compared_ to a decade old 256GB (now valued at $20) SATA3 SSD with a maximum read speed of 550MB/s, so again, access time (latency) is what matters here, and the same exact principle applies to DRAM.

So by doubling the memory channels on DDR3, Single to Dual Channel, we went from 12.5 to 25 GB/s read, and using Quad Channel we went from 25 to 50 GB/s.
On DDR4 Dual Channel we went from 25 to 50 GB/s (same as Quad Channel DDR3), and DDR4 Quad Channel we went from 50 to 100 GB/s.
Now.. what actually changed when going Quad Channel on DDR4? The bandwidth doubled.. but did the FPS double? Eh.. no, _literally no change_, because as you now know, bandwidth is irrelevant (for gaming), as long as you reach a threshold where the bandwidth is enough, which we passed long ago.
That leads us to DDR5, in Dual Channel we're looking at up to 100 GB/s (same as Quad Channel DDR4), but.. again, doesn't mean anything, we don't want bandwidth, we want access time/latency just like on SSDs!

So, if we try and forget bandwidth, how can you lower your latency? By increasing frequency (bandwidth) of course?.. No, actually, what is happening underneath the surface, is that we don't actually care about the DRAM frequency (4000 MT/s), what we're actually overclocking.. is the IMC (Memory Controller), the faster the controller frequency, the faster the access time/latency!

This is also why it's so important to lower your memory timings in BIOS, they are massively important in making your RAM faster (lowers the access time), you are making yourself a big disservice by running XMP!








As seen in one of my benchmarks, the only way to make your memory faster, is by increasing IMC frequency at the same time as lowering the timings. Framerate then rockets to the moon when increasing frequency and lowering timings as much as possible, and as seen in the 4133 MT/s 16-16-16 result, absolutely massive performance gain (very low latency)!

3466 MT/s 16-18-18 (1733 MHz IMC) is just as fast as 4133 MT/s 19-19-19 (2066 MHz IMC), that's something you might not have expected, since 4133 looks a lot faster than 3466, cost a lot more and required a stronger motherboard, which increased costs of the system even further. The 3200 MT/s 14-14-14 also shows that it challenges 4000 MT/s 18-19-19, and let me remind you, 800 MT/s faster is a decent amount of higher bandwidth, which as you now know, doesn't really matter, which this also shows.

So, back to DDR5, what do we actually want with DDR5? Do we want a high DRAM frequency? No. Do we want a high IMC frequency? Yes! How do you get higher IMC Frequency? By increasing DRAM frequency!

This is the current problem with DDR5, for DDR5 to be as fast as it can in gaming, it has to reach as low latency as possible, and DDR5 is limited to Gear 2, meaning that the Gear Ratio I mentioned earlier, is half, Gear 1 is 1:1, so if DDR4-4000 runs Gear 1, that means actual DRAM Frequency is 2000 MHz, and IMC is running at 2000 MHz, that is very fast! Not as fast as 2300 on Comet Lake and earlier processors, but fast nonetheless. So, with DDR5 you obviously can't run Gear 1 (1:1 Ratio), since running 5200 MT/s on DDR5 would mean a 2600 MHz IMC frequency, which is impossible, that leaves us with only one option.. we have to increase the IMC frequency through DRAM frequency! Since the ratio is now ½ (half), running 5200 MT/s (2600 MHz DRAM) on DDR5 results in an IMC frequency of only 1300 MHz (half the DRAM), that is 35% slower than DDR4-4000 in Gear 1, the goal is thus to go as high DRAM frequency as you possibly can, to reach the same 2000 MHz IMC as DDR4 on Gear 1, we'd then have to run DDR5 at 8000 MT/s! Now that is fast, way faster than most boards on the market today can reach, or even sticks, the fastest XMP kit we've seen coming out in the near future is 7000 MT/s with CL40, that's impressive for sure, that's an IMC frequency of 1750 (only 12.5% slower than 2000), combined with other DDR5 performance enhancements, that kind of speed will really put DDR4 to the test! But, to run that frequency, you can't just buy any board, or memory sticks, it'll be very expensive, and at best, even if DDR5 manages to beat DDR4 at a frequency of between 7000 to 8000 MT/s, it will only be by a few %, is that really worth spending that much more money? I'd obviously argue.. no, unless you either are an enthusiast/overclocker or competitive/professional gamer, but for the average person? Absolutely not.

So, where does this leave us? Is DDR4 faster than DDR5 in gaming? Yes.. but DDR5 can also be faster than DDR4! If certain criteria is met, _that happens to cost a lot of money_, for example these new high performance kits are likely to cost $500 and above, pre-tax, maybe even $600, as the current 5600 CL36 is already at $380 and 7000 CL40 is _a lot_ faster!
DDR4 will without question be significantly cheaper, and faster than the majority of DDR5 systems, that's just the reality of it.. for now! Can the most expensive DDR5 system beat the fastest DDR4 system? Again, yes, but that doesn't change the fact that the majority of DDR4 systems will beat DDR5 with ease, it won't even be close really, _if_ the rumours are true that DDR4 IMC can reach up to 2100 MHz (4200 MT/s), that will put DDR4 ahead of DDR5 by anywhere between 5 to 15% depending on what DDR5 kit you'd go up against, and that's raw performance, 200 to 210-230 FPS for a competitive gamer in a game like Warzone, for a considerably lower price, and easier overclocking since we're all already familiar with DDR4.

Let me repeat myself, DDR5 is amazing, there's no doubt about that.. but DDR4 is also amazing, and it'll take quite some time for DDR5 to become as cheap as DDR4, and even more time for faster memory sticks to appear that beats DDR4 out of box. It's likely that DDR4 will remain the recommended memory for the next two years, until Meteor Lake (14th Gen) arrives in 2023, since Raptor Lake (12th Gen) coming in 2022 will still support DDR4, that's when DDR5 has a chance to really beat DDR4, new cheaper ($200-300) Z790 motherboards with XMP certification up to 8000MT/s and affordable 7000-8000 MT/s DDR5 kits (~$300), but that's *a lot* of wishful thinking for just a year until 13th Gen processors drop.


----------



## xV Slayer

zhrooms said:


> Rocket Lake and Zen3 trade blows, Rocket Lake has faster memory (~12ns lower) but Zen3 has twice the L3 cache, 2 to 4MB per core. So they even out, that's really it, not more complicated than that. Zen3 gains a few % over Rocket Lake in some titles (mainly from increased core count on 5900X and 5950X) and in others the roles are reversed, Rocket Lake on top by a few %.
> 
> Alder Lake with Rocket Lake memory is where the magic will happen, looking at roughly ~20-25% higher performance. Coffee/Comet to Rocket Lake we saw 20% IPC improvement from 25% larger cores, double L2 cache and more, now we're seeing the same plus a little more from more than double L2 cache and close to double L3 cache.
> 
> We saw a 1.5ns memory penalty from Coffee/Comet to Rocket Lake, and should see slightly more on Alder, but we'll have to wait and see, regardless we should still be able to hit very close to 40ns, meanwhile on DDR5 you'd be lucky to get even remotely close to 50ns, that'd take new ICs that can do 8000 MT/s CL30, fastest DDR5 overclock I've seen is 8000 MT/s at CL50, we're maybe a year away from decent DDR5 latency. And bandwidth is completely irrelevant, games don't benefit from the increased bandwidth offered by DDR5, but you can't downclock DDR5 either, since it's Gear 2 so you'd cripple IMC frequency, hence latency takes a big hit.
> 
> But, we'll see.. I'm going to test both Z690I AORUS Ultra (DDR4) and Z690 AORUS Pro (DDR4) as soon as they're available, already ordered a 12900K and got water cooling ready for both.


This post aged well. You mean like 8% not 20%.


----------



## bscool

https://www.capframex.com/tests/Alder Lake-S 12900K is the new Gaming King Review with ddr4 and dd5 with 12900k.


----------



## zhrooms

xV Slayer said:


> This post aged well. You mean like 8% not 20%.


No, it's very close to 20%, 16.74% faster in CPU-Z to be exact, which is lower than the real number, I'm trying to get some R23 scores which are more accurate, I'll let you know once I got them.


bscool said:


> https://www.capframex.com/tests/Alder Lake-S 12900K is the new Gaming King


Just read through it, very good article, it definitely has some minor issues here and there, but easily the best one out so far, very in-depth, no need to look elsewhere. But of course, stay tuned, I'll get some proper benchmarks going as soon as I receive my motherboards and processors.


----------



## clackersx

Well, call me stupid and dumb.
Had a Strix A on order.
Cancelled for a DDR5 board.
Had two different sets of DDR5 orders.
Cancelled the DDR5 orders as ETA got blown out.
Ordered the Strix A again.


----------



## cstkl1

clackersx said:


> Well, call me stupid and dumb.
> Had a Strix A on order.
> Cancelled for a DDR5 board.
> Had two different sets of DDR5 orders.
> Cancelled the DDR5 orders as ETA got blown out.
> Ordered the Strix A again.


dont worry. strix A 4kc14 is fine. u should get arnd 45ns

as for ddr4 adl vs rkl
toppc has a video on this.
but because msi likes to do xoc cooling ram oc hci .. normally ignore their "daily stable" possibilities










the problem is how much limited will u be cpu oc.


----------



## zhrooms

Got the boards and processors a day after launch since it was shipped, and took some time to prepare the new setup, but it's running now. The board I've chosen to start with is the Strix A, with it, the i9-12900K and a dual rank memory kit, but trying to locate a single rank one as well to demonstrate the difference, will post regular updates throughout the coming week.


----------



## MaghX

@zhrooms perfect, btw please check gear1 limits on each cpu!


----------



## ogider

@zhrooms thanks for the effort
I am waiting for the results very much*,* I keep an eye on gaming x ddr4 as a purchase for 12900k


----------



## geriatricpollywog

I will be watching this with great interest.


----------



## HvacGuru

Nice! Can't wait for your results.


----------



## JoeRambo

@zhrooms looking forward to DDR4 results, thanks for keeping this thread alive with great info!


----------



## ogider

旧帖归档 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验


旧帖归档Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验 ,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验




www.chiphell.com


----------



## geriatricpollywog

ogider said:


> 旧帖归档 - Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> 旧帖归档Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验 ,Chiphell - 分享与交流用户体验
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.chiphell.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2531448
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2531449


----------



## D-EJ915

Dang and on the literal cheapest msi board too.


----------



## xV Slayer

Falkentyne said:


> Already created. _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


This is for DDR4. You are so clearly full of yourself you don't even read before posting. You just want the credit for everything.


----------



## chispy

@zhrooms ,i'm really looking forward to your findings and results on ddr4. Thanks for doing this !


----------



## Marcel1ne

Where this man from chiphell finde new bios version for motherboard


----------



## zhrooms

*Edit: *Apparently, my i9-12900K that I purchased for close to €699, is.. *defective!

I have edited my previous explanation (below) of the error, to no longer put any blame on the BIOS by ASUS (Strix-A).*

So what happens is that it (now I know it's the 12900K and not the board) refuses to boot in channel A, so a DIMM in A2 and B2 slot is a no go, it flat out refuses to boot, and that's in Safe Mode after a CMOS Clear or a failed Overclock. The only way to get A2 and B2 (Dual Channel) to work is if I first insert one or two DIMMs into channel B, so B1 and/or B2 slots, then it immediately boots, and the only way I managed to successfully boot with A2 and B2 was to increase voltages, basically raised everything, then a save & restart, and after that a manual shut down on the power button, then moving one of the sticks back to A2, start the system, so it has that pre-loaded BIOS profile with increased voltages, then it works, but.. it all collapses as soon as I have a failed boot, then I start over from step one, having to remove one of the sticks in A1 or A2.. extremely time consuming, we're talking up to 10-15 minutes each time it fails since it can fail multiple times in a row for no reason, not a guarantee that I can do that "Save & Restart" method even on one stick to increase the voltages, and tested it with only the essentials, 24+8-Pin cable, a Power Button and a DisplayPort cable for the iGPU, nothing else connected, on the latest BIOS, and with 3 different memory kits (6 sticks), just an absolute nightmare, wasted a whole day of testing because of this. And to clarify, the board technically works (now I know it always worked), as long as I can get past the boot issue, ran some Cinebench R23 to make sure the CPU is working as intended and it does (it clearly doesn't as it turns out), 18.000 score at just 4.4 GHz (P-Cores only), that's the same score as my 11700K at ~5.6 GHz (+1.2 GHz), and the 11700K was already very fast, for a 10700K to beat my 11700K at 4.6 GHz, it had to run ~5.6 GHz (+1 GHz).

Ram sticks tested for those curious: 16GB Dual Rank B-die (3600C14/4266C17) / 8GB Single Rank B-die (3600C16) / 8GB Single Rank (Unknown 3200C16)

Been so excited to test and then this happens, at least I can share a few more pics I took during installation (funnily enough of the Strix-A 12900K that doesn't work..).
Switching out the Strix-A for the *Elite AX* now, will report back soon.
_- (I did switch it out, I'm currently on the Elite AX and 12700K, memory working just fine, confirming that it was the 12900K, defective memory channel, the odds of that happening is one in a billion..)_


----------



## Falkentyne

Not doing this again. Defective CPU or not, a Z590 dark's RAM issues (extreme instability with one slot) was fixed by Deoxit D5 (dirty slot).


----------



## zhrooms

Falkentyne said:


> Not doing this again. Defective CPU or not, a Z590 dark's RAM issues (extreme instability with one slot) was fixed by Deoxit D5 (dirty slot).


I made sure to clean both sticks and CPU (even though it's brand new), nothing helped, tried literally everything, but finally realized it wasn't the board when I got the exact same issue on the Gigabyte Elite AX, refused to boot with a stick in A1 or A2, swapped CPU after I had cleaned the 12900K (when it still didn't want to work), and with the new CPU (12700K), instantly worked. But I'll keep that advice in mind.

Here's my first attempt at high frequency (back on the Strix A for now), only thing I did was set 133:100, 4133 MT/s, 16-16-16-28-2T, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI, 1.45V DRAM.








I knew this specific overclock _should_ work since I ran the same but 280 RFC and 65K REFI 24/7 on Z370 Apex, I did try pushing it to 4266 after this screenshot but it was a no-go.

This specific memory kit is 2x 8GB Single Rank B-die from 2017, among the first ever batches of Trident Z RGB, highest frequency I ever booted with them on Apex was 4600, so they should do 4266 with some tweaking, but my first attempt at 4266 did not work, I will try and push it when I get some sleep, as well as push the 2x 16GB Dual Rank B-die from 2021 (December 2020).
_(Also take into consideration that my 12900K was defective, meaning I have to use 12600K & 12700K which __might__ mean the IMC is not as strong!)_


----------



## Hiikeri

zhrooms said:


> I made sure to clean both sticks and CPU (even though it's brand new), nothing helped, tried literally everything, but finally realized it wasn't the board when I got the exact same issue on the Gigabyte Elite AX, refused to boot with a stick in A1 or A2, swapped CPU after I had cleaned the 12900K (when it still didn't want to work), and with the new CPU (12700K), instantly worked. But I'll keep that advice in mind.
> 
> Here's my first attempt at high frequency (back on the Strix A for now), only thing I did was set 133:100, 4133 MT/s, 16-16-16-28-2T, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI, 1.45V DRAM.
> View attachment 2531638
> 
> I knew this specific overclock _should_ work since I ran the same but 280 RFC and 65K REFI 24/7 on Z370 Apex, I did try pushing it to 4266 after this screenshot but it was a no-go.
> 
> This specific memory kit is 2x 8GB Single Rank B-die from 2017, among the first ever batches of Trident Z RGB, highest frequency I ever booted with them on Apex was 4600, so they should do 4266 with some tweaking, but my first attempt at 4266 did not work, I will try and push it when I get some sleep, as well as push the 2x 16GB Dual Rank B-die from 2021 (December 2020).
> _(Also take into consideration that my 12900K was defective, meaning I have to use 12600K & 12700K which __might__ mean the IMC is not as strong!)_


4266 error, i think its not Ram problem, its yours memory controller that cant handle its speed anymore.

DDR4 4133 gear1=1:1 divider and MC is 2061.7Mhz runs at least your pic from it.

DDR4 4266 gear1=1:1 divider and yours MC is 2133Mhz, it cant handle it anymore.

SA voltage increasing or lower CPU temp needed to get it work on higher clocks.

What SA voltage on that MC 2061Mhz?


----------



## chispy

I was testing my 12600k and Asus Strix-A D4 all night and into early morning and i could not get my Trident-z memory kit 2x16gb ddr4-4000Mhz Cas 19 B-die A0 higher than ddr4-2800Mhz 1:1 memory controller , no matter volts and loose timmings , SA all the way up from 1.25v to 1.50v and in between , mem vtt 1.09v , nothing worked. Maxed out at ddr4-2800Mhz , it seems my chip hates early Sammies dual rank 2x16gb.

Then after a long strugle with a 32gb mem kit i tried my good g.skill neo 2x8gb 3800 Cas 14 and easily i could get 4100 but that was the ceiling for me with good known mem kit sammies B-die A2. This bios seems kind of rough and need some work as there is memory holes , dividers not working , sometimes doing just a reboot it will boot normally into windows at set memory speeds 1:1 with memory controller but with default timmings and Not the ones i dialed in. I end it up just running the xmp mem timings Cas 14 at ddr4-4100Mhz ran a couple of benchmarks and i quit of exhaustion , tired and sleepy depraved. Cooling was a Dual compressors single stage -55c iddle -49c load. v.core1.55v with llc 4 , SA 1.35v , mem vtt 1.06v .


----------



## newls1

glued to this thread


----------



## chispy

Brand new article by tpu w1zzard , ddr4 versus ddr5 scaling on z690.









DDR4 vs. DDR5 on Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Review


The Intel Alder Lake platform has support for both DDR5 and DDR4 memory. We ran 38 application benchmarks and 10 games at multiple DDR4 configurations to learn what performance to expect when using DDR4 vs. DDR5 on 12th Gen, and whether there's a point at which DDR4 performance can beat the much...




www.techpowerup.com


----------



## gerardfraser

Man that review was a lot of bench's by Wizzard ,with no surprises but interesting all the same.
I am going to try to hit up to DDR4 44000Mhz Dual Rank gear 1 on MSI Board post #30 in thread.Not that it makes any difference in my use case PC gaming.
Now all I need is the LGA 1700 kit to arrive for two different 360MM.It sucks waiting for bracket and I can buy new AIO 240MM or 280MM with out of the boc compatibility but still going to wait until 1700 bracket kit arrives.


----------



## JoeRambo

I wonder if DR 16GBx2 or SR 8GBx4 is the way to go with Alder Lake and those mid range motherboards with 4 slots?


----------



## chispy

I was using first release bios and there were much more options to tweak. Now that i updated to the latest 0705 they have dumb down the tweaking options a lot on the asus strix D4 :/ . A lot of issues with ram on this board , bios is not stable. 2x16gb wont even boot now and 2x8gb nerfed to 3600Mhz 1:1 . Need a better bios than this , i know we are early adopters but dang this bios are broken and memory compatibility is aweful ...

Tested 5 kits of mem.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

chispy said:


> I was using first release bios and there were much more options to tweak. Now that i updated to the latest 0705 they have dumb down the tweaking options a lot on the asus strix D4 :/ . A lot of issues with ram on this board , bios is not stable. 2x16gb wont even boot now and 2x8gb nerfed to 3600Mhz 1:1 . Need a better bios than this , i know we are early adopters but dang this bios are broken and memory compatibility is aweful ...
> 
> Tested 5 kits of mem.


Asus generally lets the intern program the bios, even on their midrange ROG Maximus line. Avoid.


----------



## MaghX

chispy said:


> Now that i updated to the latest 0705 they have dumb down the tweaking options a lot on the asus strix D4 :/


I will get strix D4 soon, should I stay at default bios?


----------



## cstkl1

chispy said:


> I was using first release bios and there were much more options to tweak. Now that i updated to the latest 0705 they have dumb down the tweaking options a lot on the asus strix D4 :/ . A lot of issues with ram on this board , bios is not stable. 2x16gb wont even boot now and 2x8gb nerfed to 3600Mhz 1:1 . Need a better bios than this , i know we are early adopters but dang this bios are broken and memory compatibility is aweful ...
> 
> Tested 5 kits of mem.


does it have options for intel mrc algos?


----------



## Luggage

chispy said:


> Brand new article by tpu w1zzard , ddr4 versus ddr5 scaling on z690.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> DDR4 vs. DDR5 on Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Review
> 
> 
> The Intel Alder Lake platform has support for both DDR5 and DDR4 memory. We ran 38 application benchmarks and 10 games at multiple DDR4 configurations to learn what performance to expect when using DDR4 vs. DDR5 on 12th Gen, and whether there's a point at which DDR4 performance can beat the much...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.techpowerup.com


Would be interesting to see with better timings for DDR4. B-die 32-14-14-14 or even 36-14-14-14 should still save you some money vs ddr5?


----------



## MaghX

lol DDR4-3600 / 16-20-20-34 1T, waste of time


----------



## shamino1978

0705 (DDR4) has a bug whereby dram voltage is not applied, will post new bioses that fix this later

these ones fixed:








TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## SuperMumrik

shamino1978 said:


> 0705 (DDR4) has a bug whereby dram voltage is not applied, will post new bioses that fix this later


This would explain a lot 😆
Tnx!


----------



## roooo

cstkl1 said:


> does it have options for intel mrc algos?


That's what I've found on the Strix-A Gaming D4 with 0605 BIOS - is this what you were looking for?


----------



## cstkl1

roooo said:


> That's what I've found on the Strix-A Gaming D4 with 0605 BIOS - is this what you were looking for?
> 
> View attachment 2531780


not this. memory algo. should be between second and third timings


----------



## roooo

cstkl1 said:


> not this. memory algo. should be between second and third timings


Give me some keywords to look for, my MEM O/C knowledge is still quite limited. You mean training algos?


----------



## cstkl1

roooo said:


> Give me some keywords to look for, my MEM O/C knowledge is still quite limited. You mean training algos?


yes. ok if have those. ddr4 has hope.


----------



## chispy

cstkl1 said:


> does it have options for intel mrc algos?


did not play with that setting as i was having so much trouble i stop trying to get timmings to work.




shamino1978 said:


> 0705 (DDR4) has a bug whereby dram voltage is not applied, will post new bioses that fix this later
> 
> these ones fixed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Peter my old friend , thank you so much amigo , no wonder nothing was working for me  , i was pulling my hair out of my head out of frustration hahaha... i could not understand why nothing was working for me , that does explained a lot. Thank you for the new bios and the heads up of the bug on the old one 0705. Will give it a try later today and report back. Peter would it be possible to add avx512 again on this bioses ? There is no more that option even with E cores disable under avx settings. Thank you very much , i really apreciate the help and my old friend came to the rescue ,that means a lot to me brother.

Kind Regards: Chispy


----------



## roooo

cstkl1 said:


> yes. ok if have those. ddr4 has hope.


Let me know if you need more. This is BIOS 0605.


----------



## cstkl1

roooo said:


> Let me know if you need more. This is BIOS 0605.
> View attachment 2531783
> 
> View attachment 2531786
> 
> View attachment 2531785
> 
> View attachment 2531782
> 
> View attachment 2531784


tempted to grab a strix A now.


----------



## roooo

cstkl1 said:


> tempted to grab a strix A now.


TBH I was a little surprised and I'm not exactly sure if it was intended to include all these options in a midrange board BIOS. If it holds what @chispy wrote above, the latest BIOS appears to be more restricted - that's why I currently have no intention to update. If you should need the 0605 CAP, let me know!

Anyone confirm this?


----------



## 2500k_2

shamino1978 said:


> 0705 (DDR4) has a bug whereby dram voltage is not applied, will post new bioses that fix this later
> 
> these ones fixed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Greetings to you Shamino! I have 1 question for you. If it's not difficult for you, please answer.
What is the difference between CR1 1N and N: 1 modes?


----------



## zhrooms

Finished my IMC testing after multiple setbacks and about a day of testing, for example my i9-12900K turned out to be defective, various software corruption issues during failed processor and memory testing, but finally I have the first important piece of data ready (more is coming), which consists of verifying the IMC reach and stability in Call of Duty: Warzone (one of the most difficult games to run), with GPU usage at 60-80% so it was consistently bottlenecked by the Processor and Memory.

Since my i9-12900K (SP87) was defective and sent back, I've had to test on a i7-12700K (SP70), which undoubtedly has a worse memory controller, but nonetheless here it is.
So what this testing was meant to answer;
1. How fast (frequency) can I run the DRAM/IMC?​2. What System Agent Voltage is required for 3866, 4000, 4133 and 4266?​
The answer is below in the graph, but to spell it out: This specific processor (12700K) can do a bit above 4133, but at or above 4133, it is *not* stable! It's very close though, thus I had to experiment by adjusting BCLK to get the IMC frequency down from 2066.5 MHz to 2050 MHz, and it worked perfectly! Completely game stable at 4100 MT/s (2050 MHz IMC) with the timings at 16-16-16-28-2T, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI, 1.45V DRAM, these timings are just placeholder and no other timings were changed, but it is fast, with the IMC running at 2050 MHz and the previously mentioned timings, I managed to score a latency (in the latest AIDA64 Beta) of *45.0ns* (best of 10 runs), I should be able to get it down to to around 40, after tightening timings. But before I even attempt that, I need to replicate this test, but this time for 2x 16GB DDR4 Dual Rank sticks!

A few words about the graph below; to run the IMC at 1933 it required only 1.088V on the System Agent for it to be completely game stable, that is ridiculously low, any processor would do this without breaking a sweat, and that also goes for the 2000 MHz (DDR4-4000) frequency, absolutely no issues running it with just under 1.200V. At this point I think it's completely safe to say that it's a guarantee that every processor and motherboard combination can handle a kit of (Single Rank) DDR4-4000 sticks, it'll run like a breeze. 








It's only when you go beyond, that it starts to look bleak. As you can see, to increase the IMC frequency by 50, from 2000 to 2050 (2.5%), it required a voltage increase of 188mV (~16%), which is pretty nuts, highly inefficient! *But definitely safe as a daily overclock*, I will for sure keep it at 4100 or higher once I get my new i9-12900K, hopefully it's a lot better and could maybe even reach 4200, I still think game stable at 4266 would be next to impossible, even on an amazing processor.
But 4266 on this processor, I can completely forget about, as it's simply never going to happen, if 4133 requires ~1.400V SA and it literally refuses to run higher IMC frequency, even if you push voltage, I tried 1.392 all the way up to 1.492, and the game just keeps throwing errors or crashes to desktop during start-up, so it's not a voltage issue, but an actual IMC frequency (silicon) issue.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

zhrooms said:


> I still think game stable at 4266 would be next to impossible, even on an amazing processor.


Hold my beer. I will be testing the 12900K with the Gigabyte 2-Dimm 10 layer ITX motherboard, hopefully this weekend. Kit is GSkill Royals, 2x16 4000c14.


----------



## ogider

how about ddr4 clock and 1T?


----------



## kingofblog

My results on ASUS STRIX Z690-A with i9-12900k (SP=78): G.Skill Trident.Z/Neo 3600CL16 2Rx8 (Samsung B) works at rated speed. Unable to post at even marginally higher frequency (e.g. 3866CL18). Tried DDR4 voltage 1.45 V, SA voltage 1.4 V, CR 2N, but no difference.

Measured memory performance with Intel Memory Latency Checker:
DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36-1N tRFC=180ns
Cache latency: 12.2 ns
Sequential latency: 48.8 ns
Random latency: 58.7 ns
Read bandwidth: 48301.8MB/s

These latencies are barely any better than on X299 (i9-7900X), so Alder Lake has been a disappointment so far.


----------



## MaghX

roooo said:


> the latest BIOS appears to be more restricted - that's why I currently have no intention to update.


Could you please clarify what was restricted/removed?


----------



## roooo

I was quoting another poster who claimed that some O/C options had been removed from the latest BIOS versions - but I did not check myself yet. Still waiting on reply by @chispy and others on that matter.


----------



## zhrooms

kingofblog said:


> My results on ASUS STRIX Z690-A with i9-12900k (SP=78): G.Skill Trident.Z/Neo 3600CL16 2Rx8 (Samsung B) works at rated speed. Unable to post at even marginally higher frequency (e.g. 3866CL18). Tried DDR4 voltage 1.45 V, SA voltage 1.4 V, CR 2N, but no difference.


Hm, tried my Dual Rank kit, at 3600 it booted just fine, then when I tried 3733, absolutely impossible, tried 3866 as well just in case the ratio messed up, all the way up to 1.45 SA, and it flat out refuses. I've heard Dual Rank is much harder to run, but also seen screenshots of CPU-Z at 3866, though maybe they were on exceptionally good 12900K bins.

So I resorted to BCLK tuning instead, with 3600 MT/s set, I changed BCLK to 103 which increased the memory to 3700 MT/s, and it booted right away, tested a few more values below;
BCLK 103.2 = 3707 MT/s (1853 MHz on the IMC)​BCLK 103.6 = 3721 MT/s (1861 MHz on the IMC)​BCLK 100.0 = 3733 MT/s (Fail)​BCLK 103.8 = 3737 MT/s (Fail)​BCLK 104.2 = 3751 MT/s (Fail)​So not looking good for Dual Rank sticks, IMC at 1860 is ~200 MHz lower than on my Single Rank sticks (2050). This particular i7-12700K with SP70 rating really did not like 3733, but 3720 worked, thus can easily see a decent i9-12900K with stronger IMC do 3733, and maybe even 3866 if it's a god tier bin, but that's still far from the 4100-4200 on Single Rank sticks. With this limited data I'd recommend Dual Rank owners to consider switching to Single Rank, and don't get me wrong, you can still go 3600-3700 MT/s at 13-13-13 on Dual Rank, which is very fast, it'd beat most DDR5 kits, but not all, the lower IMC (1800) simply won't cut it if you want a chance to beat the highest performing DDR5 sticks, since there's a significant amount of performance left on the table from the 2050-2100 IMC frequency possible on Single Rank kits, that's how DDR4 really beats DDR5.


----------



## Exilon

zhrooms said:


> Finished my IMC testing after multiple setbacks and about a day of testing


Which board did you use? My DDR4 Aorus Elite doesn't seem to want to boot with anything other than 4133 XMP gear 2 or at max DDR-3200 gear 1 with 4 sticks of SR B-die rated at 4133 XMP


----------



## zhrooms

Exilon said:


> Which board did you use? My DDR4 Aorus Elite doesn't seem to want to boot with anything other than 4133 XMP gear 2 or at max DDR-3200 gear 1 with 4 sticks of SR B-die rated at 4133 XMP


Try using two sticks in second and fourth slot (A2/B2), at DRAM Ratio 100:133, frequency 3866 MT/s (Gear 1) with 16-16-16-28-2T as the primary timings, then RFC 360 and REFI to 32000.
DRAM Voltage at 1.450 and System Agent Voltage at 1.350 (it can do it at much lower, but just to make sure it works). And it should work, after that you can increase it to 4000 without adjusting anything (if it works), remember that 4133 might not be possible, and that 4000 might require around 1.2 SA so keep it at 1.25 just for simplicity (1.35 when you're doing the initial tests), I would probably advice against attempting 4133 unless you know what you're doing.

And I am using the Strix A currently, but I have the Gigabyte AORUS Elite AX, Gigabyte Gaming X (same board as Elite AX just no Wi-Fi module) as well as a TUF Plus. I intend to test all of them, but only after I've managed to find my maximum overclock on the Strix A, so I can try the same overclock on those boards, to compare them (if they can also do it).

*_*

Quick comment on my current Dual Rank testing, at 3600 MT/s, 13-13-13-28, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI, similar to my 4100 16-16-16-28, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI overclock, I managed to score a latency of 47.4, compared to the 4100 which landed at 45, so definitely a bit slower, since the IMC is running 250 MHz lower.


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> Hm, tried my Dual Rank kit, at 3600 it booted just fine, then when I tried 3733, absolutely impossible, tried 3866 as well just in case the ratio messed up, all the way up to 1.45 SA, and it flat out refuses. I've heard Dual Rank is much harder to run, but also seen screenshots of CPU-Z at 3866, though maybe they were on exceptionally good 12900K bins.
> 
> So I resorted to BCLK tuning instead, with 3600 MT/s set, I changed BCLK to 103 which increased the memory to 3700 MT/s, and it booted right away, tested a few more values below;
> BCLK 103.2 = 3707 MT/s (1853 MHz on the IMC)​BCLK 103.6 = 3721 MT/s (1861 MHz on the IMC)​BCLK 100.0 = 3733 MT/s (Fail)​BCLK 103.8 = 3737 MT/s (Fail)​BCLK 104.2 = 3751 MT/s (Fail)​


Thanks for the concurring data point. This puts me in an awkward position, as I need more than 50 GB/s of bandwidth to move off of X299, but so far I haven't seen any reported DDR5 latency below 60 ns (i.e. 75 ns for random, which is the real latency).

i9-7900X 5.0 GHz / 3.2 GHz for comparison:

DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36-1N tRFC=180ns + other subtimings tuned
Cache latency (10M): 14.9 ns
Sequential latency: 50.1 ns
Random latency: 60.5 ns
Read bandwidth: 96869.1 MB/s

SKX can also push up to 3733 MT/s (just tried), so things aren't looking good. ADL is 2 ns faster, which is all associated to ring vs mesh rather than IMC. Bandwidth efficiency is exactly the same too (48 GB/s dual channel vs 96 GB/s quad).


----------



## gtz

kingofblog said:


> Thanks for the concurring data point. This puts me in an awkward position, as I need more than 50 GB/s of bandwidth to move off of X299, but so far I haven't seen any reported DDR5 latency below 60 ns (i.e. 75 ns for random, which is the real latency).
> 
> i9-7900X 5.0 GHz / 3.2 GHz for comparison:
> 
> DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36-1N tRFC=180ns + other subtimings tuned
> Cache latency (10M): 14.9 ns
> Sequential latency: 50.1 ns
> Random latency: 60.5 ns
> Read bandwidth: 96869.1 MB/s
> 
> SKX could probably push up to 4000 MT/s, since its IMC is better than ADL, so things aren't looking good. ADL is 2 ns faster, which is all associated to ring vs mesh rather than IMC. Bandwidth efficiency is exactly the same too (48 GB/s dual channel vs 96 GB/s quad).


What are you using to get those numbers? Below are my Aida64 numbers on my 9980XE. Also I don't like pushing TRFC that low, at least for me. Causes to much heat.

Also if you are on Skylake X just wait for sapphire rapids, that would be the upgrade for you. Don't get me wrong the 12900K is impressive, it impressed me. But a tuned X299 system is no slouch and at the res I play CPU is not as important.


----------



## kingofblog

gtz said:


> What are you using to get those numbers? Below are my Aida64 numbers on my 9980XE. Also I don't like pushing TRFC that low, at least for me. Causes to much heat.











Intel® Memory Latency Checker v3.9a


Intel® Memory Latency Checker (Intel® MLC) is a tool used to measure memory latencies and b/w, and how they change with increasing load on the system.




software.intel.com





Sequential latency: --idle_latency
Random latency: --idle_latency -r
Bandwidth: --loaded_latency

Sequential latency is roughly comparable to AIDA64, but I don't trust AIDA64. Random latency is the number that correlates to application performance, since memory latency is only critical when the CPU misses the cache, whereas sequential accesses are always prefetched.



> Also if you are on Skylake X just wait for sapphire rapids, that would be the upgrade for you. Don't get me wrong the 12900K is impressive, it impressed me. But a tuned X299 system is no slouch and at the res I play CPU is not as important.


I don't disagree, but I wanted to reduce my CPU power consumption, as my PSU is only 850 W and my UPS is only 900 W, whereas an overclocked X299 + RTX is pushing me close to the edge. My issue with Sapphire Rapids is that it will be based on DDR5 (slow, per this thread), and the power will be even higher than X299. I finally got my X299 to a state where gaming performance doesn't suck, and it all came down to memory tuning.


----------



## kingofblog

I see that @cstkl1 found a 50 ns overclock with Samsung DDR5 (65-ish real), so that's probably the way to go. On the other hand, the dude always reports overclocks that nobody else can achieve...


----------



## Exilon

zhrooms said:


> Try using two sticks in second and fourth slot (A2/B2), at DRAM Ratio 100:133, frequency 3866 MT/s (Gear 1) with 16-16-16-28-2T as the primary timings, then RFC 360 and REFI to 32000.
> DRAM Voltage at 1.450 and System Agent Voltage at 1.350 (it can do it at much lower, but just to make sure it works). And it should work, after that you can increase it to 4000 without adjusting anything (if it works), remember that 4133 might not be possible, and that 4000 might require around 1.2 SA so keep it at 1.25 just for simplicity (1.35 when you're doing the initial tests), I would probably advice against attempting 4133 unless you know what you're doing.
> 
> And I am using the Strix A currently, but I have the Gigabyte AORUS Elite AX, Gigabyte Gaming X (same board as Elite AX just no Wi-Fi module) as well as a TUF Plus. I intend to test all of them, but only after I've managed to find my maximum overclock on the Strix A, so I can try the same overclock on those boards, to compare them (if they can also do it).
> 
> *_*
> 
> Quick comment on my current Dual Rank testing, at 3600 MT/s, 13-13-13-28, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI, similar to my 4100 16-16-16-28, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI overclock, I managed to score a latency of 47.4, compared to the 4100 which landed at 45, so definitely a bit slower, since the IMC is running 250 MHz lower.


I was too lazy to pull out the two sticks but going 100:133 actually helped a lot. At least it boots beyond 3200.

But either CPU-Z and HWinfo is buggy or the Gigabyte Elite AX is buggy, because I get ~3600 despite requesting 3433


























Looks like some weird reading error on the base clock


----------



## geriatricpollywog

kingofblog said:


> I see that @cstk1 found a 50 ns overclock with Samsung DDR5 (65-ish real), so that's probably the way to go. On the other hand, the dude always reports overclocks that nobody else can achieve...


@cstkl1 

Apparently you always report overclocks nobody else can achieve 🤣

Will be fun to see Sapphire Rapids crushed in gaming by whichever i7 is released afterwards.


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> I'd recommend Dual Rank owners to consider switching to Single Rank, and don't get me wrong, you can still go 3600-3700 MT/s at 13-13-13 on Dual Rank, which is very fast, it'd beat most DDR5 kits, but not all, the lower IMC (1800) simply won't cut it if you want a chance to beat the highest performing DDR5 sticks, since there's a significant amount of performance left on the table from the 2050-2100 IMC frequency possible on Single Rank kits, that's how DDR4 really beats DDR5.


The problem with going to 1R is that you would be limited to 16 GB capacity, unless you move to 16 Gb-based DIMMs, and those wouldn't be B-die. What you gain in IMC frequency you give back in DRAM timings. Even if you stick with B-die, DR is more bus-efficient than SR, so while you might get a few ns of latency, the bandwidth wouldn't be any better. For those that need higher bandwidth than DDR4-3600, biting the bullet on DDR5 is looking like the only option on the table...


----------



## cstkl1

0451 said:


> @cstkl1
> 
> Apparently you always report overclocks nobody else can achieve 🤣
> 
> Will be fun to see Sapphire Rapids crushed in gaming by whichever i7 is released afterwards.


eh.. anybody can do it with the correct board and ram.

ADL was gaming targeted coincidentally strong in multicore application

SRap .. multi core targeted.. might spill over to be a gaming monster. 

need better chipset to push adl potential before 13th gen


----------



## kingofblog

@zhrooms

CapFrameX claims to achieve 4000 MT/s dual-rank (?) on ASUS BIOS 0707:


__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458486529681240074
Will flash 0707 tomorrow and try again. Not believing so far.


----------



## jsz

VRM info for the missing ASUS boards



https://www.asus.com/microsite/motherboard/Intel-Alder-Lake-Z690-H670-B660/websites/download/ASUS_Z690_Full_Specs.pdf



Prime Z690-P 50A * 14
Prime PLUS 50A * 14

ASUS boards are overpriced to hell this generation. Aside from the TUF and maybe STRIX-A, there is no reason to pay excessive money for less.

I personally feel that gigabyte offers the best value for both DDR4/DDR5 boards.


----------



## Lurifaks

kingofblog said:


> My results on ASUS STRIX Z690-A with i9-12900k (SP=78): G.Skill Trident.Z/Neo 3600CL16 2Rx8 (Samsung B) works at rated speed. Unable to post at even marginally higher frequency (e.g. 3866CL18). Tried DDR4 voltage 1.45 V, SA voltage 1.4 V, CR 2N, but no difference.
> 
> Measured memory performance with Intel Memory Latency Checker:
> DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36-1N tRFC=180ns
> Cache latency: 12.2 ns
> Sequential latency: 48.8 ns
> Random latency: 58.7 ns
> Read bandwidth: 48301.8MB/s
> 
> These latencies are barely any better than on X299 (i9-7900X), so Alder Lake has been a disappointment so far.


Which bios are you running?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

jsz said:


> VRM info for the missing ASUS boards
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.asus.com/microsite/motherboard/Intel-Alder-Lake-Z690-H670-B660/websites/download/ASUS_Z690_Full_Specs.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Prime Z690-P 50A * 14
> Prime PLUS 50A * 14
> 
> ASUS boards are overpriced to hell this generation. Aside from the TUF and maybe STRIX-A, there is no reason to pay excessive money for less.
> 
> I personally feel that gigabyte offers the best value for both DDR4/DDR5 boards.


Which Gigabyte board are you testing?


----------



## eeeven

Gigabyte Z690 AORUS Elite DDR4 was not able to run 2x16 B-Die DR Modules higher than 2800 MHz. 2933 MHz -> no boot. 2x8 SR B-Die were maxed at 3466. i really cant recommend that MB for Memory OC.

MSI Z690 Edge is pretty good at Mem OC. Gear 2 with Dual Rank B-Die 4.533 C17 and Gear 1 with Dual Rank B-Die 4.000 C16. Both with tight Subs.


----------



## JoeRambo

eeeven said:


> MSI Z690 Edge is pretty good at Mem OC. Gear 2 with Dual Rank B-Die 4.533 C17 and Gear 1 with Dual Rank B-Die 4.000 C16. Both with tight Subs.


Great to know, i was eyeing that mobo, Z490 Unify was amazingly good memory experience for me, very predictable, always recovering if things were pushed too far, and BIOS got better with time as well.
Thanks for testing, could You do DR Gear1 4000 setup BIOS mem tune screens please? Anything specific needed to get them working from ODT side ?


----------



## eeeven

ODT - good Point! On ASUS the user could not see the current ODT Setting when on AUTO. On MSI you can see even on AUTO which ODT is set at the moment. Could really help for finding stability.

ODT on Gear 1 4.000 C16 were 80/34/40 on AUTO which is fine for me.

Subs:


----------



## cstkl1

eeeven said:


> ODT - good Point! On ASUS the user could not see the current ODT Setting when on AUTO. On MSI you can see even on AUTO which ODT is set at the moment. Could really help for finding stability.
> 
> ODT on Gear 1 4.000 C16 were 80/34/40 on AUTO which is fine for me.
> 
> Subs:
> 
> View attachment 2531930
> View attachment 2531929


hint. did u know @RobertoSampaio octvb guide thread has all the tools u need including "seeing" current odts for ASUS board. asus u can access all the skews, intel mrc algos and u are using asus memtweakit.


----------



## shrimpmaster

zhrooms said:


> Finished my IMC testing after multiple setbacks and about a day of testing, for example my i9-12900K turned out to be defective, various software corruption issues during failed processor and memory testing, but finally I have the first important piece of data ready (more is coming), which consists of verifying the IMC reach and stability in Call of Duty: Warzone (one of the most difficult games to run), with GPU usage at 60-80% so it was consistently bottlenecked by the Processor and Memory.
> 
> Since my i9-12900K (SP87) was defective and sent back, I've had to test on a i7-12700K (SP70), which undoubtedly has a worse memory controller, but nonetheless here it is.
> So what this testing was meant to answer;
> 1. How fast (frequency) can I run the DRAM/IMC?​2. What System Agent Voltage is required for 3866, 4000, 4133 and 4266?​
> The answer is below in the graph, but to spell it out: This specific processor (12700K) can do a bit above 4133, but at or above 4133, it is *not* stable! It's very close though, thus I had to experiment by adjusting BCLK to get the IMC frequency down from 2066.5 MHz to 2050 MHz, and it worked perfectly! Completely game stable at 4100 MT/s (2050 MHz IMC) with the timings at 16-16-16-28-2T, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI, 1.45V DRAM, these timings are just placeholder and no other timings were changed, but it is fast, with the IMC running at 2050 MHz and the previously mentioned timings, I managed to score a latency (in the latest AIDA64 Beta) of *45.0ns* (best of 10 runs), I should be able to get it down to to around 40, after tightening timings. But before I even attempt that, I need to replicate this test, but this time for 2x 16GB DDR4 Dual Rank sticks!
> 
> A few words about the graph below; to run the IMC at 1933 it required only 1.088V on the System Agent for it to be completely game stable, that is ridiculously low, any processor would do this without breaking a sweat, and that also goes for the 2000 MHz (DDR4-4000) frequency, absolutely no issues running it with just under 1.200V. At this point I think it's completely safe to say that it's a guarantee that every processor and motherboard combination can handle a kit of (Single Rank) DDR4-4000 sticks, it'll run like a breeze.
> View attachment 2531845
> 
> It's only when you go beyond, that it starts to look bleak. As you can see, to increase the IMC frequency by 50, from 2000 to 2050 (2.5%), it required a voltage increase of 188mV (~16%), which is pretty nuts, highly inefficient! *But definitely safe as a daily overclock*, I will for sure keep it at 4100 or higher once I get my new i9-12900K, hopefully it's a lot better and could maybe even reach 4200, I still think game stable at 4266 would be next to impossible, even on an amazing processor.
> But 4266 on this processor, I can completely forget about, as it's simply never going to happen, if 4133 requires ~1.400V SA and it literally refuses to run higher IMC frequency, even if you push voltage, I tried 1.392 all the way up to 1.492, and the game just keeps throwing errors or crashes to desktop during start-up, so it's not a voltage issue, but an actual IMC frequency (silicon) issue.



Hey, what's the vid on your 12700k? I also got a 12700k but with a z690 tuf, only reason I didn't get the Strix A was vrm heatsink height since I want to use a nh-d15.
VIDs are: 4.9ghz 1.3v, 5ghz 1.36v. I can post up to 4100mhz gear 1, but it's only stable up to 3866mhz...
I feel like I won the silicon lottery for the worst chip in history.


----------



## eeeven

cstkl1 said:


> hint. did u know @RobertoSampaio octvb guide thread has all the tools u need including "seeing" current odts for ASUS board. asus u can access all the skews, intel mrc algos and u are using asus memtweakit.


Yeah i knew this, but in MSI BIOS you can see the ODT without using Windows tools - pretty nice when u try to post some settings without even booting into Windows.



shrimpmaster said:


> Hey, what's the vid on your 12700k? I also got a 12700k but with a z690 tuf, only reason I didn't get the Strix A was vrm heatsink height since I want to use a nh-d15.
> VIDs are: 4.9ghz 1.3v, 5ghz 1.36v. I can post up to 4100mhz gear 1, but it's only stable up to 3866mhz...
> I feel like I won the silicon lottery for the worst chip in history.


I wouldnt say you lost the lottery.

I can Post up to 4100 with Dual Rank on my MSI Z690 Edge with the 12700K but really 24/7 stable is only 3866 (29x133). It seems like the Sweetspot for Dual Ranks is 3866 with the 100:133 strap. 3900 39x100 gives me instant BSOD in Windows. But 4000 on 40x100 strap is stable. I dont understand it.


----------



## chispy

Took a break for a well needed rest after 3 very long days testing 12600k and Strix D4. Still need to test today the new bios Shamino posted with the fix bug for the memory voltage ,bios 0707. Also i have incoming an Asrock Steel Legend ddr4 z690 mobo and a new 12700k wish should be here by friday as i want to test asrock mobo ddr4 capabilities as it has been great for me in the past on older Asrock steel legends boards. Will post back my findings on the Strix D4 and new bios later tonight.


----------



## cstkl1

chispy said:


> Took a break for a well needed rest after 3 very long days testing 12600k and Strix D4. Still need to test today the new bios Shamino posted with the fix bug for the memory voltage ,bios 0707. Also i have incoming an Asrock Steel Legend ddr4 z690 mobo and a new 12700k wish should be here by friday as i want to test asrock mobo ddr4 capabilities as it has been great for me in the past on older Asrock steel legends boards. Will post back my findings on the Strix D4 and new bios later tonight.


try the rkl algos for gear 1 for apex
might work


----------



## shrimpmaster

eeeven said:


> Yeah i knew this, but in MSI BIOS you can see the ODT without using Windows tools - pretty nice when u try to post some settings without even booting into Windows.
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldnt say you lost the lottery.
> 
> I can Post up to 4100 with Dual Rank on my MSI Z690 Edge with the 12700K but really 24/7 stable is only 3866 (29x133). It seems like the Sweetspot for Dual Ranks is 3866 with the 100:133 strap. 3900 39x100 gives me instant BSOD in Windows. But 4000 on 40x100 strap is stable. I dont understand it.


I'm using single rank b-die. Can't even get 4000mhz gear 1 fully stable. What bothers me the most are the super high VIDs, gives me the impression the chip is really bad. I'm using TVB +2, instead of all core because of this. Really can't do more than 5ghz all core, and even that requires too much voltage.


----------



## eeeven

My 12700K needs 1.28v under Load (on MSI i set 1.30v at Mode 5 LLC) for 5.1P and 4.0E @ 4.0 Ring. Temps ran up to 92C on R23 with 360 AiO.


----------



## shrimpmaster

That's around what I need for 5ghz... But it's stable on linkpack xtreme. Your sp70 is already average, mine is probably well below average.
Just tried 5.1ghz all core. llc level 4. 1.35v manual voltage. Load voltage of 1.29v when I started cinebench, instant crash...
Like I told you, I won silicone lottery for the worst 12700k


----------



## mongoled

chispy said:


> Took a break for a well needed rest after 3 very long days testing 12600k and Strix D4. Still need to test today the new bios Shamino posted with the fix bug for the memory voltage ,bios 0707. Also i have incoming an Asrock Steel Legend ddr4 z690 mobo and a new 12700k wish should be here by friday as i want to test asrock mobo ddr4 capabilities as it has been great for me in the past on older Asrock steel legends boards. Will post back my findings on the Strix D4 and new bios later tonight.


Nice to see XS members here



If you are able to can you run a CB23 with the 12600k with only the P cores enabled with defaults settings and post the score


----------



## anubis1127

eeeven said:


> Gigabyte Z690 AORUS Elite DDR4 was not able to run 2x16 B-Die DR Modules higher than 2800 MHz. 2933 MHz -> no boot. 2x8 SR B-Die were maxed at 3466. i really cant recommend that MB for Memory OC.
> 
> MSI Z690 Edge is pretty good at Mem OC. Gear 2 with Dual Rank B-Die 4.533 C17 and Gear 1 with Dual Rank B-Die 4.000 C16. Both with tight Subs.
> 
> View attachment 2531925
> View attachment 2531926
> 
> 
> View attachment 2531927


So you're saying I bought the wrong motherboard, lol. Those MSI results look nice. With my 12700k and Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4 board it has not been a super fun experience. 2x16 B-Die DR currently at 3333 MTs, was trying to get at least 3600 DR Gear1, but not having any luck.


----------



## ogider

eeeven said:


> MSI Z690 Edge is pretty good at Mem OC


wonder if that super cheap MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4 mobo will work similarly in mem oc .


----------



## zhrooms

kingofblog said:


> The problem with going to 1R is that you would be limited to 16 GB capacity, unless you move to 16 Gb-based DIMMs, and those wouldn't be B-die.


And 16GB capacity is a non-issue for any gamer. And if you're using 32GB as a gamer it should be because you had 10th Gen IMC and ran the Dual Rank B-die sticks which allowed you to run 4600 CL18 or similar, which was ridiculously fast (2300 MHz IMC). If you ran 32GB and didn't have those Dual Rank sticks, it was either because you didn't know that 32GB was useless for gaming or the PC was used for work as well as gaming. And if the latter applies (PC was being used for work too), you should instantly switch to DDR5, DDR4 is only faster in gaming, and not by a lot, like this;
DDR4 is ~5% faster in gaming (rough estimation based on limited data on the highest performing DDR4 and DDR5 speeds).
DDR5 is ~5% slower in gaming ^^
DDR4 is ~40% slower in workloads (just a guess based on bandwidth)
DDR5 is ~40% faster in workloads ^^
So, the gain in workloads is massive while the loss in gaming is very small, so to anyone using the PC for actual work as well as gaming, it's obvious you should switch over to DDR5 as soon as possible. But for every gamer that never ever touch a work application, like myself (dedicated gaming PC), DDR4 is faster, on top of being so much cheaper, which is a nice bonus, many don't need to replace memory, already on b-die.


kingofblog said:


> What you gain in IMC frequency you give back in DRAM timings.


Not sure what you mean, but IMC frequency is more important than timings. Like I demonstrated earlier;
1850 IMC at 13-13-13 = 47.4ns
2050 IMC at 16-16-16 = 45.0ns, ~10% faster IMC, ~23% higher (worse) primary timings = ~5% lower latency
For the 1850 IMC to catch up, the timings would have to be like 11-11-11, which is impossible.


kingofblog said:


> Even if you stick with B-die, DR is more bus-efficient than SR, so while you might get a few ns of latency, the bandwidth wouldn't be any better.


Not sure what you're saying here either, but I have a vague recollection from testing a while back, that there's no difference between Single and Dual Rank, only thing I remember for certain is that using T-Topology on Gigabyte back on Z390, using Quad DIMM, you scored a fair bit higher in 3DMark Physics, maybe that was bandwidth related, really don't remember, but I can easily test it, since I have both kits, I'll just set the same timings and test a game or two.


kingofblog said:


> CapFrameX claims to achieve 4000 MT/s dual-rank (?) on ASUS BIOS 0707:
> Will flash 0707 tomorrow and try again. Not believing so far.


That sounds amazing if true, I'm on 0605 Strix-A, and it couldn't do more than 3720 MT/s (1860 IMC).
I wonder if there are actual BIOS issues going on, since there are reports in this thread of Gigabyte boards having a really hard time with IMC, like it can't even boot 3600 (1800 IMC).
Since I do have the same Gigabyte AORUS Elite AX board, I just need to test it for myself, now that I have the data from the Strix-A, which can do 4100 on Single Rank and 3700 on Dual Rank.
There's no reason I shouldn't be able to match it on the Elite AX board, or any other board, those are really slow speeds for DDR4 after all, and it should just be the CPU (IMC) that decides, so motherboard really shouldn't matter, hence why it might instead be a BIOS issue perhaps (boards should be more than capable of those speeds, they are XMP tested at up to 5333 after all).


jsz said:


> I personally feel that gigabyte offers the best value for both DDR4/DDR5 boards.


I was briefly on the Elite AX two days ago, when I found out my 12900K was defective, during those few hours I had it running, the BIOS was obviously worse than on an ASUS board, that we've always known, but the way the system booted was actually really bad, it was far more unpredictable, the EZ Debug LEDs are terrible, in the wrong spot and in the wrong layout, it also got stuck in endless "OC Retry" mode, couldn't get into my OS drive either, just really not a pleasant experience compared to ASUS, I don't feel I even need the Q-CODE (Post Code/Debug LED), the EZ Debug/Status LEDs are really predictable, the only time you don't know what is happening is when you change like BCLK, then it re-trains memory and it looks like it's failing (DRAM), that's about it, but every time I do that, I know (I expect it), so I just wait it out until it boots, which it does. And I haven't had to use Clear CMOS once either, neither the DirectKey (FlexKey) function since is useless, basically doesn't work, but it doesn't matter, because every time you force shut the PC off, using the power button, just holding it for ~3 seconds, then when you start it back up, it's always in safe mode (default clock but your last BIOS changes are still there), even if it fails hard, I haven't had to manually load a BIOS profile once (or Clear CMOS as mentioned), it's actually an absolute dream to work with, I really have a flow going now after like 2 days of using it, just a shame the board is so insanely expensive, compared to the Gaming X and Elite AX. I legit don't mind that it lacks a dedicated FlexKey (Safe Boot) or a Q-CODE, I thought I'd never make such a claim, but it's still very fast and reliable/predictable, to my surprise. But I'll comment more later, on the Gigabyte BIOS, once I've had more time with it.


eeeven said:


> Gigabyte Z690 AORUS Elite DDR4 was not able to run 2x16 B-Die DR Modules higher than 2800 MHz. 2933 MHz -> no boot. 2x8 SR B-Die were maxed at 3466. i really cant recommend that MB for Memory OC.
> 
> MSI Z690 Edge is pretty good at Mem OC. Gear 2 with Dual Rank B-Die 4.533 C17 and Gear 1 with Dual Rank B-Die 4.000 C16. Both with tight Subs.


There's no actual reason the Gigabyte boards couldn't do it, likely a BIOS issue, which can be fixed, since there are claims about the newer ASUS BIOS making 2000+ IMC possible using Dual Rank, since I'm stuck at 1860 on the BIOS before it, and as you mention, MSI Edge DDR4 being able to run 4000 DR (2000 IMC). So I think it's far too early to make the statement that the Gigabyte boards should be avoided, we need more testing, which I will try to do later today.


shrimpmaster said:


> Hey, what's the vid on your 12700k? I also got a 12700k but with a z690 tuf, only reason I didn't get the Strix A was vrm heatsink height since I want to use a nh-d15.
> VIDs are: 4.9ghz 1.3v, 5ghz 1.36v. I can post up to 4100mhz gear 1, but it's only stable up to 3866mhz...
> I feel like I won the silicon lottery for the worst chip in history.


I don't use VID, and the Strix A heatsink is terrible yes, I can barely screw in my water block on that screw closest to the VRM, since it's a thumbscrew, have to use my fingers, which literally don't fit in there.

All I can say about my SP70, 12700K (5.0GHz on P-Cores and 4.7GHz on Cache) is that it's game stable at LLC6, 1.172V load in-game, only P-cores active and HT, temperature on each core: 41, 35, 37, 36, 34, 36, 36, 38 and a power consumption of 81-90 Watt with CPU usage at ~50%, 300 FPS in Warzone (against bots), 80-90% GPU usage (CPU & Memory bottlenecked).
Water at 1.5°C above Ambient, which was 23.5°C, so Water 25°C and CPU Package at 41°C, so a 16°C delta from Water. You can basically cool this CPU on a potato.
9900K/10700K R23 Multi: 13425
11700K/11900K R23 Multi: 16300 (+21.4%~)
12700K R23 Multi: 20735 (+27.2%~)
12th Gen is +54.5%~ faster than 9th/10th Gen (9900K/10700K), all of the above in 5.0GHz, P-Core only on 12th Gen (No E-Core!).
All of that performance, at just ~85 Watt and ~40°C while running one of the hardest games on the market.










anubis1127 said:


> So you're saying I bought the wrong motherboard, lol. Those MSI results look nice. With my 12700k and Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4 board it has not been a super fun experience. 2x16 B-Die DR currently at 3333 MTs, was trying to get at least 3600 DR Gear1, but not having any luck.


Again, have faith in a BIOS update for the Elite AX, I'm also testing it so we'll see if I run into the same issues on the release BIOS (F4).


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> And 16GB capacity is a non-issue for any gamer. And if you're using 32GB as a gamer it should be because you had 10th Gen IMC and ran the Dual Rank B-die sticks which allowed you to run 4600 CL18 or similar, which was ridiculously fast (2300 MHz IMC). If you ran 32GB and didn't have those Dual Rank sticks, it was either because you didn't know that 32GB was useless for gaming or the PC was used for work as well as gaming. And if the latter applies (PC was being used for work too), you should instantly switch to DDR5, DDR4 is only faster in gaming, and not by a lot, like this:


Some people use their PCs for things other than playing games... I'm trying to move off a X299 workstation with 4x DR DIMMs, and I need to get around 60-70 GB/s of bandwidth to not have too much regression in Real Apps(TM). I'm not going with DDR5 right now, because from what I see in that thread, everything on the market... sucks.



> Not sure what you mean, but IMC frequency is more important than timings. Like I demonstrated earlier;
> 1850 IMC at 13-13-13 = 47.4ns
> 2050 IMC at 16-16-16 = 45.0ns, ~10% faster IMC, ~23% higher (worse) primary timings = ~5% lower latency
> For the 1850 IMC to catch up, the timings would have to be like 11-11-11, which is impossible.


If you were using a 16 Gb-based SR DIMM to keep 32 GB capacity at 4000+ speeds, you would have something like 22 tRCD/tRP. Your AIDA64 test doesn't measure the real latency, because it uses a sequential access pattern and excludes tRCD/tRP. You should measure random latency using Intel MLC, which better correlates with application performance.



> Not sure what you're saying here either, but I have a vague recollection from testing a while back, that there's no difference between Single and Dual Rank.


DR DIMMs have higher performance than SR at any given bus frequency, because they (a) achieve higher bandwidth efficiency, and (b) reduce latency spikes by spreading refreshes across more ranks. This effect is significant with JEDEC timings, but may be mitigated on B-die, because tRFC can go very low.



> That sounds amazing if true, I'm on 0605 Strix-A, and it couldn't do more than 3720 MT/s (1860 IMC).
> I wonder if there are actual BIOS issues going on, since there are reports in this thread of Gigabyte boards having a really hard time with IMC, like it can't even boot 3600 (1800 IMC).


My B-die is back in my workstation and I don't feel like shutting it off again. I will flash 0707 and try going to 4000 with green-PCB Micron DIMMs.


----------



## cstkl1

@zhrooms
what nonsensical data comparison
"highest performing ddr5"..

ddr4 cant beat 6200c30 1t tuned
in all gaming/workloads.

dont even talk about 6400/6600 1T which is the "highest performing ddr5" day 1. 
this is not even the end game.


----------



## Chrisch

maximum with 2x16GB B-Die (DR) on my GB Z690 Gaming X, ordered now a MSI Z690 to see how much more it can 

result isnt the best, subtimings for this @ auto


----------



## Glottis

shamino1978 said:


> 0705 (DDR4) has a bug whereby dram voltage is not applied, will post new bioses that fix this later
> 
> these ones fixed:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0707.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


Does 0707 have Legacy Game Compatibility Mode? MSI and Asrock have it, ASUS doesn't. I was considering a much cheaper MSI board but went with Asus. I'm kinda disappointed now and this isn't the first time Asus is very slow to introduce new BIOS features mandated by Intel.


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> And the real latency (actual number) is irrelevant for gamers, all we need to know is: Lower AIDA64 Latency = Higher Gaming Performance, that's about it, there's no need to use Intel MLC.


I don't agree. If this were true, tuning tRCD and tRP would have no effect on game fps, and the opposite is the case. It is true, though, that random latency can be estimated by adding tRCD + ~2 ns to sequential latency, so as long as you are tuning tCL, tRCD, and tRP together, the particular measurement is not critically important. However, if you are looking at some G.SKILL bins like 16-22-22, you are deluding yourself if you only check AIDA64.

Regarding BIOS 0707, I was able to get a Micron 32 GB 2R DIMM to 3733 MT/s, but any higher would not post. Tried gear 2 and it also didn't work, so I need to locate more B-die for further evaluation.


----------



## jsz

I bought an Aorus PRO, TUF WIFI and Tomahawk D4 just to go through them and see what I like better. Won't get them until the end of the week.

Spec wise, the AORUS PRO is the best D4 board in terms of VRM vs Price. I'm currently on a X570 UNIFY with AMD hardware.

Edit: Theres a typo on Prime Plus. Has 10 stages, not 14.

Those new VISHAY 80A Stages seem to offer the best value throughout the entire Z690 range on ASUS side. ASUS has been positioning TUF as the clear price to performance pick for a few generations now.

Just find it weird that Maximus is unobtainable for most buyers now. Are people really willing to spend $600 USD on a Mobo? I though $380 for a X570 Crosshair was expensive.


----------



## zhrooms

jsz said:


> I bought an Aorus PRO, TUF WIFI and Tomahawk D4 just to go through them and see what I like better. Won't get them until the end of the week.
> 
> Those new VISHAY 80A Stages seem to offer the best value throughout the entire Z690 range on ASUS side. ASUS has been positioning TUF as the clear price to performance pick for a few generations now. Spec wise, the AORUS PRO is the best D4 board in terms of VRM vs Price. I'm currently on a X570 UNIFY with AMD hardware.


Yeah I got the TUF + Strix A and AORUS Elite AX + Gaming X, only had time to test the Strix A so far, but it's really really good, surprised me, you'd expect it though considering what it costs (TUF should be the same, that's why I bought it, way cheaper for potentially identical overclocking experience).

As for the VRM, there's absolutely no way it makes a difference, 16x 60A on Gaming X is vastly overkill for a maxed out 12900K. But we'll see, I'm going to switch to the Elite AX soon. About the Pro though, it might not be the best board after all, since I used the Elite AX briefly, and the BIOS is just so much worse than ASUS, I don't have a Q-CODE/Debug LED on the Strix A now, but I'm managing perfectly fine without it, and that's really all you're paying for on the Pro model, the better VRM won't make a difference, with the god tier BIOS and perfectly predictable/reliable EZ Debug Status LEDs on the Strix, I'd very likely prefer it over the Pro (the deep ASUS tweaks are a bonus).



jsz said:


> Just find it weird that Maximus is unobtainable for most buyers now. Are people really willing to spend $600 USD on a Mobo? I though $380 for a X570 Crosshair was expensive.


Maximus Hero is the best selling board by ASUS I believe, people are just really dumb, nothing else too it, Hero is basically a LN2 board, a worse Apex for almost the same amount of money. So 99% of the people who buy it will never use it properly, the majority of owners are definitely rocking 240 AIO coolers and never clocking the CPU higher than 5 GHz.


jsz said:


> Theres a typo on Prime Plus. Has 10 stages, not 14.


Thanks, fixed.


----------



## kingofblog

Checked the IC part number. Micron green DIMMs were 16Gb Rev.E (Micron Rev.E 8/16Gbit vs Rev.J & Hynix DJR 8Gbit), which apparently do not clock well. Reached 3733 MT/s once, but the next time, it didn't boot. LEDs got past DRAM training stage, but boot hung.


----------



## shrimpmaster

@eeeven


I've always had strange random issues when running tight subs, from aim feel in-game to random app crashes to desktop, even if the ram passes most recommended memtests for hours.
If I run tight subs now, it crashes my pc on linpack xtreme 10gb, no matter the voltage I give to the SA or ram, cpu also running stock just to make sure. Just dropping RRD_s/l to 6, 8 and tfaw 24 or 32 makes it crash on linpack xtreme. Only thing i adjust now is trfc.
I've had the same experience with my 8700k and different b-die kit, things just felt more consistent with sub timmings set to auto.

Also, max stable in gear 1 is 3733mhz, 14-14-14 1t. Even 3866mhz fails for me on linpack xtreme, and it posts up to 4100mhz...

Probably going to drop down to 15-15-15 1t, since c14 requires 1.5v to be FULLY stable, and c15 only 1.4v.


----------



## ObviousCough

My i5 and Z690i Aorus Ultra arrived today. 

A 2 dimm board with a 10 layer pcb shouldn't be horrible for memory OC.

So far i've found that it HATES dual rank b dies, my DJR 5333 kit throws errors at xmp, and i can only reach 3600 in gear 1 mode with single rank bdies. I can do 4400 in gear 2 with SR bdies, 4500 posts but throws errors immediately in even the default TM5 profile. 

This is my first gigabyte board since the P35-UDP3! My last 4 boards have been Unify/X, So far i prefer the MSI bios.


----------



## zhrooms

Got some good data on the latency difference on Alder Lake, with identical memory timings, and I confirmed it wasn't something incompatible so I let it train with everything but primary (basically XMP).
40.8ns - Coffee Lake/Comet Lake (9900K 8C/16T 16MB & 10700K 8C/16T 16MB)​42.4ns - Rocket Lake (11700K 8C/16T 16MB)​*51.4ns* - Alder Lake (12700K 8C/16T 25MB)​
R23 matched with games between 9-10th Gen (8C/16T) and 11th Gen
13425 Score on 9-10th Gen​16300 Score on 11th Gen (+21.4%)​20750 Score on 12th Gen (+27.3%)​
In World of Warcraft, the 11700K performed 21.32% faster, than the 9-10th Gen.
In Call of Duty: Warzone, the 11700K performed 22.24% faster, than the 9-10th Gen.
So, these results are near identical to the R23 Multi score of 21.4%, as well as Geekbench 5 Multi that also showed 20.09%.

So you might have expected a ~27% increase based on the R23 score, but it's not even close, since the memory latency is sky high, 9-10th Gen latency was near identical to 11th Gen, 40.8ns vs 42.4ns.

The initial results I now have from World of Warcraft,
_Average FPS:_ *+16.66%*​_5% Low:_ +16.55%​_1% Low:_ +15.00%​So nowhere near 27%, not even 20%, which makes sense, as soon as you look at the latency, 51.4 is extremely high compared to Rocket Lake at 42.4ns, so it almost looks like we're losing 1% performance every 1 higher ns, remove 10ns and gain 10% from 16.66 to 26.66% basically, that sounds reasonable.
With extremely tightened down DDR4 sticks you can get down close to 40, it should then be a full 10ns drop, and get above 25% in World of Warcraft, to closely match the R23 score.
This is something I will confirm, soon.


ObviousCough said:


> My i5 and Z690i Aorus Ultra arrived today. A 2 dimm board with a 10 layer pcb shouldn't be horrible for memory OC.
> So far i've found that it HATES dual rank b dies, my DJR 5333 kit throws errors at xmp, and i can only reach 3600 in gear 1 mode with single rank bdies. I can do 4400 in gear 2 with SR bdies, 4500 posts but throws errors immediately in even the default TM5 profile. This is my first gigabyte board since the P35-UDP3! My last 4 boards have been Unify/X, So far i prefer the MSI bios.


Oh, that sucks! Z690I AORUS Ultra DDR4 should be the best board for DDR4, for obvious reasons. It really looks like BIOS is what is to blame for poor dual rank frequencies, hopefully Gigabyte pushes out a fix, since we've seen two or three screenshots of non-Gigabyte boards running 4000 dual rank. And the fact that it looks like an updated BIOS for Strix A gets its from 3700 dual rank to 4000+. As for the MSI BIOS, it's definitely better than Gigabyte, after having used ASUS for Z270 and Z370, then going Z590 MSI, they really did a fantastic job at basically copying ASUS, it's extremely similar, but ASUS still remains the clear winner on the BIOS front. The one solace is that you're not really suppose to be in BIOS much after you've gotten a solid overclock going for the CPU and Memory, shouldn't have to touch it until next year when Raptor Lake comes out and you replace the CPU (which is optional of course). But, have some hope that Gigabyte fixes their BIOS, since the board can clearly do 4000+ in dual rank.


----------



## zhrooms

kingofblog said:


> DR DIMMs have higher performance than SR at any given bus frequency, because they (a) achieve higher bandwidth efficiency, and (b) reduce latency spikes by spreading refreshes across more ranks. This effect is significant with JEDEC timings, but may be mitigated on B-die, because tRFC can go very low.


I have the data now, with cloned timings on all systems, in World of Warcraft;
2x 8 GB Single Rank B-die at 3600 14-15-15 (51.4ns on 12th Gen)​2x 16 GB Dual Rank B-die at 3600 14-15-15 (40.8ns on 9-10th Gen, 42.4ns on 11th Gen, 51.4ns on 12th Gen)​(FPS) Dual Rank is: +0.8% faster Average, +1.2% faster in 5% Lows, +0.9% faster in 1% Lows

So, as I remembered, it was approximately 1% faster, which is basically 0%, it really doesn't matter, the reason as I mentioned before, you buy Dual Rank as a gamer to get the new B-die that can do crazy frequency and low timings on 10th Gen. But on Rocket Lake, and now Alder Lake, where high frequencies aren't possible, Dual Rank is a waste, sure it can do lower timings, lower than regular Single Rank B-die, but that's not enough to justify the cost, which is more than double, since it's 32GB. If the new BIOS on Strix A can unlock my Dual Rank to reach the same IMC, 2050, I'd probably keep them, since I already own them, but if the Single Rank can do, even just 50 more, I'd definitely switch to them.


----------



## Cuthalu

Chrisch said:


> maximum with 2x16GB B-Die (DR) on my GB Z690 Gaming X, ordered now a MSI Z690 to see how much more it can
> 
> result isnt the best, subtimings for this @ auto
> 
> View attachment 2531979


What volts did you use for that?


----------



## ObviousCough

4400c19 kit is now failing tm5 at xmp.

i may fold and grab and Apex. I was waiting to see how it compared to the Unify-X. But this is unusable!


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> Got some good data on the latency difference on Alder Lake, with identical memory timings, and I confirmed it wasn't something incompatible so I let it train with everything but primary (basically XMP).
> 40.8ns - Coffee Lake/Comet Lake (9900K 8C/16T 16MB & 10700K 8C/16T 16MB)​42.4ns - Rocket Lake (11700K 8C/16T 16MB)​*51.4ns* - Alder Lake (12700K 8C/16T 25MB)​


You can't just compare the latency like that (or, you can, but it's false to attribute it solely to IMC). Memory latency is additive to cache latency, and the cache architecture of ADL (3 MB/core, exclusive) is different from its predecessors (2 MB/core, inclusive). Also, make sure to disable E-core for highest ring speed and thus lowest latency.



> (FPS) Dual Rank is: +0.8% faster Average, +1.2% faster in 5% Lows, +0.9% faster in 1% Lows
> 
> So, as I remembered, it was approximately 1% faster, which is basically 0%, it really doesn't matter,


How much faster will you go in Warcraft by squeezing another 5 ns out of IMC frequency? Probably also on the order of 1-2%. Especially if the 0707 BIOS rumor is real, and you can only get 50 MHz more IMC frequency, which is like 1 ns, not 5.


----------



## jsz

zhrooms said:


> Yeah I got the TUF + Strix A and AORUS Elite AX + Gaming X, only had time to test the Strix A so far, but it's really really good, surprised me, you'd expect it though considering what it costs (TUF should be the same, that's why I bought it, way cheaper for potentially identical overclocking experience).
> 
> As for the VRM, there's absolutely no way it makes a difference, 16x 60A on Gaming X is vastly overkill for a maxed out 12900K. But we'll see, I'm going to switch to the Elite AX soon. About the Pro though, it might not be the best board after all, since I used the Elite AX briefly, and the BIOS is just so much worse than ASUS, I don't have a Q-CODE/Debug LED on the Strix A now, but I'm managing perfectly fine without it, and that's really all you're paying for on the Pro model, the better VRM won't make a difference, with the god tier BIOS and perfectly predictable/reliable EZ Debug Status LEDs on the Strix, I'd very likely prefer it over the Pro (the deep ASUS tweaks are a bonus).
> 
> 
> Maximus Hero is the best selling board by ASUS I believe, people are just really dumb, nothing else too it, Hero is basically a LN2 board, a worse Apex for almost the same amount of money. So 99% of the people who buy it will never use it properly, the majority of owners are definitely rocking 240 AIO coolers and never clocking the CPU higher than 5 GHz.
> 
> Thanks, fixed.


Yeah the TUF WIFI and STRIX-A look pretty much similar aside from the couple of stages missing on TUF model. It's akin to C8H vs Strix-E on X570. Strix-A has more "features", but TUF OC should be similar albeit a few degrees different. Actual heatsink design might help too when it comes to specific boards.

I would say the 60A * 16 entry giga model is fine for a 12600k and 12700k, but 12900K might want a beefier VRM just for the sake that it pushes well over 100w higher in full multicore load *w/o an OC*. It also makes no sense to run a $600+ USD binned CPU on an entry board, but I digress lol. 

Maybe Gigabyte boards are just significantly overkill this generation, but the pricing is more than fair. MSI has outliers like the Tomahawk which I consider this generations "Unify".

I would agree that AORUS PRO is definitely overkill with its 90A stages (diminishing returns for anything higher such as 105A rated). Sweet spot is definitely around the 270-330 price range. I don't see much reason to spend more unless a specific brand has a superior BIOS/updates. 

I wasn't happy with ASUS on X570 (C8H was buggy for me), hence me going MSI.


----------



## JoeRambo

zhrooms said:


> 40.8ns - Coffee Lake/Comet Lake (9900K 8C/16T 16MB /10700K 8C/16T 16MB)42.4ns - Rocket Lake (11700K 8C/16T 16MB)*51.4ns* - Alder Lake (12700K 8C/16T 25MB)


At least 3-4ns of this slow down is coming from slower L3 cache. ADL is 14-15ns L3, previous gens were 10-11ns deals. So expectations must be set accordingly.



jsz said:


> MSI has outliers like the Tomahawk which I consider this generations "Unify".


Agreed, both Tomahawk and that Edge look like Z690 Unify. I am very happy with Z490 Unify and getting MSI Z690 Edge D4.
Tho i feel like MSI made mistake not releasing DDR4 Unify, i would have thrown money at them for doing so.


----------



## jsz

JoeRambo said:


> Agreed, both Tomahawk and that Edge look like Z690 Unify. I am very happy with Z490 Unify and getting MSI Z690 Edge D4.
> Tho i feel like MSI made mistake not releasing DDR4 Unify, i would have thrown money at them for doing so.


I think they want to associate "MEG" with "high end", but theres really no excuse why the DDR5 variant is ~$500.. I can understand that it's an 8 layer board and thus adds production cost, but 19 * 105A rated stages are insanely overkill.

Pretty sure that price can get down to ~$400 MSRP (profitable) with the same 8 layer and a weaker, but suitable VRM.

X570 PRO WS (8 layer) was $380 and shared a CPU VRM with the STRIX-E ($289) as an example.

When you look at gigabyte selling boards that would previously be at a $300 price point for $200, the situation becomes pretty funny.


----------



## zhrooms

kingofblog said:


> You can't just compare the latency like that (or, you can, but it's false to attribute it solely to IMC). Memory latency is additive to cache latency, and the cache architecture of ADL (3 MB/core, exclusive) is different from its predecessors (2 MB/core, inclusive). Also, make sure to disable E-core for highest ring speed and thus lowest latency.
> 
> How much faster will you go in Warcraft by squeezing another 5 ns out of IMC frequency? Probably also on the order of 1-2%. Especially if the 0707 BIOS rumor is real, and you can only get 50 MHz more IMC frequency, which is like 1 ns, not 5.


I can yes, and I am. I did mention it previously, the latency doesn't really matter, but the lower it is, the higher framerate you will have in games, that's really all we gamers need to know, but I'm taking a leap and use the latency number the best we can, and it's working out pretty well after all the math and comparisons are done. So yes I understand it's not as correct as it it could be, but good enough for me (us gamers) is all I'm saying.

And yes, first thing I did was to disable E-cores, been running 8C/16T 5.0 GHz and 4.7GHz on the Cache, at about 1.225 load so it's R23 stable, to ensure complete stability in game tests for the memory. I did some brief testing and I should be able to get this 12700K up to 5.2 GHz at 1.36V load~, just not gotten to it yet, with that voltage it should also do higher cache (ring), maybe 4.9.

If the 0707 is legit, then I'd be going from 1860 IMC on Dual Rank to 2050, that's ~200, absolutely massive latency decrease, at 2050 IMC with CL16-16-16 I got 45.0ns, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI, while at 1800 14-15-15 (535 RFC, 14055 REFI and more lowered from Auto) I got 51.4ns, that's a 6.4ns decrease, big improvement in gaming performance, far bigger than 1-2% lol. But you mentioned 50 MHz, then perhaps up to 2% sounds reasonable, that's something I'm testing very soon.


jsz said:


> I would say the 60A * 16 entry giga model is fine for a 12600k and 12700k, but 12900K might want a beefier VRM just for the sake that it pushes well over 100w higher in full multicore load *w/o an OC*. It also makes no sense to run a $600+ USD binned CPU on an entry board, but I digress lol.
> 
> Maybe Gigabyte boards are just significantly overkill this generation, but the pricing is more than fair. MSI has outliers like the Tomahawk which I consider this generations "Unify".
> 
> I would agree that AORUS PRO is definitely overkill with its 90A stages (diminishing returns for anything higher such as 105A rated). Sweet spot is definitely around the 270-330 price range. I don't see much reason to spend more unless a specific brand has a superior BIOS/updates.
> 
> I wasn't happy with ASUS on X570 (C8H was buggy for me), hence me going MSI.


Dude, 16x 60A (960) Direct Stages is insanely overkill, 8C/16T 9900K ran on 8x50A (400), I pulled 250W from that like it's nothing, VRM hit like 60°C with the case fan pulling in from the back, at like 1000 RPM. As you say _"Maybe Gigabyte boards are just significantly overkill this generation"_, that's exactly it.. everything is overkill, the budget boards are no longer budget, they're like mid-tier.
The Gigabyte Gaming X board (same board as Elite AX but no Wi-Fi module) for $229 has the same 16x 60A Direct Stages as the Elite AX at $269, same 20-Phase PWM Controller (RAA229131) as the Apex for christ sake, these boards pack some serious VRM, especially the Pro model with 90A stages (1440), that's borderline insane, and I guess Strix A with 16x 80A (1280) in Parallel as well.

But that's why I got multiple boards, I'm currently on the Strix A, with 16x80A, but I have the Gaming X and Elite AX at 16x60A (and TUF), and I've got multiple temperature sensor (thermistor) cables as well as a FLIR thermal camera, so I'm going to max out my 12600K, 12700K and 12900K, push them to the absolute limit with P & E-cores overclocked, and see how hot they really get, I'm thinking none of the boards will exceed 50°C with a 120mm fan somewhere near the VRM, even at just 600 RPM, will probably end up removing the heatsink on the Strix A to prove it can game at 150W without even breaking a sweat.


JoeRambo said:


> I feel like MSI made mistake not releasing DDR4 Unify, i would have thrown money at them for doing so.


Yeah that's what a lot of people are thinking right now, DDR4 is supported on Raptor Lake next year, for Z790, there's a good chance we will get higher end boards at that point, maybe even before for Z690 once they see there's a demand, for example ASUS had the Strix E with Q-CODE and stronger VRM listed with DDR4, even including a price, in their own official reveal, it was then removed quietly, happened to a few more boards I believe, don't recall which, so it's not impossible they'll find their way out over the next year. I would be very excited about a Strix ITX D4 as well as a Strix E D4, or one of those "lower end" Dual DIMM boards like Unify X (it's the cheapest one by far, at $499), I'd definitely get it, no hesitation, if it was available, they're all losing big money by not giving us what we want.


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> I can yes, and I am. I did mention it previously, the latency doesn't really matter, but the lower it is, the higher framerate you will have in games, that's really all we gamers need to know,


Obviously, lower is always better, but it's not correct to claim that the latency increase is why ADL "only" gives 17% more fps in WoW vs 23% in CineBench, because that calculation doesn't account for any extra cache hits enabled by the rearchitecture. ADL/GLC also has extra execution units specifically for CB. We don't need to debate this further.



> If the 0707 is legit, then I'd be going from 1860 IMC on Dual Rank to 2050, that's ~200, absolutely massive latency decrease, at 2050 IMC


The rumor from CapFrameX (who is continuing to run with the story) is 4000 MT/s DR, or 2 GHz IMC. I mentioned that I was only able to verify up to 3733 MT/s, or 1.866 GHz, but I won't have access to B-die again for a while. Since you have all the required materials, perhaps you can try it yourself and report back whether CapFrameX is legit or if his SP just happens to be over 9000.


----------



## zhrooms

kingofblog said:


> It's not correct to claim that the latency increase is why ADL "only" gives 17% more fps in WoW vs 23% in CineBench, because that calculation doesn't account for any extra cache hits enabled by the rearchitecture.


Never said it was, my claim is it *looks* like it is, and it's 17% in WoW vs 27% in CB23, that's 10%, and it just so happened to be running at almost exactly 10ns higher, then we can _theorize_ that if I reduce ns by 10, it potentially could improve performance by enough to make it to almost 27%. I'm going to confirm (test) it, just not done it.. yet.


kingofblog said:


> CapFrameX showed 4000 MT/s DR. I mentioned that I was only able to verify up to 3733 MT/s, but I won't have access to B-die again for a while. Since you have all the required materials, perhaps you can try it yourself and report back whether CapFrameX is legit or if his SP just happens to be over 9000.


Yes, I managed to verify DR 1860 so, 3720 MT/s, on a SP70 12700K, 0605 BIOS for the Strix A, and I will flash the new BIOS yes, just not gotten around to it yet, might have to wait until tomorrow, got so many things to test.


----------



## eeeven

Anyone here know where i can download MSI DRagon Ball ver 1.0.0.08 for Z690 and Dragon Power newest Version?


----------



## therealjustin

jsz said:


> I bought an Aorus PRO, TUF WIFI and Tomahawk D4 just to go through them and see what I like better. Won't get them until the end of the week.
> 
> Spec wise, the AORUS PRO is the best D4 board in terms of VRM vs Price. I'm currently on a X570 UNIFY with AMD hardware.
> 
> Edit: Theres a typo on Prime Plus. Has 10 stages, not 14.
> 
> Those new VISHAY 80A Stages seem to offer the best value throughout the entire Z690 range on ASUS side. ASUS has been positioning TUF as the clear price to performance pick for a few generations now.
> 
> Just find it weird that Maximus is unobtainable for most buyers now. Are people really willing to spend $600 USD on a Mobo? I though $380 for a X570 Crosshair was expensive.


Where did you find the Aorus Pro DDR4? Been looking everywhere for one!


----------



## jsz

zhrooms said:


> Dude, 16x 60A (960) Direct Stages is insanely overkill, 8C/16T 9900K ran on 8x50A (400), I pulled 250W from that like it's nothing, VRM hit like 60°C with the case fan pulling in from the back, at like 1000 RPM. As you say _"Maybe Gigabyte boards are just significantly overkill this generation"_, that's exactly it.. everything is overkill, the budget boards are no longer budget, they're like mid-tier.
> The Gigabyte Gaming X board (same board as Elite AX but no Wi-Fi module) for $229 has the same 16x 60A Direct Stages as the Elite AX at $269, same 20-Phase PWM Controller (RAA229131) as the Apex for christ sake, these boards pack some serious VRM, especially the Pro model with 90A stages (1440), that's borderline insane, and I guess Strix A with 16x 80A (1280) in Parallel as well.
> 
> But that's why I got multiple boards, I'm currently on the Strix A, with 16x80A, but I have the Gaming X and Elite AX at 16x60A (and TUF), and I've got multiple temperature sensor (thermistor) cables as well as a FLIR thermal camera, so I'm going to max out my 12600K, 12700K and 12900K, push them to the absolute limit with P & E-cores overclocked, and see how hot they really get, I'm thinking none of the boards will exceed 50°C with a 120mm fan somewhere near the VRM, even at just 600 RPM, will probably end up removing the heatsink on the Strix A to prove it can game at 150W without even breaking a sweat.


Guess I have to see thermals on multiple boards to really make judgement. 12900k is the highest power draw stock part I've seen in recent years.

Even though giga's boards are fairly overkill they're still priced well which is odd to say.. And yes, I agree. The entry level boards out of giga are better than first generation HERO/MASTER/ACE X570 in VRM department.. ($300-$400 segment).

"Enthusiast" want high quality parts, but these board makers have a disconnect with the consumer at the moment. 

ASUS proved they can make a 12 * 60A 8 layer board for sub $400. This is just dumb..


----------



## jsz

therealjustin said:


> Where did you find the Aorus Pro DDR4? Been looking everywhere for one!


was on amazon but it seems pulled.. odd.


----------



## Herald

zhrooms said:


> Never said it was, my claim is it *looks* like it is, and it's 17% in WoW vs 27% in CB23, that's 10%, and it just so happened to be running at almost exactly 10ns higher, then we can _theorize_ that if I reduce ns by 10, it potentially could improve performance by enough to make it to almost 27%. I'm going to confirm (test) it, just not done it.. yet.
> 
> Yes, I managed to verify DR 1860 so, 3720 MT/s, on a SP70 12700K, 0605 BIOS for the Strix A, and I will flash the new BIOS yes, just not gotten around to it yet, might have to wait until tomorrow, got so many things to test.


I currently have a 12900k and I'mwaiting to see your results. Haven't figured out if im going with a ddr4 or a ddr5 mobo. (not that I can find any ddr5 ram to begin with). Originally I was going with the aorus master + 5600c36 gskills, but those are nowhere to be found, so I'm considering DR 4000c14 from gskill with any ddr4 mobo that can actually run those speeds. I can find the z690 Prime p ddr for 220 (170 after cashback), so that's cheap, assuming the board can deal with ram and a 12900k


----------



## therealjustin

jsz said:


> was on amazon but it seems pulled.. odd.


I've been checking nonstop every hour on Amazon, Newegg, BestBuy, and of course I miss it.  Do you happen to have the ASIN number?

It's bizarre to me how little effort there was by motherboard manufactures in regards to DDR4 offerings. Why only lower tier boards? It seems like a large percentage of sales considering how many people would likely re-use their DDR4.


----------



## Falkentyne

therealjustin said:


> I've been checking nonstop every hour on Amazon, Newegg, BestBuy, and of course I miss it.  Do you happen to have the ASIN number?
> 
> It's bizarre to me how little effort there was by motherboard manufactures in regards to DDR4 offerings. Why only lower tier boards? It seems like a large percentage of sales considering how many people would likely re-use their DDR4.


Pretty sure Intel has something to do with that.


----------



## chispy

I'll be testing the new bios 0707 for the Asus Strix-A D4 and posting my findings and results in a few minutes. Hopefully my good dual rank 2x16gb kit of sammies B-die will behave better with the bug fix. Memory kit is capable of running 4400Mhz Cas14 tight , for a 32gb kit that is very good , let's find out if is the imc limits or the motherboard limits or bios that is holding back overclocking a good 2x16 kit of B-die on Alder lake.


----------



## ibtar

eeeven said:


> Gigabyte Z690 AORUS Elite DDR4 was not able to run 2x16 B-Die DR Modules higher than 2800 MHz. 2933 MHz -> no boot. 2x8 SR B-Die were maxed at 3466. i really cant recommend that MB for Memory OC.


Seriously? Seems the board is defective to me, I'd return that ASAP. I doubt that's representative of all of the boards, but if it is, Gigabyte really ****ed up.


----------



## anubis1127

This Gigabyte Elite AX DDR4 board is not very good, which is a shame, because it looks nice on paper. 

I wouldn't even consider this ready for retail if I were testing it. Basic XMP function doesn't even work properly, if it even POSTS, which is a big IF, it can completely ignore primary timings, and/or boot at half the rated / set speed. I cleared CMOS, enter bios, XMP set with a 4000cl17 kit, save, enter bios, it booted seemingly normal, no boot failure/recovery:








Save and Exit, boots to Windows, and...








It's running at half the speed! 4000MTs should be 2000 Mhz last I checked, and completely ignored the XMP timings, off to a GREAT start!

I've tested 9 different retail XMP DDR4 kits ranging from basic 3600cl14 SR b-die, to 5333 SR DJR, and only 2 of them were able to POST the XMP timings, and both times it was in gear 2, a 4133cl19 Patriot Viper Steel kit SR B-Die, and 3600cl18 Klevv Boltx DR DJR. 

Manual overclocking isn't much better, thus far I'm limited to 3466MTs for Gear1, but that could just be my 12700k CPU. Gear 2 I haven't been able to go over 4000MTs ratio, 4133 MTs is possible with BCLK OC.

Another fun thing; it likes to yeet Vdd/VddQ if I leave it on auto when booting aforementioned 3466 MTs gear 1 OC it sets 1.5V.


----------



## kingofblog

Falkentyne said:


> Pretty sure Intel has something to do with that.


Intel marketing is working overtime to put the E-core and DDR5 memes in people's heads. They backstabbed AVX-512 to make sure E-core is never beaten by P-core, and they even set the reference BIOS to default DDR4-3200 in Gear2 (check latencies from Anandtech review) to hide the gaming performance regression.

I wouldn't be surprised if Intel put a contract term prohibiting motherboard OEMs from selling DDR4 in the highest product tiers. Intel has a lot of leverage over product decisions through marketing development funds (continuation of Intel Inside).


----------



## zhrooms

Just messed around a little, left RDWR and WRRD on Auto, and the last 5 in Tertiary, see image at the bottom of the post. Since 4133 isn't possible on this CPU, had to resort to BCLK tuning. This as expected, wasn't stable (15-15-15), but here are a few scores (framerate numbers) with 16-16-16 instead, 44.7ns.

These sticks are 8GB Single Rank Trident Z RGB B-die from early 2017, so manufactured almost five years ago 😬. So it's no surprise they can't do 4133 MT/s at 15-15-15, I always ran them at 4133 MT/s 16-16-16 on my Apex boards, and even that was borderline unstable at times, that is obviously still very fast but not as fast as the newer B-die kits. Really hope the new ASUS BIOS can get my Dual Rank going with the same 2050 IMC, then it'd be easy. Anyway, World of Warcraft as usual,

3600 - 14-15-15-35-2T, RFC 535 and 14055 REFI, 51.4ns (basically XMP)
173.6 - Average FPS​167.2 - 5% Low FPS​160.4 - 1% Low FPS​
4100 - 16-16-16-36-2T, RFC 320 and 65535 REFI, 45.2ns
182.6 - Avg (+5.18%)​176.6 - 5% (+5.62%)​168.6 - 1% (+5.11%)​
4100 - 16-16-16-36-2T, RFC 320 and 65535 REFI, ?ns
186.2 - Avg (+1.97%)​179.9 - 5% (+1.86%)​172.0 - 1% (+2.00%)​(This is what was added ^^: RRDL 6, RRDS 4, RTP 6, FAW 16, CKE 4, CWL 18)

4100 - 16-16-16-30-2T, RFC 320 and 65535 REFI, 44.7ns
186.9 - Avg (+0.38%)​180.9 - 5% (+0.56%)​172.0 - 1% (+0.00%)​(This is what was added ^^: CWL 18 to 14 and 36 RAS to 32, 28 didn't boot. Tertiary untouched (7-4, 16-16, 40-30).

So from basically slightly tuned XMP (ASUS Memory Tweak Mode): +7.67% Average FPS from going 51.4ns to 44.7ns (-6.7ns), almost 1% per ns, which is what I expected. @kingofblog
5% Low FPS: +8.2% and 1% Low FPS: 7.23%


----------



## kingofblog

Thanks, @zhrooms. Looking forward to the DR results and expecting ~55 GB/s bandwidth at 4000 MT/s (real, not AIDA64). As for latency, my notes suggest it should be 2 ns per 100 MHz, so I'm surprised that refresh tuning and 250 MHz higher IMC together are only worth 6 ns. Must be that the gains are diminishing at higher IMC frequencies (100 MHz is a higher increase percentage-wise starting from 1 GHz vs 2 GHz).


----------



## Exilon

My 12900K doesn't like 4000CL18 XMP with 16Gbit SR Hynix modules. Not even stable at 1.35v VCCSA under load to pass a single MLC run. The memory POSTs without issue, but the entire thing falls over under the slightest memory load. This probably explains why I'm stuck at 3466 with dual rank 8Gbit B-die with 1.3v VCCSA. Oh well.


----------



## Chrisch

Cuthalu said:


> What volts did you use for that?


1.10v VCCSA & 1.45v vDimm


----------



## chispy

With limited time i had tonight best i could do is 3733Mhz on a 2x16gb kit of b-die highest ram clocks frequency on this b-die 32gb kit. As far as timmings goes , i spend the time testing primary timmings only as low and thight as it goes , it does not like Cas14 at all :/ no matter voltages SA and v.mem it wont boot at Cas14 ddr4-3733Mhz , best i could do was 15-16-15-24-2T . 1T is possible up to 3600Mhz , after that only it will boot at 2T. Will keep testing secondary and thirdtiary timmings tomorrow. this is a very lenghty process of testing timmings one by one. * Tip - start with low volts for System Agent at 1.10v as it seems it does not like high SA volts , tested all the way up to 1.40v SA and made it worst * train your memory and your way up , start at 3200Mhz let train run some benchmark , check stability and go for 3333Mhz change and repeat , 3400Mhz etc... all the way up to 3733Mhz little by little take your time it takes time for the memory to train. It seems AL is imc limited like RKL more or less same ceiling. 2x8gb kits are much more easy to train and goes higher in frequency easier up to 4133Mhz.

cpu -12600k @ 5.1Ghz 1.43v core / SA 1.17v / v.mem 1.65v ( E cores disable ) / G.Skill trident Z ddr4-4000mhz 2x16gb cas19-19-19 memory kit b-die. / v.mem 1.65v / SA 1.17v / 1:1 100:133 strap boot straight from bios.


----------



## shrimpmaster

I've done some tests on my z690 tuf with new 707 bios and it's 3866mhz gear 1, but it requires 2t command rate to be stable, while at 3733mhz it can run 1t.
Can even run 3866mhz gear 1 with flat 14-14-14...

Still can't tighten RRDs and tfaw without instant crash on linkpack xtreme, even at 3600mhz. Very strange, it's not vcore either, it happens at stock.


----------



## JoeRambo

shrimpmaster said:


> Still can't tighten RRDs and tfaw without instant crash on linkpack xtreme, even at 3600mhz. Very strange, it's not vcore either, it happens at stock.


It's not "stock". Stock is BIOS defaults coupled to 3200 with JEDEC memory timings.

It is crashing simply due to lack of stability to run massive incresae of GFlops that memory tunings is giving to it. On 9900K it was not uncommon to gain 20-25% GFlops in LInpack JUST by memory tune from defaults. Linpack is this sensitive to bandwidth and latency. CPU theoretical performance is above default and limited mostly by memory. And RRD and TFaw play big role in just how fast memory requests are served and fed into Linpack to fuel those FP calcs.


----------



## shrimpmaster

JoeRambo said:


> It's not "stock". Stock is BIOS defaults coupled to 3200 with JEDEC memory timings.
> 
> It is crashing simply due to lack of stability to run massive incresae of GFlops that memory tunings is giving to it. On 9900K it was not uncommon to gain 20-25% GFlops in LInpack JUST by memory tune from defaults. Linpack is this sensitive to bandwidth and latency. CPU theoretical performance is above default and limited mostly by memory. And RRD and TFaw play big role in just how fast memory requests are served and fed into Linpack to fuel those FP calcs.


when i say crashing I mean pc crashing with bluescreen... Not linpack itself.


----------



## JoeRambo

shrimpmaster said:


> when i say crashing I mean pc crashing with bluescreen... Not linpack itself.


Yup, CPU not stable. Just like default memory/clocks and lowering voltage will make Linpack bluescreen at some point.


----------



## shrimpmaster

JoeRambo said:


> Yup, CPU not stable. Just like default memory/clocks and lowering voltage will make Linpack bluescreen at some point.


Actually u might be right. Tried disabling e-core and it's not crashing anymore... Can anyone test linpack xtreme with tuned memory? I wonder if it's a defective cpu or is related to ring clock dropping to 3.6ghz when e cores are enabled.


----------



## anubis1127

shrimpmaster said:


> Actually u might be right. Tried disabling e-core and it's not crashing anymore... Can anyone test linpack xtreme with tuned memory? I wonder if it's a defective cpu or is related to ring clock dropping to 3.6ghz when e cores are enabled.


I would try, but ugh, I can't even pass a cinebench r20 run with tuned memory, xD.


----------



## eeeven

JoeRambo said:


> It's not "stock". Stock is BIOS defaults coupled to 3200 with JEDEC memory timings.
> 
> It is crashing simply due to lack of stability to run massive incresae of GFlops that memory tunings is giving to it. On 9900K it was not uncommon to gain 20-25% GFlops in LInpack JUST by memory tune from defaults. Linpack is this sensitive to bandwidth and latency. CPU theoretical performance is above default and limited mostly by memory. And RRD and TFaw play big role in just how fast memory requests are served and fed into Linpack to fuel those FP calcs.


I wouldnt recommend using Lipack AVX for 12th Gen CPUs. U risk damaging the CPU. Linpack is not designed to be loaded to all Cores at the same time. It is designed for single Core usage as far as i know.

I could run 9900K with Linpack with tight Subs without any issue.









Maybe your DRAM is running too hot - possible? Try to put a fan in front of your DRAM Modules.


----------



## JoeRambo

The guy i was responding to is having problems with Linpack + tight memory stability.
Personally i have not run Linpack in ages, something like RealBench stability is plenty for me.



eeeven said:


>


Good example, as stock memory 5Ghz all core is ~420GFlops, gained 120Gflops from memory OC alone


----------



## shrimpmaster

eeeven said:


> I wouldnt recommend using Lipack AVX for 12th Gen CPUs. U risk damaging the CPU. Linpack is not designed to be loaded to all Cores at the same time. It is designed for single Core usage as far as i know.
> 
> I could run 9900K with Linpack with tight Subs without any issue.
> 
> View attachment 2532130
> 
> 
> Maybe your DRAM is running too hot - possible? Try to put a fan in front of your DRAM Modules.


Damaging the cpu? It doesn't even run that how or high power. Similar temps and power to r23 without any power limit.


----------



## anubis1127

shrimpmaster said:


> Damaging the cpu? It doesn't even run that how or high power. Similar temps and power to r23 without any power limit.
> I think my cpu is defective, I enabled e-cores again, but locked them to 3ghz, no crashing either. e-cores not stable at stock...
> Also when I tried to oc them it crashed cinebench at just 4.0ghz... memory was not tuned either.


I just set my CPU back to "auto" everything, and disabled MCE, which on this gigabyte board is basically running stock multipliers with power limits removed, but my cooling wasn't adequate enough for Linpack Xtreme run, I stopped it after a few seconds and thermal throttling:









This was with the mem tuned at 3466MTs, passed TM5, and 200% HCI, so there is some semblance of stability.

3466cl14, timings for reference on "mem tuned":


----------



## shrimpmaster

anubis1127 said:


> I just set my CPU back to "auto" everything, and disabled MCE, which on this gigabyte board is basically running stock multipliers with power limits removed, but my cooling wasn't adequate enough for Linpack Xtreme run, I stopped it after a few seconds and thermal throttling:
> View attachment 2532136
> 
> 
> This was with the mem tuned at 3466MTs, passed TM5, and 200% HCI, so there is some semblance of stability.
> 
> 3466cl14, timings for reference on "mem tuned":
> View attachment 2532137



Mine runs around 190w only. 600gflops. I guess i should ignore it crashing with e core enabled since it's new arc and doesn't crash with e cores off. As long as it runs stable in daily usage i'm good.

Where did you get memtweakit? I can't find anything that works to read ram timings on z690.


----------



## anubis1127

shrimpmaster said:


> Mine runs around 190w only. 600gflops. I guess i should ignore it crashing with e core enabled since it's new arc and doesn't crash with e cores off. As long as it runs stable in daily usage i'm good.
> 
> Where did you get memtweakit? I can't find anything that works to read ram timings on z690.


First post on hwbot z690 apex thread, here's a link to the download from that thread.

- MemTweakIt
MemTweakIt 20210910.zip


----------



## sniperpowa

ogider said:


> wonder if that super cheap MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4 mobo will work similarly in mem oc .


It works good I’m using it. It’s no apex but it’s not as bad as I though it would be


----------



## chispy

quick test on asus strix D4 , g.skill Neo 3800 cas14 2x8gb bdie kit highest clocks i could get it stable 4133Mhz 14-15-14-24 2t.
I'm moving on to test Asrock z690 Steel legend ddr4 motherboard later. Will post my findings.


----------



## eeeven

chispy said:


> quick test on asus strix D4 , g.skill Neo 3800 cas14 2x8gb bdie kit highest clocks i could get it stable 4133Mhz 14-15-14-24 2t.
> I'm moving on to test Asrock z690 Steel legend ddr4 motherboard later. Will post my findings.


Can you please test Dual Rank B-Die on ASRock Z690? Im wondering how far you could push it on ASRock.


----------



## kingofblog

Not looking good for the 0707 rumor; too good to be true, and 3733 is the real limit for non-golden silicon.


----------



## shrimpmaster

kingofblog said:


> Not looking good for the 0707 rumor; too good to be true, and 3733 is the real limit for non-golden silicon.


My 12700k is really bad and I can get 3866mhz stable. Like it needs over 1.3v load voltage just to run cinebench at 5.1ghz.

Also It's linpack stable now, I'm dumb, it was the cpu, not the small core. Voltage issue..


----------



## zhrooms

I can now *confirm*, the limitation up to 4200 on both Single and Dual rank, has *nothing* to do with the CPU IMC as previously thought. It's *all just motherboard* BIOS.

After flashing the 0707 BIOS shared by @shamino1978, I now managed to not only boot higher than 3720 MT/s (1860 MHz IMC), but I completely shot past my previous max Single Rank of 4100 MT/s!

ASUS Strix A BIOS 0605 Official
_Single Rank:_ 4100 MT/s (4133 Impossible)
_Dual Rank:_ 3720 MT/s (3733 Impossible)

ASUS Strix A BIOS 0707 Unofficial
_Single Rank:_ Unknown (Untested)
_Dual Rank:_
3733: Pass! 
3866: Pass! 
4000: Pass!  (2000.0 IMC)
4133: *Pass!*  (2066.5 IMC)

Why stop there?
4150: Pass!  (2075.0 IMC)
4166: Pass!  (2083.0 IMC)
4175: Pass!  (2087.5 IMC)

Let's shoot for the stars!
4179: Pass! 🚀 (2089.5 IMC)
4183: Pass! 🌘 (2091.5 IMC)
*4187:* *Pass!*  (2093.5 IMC)
4191: Fail!  (2095.5 IMC)

*Proof below, using 2x 16GB Dual Rank G.Skill Ripjaws V 3600 CL14-15-15 / 4000 CL17-18-18 / 4266 CL17-18-18*








So people need not worry, a _simple_ BIOS update "unlocked" Dual Rank on ASUS boards, from 3720 MT/s to 4187 MT/s! So I'd assume Gigabyte is updating soon, since their boards seem borderline broken right now.


----------



## zhrooms

I can now also confirm *Single Rank*, it reaches the *exact same* frequency, *4187 MT/s*, but not 4191 MT/s, that one just refuses to work, no matter what I do (increase SA, DRAM Voltage or loosening any of the primary timings up). I sadly can't test if it is the IMC (but it doesn't seem like it), which a simple CPU change would show, my new i9-12900K arrives sometime next week after I had to send back the previous one for being defective, although I do have a 12600K I could use to test this with, basically, if it got stuck at 4187 just the same, then we'd know it's still the motherboard holding us back and not the CPU, now _that'd be crazy_ since it'd mean we might even reach 4266 or above once more BIOSes are out. DDR5 is in serious trouble now. We're basically at 2100 IMC (that's DDR5 at 8400 MT/s) with Dual Rank sticks (1% higher performance than Single Rank) that also happen to overclock extremely well, I'm about to put a water block on these bad boys in the coming days, should hopefully get some crazy low timings stable at _above_ 4150 MT/s, shouldn't be a problem reaching 43ns and below now (I managed to get 44.0 using SR sticks at 4100 MT/s CL15, so 4160 MT/s with CL14 would be diabolical !)


----------



## 2500k_2

I have to admit the memory controller Aler Lake does not like dual-rank modules. It does not allow to rise in frequency and squeeze the _dr + timings in dual-rank modules, the latency is initially higher.
Therefore, I recommend using only peer-to-peer modules. cr1 will give you an advantage over dual rank modules

My result is not the highest. Below I publish 2 more


Spoiler: top bdie Gear 1 16*2






















not bad for a $ 200 board xD


If you do 5.3 5.0 - then the latency can still be omitted.








I'm sure guys that you will get 40 ns. Good luck!


----------



## kingofblog

@zhrooms Godly! Glad to see my fears were misplaced. Do you think you could even manage to drive 2DPC (4x DIMMs) of DR at 4000 if the limiter isn't signal integrity? What SA voltage did you need for 4100 MT/s DR? I will have B-die again tomorrow, and looking forward to trying for myself.


----------



## JoeRambo

@2500k_2 Where are you guys getting those fresh MSI dragon tools ? looked around and they are nowhere to download?


----------



## 2500k_2

JoeRambo said:


> @2500k_2 Where are you guys getting those fresh MSI dragon tools ? looked around and they are nowhere to download?








Z690TOOL.rar - AnonFiles







anonfiles.com




Asus memtweak + Msi DragonBall+ Dragonpower for Z690


----------



## zhrooms

2500k_2 said:


> Not bad for a $ 200 board xD


Amazing that you were able to confirm what I/we suspect, it's really *all about the BIOS*, surprising to some, it looks like MSI had the best release BIOS, since it was capable of 4200 straight out of box, the ASUS had to be updated with an unofficial/pre-release BIOS and Gigabyte has still not released a BIOS, but once it's out, then ASUS, Gigabyte and MSI boards are all capable of 4150 MT/s+ in Dual Rank. 
So, ASUS owners (TUF and Strix) need to update their BIOS to 0707, and Gigabyte owners just got to wait until they release a new one that fixes the issue of low frequencies. Note: Only the TUF and Strix has the 0707 as far as I know, so any Prime users are out of luck for now, thus, TUF is the board to aim for basically, considerably cheaper than Strix A and just as good, just slightly weaker VRM but it doesn't matter, still overkill.

As for your timings @2500k_2, looking good at ~4125 MT/s 14-15-14 @ 1.63V, I've managed to get my Dual Rank sticks stable at 4133 MT/s 15-15-15 with a voltage of approximately 1.52, got a game crash at 1.50 but at 1.52 it's smooth sailing (confirmed it by lowering back to 1.50 and got crash again). I should be able to reach CL14 like you did by raising voltage over a bit further, but I'll wait on doing that until I get the water block on, then the sticks should remain ambient temp no matter what voltage I throw at it.


kingofblog said:


> Do you think you could even manage to drive 2DPC (4x DIMMs) of DR at 4000 if the limiter isn't signal integrity? What SA voltage did you need for 4100 MT/s DR?


No clue about 4 DIMMs, also these SA values should still apply, but I guess I'll have to re-test later with the new BIOS.


----------



## anubis1127

zhrooms said:


> Amazing that you were able to confirm what I/we suspect, it's really *all about the BIOS*, surprising to some, it looks like MSI had the best release BIOS, since it was capable of 4200 straight out of box, the ASUS had to be updated with an unofficial/pre-release BIOS and Gigabyte has still not released a BIOS, but once it's out, then ASUS, Gigabyte and MSI boards are all capable of 4150 MT/s+ in Dual Rank.
> So, ASUS owners (TUF and Strix) need to update their BIOS to 0707, and Gigabyte owners just got to wait until they release a new one that fixes the issue of low frequencies. Note: Only the TUF and Strix has the 0707 as far as I know, so any Prime users are out of luck for now, thus, TUF is the board to aim for basically, considerably cheaper than Strix A and just as good, just slightly weaker VRM but it doesn't matter, still overkill.
> 
> As for your timings @2500k_2, looking good at ~4125 MT/s 14-15-14 @ 1.63V, I've managed to get my Dual Rank sticks stable at 4133 MT/s 15-15-15 with a voltage of approximately 1.52, got a game crash at 1.50 but at 1.52 it's smooth sailing (confirmed it by lowering back to 1.50 and got crash again). I should be able to reach CL14 like you did by raising voltage over a bit further, but I'll wait on doing that until I get the water block on, then the sticks should remain ambient temp no matter what voltage I throw at it.
> 
> No clue about 4 DIMMs, also these SA values should still apply, but I guess I'll have to re-test later with the new BIOS.


You're putting a lot of faith in Gigabyte to produce a competent BIOS, something they have time and again proven to be incapable of. I remember waiting 2 months for a bios update(s) to fix things after z490 launch when I bought an aorus master, eventually I gave up and bought an Apex XII.

I hope I'm wrong, and they manage to do it, but I think I'm just going to go exchange this Elite AX DDR4 board while I still can.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

The one good thing a out Asus is that they release an abundance of bios updates. Their boards are hot garbage at every price point and their bioses are often broken, but you’re guaranteed to get bios updates no matter what.


----------



## robertr1

How about some sottr benches with dr bdie Tuned?

1080p. High. Taa = off.


----------



## zhrooms

anubis1127 said:


> You're putting a lot of faith in Gigabyte to produce a competent BIOS, something they have time and again proven to be incapable of. I remember waiting 2 months for a bios update(s) to fix things after z490 launch when I bought an aorus master, eventually I gave up and bought an Apex XII. I hope I'm wrong, and they manage to do it, but I think I'm just going to go exchange this Elite AX DDR4 board while I still can.


I understand and agree, by the looks of it, the MSI Z690-A Pro board is the one you want, it comes with a launch BIOS capable of up to 4200 MT/s in Dual Rank, and it only costs $220 MSRP, the TUF starts at $70 more and the Gigabyte boards (Gaming X and AORUS Elite AX) are not viable, at the moment. Gaming X is just $10 more than the MSI A Pro, and a lot more gaming oriented, way nicer board really, but as said, it's simply not working right now and there's no ETA on a BIOS update as you point out, there might not be a fix until the end of year or even later, so it's a much, much safer bet, to just get the MSI Z690-A Pro right now, it can handle a 12900K at 5.3GHz without issues. But I would advice anyone that can find a TUF, with our without Wi-Fi, for a decent price (lower than MSRP or with a discount when purchasing a 12th Gen CPU, bundle that is), to get it instead, since the BIOS truly is the best and how the board _fails_ and _re-tries_ overclocks is just amazing, it's really fast, surprisingly reliable/predictable, so good that I can completely live without the Q-CODE (featured on the Strix-E and above, this board has EZ Debug Status LED), and no need for a Safe Boot button either. Basically there's zero difference between TUF and Strix A, except for the price.


robertr1 said:


> How about some sottr benches with dr bdie Tuned?


God no, awful game to benchmark. I'll be getting some comparisons in Call of Duty: Warzone, Battlefield 2042, Grand Theft Auto V and World of Warcraft soon, I just need my new 12900K. And install my water block on the dual rank sticks.


----------



## eeeven

2500k_2 said:


> View attachment 2532200
> 
> I have to admit the memory controller Aler Lake does not like dual-rank modules. It does not allow to rise in frequency and squeeze the _dr + timings in dual-rank modules, the latency is initially higher.
> Therefore, I recommend using only peer-to-peer modules. cr1 will give you an advantage over dual rank modules
> 
> My result is not the highest. Below I publish 2 more
> 
> 
> Spoiler: top bdie Gear 1 16*2
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2532201
> 
> View attachment 2532202
> 
> 
> 
> not bad for a $ 200 board xD
> 
> 
> If you do 5.3 5.0 - then the latency can still be omitted.
> View attachment 2532203
> 
> I'm sure guys that you will get 40 ns. Good luck!



Can you please Upload MSI Dragon Ball / Dragon Power for me?
EDIT// Already found it - Thanks!!


----------



## anubis1127

zhrooms said:


> I understand and agree, by the looks of it, the MSI Z690-A Pro board is the one you want, it comes with a launch BIOS capable of up to 4200 MT/s in Dual Rank, and it only costs $220 MSRP, the TUF starts at $70 more and the Gigabyte boards (Gaming X and AORUS Elite AX) are not viable, at the moment. Gaming X is just $10 more than the MSI A Pro, and a lot more gaming oriented, way nicer board really, but as said, it's simply not working right now and there's no ETA on a BIOS update as you point out, there might not be a fix until the end of year or even later, so it's a much, much safer bet, to just get the MSI Z690-A Pro right now, it can handle a 12900K at 5.3GHz without issues. But I would advice anyone that can find a TUF, with our without Wi-Fi, for a decent price (lower than MSRP or with a discount when purchasing a 12th Gen CPU, bundle that is), to get it instead, since the BIOS truly is the best and how the board _fails_ and _re-tries_ overclocks is just amazing, it's really fast, surprisingly reliable/predictable, so good that I can completely live without the Q-CODE (featured on the Strix-E and above, this board has EZ Debug Status LED), and no need for a Safe Boot button either. Basically there's zero difference between TUF and Strix A, except for the price.
> 
> God no, awful game to benchmark. I'll be getting some comparisons in Call of Duty: Warzone, Battlefield 2042, Grand Theft Auto V and World of Warcraft soon, I just need my new 12900K. And install my water block on the dual rank sticks.


I'll keep the TUF in mind then, thanks for the recommendation.


----------



## jomama22

What voltages are you guys changing exactly? New to the platform so not entirely sure what I should be adjusting. Just SA and vdimm? As far as memory is concerned that is.


----------



## jsz

0451 said:


> The one good thing a out Asus is that they release an abundance of bios updates. Their boards are hot garbage at every price point and their bioses are often broken, but you’re guaranteed to get bios updates no matter what.


TUF isn't bad for the price. A 14 * 80A 6 layer board didn't exist at this price range 2 years back.

70A * 14 boards were in the $700 price range (MSI godlike for example) for X570 launch. Granted that was 8 layer and this is only 6.. Not that 8 layer pushes price super high either.. Should be less than $100 USD difference moving up from 6 layer.

But i'll generally agree. The cheap prime boards with 50A stages and anything above Strix-A is hard to justify vs competitors. Sweet spot is TUF and STRIX A (Extra features/bigger VRM, but prob not worth the price).



therealjustin said:


> I've been checking nonstop every hour on Amazon, Newegg, BestBuy, and of course I miss it.  Do you happen to have the ASIN number?
> 
> It's bizarre to me how little effort there was by motherboard manufactures in regards to DDR4 offerings. Why only lower tier boards? It seems like a large percentage of sales considering how many people would likely re-use their DDR4.


They actually canceled my order which was suppose to ship today. Page was removed too... I tried asking support but they said it was an error and not suppose to be listed which makes no sense.

Anyway.. I got my Tomahawk and TUF in. I think i'll mess with the MSI first.


----------



## Exilon

anubis1127 said:


> So you're saying I bought the wrong motherboard, lol. Those MSI results look nice. With my 12700k and Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4 board it has not been a super fun experience. 2x16 B-Die DR currently at 3333 MTs, was trying to get at least 3600 DR Gear1, but not having any luck.


Yeah, GB Aorus Elite DDR4 buyers got screwed with awful launch firmware. Mine maxes out at dual rank 3466.
I'm tempted to just buy a TUF and flip the GB later on Ebay when new firmware come out.


----------



## jsz

Exilon said:


> Yeah, GB Aorus Elite DDR4 buyers got screwed with awful launch firmware. Mine maxes out at dual rank 3466.
> I'm tempted to just buy a TUF and flip the GB later on Ebay when new firmware come out.


I would just return when you get a new board. Most shops don't care about RMA's anymore, even newegg.


----------



## FinnFIN

I have a Gigabyte Gaming X sitting next to me, haven't installed yet as I'm waiting on a new case. I guess the smart play is to return it and get something else. Shame the MSI PRO Z690-A doesn't have an optical audio out, I would miss it. Would the Asus PRIME Z690-P be a decent choice? I thought I saw some BIOS issues mentioned for that as well, but not sure what those were.


----------



## ObviousCough

4500 is the highest i can get it to post at with SR bDies, so i guess it shouldn't be too much of a surprise that i get errors at xmp of 4400.


----------



## zhrooms

FinnFIN said:


> I have a Gigabyte Gaming X sitting next to me, haven't installed yet as I'm waiting on a new case. I guess the smart play is to return it and get something else. Shame the MSI PRO Z690-A doesn't have an optical audio out, I would miss it. Would the Asus PRIME Z690-P be a decent choice? I thought I saw some BIOS issues mentioned for that as well, but not sure what those were.


Well, we have no idea when a BIOS update will come, you might be able to get away with 3600 MT/s until a BIOS update comes that raises it up to 4200 MT/s, point is, 3600 is still fast.
But if you haven't opened it yet, and can get another board fairly fast, then I guess that's not a bad idea, as for the Prime board, we have no idea how it performs, but if you have Single Rank sticks it should be fine, without the BIOS update on TUF and Strix, they could still boot 4133 MT/s, so I'd say it's highly likely the Prime P should be able to do the same, after all, the $220 MSI Z690-A Pro had no issues going all the way to 4200 on the release BIOS. The Prime P can technically do it, so even if it couldn't, should be a BIOS update for that board too, eventually. I say go for it, then you can test it for us! 🙏


----------



## FinnFIN

zhrooms said:


> Well, we have no idea when a BIOS update will come, you might be able to get away with 3600 MT/s until a BIOS update comes that raises it up to 4200 MT/s, point is, 3600 is still fast.
> But if you haven't opened it yet, and can get another board fairly fast, then I guess that's not a bad idea, as for the Prime board, we have no idea how it performs, but if you have Single Rank sticks it should be fine, without the BIOS update on TUF and Strix, they could still boot 4133 MT/s, so I'd say it's highly likely the Prime P should be able to do the same, after all, the $220 MSI Z690-A Pro had no issues going all the way to 4200 on the release BIOS. The Prime P can technically do it, so even if it couldn't, should be a BIOS update for that board too, eventually. I say go for it, then you can test it for us! 🙏


Thank you for this.
I don't actually care that much about memory OC at this point. I have a dual rank kit, Kingston Fury Renegade 3600MHz CL16. And that's all I really want them to run at, so maybe Gaming X would actually be fine. But was I understanding incorrectly, that people are having issues with running dual rank kits even at standard XMP settings? That's my main concern tbh, so if that is the case, might as well grab the MSI and just make do without the digital audio out


----------



## zhrooms

FinnFIN said:


> I don't actually care that much about memory OC at this point. I have a dual rank kit, Kingston Fury Renegade 3600MHz CL16. And that's all I really want them to run at, so maybe Gaming X would actually be fine. But was I understanding incorrectly, that people are having issues with running dual rank kits even at standard XMP settings?


Ah, then it's fine, keep the Gaming X, from what I've seen from another person on the Elite AX (same board as Gaming X), he's limited to 3466 for the moment, but I can't say if 3600 would be possible by increasing SA (he didn't specify what he used). As for XMP, all XMP does is set DRAM Voltage and Primary timings, that's about it, in case 3600 XMP didn't work you can just set it manually, and reduce 3600 to 3466 until Gigabyte releases an updated BIOS, then you can increase it to 3600 again, or even beyond, 3733 should work without adjusting voltage even.


----------



## DaTraS

Gotta repost my question in this thread. Every overclocking guide I know for DDR4 tells me to increase VCCSA and VCCIO, as well as the voltage of the RAM itself.
Got a Strix Z690-A, but can't find the the setting for VCCIO. On the front page of the AI tweaker theres only DDR voltage and system agent voltage (along with some other voltages that i have no clue about). Does the board just don't have the option? Or is it hidden? Or is it simply not needed for Z690?

At least, thanks to the tip in the Asus Owner thread, i found out where/what this ominous "gear" setting is they are all talking about sind rocket lake.
(Coming from 9900K so didn't know that memory controller to dram speed ratio was meant)


----------



## FinnFIN

zhrooms said:


> Ah, then it's fine, keep the Gaming X, from what I've seen from another person on the Elite AX (same board as Gaming X), he's limited to 3466 for the moment, but I can't say if 3600 would be possible by increasing SA (he didn't specify what he used). As for XMP, all XMP does is set DRAM Voltage and Primary timings, that's about it, in case 3600 XMP didn't work you can just set it manually, and reduce 3600 to 3466 until Gigabyte releases an update BIOS, then you can increase it to 3600 again, or even beyond, 3733 should work without even adjusting voltage.


Thanks! Yeah I really like the feature set in this mobo for the price point. Let's hope they get BIOS issues sorted! Thanks again for the help.


----------



## chispy

Quick test on the ASRock z690 Steel Legend ddr4 motherboard. Motherboard is very stable at high cpu clocks. memory wise it's not there yet as there is only one bios for this board " first release bios 2.02 ". 2x16gb kit of b-die max i could get was 2800Mhz , 2x8gb kit of b-die max i could get was 3200Mhz. Has exact same problems as every board with early bios. Bios need some work , but a new one is incoming soon and should fix the low memory overclocking ceiling. I like this board  , ASRock Steel Legend always good for price/performance ratio.

Even with limited memory speed and tweaking i got 1st place last night on pcmark10 at hwbot for 6 core cpu ( E cores disable ). My chip 12600k is not a stelar overclocker either , after 5.5Ghz it wants 1.60v+ v.core for 5.6Ghz , rofl  lol .
Will test a new 12700k i have just receive today back on the Strix z690 D4 tonight.
*PS - Alder Lake is really , i mean really fast , 5.5Ghz alder lake = 6.2Ghz rocket lake 😂 , i ran on dual compressors single stage at -55c.









chispy`s PCMark10 Express score: 9862 marks with a Core i5 12600K (6P)


The Core i5 12600K (6P) @ 5500MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the PCMark10 Express benchmark. chispyranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org


----------



## Bobbylee

Just chiming in, no problems running 4400cl19 XMP on asus tuf board, struggling to run 4400cl16 like I could on 10850k and msi z590 a pro with the same dimms. May be user error, used msi board all my life so just learning the asus bios.


----------



## Bobbylee

DaTraS said:


> Gotta repost my question in this thread. Every overclocking guide I know for DDR4 tells me to increase VCCSA and VCCIO, as well as the voltage of the RAM itself.
> Got a Strix Z690-A, but can't find the the setting for VCCIO. On the front page of the AI tweaker theres only DDR voltage and system agent voltage (along with some other voltages that i have no clue about). Does the board just don't have the option? Or is it hidden? Or is it simply not needed for Z690?
> 
> At least, thanks to the tip in the Asus Owner thread, i found out where/what this ominous "gear" setting is they are all talking about sind rocket lake.
> (Coming from 9900K so didn't know that memory controller to dram speed ratio was meant)


I have the same question for the TUF, sounds exactly the same as the strix


----------



## zhrooms

DaTraS said:


> Every overclocking guide I know for DDR4 tells me to increase VCCSA and VCCIO, as well as the voltage of the RAM itself.
> Got a Strix Z690-A, but can't find the the setting for VCCIO. Is it simply not needed for Z690?


That is correct, there is only SA.
All you need to know: Stick to Gear 1 and 100:133 ratio, then just increase SA voltage as needed, and DRAM voltage, it's really that simple.
I needed roughly 1.088V (SA) for 3866 MT/s, 1.184V for 4000 MT/s and 1.392V for 4133 MT/s on the Strix A board using the 0605 BIOS, as seen in this post. 
Need to re-test on the new 0707 BIOS, but now you have an idea of what's needed for X frequency.


chispy said:


> Quick test on the ASRock z690 Steel Legend ddr4 motherboard. memory wise it's not there yet as there is only one bios for this board " first release bios 2.02 ". 2x16gb kit of b-die max i could get was 2800Mhz , 2x8gb kit of b-die max i could get was 3200Mhz. *Has exact same problems as every board with early bios*. Bios need some work , but a new one is incoming soon and should fix the low memory overclocking ceiling. I like this board  , ASRock Steel Legend always good for price/performance ratio.


Take it easy with those statements , MSI does not have any issues running dual rank at 4200 on its release BIOS. ASUS also managed to do 4133 on single rank, 3733 on dual rank, and with the updated BIOSes for ASUS they are both the same 4200 as on MSI. It's only Gigabyte that is catastrophic, stuck at 3466-3600, and now according to you it's also ASRock, even worse than Gigabyte. But yeah don't trash talk MSI, they had a working BIOS out of box , on a $220 board even. ASUS deserves some flack, since this updated BIOS is not officially available on their support page _yet_.


----------



## anubis1127

To follow up on my previous post(s). Returned the Elite AX DDR4 today for the Z690-A Pro DDR4. Same 12700k, same DR B-Die, and yet XMP boots fine:








Now to do some overclocking.


----------



## therealjustin

A real shame about these Z690 Gigabyte boards. Sure it's early days and there _may _be a fix in future updates, but can you really trust them to ever come out with a stable BIOS?  What a disappointment.


----------



## Exilon

jsz said:


> I would just return when you get a new board. Most shops don't care about RMA's anymore, even newegg.


The Gigabyte boards are, funnily enough, replacement exchange only on Newegg.


----------



## HvacGuru

Exilon said:


> The Gigabyte boards are, funnily enough, replacement exchange only on Newegg.



RMA #: 119439220Return Type: RefundRestocking Fee: $0.00Original Order: 389498463Customer Comment: [item 13-145-350]-Don't have a updated bios ready for the new 12900k.


----------



## gerardfraser

MSI Pro Z690-A DDR4 Dual Rank 4000Mhz Gear 1 with just primary timings changed.

Need 1.45 SA to Boot and 1.46 stable in Cinebench/PC gaming

12900K CPU 1.2v


----------



## Exilon

Speaking of the MSI Pro-A, it is now sold out on Amazon.


HvacGuru said:


> RMA #: 119439220Return Type: RefundRestocking Fee: $0.00Original Order: 389498463Customer Comment: [item 13-145-350]-Don't have a updated bios ready for the new 12900k.


What return reason did you use?


----------



## HvacGuru

Exilon said:


> Speaking of the MSI Pro-A, it is now sold out on Amazon.
> 
> 
> What return reason did you use?


It's There...Customer Comment: [item 13-145-350]-Don't have a updated bios ready for the new 12900k.


----------



## anubis1127

gerardfraser said:


> MSI Pro Z690-A DDR4 Dual Rank 4000Mhz Gear 1 with just primary timings changed.
> 
> Need 1.45 SA to Boot and 1.46 stable in Cinebench/PC gaming
> 
> 12900K CPU 1.2v


Nice result with the 12900k. I just picked up the same board earlier today. 

Curious, do you see a way to turn off the e-cores in the BIOS? The setting I found, and adjusted "active e-cores" only lets me toggle 1,2,3, or All (on 12700k).


----------



## gerardfraser

anubis1127 said:


> Nice result with the 12900k. I just picked up the same board earlier today.
> 
> Curious, do you see a way to turn off the e-cores in the BIOS? The setting I found, and adjusted "active e-cores" only lets me toggle 1,2,3, or All (on 12700k).


Here is how to disable E cores on the motherboard MSI Pro Z690-A

Per E-Core-Control in BIOS


----------



## anubis1127

gerardfraser said:


> Here is how to disable E cores on the motherboard MSI Pro Z690-A
> 
> Per E-Core-Control in BIOS


Huh, cool thanks, I thought I tried that too.

Yeah, that worked, I don't know why I thought it didn't the first time.


----------



## gerardfraser

Awesome I always love these Cheaper MSI Motherboard with higher end features and they always overclock good for me.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

My Asus Tuf Gaming Z690-Plus WIFI D4 is borderline unusable. My Gskill 4000c14 dual rank kit can’t post at any speed other than JDEC, even with the 0707 bios. This kit posts at 4040c14 Gear 1 on my ASRock Z690 OC Formula. I will be returning this board tomorrow for anything but Asus.

Edit: Put DIMMs in b-slots and it works fine at 4133 15-15-15


----------



## Exilon

Surprising that you're having that much trouble with a TUF. We've had people that did 3866 DR fine earlier in the thread with 100:133

MSI Pro-A on Newegg got a $10 price increase.


----------



## chispy

asus strix d4 / 12700k / g.skill tridentz neo bdie 16gb kit bdie /
I can run 4133Mhz but with losser timmings as i prefer low latency this is perfect for me.

Best results after tweaking timmings ddr4-4000 14-14-14-26 2T , 1.43v.core / 1.60v.mem / 1.45v. SA


----------



## Exilon

I'm more impressed by that 4.5GHz ring frequency. Is it the Vcore that lets you hit that?

Since we have people with the TUF D4 in here, can you post your HWInfo sensor page? I want to see what's available. The stuff on the Aorus Elite is quite bare.


----------



## shrimpmaster

Exilon said:


> I'm more impressed by that 4.5GHz ring frequency. Is it the Vcore that lets you hit that?
> 
> Since we have people with the TUF D4 in here, can you post your HWInfo sensor page? I want to see what's available. The stuff on the Aorus Elite is quite bare.













Also, my TUF works very well for memory. I think I can even get 4000mhz gear 1 stable, but probably need around 1.45-1.5v SA. 3866mhz SR is stable on every stress test with just 1.2v SA.
I might it, but I'm not comfortable running that much voltage into my IMC daily.


----------



## Siablo

0451 said:


> My Asus Tuf Gaming Z690-Plus WIFI D4


I also have 11900 and a Formula. How does it feel with the new platform, does it make sense to change to the z690? I ordered TUF and 12900k, but so far I'm in doubt.


----------



## zhrooms

0451 said:


> My ASUS TUF is borderline unusable. Gskill 4000c14 dual rank kit can’t post at any speed other than JDEC, even with the 0707 bios. This kit posts at 4040c14 Gear 1 on my ASRock Z590 OC Formula. I will be returning this board tomorrow for anything but Asus. Put DIMMs in b-slots and it works fine at 4133 15-15-15


Yeah that sounds weird, as I was able to boot 4187 with like 1.4 SA on Strix A, TUF should be just as good with the 0707 BIOS, and I do have the TUF as well, going to try it sometime this week, so I'll confirm any differences with the Strix.
Also, did you even read the thread? There is nothing else other than ASUS or MSI if you want to boot 4200 DR, and MSI might be out of stock.


chispy said:


> asus strix d4 / g.skill tridentz neo bdie 16gb kit bdie
> I can run 4133Mhz but with losser timmings as i prefer low latency this is perfect for me.
> Best results after tweaking timmings ddr4-4000 14-14-14-26 2T, 1.60v.mem / 1.45v. SA


1.45 SA sounds ridiculously high for just 4000, I was able to run like 1.182 game stable with that IMC (2000), same board.


Exilon said:


> I'm more impressed by that 4.5GHz ring frequency. Is it the Vcore that lets you hit that?


Hm? Impressed by 4.5? Did you actually not see that Cache/Ring clocks the same as on 9/10th Gen? I'm doing 5.0/4.7 easy, at low voltage (1.2V load), just like my 9900K. Seen many screenshots of it at 5.2-5.3 GHz as well, but for that you surely have to crank the voltage.


shrimpmaster said:


> Also, my TUF works very well for memory. I think I can even get 4000mhz gear 1 stable, but probably need around 1.45-1.5v SA. 3866mhz SR is stable on every stress test with just 1.2v SA.
> I might it, but I'm not comfortable running that much voltage into my IMC daily.


As mentioned above, I could run 4000 Gear 1 with just 1.182 SA, completely game stable (20 Minute Warzone at 220 FPS, CPU bottlenecked). And sure that was SR, and I haven't measured DR yet but it looks to be the same for 4000 at least, I can run Warzone at like 1.34 SA with dual rank sticks at that frequency, not tried lower, but it can probably do it, so I'm really confused why you say you think you need 1.45-1.5, that's an insane voltage, how are you even testing it?


Siablo said:


> I also have 11900 and a Formula. How does it feel with the new platform, does it make sense to change to the z690? I ordered TUF and 12900k, but so far I'm in doubt.


Well, the Alder Lake CPU IPC is like 27% higher, but latency is 10ns higher on DDR4 which sucks, so matching DRAM speed at 3600 CL14-15-15, the 12700K with 25MB of L3 Cache (12900K has 30 so a little higher performance) at 5.0/4.7 performs 16.66% faster than 11700K at 5.0/4.3 in games, with the same exact memory frequency and timings. But when comparing with overclocked memory on both platforms, Alder Lake gains a bit because Rocket Lake had such trouble with IMC, so at the end of the day, I can safely say Alder Lake is above 20%, so from 16.66% with identical Memory and 20%+ with overclocked memory on both systems. So if you want a minimum of 20% performance boost in games (that's 100 to 120 FPS or 200 to 240 FPS), then.. yes.


----------



## Siablo

I left an order for TUF and 12900k, let's see how it will be with the Micron b-die DDR4 [email protected]).


----------



## shrimpmaster

zhrooms said:


> Yeah that sounds weird, as I was able to boot 4187 with like 1.4 SA on Strix A, TUF should be just as good with the 0707 BIOS, and I do have the TUF as well, going to try it sometime this week, so I'll confirm any differences with the Strix.
> Also, did you even read the thread? There is nothing else other than ASUS or MSI if you want to boot 4200 DR, and MSI might be out of stock.
> 
> 1.45 SA sounds ridiculously high for just 4000, I was able to run like 1.182 game stable with that IMC (2000), same board.
> 
> Hm? Impressed by 4.5? Did you actually not see that Cache/Ring clocks the same as on 9/10th Gen? I'm doing 5.0/4.7 easy, at low voltage (1.2V load), just like my 9900K. Seen many screenshots of it at 5.2-5.3 GHz as well, but for that you surely have to crank the voltage.
> 
> As mentioned above, I could run 4000 Gear 1 with just 1.182 SA, completely game stable (20 Minute Warzone at 220 FPS, CPU bottlenecked). And sure that was SR, and I haven't measured DR yet but it looks to be the same for 4000 at least, I can run Warzone at like 1.34 SA with dual rank sticks at that frequency, not tried lower, but it can probably do it, so I'm really confused why you say you think you need 1.45-1.5, that's an insane voltage, how are you even testing it?


I'm testing with linpack xtreme.
For 4000mhz, it can boot to windows just fine with only 1.2sa, but even running games crashes to desktop very fast. 1.4 runs games fine but still crashes on linpack xtreme 10gb. 3866mhz runs just fine, 20 passes of linpack xtreme at 1.2sa, at both cl16 1.38vdimm and cl14 1.55vdimm.
CPU runs up to 82ºC for me on that test, with 200w load.

For testing memory only I'm using testmem5.


----------



## Cuthalu

I've tinkered quite a bit with Giga Gaming X and I really have to wonder why they thought it's a good idea to release the bios in this state.

Problem 1) if trefi is set manually, it won't boot, not even if the manual value is identical to auto. Luckily clearing bios fixed this issue, for now.
2) Cannot change ring ratio or vcore, there's always same values in Windows. They worked at first, until they didn't. Clearing bios fixed the issue.
3) Switching to gear 2 is instant boot fail, resetting bios doesn't seem to work. It worked before my first bios reset.
4) DDR4-3500 actually boots as 3333.
5) I tried 3600, nothing works (4x single rank b-die, on previous mobo was 3733 16-16-16-35). Then I went back to my perfectly stable 3466 16-16-16-35 bios profile, and at first it refused to boot. Then it booted @ 3066 and refuses to do the 3466. Once again had to clear bios, then it started working.
6) There's often boot fails which the bios cannot resolve by itself, so clearing bios becomes too familiar.

Edit: 7) Previously stable 3466 profile is now extremely unstable, memtest pro freezes the system quite fast without even showing any errors.

I give up. Gigabyte? Never, ever again.


----------



## zhrooms

Cuthalu said:


> I've tinkered quite a bit with Giga Gaming X and I really have to wonder why they thought it's a good idea to release the bios in this state.
> I give up. Gigabyte? Never, ever again.


And I'm assuming you brute forced SA/DRAM to like 1.4/1.45V, but yeah if you can return the board I'd suggest you do, if you're having that many issues, question is what board you'd get instead, that was also in stock. Actually, when checking MSI Pro Z690-A WiFi DDR4 (Emolevyt) it looks like it's in stock at multiple stores. ASUS Prime P also appear to be in stock Asus Prime Z690-P D4 (Emolevyt), both similarly priced, either of them would be much better now than the Gaming X, but in the long run, the Gaming X should be the best board between the three, but since the other two are also overkill, doesn't really matter, ASUS should have the best BIOS. Basically, get whatever you want, the ASUS board should have no issues with running 3600 on the release BIOS, since I managed to get 3733 on the Strix A release BIOS. And the MSI board we know can do 4200 on both Single and Dual Rank out of box.


----------



## shrimpmaster

My 12700k requires 1.26v load voltage for 5ghz cinebench r23 stable, with e cores disabled! Temps in low 80s.

If I leave it stock and only set SVID: Best Case it's unstable, at stock clocks!

Is this normal?


----------



## FinnFIN

zhrooms said:


> And I'm assuming you brute forced SA/DRAM to like 1.4/1.45V, but yeah if you can return the board I'd suggest you do, if you're having that many issues, question is what board you'd get instead, that was also in stock. Actually, when checking MSI Pro Z690-A WiFi DDR4 (Emolevyt) it looks like it's in stock at multiple stores. ASUS Prime P also appear to be in stock Asus Prime Z690-P D4 (Emolevyt), both similarly priced, either of them would be much better now than the Gaming X, but in the long run, the Gaming X should be the best board between the three, but since the other two are also overkill, doesn't really matter, ASUS should have the best BIOS. Basically, get whatever you want, the ASUS board should have no issues with running 3600 on the release BIOS, since I managed to get 3733 on the Strix A release BIOS. And the MSI board we know can do 4200 on both Single and Dual Rank out of box.


It's a tough call  I have been out of the loop for quite a while, what's the Gigabyte track record like? How quickly if at all, could one expect issues like these resolved? We talking about days/weeks/months? 
It's quite weird none of the media has picked this up since running even stock speeds and timings seems impossible at the moment and it should affect all users. Number of reports of the issues are still somewhat limited and quite hidden in various forums.


----------



## zhrooms

shrimpmaster said:


> My 12700k requires 1.26v load voltage for cinebench r23 stable, with e cores disabled! If I leave it stock and only set SVID: Best Case it's unstable, at stock clocks!
> Is this normal? Temps in the low 80s running r23 with 1.26v load voltage.


My 12700K SP70 is game stable (with E-cores disabled) at 1.182V Load (LLC 6 on Strix A, 1.190V set in BIOS I believe, manual voltage), but for it to be R23 stable I had to increase it to about 1.22V, so roughly 40mV higher, I haven't measured _exactly_ what it needs yet but since I've been testing memory I just increased voltage to about 1.24-1.25V Load, to ensure complete stability, and that's with 5.0GHz (50x) Sync All Cores, C-States Disabled, Turbo/SpeedShift/Turbo 3.0 enabled, and Cache/Ring on 4.7GHz (47x). I do have a beefy radiator setup for the processor though, triple radiator and the water temp never goes more than 1.5°C above ambient when gaming at ~100W.


FinnFIN said:


> I have been out of the loop for quite a while, what's the Gigabyte track record like? How quickly if at all, could one expect issues like these resolved? We talking about days/weeks/months?
> It's quite weird none of the media has picked this up since running even stock speeds and timings seems impossible at the moment and it should affect all users. Number of reports of the issues are still somewhat limited and quite hidden in various forums.


I have no idea, I dislike Gigabyte products with a passion, not because I have anything against the brand itself per se, it's just that all of their products are rather.. poor, and that's just a fact. GPUs, Motherboards, Power Supplies, doesn't matter, worse than all of the competition, in general.._ (there are always exceptions)_, they've had some good boards over the past few years but they've been very, very rare. So, I don't own anything Gigabyte and thus lack any deep insight in their track record, such as BIOS updates, which you would only know about if you owned a board, but to be clear, so you don't think I'm sounding like a "fanboy" of any such nonsense, *I did buy a Gaming X and Elite AX* for Z690 to test out and *very likely keep, that was the plan,* because on paper they are literally the best boards, *unbeatable* price/performance, but nope, BIOS is basically* pre-alpha* by the looks of it, they clearly don't care, since it's been a week now and still no BIOS update. So vote with your wallet I guess, support brands that know what they're doing. If a BIOS update isn't out within the next 5 days, I'm not even going to bother testing the boards, not going to waste my time messing around on a broken BIOS (and yes, it's literally broken, I had the same bug as Cuthalu but on my Elite AX when I tried it briefly a few days ago, I brushed it off as something I did wrong, *gave Gigabyte the benefit of the doubt*, but after seeing Cuthalu encountering *the same problem on a different board*.. literally just broken BIOS).


----------



## shrimpmaster

zhrooms said:


> My 12700K SP70 is game stable at 1.182V Load (LLC 6 on Strix A, 1.190V set in BIOS I believe, manual voltage), but for it to be R23 stable I had to increase it to about 1.22V, so roughly 40mV higher, I haven't measured _exactly_ what it needs yet but since I've been testing memory I just increased voltage to about 1.24-1.25V Load, to ensure complete stability, and that's with 5.0GHz (50x) Sync All Cores, C-States Disabled, Turbo/SpeedShift/Turbo 3.0 enabled, and Cache/Ring on 4.7GHz (47x). I do have a beefy radiator setup for the processor though, triple radiator and the water temp never goes more than 1.5°C above ambient when gaming at ~100W.


Ok, it's in spec then. Good to know. Another thing i've found is if chip isn't totally stable in heavy avx benchmarks, like r23 yet it's stable in game, my aim feels heavy for some reason. This happened on old 8700k. If things aren't stable aiming feels heavy and strange.


----------



## grey.clock

Using some cheap 4000mhz cl18 sticks I had my system running at 3733mhz 1st gear 1T cl18 on a 12600k. Everything was game stable and I played for two days without issues. Never being satisfied, I tried booting the computer with CL16 and ALL the same settings and it blue screened while starting the benchmark. I rebooted and had to deal with a constant chain of blue screens until I reset the bios. The RAM also was never XMP capable from the box, I figured this was a limitation of z690. 

Now it crashes and blue screens with anything even CLOSE to what I was running it at. Since things worked fine without the cl16 attempt and now even with the same settings I cannot do it, I am really confused. Leaving the ram down at 3200mhz allows me to use the computer without any issues but if I try and use it for an amount of time at anything higher it becomes unstable during normal use after a period of time. 

What the heck did I mess up? Is this ram fried?


----------



## Sarzinski

grey.clock said:


> Now it crashes and blue screens with anything even CLOSE to what I was running it at. Since things worked fine without the cl16 attempt and now even with the same settings I cannot do it, I am really confused. Leaving the ram down at 3200mhz allows me to use the computer without any issues but if I try and use it for an amount of time at anything higher it becomes unstable during normal use after a period of time.
> 
> What the heck did I mess up? Is this ram fried?


Potentially dead memory. Which IC is on your modules and how much voltage did you set? There are some newer ICs like c-dies that really don't like running at high voltages. Try MemTest at their rated spec.

Otherwise: have you tried a fresh Windows install? Bad memory OC can corrupt a Windows install to the point where it's unusable.


----------



## Falkentyne

shrimpmaster said:


> My 12700k requires 1.26v load voltage for cinebench r23 stable, with e cores disabled! Temps in low 80s.
> 
> If I leave it stock and only set SVID: Best Case it's unstable, at stock clocks!
> 
> Is this normal?


What frequency are you talking about for 1.26v load voltage in R23?


----------



## kingofblog

shrimpmaster said:


> Ok, it's in spec then. Good to know. Another thing i've found is if chip isn't totally stable in heavy avx benchmarks, like r23 yet it's stable in game, my aim feels heavy for some reason. This happened on old 8700k. If things aren't stable aiming feels heavy and strange.


If you're borderline on voltage, you might have EDP/PL4/ICCmax throttling (check HWinfo performance-limit reasons). Your voltage is drooping on load changes, which causes reactive throttling to 800 MHz. Transients can't be tested in steady-state workloads, e.g. continuous prime95. To test for transient response, you should rapidly start and stop a high-power workload and check for EDP throttling.

As for thermal, I'm not looking forward to testing it. All the reviews I saw indicate thermal throttling (100 C) at stock frequencies (4.9 GHz) on 12900k...


----------



## Exilon

zhrooms said:


> Hm? Impressed by 4.5? Did you actually not see that Cache/Ring clocks the same as on 9/10th Gen? I'm doing 5.0/4.7 easy, at low voltage (1.2V load), just like my 9900K. Seen many screenshots of it at 5.2-5.3 GHz as well, but for that you surely have to crank the voltage.


E-cores enabled? I'm hitting a 4.2 wall with them enabled but the ring goes up to 5.0 fine without. The E-core L2 cluster seems to run at the same frequency as the ring so that's probably the limiting factor here.


----------



## Chrisch

with e-cores disabled high cache/ring isn't a problem but enabled i get a bs at windows start if higher as 4.2Ghz


----------



## JoeRambo

Chrisch said:


> with e-cores disabled high cache/ring isn't a problem but enabled i get a bs at windows start if higher as 4.2Ghz


Can You try to increase E core clocks to 4.1 or so, that should enable more Ring Freq. I think it has to be within 300-400mhz of ring by design.


----------



## ObviousCough

MSI PRO Z690-A ordered. I'm going to hold onto the Gigabites board too, maybe they'll get their **** together before Raptor Lake and it's still the only known DDR4 2 dimm board coming.


----------



## shrimpmaster

z690 TUF is really good at memory oc, my IMC can't do more than 3866mhz gear 1, yet on gear 2 runs 4600mhz no problem. This is on a 3600mhz c16 tridentz kit


----------



## glnn_23

I've been on AM4 for a while so a bit to learn with Z690.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Siablo said:


> I also have 11900 and a Formula. How does it feel with the new platform, does it make sense to change to the z690? I ordered TUF and 12900k, but so far I'm in doubt.


The Z690 Tuf is a major downgrade in terms of features compared to the Z590 OC Formula. Then again so is every DDR4 Z690 board.

The platform doesn’t_ feel_ any different but it’s noticeably less stable than Z590 when overclocking to the threshold. In core overclocking, Rocket Lake had a very clear line between stable and unstable but Alder Lake has a very wide range of frequencies that will boot and bench, but are unstable. With ADL, 5.2 is completely stable while 5.3 and 5.4 are benchable but unstable. With RKL, 5.3, 5.4, and 5.5 were all stable depending on what voltage I set and 5.6 was practically unbootable.

Then again none of the XOC boards have been released yet.


----------



## Sarzinski

Is there some sort of secret to stabilizing higher gear 1 frequencies other than BIOS version, good chip and cranking up SA voltage?


----------



## FinnFIN

Saw this posted elsewhere. Gigabyte added these lists very recently I think. Z690 GAMING X DDR4 (rev. 1.0) Support | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global
Wonder if the few "successful" (read, not total failures) cases are found on this list, and the ones with issues not..


----------



## Chrisch

JoeRambo said:


> Can You try to increase E core clocks to 4.1 or so, that should enable more Ring Freq. I think it has to be within 300-400mhz of ring by design.


I will try but the bios is buggy because most time i have no option to change the E-core multiplier and sometimes it's there


----------



## owikh84

12900K SP 91
CPU Stock
ROG Strix Z690-A
2x16GB DDR4-4000 CL17-18-18-38-2T Gear1 @ 1.40v


----------



## shrimpmaster

Falkentyne said:


> What frequency are you talking about for 1.26v load voltage in R23?


5ghz all core. Manual fixed voltage of 1.35. 1.26v load vcore on hwinfo. If I apply 1.32v in bios it crashes cinebench(1.22-1.23v load)

4000mhz 1:1 not stable even with 1.45v sa. Fails fast on testmem5. But memory stable up to 4600mhz gear 2.
It's stable at 3866mhz 1:1 but already requires command rate 2. Command rate 1 with gear 1, max 3733mhz.

Always very unlucky with chips, my 8700k was the same...


----------



## Sarzinski

owikh84 said:


> 12900K SP 91
> CPU Stock
> ROG Strix Z690-A
> 2x16GB DDR4-4000 CL17-18-18-38-2T Gear1 @ 1.40v
> View attachment 2532452


Could you share BIOS screenshots of your settings? I'm still not sure if my chip is a potato or if I'm just missing some important settings to make high gear 1 work. Thanks in advance.


----------



## zhrooms

Before I install the water block, I needed to replace the original heatspreaders/heat spreader, so I thought I'd do a temperature comparison between the two (G.Skill and Alphacool). As seen below the Ripjaws is barely covering the memory chips, it's about 60% coverage on the top one and 40% bottom, but overall on both sticks, looking from either side, it's about ~50% I'd say, so, basically half of the chips are covered/aren't covered, question is then, does it affect temperature, and if so, how much? Scroll down to find out!








These sticks are Q4 2020 *2x16GB Dual Rank* G.Skill *Ripjaws* /* RGB* / *Royal* kits available in *3600 CL14-15-15* @ 1.45V / *4000 CL17-18-18* @ 1.40V / *4266 CL17-18-18* @ 1.50V
Below, I have the Ripjaws 4000 CL17-18-18 kit








For my Alphacool RAM block (17467) I'm using the Alphacool D-RAM heatspreaders (17268) _EAN: 4250197172684_, doing a quick search I can find them for as little as €22 incl. tax!








The installation was extremely simple, removing the original heatspeader was also very easy, used a hair dryer for about 15 seconds and slightly pried up the edges on both sides, then in the middle, that side then came right off, did the same for the other side, removed a small amount of glue left on some of the memory chips, then installed one of the thermal pads on the larger Alphacool heatspreader side, placed the G.Skill stick onto it (pad), then pressed down enough so it stuck to the thermal pad, the second thermal pad I placed directly on the uncovered side of the stick, then the smaller heatspreader side on top of the thermal pad and screwed in the (3) screws, didn't tighten them all the way down, but almost, for optimal contact on the memory chips, and I guess it's worth mentioning, the thermal pads didn't fully cover them (memory chips), but close, somewhere around 90 to 95% I'd say, infinitely better than the Ripjaws one at ~50%.








Looks pretty good to me, I mounted the second heatspreader the other way around, so the logo is visible from both sides of the PC (back side of each stick is facing each other).








As seen above, the results are as expected, with no airflow at all, the sticks hit 50°C regardless of which heatspreader was used. And as an almost completely silent 140mm fan at 600 RPM was added next to the sticks, about 10cm away, behind the 24-pin cable, the temperature dramatically dropped, from 51 - 52.5°C on the Ripjaws, to 41.3 - 43.8°C, a drop of almost 10°C. And here is where the Alphacool heatspreaders shine, they got even further down to 39.5 - 42.5°C, the reason for the second stick being significantly lower in temp, is because it's closest to the fan (first stick is kind of getting blocked by the second one). And last, we have the 1200 RPM results, with the fan placed directly on top of the ram sticks, so an equal airflow over them, got the temperature near identical on both sticks, but Alphacool really outperformed G.Skill here, with a full 3°C reduction on both sticks, I was honestly kind of expecting better results but if we look at the difference from ambient, the Alphacool managed to stay 9.3°C above ambient, while the Ripjaws only managed 12.3°C, that difference is just shy of 25% lower, which is pretty good because, remember that these heatspreaders are not designed to be used with a case fan after all, but an actual water block on top, so I guess I'm impressed.

This is what the memory ran at: 4000 MT/s 15-15-15-35-2T, 360 RFC, REFI 32000, and some more minor adjustments on RTP, FAW, WL and such, but most importantly, *voltage* set to 1.527 (~1.53V). Ran them for up to 40 minutes straight, in Call of Duty: Warzone with the GPU usage at max 80%, so CPU/RAM bottlenecked the whole time!

Here are some interesting FLIR (thermal camera) shots to go with the above graph and information! (If the text is hard to read, open the the image directly by clicking here)








(No FLIR image for Alphacool with the fan at 1200 RPM, because they were simply not visible, both heatspreaders under 35°C)


----------



## JoeRambo

zhrooms said:


> This is what the memory ran at: 4000 MT/s 15-15-15-35-2T, 360 RFC, REFI 32000, and some more minor adjustments on RTP, FAW, WL and such, but most importantly, *voltage* set to 1.527 (~1.53V). Ran them for up to 40 minutes straight, in Call of Duty: Warzone with the GPU usage at max 80%, so CPU/RAM bottlenecked the whole time!


I've got same RAM - REFI 65535 not stable?


----------



## zhrooms

JoeRambo said:


> I've got same RAM - REFI 65535 not stable?


It was just a "mild" overclock for testing purposes, I basically needed to make sure they weren't going to crash while running them at 50°C (and above), and they *did* crash once!
When I ran the Ripjaws and one of the sticks hit 52.5°C, a few minutes later the round ended and I was back in the lobby, just as it was about to throw me into a new round of plunder, the game gave me an error and crashed , so that overclock really didn't like the sticks running above 50°C, so I was right in keeping the secondaries & tertiary back a bit.

Also, speaking of REFI, there's a reason I kept it at 32000 specifically, here's a test I did during the Rocket Lake launch, in World of Warcraft, severely CPU/MEM bottlenecked.








As you can see, the framerate suffers when you set REFI under ~10K, it auto trains at around 14055 on my board and frequency, usually.
Which is pretty good when you look at the graph, 14055 (default) is definitely acceptable, but 32000 looks like the sweet spot to me.
10000 100.5 FPS​22000 102.4 FPS (+2.0~)​32000 102.9 FPS (+0.5)​62000 103.4 FPS (+0.5)​Like, pushing that last 0.5 FPS takes a significant toll on stability (potentially).
And to be clear, I'm obviously running max REFI possible on my daily overclock, but just to show that it's not necessarily needed, doesn't hurt much by keeping it fairly low.


----------



## owikh84

Sarzinski said:


> Could you share BIOS screenshots of your settings? I'm still not sure if my chip is a potato or if I'm just missing some important settings to make high gear 1 work. Thanks in advance.


Nothing special actually. Here's the BIOS screenshots for my RAM settings: 


http://imgur.com/a/l7ee1fk


----------



## Sarzinski

owikh84 said:


> Nothing special actually. Here's the BIOS screenshots for my RAM settings:
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/l7ee1fk


Thanks.
Seems like you did the bare minimum tweaks and it just runs. Good for you, bad news for me. Same BIOS version as well. I guess my CPU sucks, because it won't even boot 4000 with 2x 16 b-die and 3800 isn't stable either. The memory can't be the issue, those sticks have done a lot tighter timings and a lot higher frequencies in the past. Guess I'll have to buy another 12900k.


----------



## grey.clock

Sarzinski said:


> Potentially dead memory. Which IC is on your modules and how much voltage did you set? There are some newer ICs like c-dies that really don't like running at high voltages. Try MemTest at their rated spec.
> 
> Otherwise: have you tried a fresh Windows install? Bad memory OC can corrupt a Windows install to the point where it's unusable.


I dont think I can tell what the IC is without removing the heat spreader.... would rather be able to return it if defective so I am hesitant to remove anything. They are rated at 1.4v and I never exceeded that unless the board is over volting on its own.

I read a post somewhere that someone had stressed their 9900k CPU's IMC (permanent damage) while tightening timings and it lead to increasingly unstable overclocks as they pushed back to the 4000mhz range. I DID have my ram @ 3733 in 1st gear 1t at CL18 1.4v........ Could dropping the CL to 16 with everything else going on have damaged the CPU's IMC? Is there any way to test for that? I have a crucial ram kit coming today to test more....


----------



## weleh

Newest bios for TUF Plus anyone? Or is 0707 newest?


----------



## JoeRambo

zhrooms said:


> 10000 100.5 FPS22000 102.4 FPS (+2.0~)32000 102.9 FPS (+0.5)62000 103.4 FPS (+0.5)Like, pushing that last 0.5 FPS takes a significant toll on stability (potentially).
> And to be clear, I'm obviously running max REFI possible on my daily overclock, but just to show that it's not necessarily needed, doesn't hurt much by keeping it fairly low.


That's good to know. Of course impact of REFI depends on RFC, the smaller RFC, the less impact there will be.
To me an important advantage of B-DIE is ability to run ridiculously rare and short refresh cycles when properly volted. That is extra performance in real world beyond what brutal latency or BW testing would tell.


----------



## weleh

[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


In the bios of my Z690 Hero the post delay is set to 3 seconds by default. Would it be ok to set the delay to 0 or is there a reason to keep it on the 3 second post delay?




www.overclock.net





New bios here from Shamino for some DDR4 boards


----------



## zhrooms

weleh said:


> New bios here from Shamino for some DDR4 boards


I'll flash it as soon as I have time, and again we see the TUF Plus, TUF Plus W-Fi and Strix A, no Prime P support yet.
*Edit:* Pulled the TUF Plus (Non Wi-Fi) link because it might not be the correct one.








TUF-GAMING-Z690-PLUS-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




Thanks @shamino1978 ⭐


----------



## ogider

Core Wars: Alder, Rocket & Comet Lake at the RAM limit - benchmarks and gaming with DDR4 3733c14 Gear 1 | igor'sLAB


The new memory controller with DDR5 support is known to be one of the biggest changes in the 12th generation Intel Core CPUs. But DDR4 is also still supported – assuming an appropriate motherboard…




www.igorslab.de


----------



## kingofblog

I can confirm that ASUS BIOS 0707 is an improvement, but DDR4-4000 is still unstable here.

RAM: G.Skill TridentZ/Neo DDR4-4000CL16 2Rx8
CPU: i9-12900K SP78
Settings: Gear1 VccSA=1.35 Vdd=1.425 16-16-16-36-2N tRFC=180ns

I was able to boot to OS with these parameters, but running any kind of heavy memory benchmark causes a crash. Idle latency was 45.8 ns (sequential). The system is not able to cold-boot with these settings, and needs a CMOS clear each time.

EDIT: 3866 MT/s (16-16-16-36) was able to boot and complete a benchmark. It still needs several tries to cold-boot, so it can't be called stable either.

Sequential latency: 45.8 ns (4000), 45.9 ns (3866)
Random latency: 56.5 ns (4000), 59.9 ns (3866)
Read bandwidth: crash (4000), 50863.6 MB/s (3866)


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks @shamino1978 ⭐


Wrong link for STRIX-A D4. Proper: ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar

EDIT: Tested BIOS 0801. No change to DDR4-4000 (still unstable), but the BIOS menu at least doesn't run at 90 C anymore.


----------



## zhrooms

kingofblog said:


> Wrong link for STRIX-A D4. Proper: ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar


I'm so confused, I ran the SHA256 and they're indeed different, but it's for the same board, there is no DDR5 version, did he link to an unreleased DDR5 board? I replaced the link at least, removing the TUF Plus (Non Wi-Fi) since I'm now skeptical of that one.


kingofblog said:


> Tested BIOS 0801. No change to DDR4-4000 (still unstable), but the BIOS menu at least doesn't run at 90 C anymore.


Really surprised you're unstable at 4000, has to be the sticks, since I'm at least game stable up to like 4160+, at ~1.4 SA, not touching VDD.


----------



## SuperMumrik

Hey guys. I've done some d4 v d5 testing over at my local forum. Got the d4 testing done, but a few titles missing for the d5 setup, but you'll get the gist of it. 
System used is [email protected]/5.0ring(no e-cores). 

From the bottom of page two there are some d5 vs d4 game benchmarks (below the aida64 results). 



ADL D4 vs D5 tråden


----------



## Relent

kingofblog said:


> Wrong link for STRIX-A D4. Proper: ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0801.rar
> 
> EDIT: Tested BIOS 0801. No change to DDR4-4000 (still unstable), but the BIOS menu at least doesn't run at 90 C anymore.


SA 1.35-1.37
VDimm 1.55-1.6

Tested 0707 and was able to boot 4000 but I was getting lot of errors and bsods

Now testing BIOS 0801 with the following results:

No post with DR4000
No post with DR4133-14-15-15-32 1.35/1.57
Completed TestMem5 extreme with DR4133-16-16-16-36 1.35/1.57
13 min Testing TestMem5 extreme with DR4133-15-16-16-36 1.35/1.57


----------



## geriatricpollywog

chispy said:


> asus strix d4 / 12700k / g.skill tridentz neo bdie 16gb kit bdie /
> I can run 4133Mhz but with losser timmings as i prefer low latency this is perfect for me.
> 
> Best results after tweaking timmings ddr4-4000 14-14-14-26 2T , 1.43v.core / 1.60v.mem / 1.45v. SA
> 
> 
> View attachment 2532357


Thanks! I plugged in these exact timings and they worked on my Tuf at 4100. Board has a dirty dimm slot so I’m using A_2 and B_2. I’ll post results after I exchange my board for a new one.


----------



## bscool

0451 said:


> Thanks! I plugged in these exact timings and they worked on my Tuf at 4100. Board has a dirty dimm slot so I’m using A_2 and B_2. I’ll post results after I exchange my board for a new one.


Those are the correct slots for 2 dims. Or are you trying to run 4 dims?


----------



## Hiikeri

0451 said:


> Thanks! I plugged in these exact timings and they worked on my Tuf at 4100. Board has a dirty dimm slot so I’m using A_2 and B_2. I’ll post results after I exchange my board for a new one.


Propably only user error. 2 dimm conf. must use slots 2 & 4, NOT 1 & 3.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> Those are the correct slots for 2 dims. Or are you trying to run 4 dims?


Really? They are further from the cpu socket.


----------



## JoeRambo

SuperMumrik said:


> Hey guys. I've done some d4 v d5 testing over at my local forum. Got the d4 testing done, but a few titles missing for the d5 setup, but you'll get the gist of it.
> System used is [email protected]/5.0ring(no e-cores).


Can you please post your secondaries/tertiaries in Memtweak it for DDR4 system? Nice results btw, for both systems!


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Hiikeri said:


> Propably only user error. 2 dimm conf. must use slots 2 & 4, NOT 1 & 3.


So it’s user error slots 1 and 3 to only work up to 2667 while 2 and 4 work up to 4100?


----------



## JoeRambo

0451 said:


> Really? They are further from the cpu socket.


Yup, that's the way memory is meant to be inserted in 4 DIMM motherboards for years now. Pretty much need DIMMs on the end of signal path in those daisy chains.



0451 said:


> So it’s user error slots 1 and 3 to only work up to 2667 while 2 and 4 work up to 4100? I hope you don’t work in tech support.


Users are prone to not read manuals included with motherboards, that's for sure


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> Really surprised you're unstable at 4000, has to be the sticks, since I'm at least game stable up to like 4160+, at ~1.4 SA, not touching VDD.


I figured it out. 4000 MT/s gear 2 was stable, so it had to be the CPU. It turns out that the CPU was unstable when running the memory bandwidth test, because I was using an Intel stock cooler on my testbench. Thermal throttling should be keep the temperature under 100 C, but I suppose 2 GHz IMC requires a lower temperature than that. When I reduced the CPU power limit to 65 W, I was able to complete the bandwidth test without crashing (52870.9 MB/s, i.e. full speed). When I get a real heatsink, I should be able to run 1.375 VccSA and 4000 MT/s, at least with the appropriate power/thermal limits set.

EDIT: Adding thermal paste seems to have helped. I was using the stock cooler without paste for quick swapping between boards. Now I can complete multiple cycles of bandwidth test without crashing at 4000 MT/s, 1.375 VccSA.

EDIT2: I can't reproduce my earlier values for 4000 MT/s latency. Now I get 58.6 ns random latency, which makes more sense (~1 ns faster for 66 MHz IMC frequency). I also didn't manage to tighten sub-timings. Following the DDR4 OC Guide's (MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper) "conservative" values of tRRDS=6 tRRDL=6 tFAW=24 failed to boot.


----------



## Hiikeri

Get my mobo and a new rig is now ready to play. Just XMP1 for Ram and boot + installing Z690 drivers to my 1 year old Win10>Win11 installion...

DDR4 @ 80GB/s read...


----------



## Chrisch

I think I found my daily setting










3800 C15 runs also gear1 w/o problems but need ~150mV more VCCSA. Btw water @ ~29°C 

I will test more if there is a new bios for the MSI, actually it's a little bit buggy (can't change E-core multiplier etc).


----------



## ptuga

z690 TUF owners, do you have bad coil whine while running aida64 memory/cache benchmark?


----------



## Hiikeri

ptuga said:


> z690 TUF owners, do you have bad coil whine while running aida64 memory/cache benchmark?


I have also with MSI Mpg Edge Wifi DDR4 mobo on 5000+ ram speeds like an these 2 pics... no coil whining on ram 4000+ speeds.

DDR4 5133 CL18 1T > 85GB/s...









DDR4 5400 CL20 1T:









And some of IMC testing (4266, CL14, SA 1.35V):


----------



## Glottis

Asus TUF BIOS 0707 is now on Asus website. No mention of Legacy Game Compatibility Mode though, so I guess it's still not in this version and we gotta keep waiting.


----------



## Bobbylee

Glottis said:


> Asus TUF BIOS 0707 is now on Asus website. No mention of Legacy Game Compatibility Mode though, so I guess it's still not in this version and we gotta keep waiting.


Version 0801 has this, a few pages back in this post


----------



## riximFPS

Hello everyone, I'm new here and I would also like to share my results with you.



ptuga said:


> z690 TUF owners, do you have bad coil whine while running aida64 memory/cache benchmark?


I also have the TUF z690 and have coil whine when running aida64 cache & memory benchmark, especially noticeable during write / copy. Is it something to worry about?

Here are my results:








I set 1.34v for the CPU and 1.4v for the RAM. I have four RAM sticks and have reached a maximum of 3866 MHz Gear 2, T2. I should be able to clock faster with just two sticks, but that's okay for me because the result looks pretty good, I think. The system benefits enormously from overclocking the FSB.


----------



## Bobbylee

riximFPS said:


> Hello everyone, I'm new here and I would also like to share my results with you.
> 
> 
> I also have the TUF z690 and have coil whine when running aida64 cache & memory benchmark, especially noticeable during write / copy. Is it something to worry about?
> 
> Here are my results:
> View attachment 2532599
> 
> I set 1.34v for the CPU and 1.4v for the RAM. I have four RAM sticks and have reached a maximum of 3866 MHz Gear 2, T2. I should be able to clock faster with just two sticks, but that's okay for me because the result looks pretty good, I think. The system benefits enormously from overclocking the FSB.


Interesting to see, we have the same ram sticks but my latency is higher, when I would expect it to be lower. Can you explain a little or point me in the right direction for overclocking FSB? Or do you think running CR2 vs 1 is the problem for me?


----------



## riximFPS

Bobbylee said:


> Interesting to see, we have the same ram sticks but my latency is higher, when I would expect it to be lower. Can you explain a little or point me in the right direction for overclocking FSB? Or do you think running CR2 vs 1 is the problem for me?
> View attachment 2532609


It actually has to do with the FSB, the entire system performance benefits from the increase in the FSB. The increase improves the latency times and transfer rates of RAM and the CPU(Cache). Overclocking the FSB is actually always a bit more difficult, but on the z690 platform it seems relatively simple. Above all, one must note that the multiplier for RAM and CPU (P&E Cores) and also the cache change, of course. E.g. in my screenshot you can see that with an FSB of 109 I am using a CPU multiplier of 47 (47 x 108,9mhz = 5118,3mhz). Otherwise it also has something to do with luck, the maximum value that can be achieved differs from board to board. You also have to sound out with which value you can use in order to be able to set the desired RAM frequency. The conversion happens live in the BIOS when you switch, so it is actually very simple.


----------



## Cuthalu

Another day, another disappointment. Still no new GB bioses - it's been over 2 weeks since they released "launch bios". On an completely unrelated topic, is there any performance reason (no extreme overlocking, but focus on mem performance) to prefer MSI Tomahawk over Pro Z690-A, or Edge over Tomahawk?


----------



## Revv23

chispy said:


> Quick test on the ASRock z690 Steel Legend ddr4 motherboard. Motherboard is very stable at high cpu clocks. memory wise it's not there yet as there is only one bios for this board " first release bios 2.02 ". 2x16gb kit of b-die max i could get was 2800Mhz , 2x8gb kit of b-die max i could get was 3200Mhz. Has exact same problems as every board with early bios. Bios need some work , but a new one is incoming soon and should fix the low memory overclocking ceiling. I like this board  , ASRock Steel Legend always good for price/performance ratio.
> 
> Even with limited memory speed and tweaking i got 1st place last night on pcmark10 at hwbot for 6 core cpu ( E cores disable ). My chip 12600k is not a stelar overclocker either , after 5.5Ghz it wants 1.60v+ v.core for 5.6Ghz , rofl  lol .
> Will test a new 12700k i have just receive today back on the Strix z690 D4 tonight.
> *PS - Alder Lake is really , i mean really fast , 5.5Ghz alder lake = 6.2Ghz rocket lake 😂 , i ran on dual compressors single stage at -55c.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> chispy`s PCMark10 Express score: 9862 marks with a Core i5 12600K (6P)
> 
> 
> The Core i5 12600K (6P) @ 5500MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the PCMark10 Express benchmark. chispyranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> hwbot.org



I'm using this board same ram issue can't boot really good B die anywhere close to where it should be. Hopefully they update bios fast. I'm not going to both switching in my 2*8gb after seeing your results im just sticking with jedec until update.


----------



## kingofblog

Bobbylee said:


> Interesting to see, we have the same ram sticks but my latency is higher, when I would expect it to be lower. Can you explain a little or point me in the right direction for overclocking FSB? Or do you think running CR2 vs 1 is the problem for me?


CR1 at 4000 MT/s is impossible, don't bother. For AIDA64/sequential latency, disabling E-cores can get you ~1 ns from ring frequency. If you haven't tuned tRFC, set it to 180 ns or lower, which will shave off another 2-3 ns. Finally, if you have your RAM under a waterblock or if you just don't care about stability, you can set tREFI to the maximum value allowed by the BIOS, which is worth another 1-2 ns.


----------



## kingofblog

Can anyone else with an ASUS board on BIOS 0707 and B-dies confirm whether lowering tRRDS/tRRDL/tFAW works? I was using 6/6/24 on X299 without issue, but it's a no-boot on Z690.


----------



## bscool

riximFPS said:


> It actually has to do with the FSB, the entire system performance benefits from the increase in the FSB. The increase improves the latency times and transfer rates of RAM and the CPU(Cache). Overclocking the FSB is actually always a bit more difficult, but on the z690 platform it seems relatively simple. Above all, one must note that the multiplier for RAM and CPU (P&E Cores) and also the cache change, of course. E.g. in my screenshot you can see that with an FSB of 109 I am using a CPU multiplier of 47 (47 x 108,9mhz = 5118,3mhz). Otherwise it also has something to do with luck, the maximum value that can be achieved differs from board to board. You also have to sound out with which value you can use in order to be able to set the desired RAM frequency. The conversion happens live in the BIOS when you switch, so it is actually very simple.


I think it is a bug @cstkl1 posted about it here Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> I think it is a bug @cstkl1 posted about it here Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion


Pulling out my hair because 4100 14-14-14-26 is stable with tight timings at bclk 100, but Aida is 64k/62k/62k/50ns.

Does increasing bclk artificially inflate Aida numbers?


----------



## riximFPS

After each increase I ran Cinebench r20 a few times to see how the voltage behaved. The higher the FSB, the more the CPU voltage drops under load. It is therefore inevitable to increase the loadline calibration from a certain point. I'm happy about my result, but would also be interested in what could be achieved with DDR5 and a higher FSB.








Isn't that impressive?


----------



## bscool

0451 said:


> Pulling out my hair because 4100 14-14-14-26 is stable with tight timings at bclk 100, but Aida is 64k/62k/62k/50ns.
> 
> Does increasing bclk artificially inflate Aida numbers?


I dont have ADL(still debating ddr4 vs ddr5 MB but leaning towards dd4) but just looking at the posts people made with higher blck it looks like it does.


----------



## Exilon

0451 said:


> Does increasing bclk artificially inflate Aida numbers?


Yes. It's doing time calculations assuming bclk 100 so all numbers are off by bclk/100 in the worse direction.


----------



## grey.clock

grey.clock said:


> I dont think I can tell what the IC is without removing the heat spreader.... would rather be able to return it if defective so I am hesitant to remove anything. They are rated at 1.4v and I never exceeded that unless the board is over volting on its own.
> 
> I read a post somewhere that someone had stressed their 9900k CPU's IMC (permanent damage) while tightening timings and it lead to increasingly unstable overclocks as they pushed back to the 4000mhz range. I DID have my ram @ 3733 in 1st gear 1t at CL18 1.4v........ Could dropping the CL to 16 with everything else going on have damaged the CPU's IMC? Is there any way to test for that? I have a crucial ram kit coming today to test more....





bscool said:


> Those are the correct slots for 2 dims. Or are you trying to run 4 dims?



Replying to myself.... anyone think it is possible I damaged the cpu or motherboard by lowering the CL while running such a ratio? Running stable at a much lower rate with different sticks (2x8gb 1.35v 3000mhz t1, gear 1, cl 15 16 16 35)


----------



## gerardfraser

grey.clock said:


> Replying to myself.... anyone think it is possible I damaged the cpu or motherboard by lowering the CL while running such a ratio? Running stable at a much lower rate with different sticks (2x8gb 1.35v 3000mhz t1, gear 1, cl 15 16 16 35)


Nope


----------



## kingofblog

Only voltage can damage components. Changes to timing or frequency only cause crashes or data loss. However, changing DDR frequency automatically changes VccSA, which can cause damage, depending on the motherboard, because VIDs for frequencies beyond 3200 MT/s are set by the motherboard vendor and not Intel. Set VccSA manually when overclocking memory.


----------



## Kana Chan

riximFPS said:


> After each increase I ran Cinebench r20 a few times to see how the voltage behaved. The higher the FSB, the more the CPU voltage drops under load. It is therefore inevitable to increase the loadline calibration from a certain point. I'm happy about my result, but would also be interested in what could be achieved with DDR5 and a higher FSB.
> View attachment 2532683
> 
> Isn't that impressive?


Any difference in temps vs 100?


----------



## grey.clock

kingofblog said:


> Only voltage can damage components. Changes to timing or frequency only cause crashes or data loss. However, changing DDR frequency automatically changes VccSA, which can cause damage, depending on the motherboard, because VIDs for frequencies beyond 3200 MT/s are set by the motherboard vendor and not Intel. Set VccSA manually when overclocking memory.


Thank you for the reply. Short of replacing the CPU, any way to tell? I have crucial 4000mhz cl18 32 16x2 sticks coming in that I was going to test to see if I could get them at least running at XMP or 3600 @ cl16 1t /1st gear


----------



## kingofblog

grey.clock said:


> Thank you for the reply. Short of replacing the CPU, any way to tell? I have corsair 4000mhz cl18 32 16x2 sticks coming in that I was going to test to see if I could get them at least running at XMP.


Good rule of thumb for figuring out if CPU or RAM is the weak link: frequency stresses CPU while timings stress RAM. Try to run your previous RAM timings, or slightly faster, at the lower frequency but same Vdd, e.g. 3000CL14 vs. 3733CL18. If this works, your CPU is degraded. Otherwise, your RAM is degraded. Likewise, if you can reach 3733 MT/s (any timings) in Gear2 but not Gear1, the problem is your CPU.


----------



## Lurifaks

kingofblog said:


> Can anyone else with an ASUS board on BIOS 0707 and B-dies confirm whether lowering tRRDS/tRRDL/tFAW works? I was using 6/6/24 on X299 without issue, but it's a no-boot on Z690.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

GSkill F4-4000C14D-32GTEG

Any ideas how I can improve bandwidth?


----------



## bscool

@0451 I am guessing your subs timings? Do you have RTL(Round Trip Latency) enabled?

Some subs to compare [Sammelthread] - Intel DDR4 RAM OC Thread + Guides und Tipps

Edit lol nevermind I thought you had 54ns. Looks very good already


----------



## JoeRambo

0451 said:


> Any ideas how I can improve bandwidth?


Theoretical bandwidth for 4100 dual channel is 65600MB/s so You are quite near already. Tightening tertiaries is the way to improve efficiency and BW ( once primaries and sensible secondaries are used ).
With DR DRAM there is nice trick => sometimes on very good motherboards it is possible to run tRDRD_DR at 5 instead of 6 ( while keeping tRDRD_SG at 6 ).


----------



## geriatricpollywog

JoeRambo said:


> Theoretical bandwidth for 4100 dual channel is 65600MB/s so You are quite near already. Tightening tertiaries is the way to improve efficiency and BW ( once primaries and sensible secondaries are used ).
> With DR DRAM there is nice trick => sometimes on very good motherboards it is possible to run tRDRD_DR at 5 instead of 6 ( while keeping tRDRD_SG at 6 ).


Thank you! I could not stabilize 5/6 or 6/7 but 7/8 gave me a nice bump!


----------



## JoeRambo

0451 said:


> Thank you! I could not stabilize 5/6 or 6/7 but 7/8 gave me a nice bump!


Can You try? RDRD_SG 7 / RDRD_DG 4 / RDRD_DR 7 / RDRD_DD 7 ( _DD is irrelevant, since there is no different DIMM ).
And please show us Your full Dragon Ball screen.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

JoeRambo said:


> Can You try? RDRD_SG 7 / RDRD_DG 4 / RDRD_DR 7 / RDRD_DD 7 ( _DD is irrelevant, since there is no different DIMM ).
> And please show us Your full Dragon Ball screen.


Yes I will. It is late but I will post tomorrow night.


----------



## Siablo

First pen test) Micron B-die 2*16


----------



## jomama22

0451 said:


> Thank you! I could not stabilize 5/6 or 6/7 but 7/8 gave me a nice bump!
> 
> 
> View attachment 2532755


Are you using tm5 to test stability or just seeing a post and trying to game? Really should be using tm5...


----------



## RobertoSampaio

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
ALERT !
''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''​
A problem with adaptive voltage control was detected in Asus beta BIOS 0801

It is recommended to revert to 0702


Download link:









ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...




www.overclock.net


----------



## geriatricpollywog

RobertoSampaio said:


> ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
> ALERT !
> ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''​
> A problem with adaptive voltage control was detected in Asus BIOS 0801
> 
> It is recommended to revert to 0702
> 
> 
> Download link:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...
> 
> 
> Disclaimer ! These settings and methods are outside Intel's specifications, just like any other overclocking method. ---------------------------------------------------- For Z790/13900K click here Introduction: In a world increasingly concerned with natural resources, the watchword is...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Oh no Asus problems 🤣 Thanks for letting us know

I knew what I was getting myself into when I bought the Tuf. I just wish Asus would include a dual bios switch to deal with the frequent need to revert back to the old bios while waiting for a hotfix.


----------



## Siablo

More tests of gir2


----------



## Siablo

Processor and ring in stock


----------



## kingofblog

0451 said:


> GSkill F4-4000C14D-32GTEG
> 
> Any ideas how I can improve bandwidth?


For starters, use Intel Memory Latency Checker instead of AIDA64. AIDA64 uses only 128 MB buffer size, and you are measuring a significant contribution from 30 MB of L3 cache. DDR4-4000CL16 should produce 52 GB/s bandwidth, which is 82% of peak (64 GB/s @ 4000 MT/s), whereas AIDA64 will eventually tell you that you are achieving >100% of theoretical, which is absurd.

Extracting more bandwidth comes down to minimizing down-time on the bus. Push tRFC as low as possible (apparently 120 ns is achievable with enough volts) and push tREFI to the max. Beyond that, lowering timings will also help, particularly some rank-to-rank timings mentioned by others. tFAW is also important here.



RobertoSampaio said:


> ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
> ALERT !
> ''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''​
> A problem with adaptive voltage control was detected in Asus beta BIOS 0801
> 
> It is recommended to revert to 0702


Is there any additional information about the problem? Can it result in hardware damage?


----------



## RobertoSampaio

kingofblog said:


> For starters, use Intel Memory Latency Checker instead of AIDA64. AIDA64 uses only 128 MB buffer size, and you are measuring a significant contribution from 30 MB of L3 cache. DDR4-4000CL16 should produce 52 GB/s bandwidth, which is 82% of peak (64 GB/s @ 4000 MT/s), whereas AIDA64 will eventually tell you that you are achieving >100% of theoretical, which is absurd.
> 
> Extracting more bandwidth comes down to minimizing down-time on the bus. Push tRFC as low as possible (apparently 120 ns is achievable with enough volts) and push tREFI to the max. Beyond that, lowering timings will also help, particularly some rank-to-rank timings mentioned by others. tFAW is also important here.
> 
> 
> 
> Is there any additional information about the problem? Can it result in hardware damage?


I don't think it is dangerous... but you can't fine control the interpolation of the adaptive voltage for frequencies above 5200MHz...
If you are not playing with an extreme high frequency and voltages, you probably will not feel the issue...
But it's highly recommended rolling back to 0702.
It's not clear yet if it is an ucode issue or an interpolation issue.


----------



## grey.clock

0451 said:


> Oh no Asus problems 🤣 Thanks for letting us know
> 
> I knew what I was getting myself into when I bought the Tuf. I just wish Asus would include a dual bios switch to deal with the frequent need to revert back to the old bios while waiting for a hotfix.


 I am considering returning it for the $220 MSI..... Any reason to not just go ahead and do this?


----------



## Cuthalu

I removed 2 of my b-dies and started tinkering again with Gamix X with 2 sticks. This thing really seems to like vdd/vddq voltage. 3600 doesn't even boot with 1.28, but at 1.34 it works nicely and 3733 boots.

But something weird happened with 3733 - my Aida read bw went from 60000 (3600) to 42000. Yet at the same time latency dropped and write speeds are reasonable, 57.6k. Then I tried configuring more timings manually and latency dropped further down to 50.9, but read bw is still terrible. What gives?

Edit: went back to 3600, now read bw is 40k.  Memtest Pro speeds are also far lower than expected, so it's not just Aida issue.


----------



## Hiikeri

5066 and CL18 on BIOS > No Post, CL19 (on BIOS) it goes to OS and Karhu Ram Test get error in 1-2 min.

But if i boot CL20 and change CL18 via Windows, its fine.


----------



## PolRoger

Cuthalu said:


> I removed 2 of my b-dies and started tinkering again with Gamix X with 2 sticks. This thing really seems to like vdd/vddq voltage. 3600 doesn't even boot with 1.28, but at 1.34 it works nicely and 3733 boots.
> 
> But something weird happened with 3733 - my Aida read bw went from 60000 (3600) to 42000. Yet at the same time latency dropped and write speeds are reasonable, 57.6k. Then I tried configuring more timings manually and latency dropped further down to 50.9, but read bw is still terrible. What gives?
> 
> Edit: went back to 3600, now read bw is 40k.  Memtest Pro speeds are also far lower than expected, so it's not just Aida issue.


You're running a Giga Z690 motherboard?? I'm running a Giga Z690i Ultra (DDR4) and whenever my BIOS settings and results start looking "flakey" and or peculiar from changes or pushing things too hard... (Sometimes my LAN will even cut out). I always now clear the CMOS via jumper and then reload my good saved BIOS preset and move on from there. Still waiting on new Giga Z690 BIOS updates.


----------



## Cuthalu

PolRoger said:


> You're running a Giga Z690 motherboard?? I'm running a Giga Z690i Ultra (DDR4) and whenever my BIOS settings and results start looking "flakey" and or peculiar from changes or pushing things too hard... (Sometimes my LAN will even cut out). I always now clear the CMOS via jumper and then reload my good saved BIOS preset and move on from there. Still waiting on new Giga Z690 BIOS updates.


I cleared cmos, the problem still persists. I even dropped to 3466 and tried slightly higher voltages and disabling xmp, nothing works. This is very far from "pushing things too hard". 

Edit: loaded old 3400 profile, which for some Gigabyte reason booted at 3333, and now read bw is 55k. There's no boring moments with this board that's for sure.

Edit2: I finally ordered MSI Pro Z690-A.


----------



## grey.clock

Switching to different memory possibly solved my problems....

I set the system to XMP with auto/default everything else and things booted right up. I could not do this with the GSKILL Ripjaw V set that I had.

Using the MD4U1640180BRPDE 4000mhz cl18 1.4v 16gb x2 Oloy BLADE kit. Seems like they just launched these so hopefully with some tweaking I can get the snappy feeling I am aiming for.

Edit: here are the settings that my ripjaw set choked at after 2 days of use when I tried to take my CAS latency down to 16. After trying to take the ripjaw set from 18 to 16, they would no longer boot at the settings you see here. Considering trying to tighten the timings here as well but I might drop it to 3600mhz to keep things safe. It blue screened when trying to boot into windows at 4000mhz T1 / gear 1


----------



## ObviousCough

My MSI PRO Z690-A got here and i was able to pass default tm5 profile with PVS 4400c19 in XMP.
The "Memory Try it!" profile for 4000C17 Gear 1 passed too.

I can't wait to get home from work tomorrow and see what it can really do.


----------



## Hiikeri

Hiikeri said:


> 5066 and CL18 on BIOS > No Post, CL19 (on BIOS) it goes to OS and Karhu Ram Test get error in 1-2 min.
> 
> But if i boot CL20 and change CL18 via Windows, its fine.
> 
> View attachment 2532821


I had multiple problems with RAM readings/settings via Windows app latencies. CPU-Z + MSI Dragon Ball show real-time latencies, but i found that its not true if Memory Boost is ON via Bios.

I had Intel Memory Boost ON.
When i boot CL20 to Windows and change my CL to 18, CPU-Z + MSI Dragon Ball (both show real-time RAM settings) shows CL18...and before i started Karhu Ram Test, my RAM speed was dropped on backround and boosted again max performance becouse Ram Test has started... but those programs show still Win-tweaked settings CL18 and not real-time settings what were readed from Bios (Intel Dynamic Boost).

Well, if Dynamic boost is ON, then those programs doesn't show you real-time settings if you were tweaked Ram settings via WIndows.


----------



## robertr1

ObviousCough said:


> My MSI PRO Z690-A got here and i was able to pass default tm5 profile with PVS 4400c19 in XMP.
> The "Memory Try it!" profile for 4000C17 Gear 1 passed too.
> 
> I can't wait to get home from work tomorrow and see what it can really do.


4400 gear 1? sr or dr?


----------



## grey.clock

ObviousCough said:


> My MSI PRO Z690-A got here and i was able to pass default tm5 profile with PVS 4400c19 in XMP.
> The "Memory Try it!" profile for 4000C17 Gear 1 passed too.
> 
> I can't wait to get home from work tomorrow and see what it can really do.


Great numbers. I am noticing weird behavior with my Z690 TUF board... perhaps someone who is better at this understands what is going on.

Setting my XMP-4000 (xmp 1) results in my system wanting to run my 4000mhz cl18 32gb kit at 3900mhz. At 3900mhz my system seems to be stable at gear 1 / t1 but at 4000mhz (xmp profile 2 runs at this) I can only do T1 and gear 2. The bluescreen is also weird with it happening very soon upon system boot. I wonder if my inability to run this ram at gear 1/t1 @4000mhz is related to the z690 TUF and not the ram.


----------



## bscool

grey.clock said:


> Great numbers. I am noticing weird behavior with my Z690 TUF board... perhaps someone who is better at this understands what is going on.
> 
> Setting my XMP-4000 (xmp 1) results in my system wanting to run my 4000mhz cl18 32gb kit at 3900mhz. At 3900mhz my system seems to be stable at gear 1 / t1 but at 4000mhz (xmp profile 2 runs at this) I can only do T1 and gear 2. The bluescreen is also weird with it happening very soon upon system boot. I wonder if my inability to run this ram at gear 1/t1 @4000mhz is related to the z690 TUF and not the ram.
> View attachment 2532901


Gear 1 is harder to run 1t, most likely needs 2t. Single rank is more likely to be able to run 1t in gear 1.


----------



## Relent

...


----------



## Relent

Guys whats daily max safe for VDDQ and VCCSA . I've been having a lot of issues stabilizing 0707 and 0801 (0707 performs a bit worse).

For some reason what was stable yesterday tighteen is not anymore, even with auto tertiaries.

Now Im having an error in test#2 and test#14 (anta777)

BOARD: Asus Strix 690-A D4
VDIMM 1.55-1.58
MHZ: 3900-4133
VDDQ 1.35-1.38
VCCSA 1.35-1.38


----------



## eeeven

JoeRambo said:


> Theoretical bandwidth for 4100 dual channel is 65600MB/s so You are quite near already. Tightening tertiaries is the way to improve efficiency and BW ( once primaries and sensible secondaries are used ).
> With DR DRAM there is nice trick => sometimes on very good motherboards it is possible to run tRDRD_DR at 5 instead of 6 ( while keeping tRDRD_SG at 6 ).


I am not able to run tRDRD_DR at 5. Not even at 6. I noticed a tRDRD Issue on Z690 from Day 1 as i wanted to tighten my Subtimings.

My IMC is not the Best. Dual Rank B-Die is max stable at 3866 at 1.36v SA. 4000 will boot and i can Run Benchmarks, but its not stable. Not even with 1.45 SA.
But in some situations the MSI Z690 EDGE refuses to Post with 3866 G1. I will probably have to go down to 3800 G1 to have 100% Post rate.








Did someone find a way to tighten RTL on MSI Z690 Edge? I am running 71 RTL on 3866C15 which is really high.
I already tried enabling Round Trip Latency with no succes. Same 71 RTL.


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> Gear 1 is harder to run 1t, most likely needs 2t. Single rank is more likely to be able to run 1t in gear 1.


I have single rank b-die and can run 1t g1 up to 3733mhz. 3866mhz 2t. 4000mhz g1 unstable even with 1.4v sa. Errors in testmem5 in less than 5min.
4600mhz 1t gear 2 works well and stable.


----------



## ObviousCough

robertr1 said:


> 4400 gear 1? sr or dr?


4100 Gear 1 SR

4400 in gear 2. I couldn't get any level of stability in gear 2 on my gigabyte board with multiple kits tested.





edit: Now it doesn't want to do it! What the heck?

lol




edit2: 4*8 sticks won't make it into windows at xmp settings. i assume it's 100% the memory controller of the 12600k being weak.
edit3: 4*8 sticks won't do 3600 in gear 1. it makes it into windows but blue screens randomly.


----------



## Revv23

grey.clock said:


> Replying to myself.... anyone think it is possible I damaged the cpu or motherboard by lowering the CL while running such a ratio? Running stable at a much lower rate with different sticks (2x8gb 1.35v 3000mhz t1, gear 1, cl 15 16 16 35)


No shot.

Is there a bios update for your mobo yet?

My ASRock can't even run ddr 2400 with release bios.


----------



## zhrooms

Continued from the previous post where I installed the heatspreaders on my G.Skill 2x 16GB Dual Rank sticks.
This RAM block is the latest and greatest by Alphacool, initially released about two years ago and I bought mine about a year ago, but have not used it until now.
*Alphacool Aurora Acryl X4 D-RAM Water Block* (17467) EAN: 4250197174671, and yes, it features 3-Pin ARGB (A-RGB) / D-RGB lighting (6 LEDs)! 
It's made out of Copper (Nickel Plated) and Plexi (PMMA), build quality is very, very good! But that's expected considering it almost costs €60.











The accessories seen here include: A small syringe of thermal paste for when you attach the RAM block to the top of the heatspreaders, eight M3x8 screws, a hex key and an adapter cable 
(JST-SM 3-Pin ARGB to regular 3-Pin ARGB female connector that goes into your motherboard 3-Pin 5V RGB Header), as for the cable attached to the block, it's a Y-split JST cable (Male & Female) that allow you to hook up several more illuminated products if you so wish (in a row/series), my board has 3x ARGB headers so I use one for each block, CPU, GPU and now RAM.








_"The aRGB LED strip has six digital RGB LEDs. Enough to illuminate the entire RAM cooler homogeneously. Each LED can be controlled separately with an appropriate controller."_
















Really interesting visual effect, you can't actually see the water from the side angle, only from the top as seen in the previous picture, what you instead see is the reflecting bottom of the plexi.








Paired with two EK-AF Classic Angled 90° Nickel and two EK-ACF Fitting 10/13mm Black (EOL) fittings, the same fitting combination can be seen on the CPU block below.








These are not the final pictures and only brief results can be presented, as I was missing an O-ring for my third pump/res loop, had to improvise and when the picture was taken the PC had been running without the pump turned on so that's why you see all of the bubbles.
With the O-ring issue solved about a day later, I'm instead having trouble getting optimal contact with the thermal pads on the heatspreaders, since I noticed that one stick showed a considerably higher temperature reading, but all of the aftermarket RAM heatspreaders has the same issue, they all clamp together at the top, I'm currently experimenting on how to optimally fit/tighten the heatspreaders, and I'm real close now, initial results are very good, the best temperature reading so far has shown it 2°C below using a fan, specifically a 140mm one at 1200 RPM directly on top of the sticks, that's a ton of airflow and it (block) beat it with suboptimal thermal pad pressure, that's also without any fans attached to the radiator, passively cooling it so it's making zero noise (D5 Pump at 1400 RPM is inaudible), compared to the 140mm at 1200 RPM which is borderline loud.

_To be continued!_


----------



## grey.clock

ObviousCough said:


> 4100 Gear 1 SR
> 
> 4400 in gear 2. I couldn't get any level of stability in gear 2 on my gigabyte board with multiple kits tested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit: Now it doesn't want to do it! What the heck?
> 
> lol
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit2: 4*8 sticks won't make it into windows at xmp settings. i assume it's 100% the memory controller of the 12600k being weak.
> edit3: 4*8 sticks won't do 3600 in gear 1. it makes it into windows but blue screens randomly.



After seeing the other post about someone not being able to post at timings that were previously stable I went ahead and rolled my system back to the XMP profile. I think you might have something with the 12600k having a weak memory controller. I wonder if it is causing damage to memory modules due to something weird going on. I just ordered a 12700k from amazon, maybe that will fix my problems.


----------



## ogider

For me with msi z690 a-pro with 2x16GB b-die DR auto odt not working
With 4100 mainboard set 80 34 40 and tm5 start showing errors after 20 sec lol
This is with odt by hand. Most timings are on auto just testing max MHz
4100 cr2 gear1 12900k 4.6 cache small cores disabled


----------



## ObviousCough

grey.clock said:


> After seeing the other post about someone not being able to post at timings that were previously stable I went ahead and rolled my system back to the XMP profile. I think you might have something with the 12600k having a weak memory controller. I wonder if it is causing damage to memory modules due to something weird going on. I just ordered a 12700k from amazon, maybe that will fix my problems.


Best i am able to manage with 16GB sticks is 3600 in Gear 1. They are 3800C14D so i know it's not my memory. I didn't look at my memory settings when i did the 4100, i was just excited it posted into windows with no problem. But it is possible the ram was at 2133 instead of the 4100 i had set in the bios. There's no post code and the board will still boot pretty fast when the memory settings fail. It doesn't always tell me memory overclock failed either.

With 16GB sticks 4400 in gear 2 appears to be a hard no.




Edit: still a massive leap over the stability i was experiencing with Gigabytes bios. 3600 would post but bsod.


----------



## grey.clock

ObviousCough said:


> Best i am able to manage with 16GB sticks is 3600 in Gear 1. They are 3800C14D so i know it's not my memory. I didn't look at my memory settings when i did the 4100, i was just excited it posted into windows with no problem. But it is possible the ram was at 2133 instead of the 4100 i had set in the bios. There's no post code and the board will still boot pretty fast when the memory settings fail. It doesn't always tell me memory overclock failed either.
> 
> With 16GB sticks 4400 in gear 2 appears to be a hard no.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: still a massive leap over the stability i was experiencing with Gigabytes bios. 3600 would post but bsod.


Look at my previous post. I had 4000mhz sticks that ended up degrading after two days of use. Rock solid computer for two days at 3733 gear 1 /t1 ,1.4v. After trying to do gear 1 /t1 3733 cl16 instead of cl18, the ram would never run stable at 3733 t1/gear1 again. I ended up returning the ram. The 2nd set of ram is doing the same thing.... is stable at 3733 gear 1 / t1. I decided to just run it at XMP for now since I think messing with the timings on the 12600k could be damaging something.


----------



## Cuthalu

grey.clock said:


> Look at my previous post. I had 4000mhz sticks that ended up degrading after two days of use. Rock solid computer for two days at 3733 gear 1 /t1 ,1.4v. After trying to do gear 1 /t1 3733 cl16 instead of cl18, the ram would never run stable at 3733 t1/gear1 again. I ended up returning the ram. The 2nd set of ram is doing the same thing.... is stable at 3733 gear 1 / t1. I decided to just run it at XMP for now since I think messing with the timings on the 12600k could be damaging something.


Were the sticks brand new? "Messing" with the timings wont damage anything. Voltages that are too high could do that. Some auto voltages could be excessively high - it would help to know what the safe voltage ranges are.


----------



## ObviousCough

grey.clock said:


> Look at my previous post.


I did, you didn't mention which board/bios you were using. They're not all created equal ya know


----------



## zhrooms

ObviousCough said:


> Best I am able to manage with 16GB sticks is 3600 in Gear 1. They are 3800C14D so i know it's not my memory.


Well we have proof from a few pages back of;
*2x 16GB* *Dual Rank* at *4133* 14-15-14-28-2T, 6/4 RRD, 320 RFC, 65535 REFI, 6 RTP, 16 FAW, 4 CKE, 14 WCL, *1.63V* DRAM, *1.45V* SA, *12600K* at 5.2/4.9 and 1.38V on *MSI A Pro*

I can run this too, example on my ASUS ROG Z690-A Strix, with a SP70 rated 12700K at 5.0/4.7 @ 1.23V, and it's game stable at 1.182V SA and 1.52V DRAM, with basically his timings but at 4000 instead of 4133, not attempted higher yet because I've been working on the RAM cooling, but I know I can boot 4187 into Windows on the ASUS 0707 BIOS.

Anyway, my point is, it seems that _some_ people in this thread are having major issues on ASUS and MSI boards that other people do *not* experience, and the only explanation I can think of is:
User error, for example, we had one person run the sticks in the wrong slots, and another person running the CPU on an Intel Stock cooler at 100°C, that caused major stability issues. So what else are other users doing that completely mess up the stability and capability of these boards and processors? There's absolutely no way your 12600K can't do above 3600, when we have multiple users running the 12600K and the same board, and they can all boot up to *4200* with *2x 16GB Dual Rank*.. that IMC difference is 1800 vs 2100, _there's just no way_, a realistic IMC difference would be maybe 50, not *300*. Only explanation is that it's user error, or the CPU is actually defective like my 12900K that I had to return, with an almost completely busted B channel. Like I don't know what to say other than I simply think you're doing something wrong, because we know the board and processor can do it, then you have to make sure the RAM is not faulty, or your BIOS settings aren't messed up, like triple and quadruple check. I'm at least going to write down (like this) the entire Strix A BIOS and share it here so everyone can see exactly what I'm changing for 3866, 4000 and 4133+ to boot and be game stable. I have a friend with the MSI Z690-A Pro so going to do the same for that one, but it'll be a few days. The Strix A one should apply to TUF Plus as well.


----------



## grey.clock

ObviousCough said:


> I did, you didn't mention which board/bios you were using. They're not all created equal ya know


Asus TUF z690 on 0707 

Memory both times was brand new, same exact chips (SK hynix 4000mhz cl18 22 22 22 42 1.4v) but one was gskill and the other is branded Oloy


----------



## bscool

grey.clock said:


> Look at my previous post. I had 4000mhz sticks that ended up degrading after two days of use. Rock solid computer for two days at 3733 gear 1 /t1 ,1.4v. After trying to do gear 1 /t1 3733 cl16 instead of cl18, the ram would never run stable at 3733 t1/gear1 again. I ended up returning the ram. The 2nd set of ram is doing the same thing.... is stable at 3733 gear 1 / t1. I decided to just run it at XMP for now since I think messing with the timings on the 12600k could be damaging something.


I have a feeling there is something else going on. Like timings changing on reboots and from cold to warm boots.

Are you setting all timings manually? But even them RTL/IOLs can drift/change on reboots. I could be wrong but I really doubt it is degrading the sticks.


----------



## Lurifaks

Just to see if the ASUS ROG Z690-A Strix and 12600k can boot high memory clock into windows. Which some seem to struggle with.
Have not tested any other stability than the little you see. 2300 (4600Mh DDR) also booted, but failed after few seconds

Maybe I'll look at whether it is possible to stabilize at a later occasion. Will probably use lower and tighter gear1 for daily.
Have been busy installing LF2 since the LGA1700 kit finally arrived.


----------



## Hiikeri

eeeven said:


> Did someone find a way to tighten RTL on MSI Z690 Edge? I am running 71 RTL on 3866C15 which is really high.
> I already tried enabling Round Trip Latency with no succes. Same 71 RTL.


I haven't try yet on this board becouse my settings on default are so low RTL:s. DDR4 5166Mhz RTL 50.

Did you try RTL training Enabled, not Auto? After that i think (my earlier mobos) then you can lower 21 (=default trainig) to example 20 = tigher RTLs...

Or if that doesnt work on these motherboards, maybe some of "new" setting forces yours settings on every post?

Example, Intel Dynamic Ram boost Enabled (works also on DDR4, should be disabled on normal Ram overclocking, i think so)?


----------



## Chrisch

JoeRambo said:


> Can You try to increase E core clocks to 4.1 or so, that should enable more Ring Freq. I think it has to be within 300-400mhz of ring by design.


sorry for the late answer, tested it and it doesn't make a difference if E-cores @ default or overclocked, cache/ring max is 4.2GHz with active E-cores.


----------



## Revv23

Lurifaks said:


> View attachment 2532743


Can anyone point me to dragonball software? Cant find on msi website.


----------



## grey.clock

bscool said:


> I have a feeling there is something else going on. Like timings changing on reboots and from cold to warm boots.
> 
> Are you setting all timings manually? But even them RTL/IOLs can drift/change on reboots. I could be wrong but I really doubt it is degrading the sticks.



Perhaps....

I will have a i7 12700k by the 26th to test on... will be interesting to see if my ram is more stable with a more powerful memory controller


----------



## Chrisch

Revv23 said:


> Can anyone point me to dragonball software? Cant find on msi website.


*MSI Dragon Ball 1.0.0.08*


----------



## Revv23

Chrisch said:


> *MSI Dragon Ball 1.0.0.08*


Thank you!

Glad to finally find this forum... i've been in the dark since XS went silent.


----------



## bscool

grey.clock said:


> Perhaps....
> 
> I will have a i7 12700k by the 26th to test on... will be interesting to see if my ram is more stable with a more powerful memory controller


Also gear 1 1t is VERY hard to get stable. If ADL is anything like RCL on IMC 1t and gear 1 is not going to be possible to keep stable unless running SR or DR at lower clocks. Very difficult to do.

Edit I am baising this off of what i have seen with b die. But i havent seen many do 1t gear 1 higher clock 2x16gb.


----------



## Revv23

bscool said:


> Also gear 1 1t is VERY hard to get stable. If ADL is anything like RCL on IMC 1t and gear 1 is not going to be possible to keep stable unless running SR or DR at lower clocks. Very difficult to do.
> 
> Edit I am baising this off of what i have seen with b die. But i havent seen many do 1t gear 1 higher clock 2x16gb.


what mobo?


----------



## bscool

Revv23 said:


> what mobo?


Any, just because you see 1 or 2 people doing it dont assume eveyone can. I dont think a lot has changed from RKL to ADL on ddr4 mem OC outside ADL can run a little higher. I could be wrong I am just basing it off what I see, I dont have an ADL MB yet.

If you ment what boards I had on z590 Apex, Unify X, Hero. And 1t gear 1 high clocks is rare.


----------



## grey.clock

This is as good as it is going to get for me without a bios update or perhaps the 12700k I have coming in the mail. Going to return them to XMP settings though since I am worried about potentially damaging something like I am worried I did with the last sticks. Running a 12600k with Oloy 4000mhz cl 18 1.4v 2x16gb


----------



## geriatricpollywog

JoeRambo said:


> Can You try? RDRD_SG 7 / RDRD_DG 4 / RDRD_DR 7 / RDRD_DD 7 ( _DD is irrelevant, since there is no different DIMM ).
> And please show us Your full Dragon Ball screen.


Here it is. I need to work on latency. RTL looks high.


----------



## bscool

@0451 Does your bios have round trip latency under memory algorithms section? Maybe it doesnt work on ADL, I saw someone post it didnt work for them on MSI. I have a z690 Strix that should be here next week to join in on the fun  I canceled the MSI z690A. Too many MB and CPU and ram sitting around already.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> @0451 Does your bios have round trip latency under memory algorithms section? Maybe it doesnt work on ADL, I saw someone post it didnt work for them on MSI. I have a z690 Strix that should be here next week to join in on the fun  I canceled the MSI z690A. Too many MB and CPU and ram sitting around already.


It does, but enabling did not change RTL.


----------



## bscool

0451 said:


> It does, but enabling did not change RTL.


Interesting that no "reviewers" or manufacture reps that post online mentioned this other than end users. Or maybe they did and I missed it or it is a secret


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> Interesting that no "reviewers" or manufacture reps that post online mentioned this other than end users. Or maybe they did and I missed it or it is a secret


It appears you can set RTL manually. But when I lower from 69 to 68 it doesn’t post. I wouldn’t necessarily blame the bios for anything yet as I just barely started messing with RTL and I don’t really know what I’m doing anyway.


----------



## bscool

0451 said:


> It appears you can set RTL manually. But when I lower from 69 to 68 it doesn’t post. I wouldn’t necessarily blame the bios for anything yet as I just barely started messing with RTL and I don’t really know what I’m doing anyway.


It was like that on z590 with Asus and MSI also but changing manually didn't work. Maybe they got rid of it on ADL or it takes something else enabled/flipped to get them lower.


----------



## eeeven

They already striked out the IOL Settings since 11th Gen.

I can confirm that i have tried like 100 different Combos of lower RTL on MSI Z690 Edge with no succes. No Post when tightening the RTL. Round Trip Latency enabled does not not change the RTL.
I Also tried by enableing Late Command Training and Cmd Drive Strength + TX Equal. Nothing changed. It seems that the RTL is not changeable on this BIOS Version or maybe in generell on Alder Lake.


----------



## JoeRambo

0451 said:


> Here it is. I need to work on latency. RTL looks high.













This whole part of tertiaries is not optimal for DR DRAM and probably holding You back versus SR.

Only things that need around > 12 or so are RD ->WR transition for all types 
and WR -> RD on same rank ( sg and dg )

So WRRD_DR RDWR_DR WRWR_DR can all be tightened, i think WRRD_DR can do 9,8; RDWR_DR can do 16 and less, WRWR 9, 8 and less. 

And there are adventurous optimizations like RDRD_DR trying 6 instead of 7.


----------



## eeeven

tRDRD_dr 6 is not possible for me with Dual Rank B-Die. 7 is the lowesti can go.


----------



## shrimpmaster

New 0002 bios is amazing. While before I could do 3866mhz g1 max. Now I can do 4000mhz with only 1.3v sa.
I'm curious to see what u guys manage with good chips.

Even 4000mhz 1t seems to be stable, from the little testing I've done. Before max g1 1t was 3733mhz for me


----------



## warbucks

shrimpmaster said:


> New 0002 bios is amazing. While before I could do 3866mhz g1 max. Now I can do 4000mhz with only 1.3v sa.
> I'm curious to see what u guys manage with good chips.
> 
> Even 4000mhz 1t seems to be stable, from the little testing I've done. Before max g1 1t was 3733mhz for me


Single rank and not dual rank, correct?


----------



## RetroWave78

Hi everyone, I've been lurking here for a few days, I picked up an Asus Swift Z690-A D4 and have 4 dimms of F4-4266C19D-16GTRS (CL19-19-19-39) that I believe is on the QVL (I believe there is a spelling error: ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG USA

Page 2, listed as both F4-4266C19D-16GTZRS and " "RG, if you google F4-4266C19D-16GTZRS there is no hit, even if you input that memory into G-Skil's site there is no memory associated with it, if you remove the Z it shows as G-Skill Royals of the same speed, capacity and timings. I cannot tell if this is B-Die or not, but it is Samsung. 

Anyhow, I intend to try to boot with two of these sticks in slots A2 and B2 but I am concerned with how successfull I will be trying to run them at 4266 XMP as it seems most Strix A D4 owners here are struggling to get their system to boot above 3800 MHz, (but much tighter timings). And if things are stable I intend to try to boot with 4 sticks, even though 4 sticks of these particular dimms aren't on the QVL. 

I managed to find BIOS 0707 here, should I flash to that before proceeding with the mobo and CPU swap? Also, is there any reason 0707 is not officially available yet? 

I became concerned with the viability of this board after viewing FrameChaser's recent appraisal of it where he says that many owners are having tremendous difficulty getting memory speed above 3800 MHz to work (video can be found earlier in this thread). I don't ascribe much authority to FrameChaser's information per se, there could be many variables here, to include BIOS version, memory timings, and whether or not the memory in question is on the QVL but there are other reports here that tend to corroborate his assessment, that getting memory above 3800 MHz to work with this board is currently problematic. I believe zhrooms may have managed to get memory working at 4133 MHz? 

I am upgrading from 8700k + 3090 FE under full loop to 12900k. I'm essentially just upgrading the motherboard, CPU and memory, but will need to completely disassemble my loop and PC as the rads are due for flushing (Mayhems Blitz) due to EKWB Mystic Fog fallout. 

Given how much work is entailed with this upgrade I am going to try to do this without clean installing Windows, using this guide: 




Also, going by the Newegg reviews for this board, there is an issue where if you don't install the LAN drivers before hand you will not be able to connect to the internet? 

In preparation for this project I have two system images and a cloned boot drive on hand to fall back on or return to my Z370 board if I can't get this to work and I have Windows rescue media should I have to resort to clean installing Windows on one of the drives. I'm staying on 10 for the time being, I don't like the changes that were made to 11 and don't know how useful the scheduler will be for 12900k in regards to gaming. 

Two of my biggest concerns are having a problem with Windows, i.e. Blue Screen Boot Loop, or the memory, or worse, not being able to tell whether or not the problem is the memory or Windows. 

To rule out the memory I can run MemTest86 which I understand is built into the BIOS now (I've been using Gigabyte for the past 4 years) and also drop the speed down to 3200 MHz or lower and I can clean install Windows on a drive to rule out the OS. 

I also intend to use Thermal Grizzly conductonaut between the 12900k IHS and EKWB LGA 1700 Supremacy 2 block (EKWB CE 420 + XE 360, 2x D5 in serial). Currently I have Conductonaut on both my 8700k and 3090 FE and the temps are phenomenal. 

Looking for any feedback, tips, help and corroboration with all of the above. 

Thanks in advance.


----------



## shrimpmaster

warbucks said:


> Single rank and not dual rank, correct?


yes single rank


----------



## Gardiff

RetroWave78 said:


> Hi everyone, I've been lurking here for a few days, I picked up an Asus Swift Z690-A D4 and have 4 dimms of F4-4266C19D-16GTRS (CL19-19-19-39) that I believe is on the QVL (I believe there is a spelling error: ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG USA
> 
> Page 2, listed as both F4-4266C19D-16GTZRS and " "RG, if you google F4-4266C19D-16GTZRS there is no hit, even if you input that memory into G-Skil's site there is no memory associated with it, if you remove the Z it shows as G-Skill Royals of the same speed, capacity and timings. I cannot tell if this is B-Die or not, but it is Samsung.
> 
> Anyhow, I intend to try to boot with two of these sticks in slots A2 and B2 but I am concerned with how successfull I will be trying to run them at 4266 XMP as it seems most Strix A D4 owners here are struggling to get their system to boot above 3800 MHz, (but much tighter timings). And if things are stable I intend to try to boot with 4 sticks, even though 4 sticks of these particular dimms aren't on the QVL.
> 
> I managed to find BIOS 0707 here, should I flash to that before proceeding with the mobo and CPU swap? Also, is there any reason 0707 is not officially available yet?
> 
> I became concerned with the viability of this board after viewing FrameChaser's recent appraisal of it where he says that many owners are having tremendous difficulty getting memory speed above 3800 MHz to work (video can be found earlier in this thread). I don't ascribe much authority to FrameChaser's information per se, there could be many variables here, to include BIOS version, memory timings, and whether or not the memory in question is on the QVL but there are other reports here that tend to corroborate his assessment, that getting memory above 3800 MHz to work with this board is currently problematic. I believe zhrooms may have managed to get memory working at 4133 MHz?
> 
> I am upgrading from 8700k + 3090 FE under full loop to 12900k. I'm essentially just upgrading the motherboard, CPU and memory, but will need to completely disassemble my loop and PC as the rads are due for flushing (Mayhems Blitz) due to EKWB Mystic Fog fallout.
> 
> Given how much work is entailed with this upgrade I am going to try to do this without clean installing Windows, using this guide:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, going by the Newegg reviews for this board, there is an issue where if you don't install the LAN drivers before hand you will not be able to connect to the internet?
> 
> In preparation for this project I have two system images and a cloned boot drive on hand to fall back on or return to my Z370 board if I can't get this to work and I have Windows rescue media should I have to resort to clean installing Windows on one of the drives. I'm staying on 10 for the time being, I don't like the changes that were made to 11 and don't know how useful the scheduler will be for 12900k in regards to gaming.
> 
> Two of my biggest concerns are having a problem with Windows, i.e. Blue Screen Boot Loop, or the memory, or worse, not being able to tell whether or not the problem is the memory or Windows.
> 
> To rule out the memory I can run MemTest86 which I understand is built into the BIOS now (I've been using Gigabyte for the past 4 years) and also drop the speed down to 3200 MHz or lower and I can clean install Windows on a drive to rule out the OS.
> 
> I also intend to use Thermal Grizzly conductonaut between the 12900k IHS and EKWB LGA 1700 Supremacy 2 block (EKWB CE 420 + XE 360, 2x D5 in serial). Currently I have Conductonaut on both my 8700k and 3090 FE and the temps are phenomenal.
> 
> Looking for any feedback, tips, help and corroboration with all of the above.
> 
> Thanks in advance.




I also have the strix Z690-A D4. currently running 4x8gb sticks of 4400cl19 patriot viper steel @ 3866 cl15 2t gear 1
original bios 605 i wasn't able to post > 3800 
upgrading to 801 i've been able to post in gear 1 up to 4133 cl16 but haven't worked to get it stable
801 reportedly has some issues with adaptive voltage and i haven't tested any of the 700 series bios

as a note, my board / chip likes low SA and Vddq tx (1.1 and 1.2 respectively). Dram voltage 1.45v


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

RetroWave78 said:


> Hi everyone, I've been lurking here for a few days, I picked up an Asus Swift Z690-A D4 and have 4 dimms of F4-4266C19D-16GTRS (CL19-19-19-39) that I believe is on the QVL (I believe there is a spelling error: ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | ROG Strix | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG USA
> 
> Page 2, listed as both F4-4266C19D-16GTZRS and " "RG, if you google F4-4266C19D-16GTZRS there is no hit, even if you input that memory into G-Skil's site there is no memory associated with it, if you remove the Z it shows as G-Skill Royals of the same speed, capacity and timings. I cannot tell if this is B-Die or not, but it is Samsung.
> 
> Anyhow, I intend to try to boot with two of these sticks in slots A2 and B2 but I am concerned with how successfull I will be trying to run them at 4266 XMP as it seems most Strix A D4 owners here are struggling to get their system to boot above 3800 MHz, (but much tighter timings). And if things are stable I intend to try to boot with 4 sticks, even though 4 sticks of these particular dimms aren't on the QVL.
> 
> I managed to find BIOS 0707 here, should I flash to that before proceeding with the mobo and CPU swap? Also, is there any reason 0707 is not officially available yet?
> 
> I became concerned with the viability of this board after viewing FrameChaser's recent appraisal of it where he says that many owners are having tremendous difficulty getting memory speed above 3800 MHz to work (video can be found earlier in this thread). I don't ascribe much authority to FrameChaser's information per se, there could be many variables here, to include BIOS version, memory timings, and whether or not the memory in question is on the QVL but there are other reports here that tend to corroborate his assessment, that getting memory above 3800 MHz to work with this board is currently problematic. I believe zhrooms may have managed to get memory working at 4133 MHz?
> 
> I am upgrading from 8700k + 3090 FE under full loop to 12900k. I'm essentially just upgrading the motherboard, CPU and memory, but will need to completely disassemble my loop and PC as the rads are due for flushing (Mayhems Blitz) due to EKWB Mystic Fog fallout.
> 
> Given how much work is entailed with this upgrade I am going to try to do this without clean installing Windows, using this guide:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Also, going by the Newegg reviews for this board, there is an issue where if you don't install the LAN drivers before hand you will not be able to connect to the internet?
> 
> In preparation for this project I have two system images and a cloned boot drive on hand to fall back on or return to my Z370 board if I can't get this to work and I have Windows rescue media should I have to resort to clean installing Windows on one of the drives. I'm staying on 10 for the time being, I don't like the changes that were made to 11 and don't know how useful the scheduler will be for 12900k in regards to gaming.
> 
> Two of my biggest concerns are having a problem with Windows, i.e. Blue Screen Boot Loop, or the memory, or worse, not being able to tell whether or not the problem is the memory or Windows.
> 
> To rule out the memory I can run MemTest86 which I understand is built into the BIOS now (I've been using Gigabyte for the past 4 years) and also drop the speed down to 3200 MHz or lower and I can clean install Windows on a drive to rule out the OS.
> 
> I also intend to use Thermal Grizzly conductonaut between the 12900k IHS and EKWB LGA 1700 Supremacy 2 block (EKWB CE 420 + XE 360, 2x D5 in serial). Currently I have Conductonaut on both my 8700k and 3090 FE and the temps are phenomenal.
> 
> Looking for any feedback, tips, help and corroboration with all of the above.
> 
> Thanks in advance.



Can confirm that 3800mt DR seems like the hard limit for me - have multiple different options for ram (all b-die variants) but DR reaches a hard limit at 3800 gear 1 or 2. Can not post higher with any combination of latencies, voltages, rtl etc. Can post SR gear 1 to 4200 but _nothing_ is stable above 3900. In gear 2 DR I cannot even reach detuned xmp4400c16 or xmp4000c14, but gear 2 SR can go higher.

There is a bit of odd behavior that spans the different bios versions I've tried.
I can not get the system to POST (even with high VCCSA boot voltage) at 3800c14 with anything less than 1.27v in DR. But exactly 1.27V and higher the system is DEAD stable at tight c14. There is no bootable VCCSA value that is unstable unless I go dicking around into super tight c12 high voltage zone - but then ram volts seem to even that out). T1 is not possible period. Seems a bit odd to me that there isn't a zone of even 10mv where the system posts but is unstable.
Disabling the E-cores improves the latencies (2.5ns linear), and allows ring to be turned up to 49 (50 is a no got to 1.45vcore).
SR seems to be intermittently unstable for reasons that are not reproducible at above 3800 - this is the most frustrating.

3 possible scenarios exist in my mind.
1. One of the memory controllers on 12900k is not very good (though I'm not sure I remember correctly - potentially only one of the memory controllers is used for ddr4?). Or just IMC is only slightly better than rocketlake.
2. Memory sockets / traces / etc are not very good. Cannot do DR 4000 even in gear 2 (i've swapped in different kits - not a kit problem).
3. Bios issues? The same issues have lasted since release bios for me - so I'm not hopeful that a bios will remedy. The strange VCCSA behavior seems to me potentially related to cascade events in dark bios auto corrections - so I'm not quite sure what to make of that.

I would very much like to try an MSI board and another 12900k or two to see what evidence I can gather.


----------



## warbucks

Professor DumbDumb said:


> Can confirm that 3800mt DR seems like the hard limit for me - have multiple different options for ram (all b-die variants) but DR reaches a hard limit at 3800 gear 1 or 2. Can not post higher with any combination of latencies, voltages, rtl etc. Can post SR gear 1 to 4200 but _nothing_ is stable above 3900. In gear 2 DR I cannot even reach detuned xmp4400c16 or xmp4000c14, but gear 2 SR can go higher.
> 
> There is a bit of odd behavior that spans the different bios versions I've tried.
> I can not get the system to POST (even with high VCCSA boot voltage) at 3800c14 with anything less than 1.27v in DR. But exactly 1.27V and higher the system is DEAD stable at tight c14. There is no bootable VCCSA value that is unstable unless I go dicking around into super tight c12 high voltage zone - but then ram volts seem to even that out). T1 is not possible period. Seems a bit odd to me that there isn't a zone of even 10mv where the system posts but is unstable.
> Disabling the E-cores improves the latencies (2.5ns linear), and allows ring to be turned up to 49 (50 is a no got to 1.45vcore).
> SR seems to be intermittently unstable for reasons that are not reproducible at above 3800 - this is the most frustrating.
> 
> 3 possible scenarios exist in my mind.
> 1. One of the memory controllers on 12900k is not very good (though I'm not sure I remember correctly - potentially only one of the memory controllers is used for ddr4?). Or just IMC is only slightly better than rocketlake.
> 2. Memory sockets / traces / etc are not very good. Cannot do DR 4000 even in gear 2 (i've swapped in different kits - not a kit problem).
> 3. Bios issues? The same issues have lasted since release bios for me - so I'm not hopeful that a bios will remedy. The strange VCCSA behavior seems to me potentially related to cascade events in dark bios auto corrections - so I'm not quite sure what to make of that.
> 
> I would very much like to try an MSI board and another 12900k or two to see what evidence I can gather.


I believe the bios needs to be tuned better for dual rank.


----------



## RetroWave78

Gardiff said:


> I also have the strix Z690-A D4. currently running 4x8gb sticks of 4400cl19 patriot viper steel @ 3866 cl15 2t gear 1
> original bios 605 i wasn't able to post > 3800
> upgrading to 801 i've been able to post in gear 1 up to 4133 cl16 but haven't worked to get it stable
> 801 reportedly has some issues with adaptive voltage and i haven't tested any of the 700 series bios
> 
> as a note, my board / chip likes low SA and Vddq tx (1.1 and 1.2 respectively). Dram voltage 1.45v


Right, so basically they aren't able to run at their XMP speed correct? Is this common? I heard 0801 had the issue with adaptive voltage and that 0707 was better or do I have this backwards? 



Professor DumbDumb said:


> Can confirm that 3800mt DR seems like the hard limit for me - have multiple different options for ram (all b-die variants) but DR reaches a hard limit at 3800 gear 1 or 2. Can not post higher with any combination of latencies, voltages, rtl etc. Can post SR gear 1 to 4200 but _nothing_ is stable above 3900. In gear 2 DR I cannot even reach detuned xmp4400c16 or xmp4000c14, but gear 2 SR can go higher.
> 
> There is a bit of odd behavior that spans the different bios versions I've tried.
> I can not get the system to POST (even with high VCCSA boot voltage) at 3800c14 with anything less than 1.27v in DR. But exactly 1.27V and higher the system is DEAD stable at tight c14. There is no bootable VCCSA value that is unstable unless I go dicking around into super tight c12 high voltage zone - but then ram volts seem to even that out). T1 is not possible period. Seems a bit odd to me that there isn't a zone of even 10mv where the system posts but is unstable.
> Disabling the E-cores improves the latencies (2.5ns linear), and allows ring to be turned up to 49 (50 is a no got to 1.45vcore).
> SR seems to be intermittently unstable for reasons that are not reproducible at above 3800 - this is the most frustrating.
> 
> 3 possible scenarios exist in my mind.
> 1. One of the memory controllers on 12900k is not very good (though I'm not sure I remember correctly - potentially only one of the memory controllers is used for ddr4?). Or just IMC is only slightly better than rocketlake.
> 2. Memory sockets / traces / etc are not very good. Cannot do DR 4000 even in gear 2 (i've swapped in different kits - not a kit problem).
> 3. Bios issues? The same issues have lasted since release bios for me - so I'm not hopeful that a bios will remedy. The strange VCCSA behavior seems to me potentially related to cascade events in dark bios auto corrections - so I'm not quite sure what to make of that.
> 
> I would very much like to try an MSI board and another 12900k or two to see what evidence I can gather.


Thanks for the extensive data and feedback. As an update, having further scrutinized the QVL I did find much better 4x8 sticks with much lower timings and latency. I managed to grab one of the few remaining Royal heat-spread variants of this memory on ebay and will return my order of the original memory as I have yet to open the packaging and am within the return window. I'm still concerned that this may not work even at the stated XMP speed: 

I ordered: F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com) 

Which is the Royal heat-spreader version of: F4-4000C15Q-32GTZR-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com) which is on the QVL. I'm still relatively new to this and haven't upgraded in a while, I'm assuming that although the Royal variant is not on the QVL that it is the same memory as the latter listed here (going by timings, voltage etc.) just with Royal heat-spreaders. I have more confidence in this kit as it's a 4 stick matched kit whereas previously I was going to try to run two separate 2x8 kits that were not matched. 

I saw your reply on Reddit, someone else in that thread has indicated that they have 4400 MHz dimms working, although I'm not sure about what Gear. (1) Is the z690-A strix ddr4 enough to drive a 12900k? : intel (reddit.com) 

"Crucial max 2x16 cl19 4400mhz "

I'm truly curious as to whether or not the new memory will even boot in XMP, they are also listed at 1.5v. Not sure. 



warbucks said:


> I believe the bios needs to be tuned better for dual rank.


Dual rank as in 4x8 not to be confused with double sided ram?


----------



## chispy

RetroWave78 said:


> Right, so basically they aren't able to run at their XMP speed correct? Is this common? I heard 0801 had the issue with adaptive voltage and that 0707 was better or do I have this backwards?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the extensive data and feedback. As an update, having further scrutinized the QVL I did find much better 4x8 sticks with much lower timings and latency. I managed to grab one of the few remaining Royal heat-spread variants of this memory on ebay and will return my order of the original memory as I have yet to open the packaging and am within the return window. I'm still concerned that this may not work even at the stated XMP speed:
> 
> I ordered: F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)
> 
> Which is the Royal heat-spreader version of: F4-4000C15Q-32GTZR-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com) which is on the QVL. I'm still relatively new to this and haven't upgraded in a while, I'm assuming that although the Royal variant is not on the QVL that it is the same memory as the latter listed here (going by timings, voltage etc.) just with Royal heat-spreaders. I have more confidence in this kit as it's a 4 stick matched kit whereas previously I was going to try to run two separate 2x8 kits that were not matched.
> 
> I saw your reply on Reddit, someone else in that thread has indicated that they have 4400 MHz dimms working, although I'm not sure about what Gear. (1) Is the z690-A strix ddr4 enough to drive a 12900k? : intel (reddit.com)
> 
> "Crucial max 2x16 cl19 4400mhz "
> 
> I'm truly curious as to whether or not the new memory will even boot in XMP, they are also listed at 1.5v. Not sure.
> 
> 
> 
> Dual rank as in 4x8 not to be confused with double sided ram?



Bios 0801 has been fixed and a new bios / latest has been posted by Shamino , bios 0202 , download here amigo - ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar

Post # 319 - [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


----------



## GtiJason

I finally got around to testing my Strix board today . It boots and trains beyond painfully slow tho and with black screen so I have to use the reset (flex key) button from a case as a Direct (to bios) key. Has anyone else noticed this with their board. I thought it might of been from Armoury Crate but I had it disabled. I then tought maybe it's just a DR B Die G1 thing but then I tested SR kits and same.
So I've started off using SR B Die because of that ridiculously long time to post to try and avoid major headaches. This is all I've been able to do today as I have only had a couple hours with it and had to test coolers to see what sits low enough and get W11 OS set up.


----------



## RetroWave78

shrimpmaster said:


> New 0002 bios is amazing. While before I could do 3866mhz g1 max. Now I can do 4000mhz with only 1.3v sa.
> I'm curious to see what u guys manage with good chips.
> 
> Even 4000mhz 1t seems to be stable, from the little testing I've done. Before max g1 1t was 3733mhz for me


Single Rank or Dual Rank, Strix-A D4?

Edit: 

Disregard, you provided all the information in CPU-Z.


----------



## RetroWave78

chispy said:


> Bios 0801 has been fixed and a new bios / latest has been posted by Shamino , bios 0202 , download here amigo - ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0002.rar
> 
> Post # 319 - [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Thanks! Is this better or worse than 0707? Some in that thread a complaining of worse performance though I believe the issue may be isolated to dual rank sticks. I have downloaded 0707 as it has finally appeared on the board's support page. I believe I have single rank dimms, which BIOS should I try initially?


----------



## chispy

RetroWave78 said:


> Thanks! Is this better or worse than 0707? Some in that thread a complaining of worse performance though I believe the issue may be isolated to dual rank sticks. I have downloaded 0707 as it has finally appeared on the board's support page. I believe I have single rank dimms, which BIOS should I try initially?


I'm still on 0707 until final verdict on this new bios 0202 is out. Start with 0707.


----------



## chispy

GtiJason said:


> I finally got around to testing my Strix board today . It boots and trains beyond painfully slow tho and with black screen so I have to use the reset (flex key) button from a case as a Direct (to bios) key. Has anyone else noticed this with their board. I thought it might of been from Armoury Crate but I had it disabled. I then tought maybe it's just a DR B Die G1 thing but then I tested SR kits and same.
> So I've started off using SR B Die because of that ridiculously long time to post to try and avoid major headaches. This is all I've been able to do today as I have only had a couple hours with it and had to test coolers to see what sits low enough and get W11 OS set up.
> View attachment 2533466



That's a good start Jason. I tried cas lat 13 and 12 but it wont do it even with 2.0 v.mem and 1.48~1.50 SA , maxmem 3.5 , it just wont boot , it blacks screen until i change it back to Cas 14 . Best i could do was 14-13-12-24 2T thight timmings ddr4-4000Mhz 1:1 1.715 v.dimm 1.47 SA wish ran flawlessly 3d and 2d benchmarks.

Here is an example running 3d11.


----------



## raWer

Hi. when I read memory problems here ... I ordered Strix d4 and Tomahawk. Wouldn't the Tomahawk be a better choice? thank you for your opinion. (12700kf)


----------



## anubis1127

Busy work week, but did some testing on the Z690-A DDR4 tonight with DR b-die 2x16GB. I was hoping for 4100, or 4133 gear1 oc, but settled at 4000cl16 gear 1 CR 2T for a daily type mem oc, 1.47V vdimm set in bios, 1.4V VCCSA (so far), think my 12700k isn't anything special, can only do 51x on my 360 AIO.










Just a quick tm5 run, but passed it a couple times, trying to dial in voltages a bit, the board auto VCCSA setting was 1.5V, so I'm trying to scale that back.


----------



## Exilon

ASUS Strix D4 0002 results with VCCSA 1.25V

4xSR Samsung B-die - 3733CL15 2T 1.45V
2xDR Micron E-die - 4000CL18 2T 1.45V

No boot with 1T on either setup.
Increasing SA doesn't help the 4xSR setup at all.

The 4xSR setup passes 4 passes of MemTest86 but needs me to reset POST process once with Ctrl-Alt-Del to boot the first time. Very strange...


----------



## owikh84

12900K SP 91 - Stock
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0707
2x16GB G.Skill F4-4000C17D-32GTRSB

4000 CL14-16-16-36-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.60v (1.581-1.598v), SA 1.40v (1.376v), VDDQ Auto:









4000 CL15-16-16-36-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.50v (1.492v), SA Auto (1.328-1.344v), VDDQ Auto:









4000 CL16-16-16-36-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.4125v (1.403v), SA Auto (1.328-1.344v), VDDQ Auto:


----------



## grey.clock

Well that answers the question I had about the i5. The i7 lets me run the ram at the speed I want to without having to fuss with any additional tweaking. This is stable in memtest and in game.

Same exact motherboard/ram as before I am running at gear 1 at the XMP2 profile (t1 4000mhz cl18 22 22 22 42 1.4v) using the i7, completely stable. My experience may be different than yours, and it may not be the i5's fault... but I know which CPU I will be keeping.


----------



## Lurifaks

"Testing in Progress"

Testing 4600MHz now. Later i will test 4533 for stability longer and then possibly with tighter timings and so on.

Strix Z690-A-D4 | BIOS 0707
i5-12600K 52x2-51x4-50x6
2x8GB SR-B-die
DDR4 4533MHz 19-19-19-39-1T Gear2
VDIMM 1.50v (1.492-1.510v), SA 1.35v (1.328-1.344)


----------



## kmellz

2x16GB SR
DDR4 4200MHz 18-20-20-37-1T Gear1
VDIMM 1.525v SA 1.4v
Voltages that high might not be needed, haven't dialed everything in 100%
I'll probably be settling for somewhere around here, speedy and nice! Kit is made more towards high speed than low timings so
New 0002 bios made 1T possible too without any problems it seems


----------



## Hiikeri

RetroWave78 said:


> I'm truly curious as to whether or not the new memory will even boot in XMP, they are also listed at 1.5v. Not sure.


Its not yours memory, its memory controller. ADL CPU are DDR4 3200 sertified, everything faster ram speeds are overclocking, even ram XMP is actually overclocking.

4266 ram and gear1 and yours IMC is running 2133Mhz and that is no way it cant handle that overclocking.

IMC are sertified to work at speed on 1600Mhz ( Ram 3200 DDR, gear1) and you try to give it 2133Mhz, thats 25% overclock.

Same that you try to overclock yours CPU to 5000Mhz to 6250Mhz, of course it wont work on that speed.

You should just read an couple hours how processor memory controller and Ram memory actually works together. And IMC (Integrated Memory Controller) is inside CPU and voltages, divider (gear1 or 2), temps, mobo, etc. have also role how IMC is working...


----------



## chispy

SuperPi 32m world record has been broken by safedisk on a overclock gathering with Elmor and der8auer using Asus Strix Z690-A Gaming Wifi D4 + 12900k + 2x8gb Samsung B-die DDR4 kit ( Alder Lake with ddr4 combo is faster by 10sec on Pi32m than with ddr5 ).

Holy score ... 😲








safedisk`s SuperPi - 32M score: 3min 36sec 841ms with a Core i9 12900K (8P)


The Core i9 12900K (8P) @ 7330MHzscores getScoreFormatted in the SuperPi - 32M benchmark. safediskranks #null worldwide and #null in the hardware class. Find out more at HWBOT.




hwbot.org


----------



## neteng101

First time here, long time OC but things have changed a lot and I've never dabbled much into memory.

MSI Z690-A Pro + 12700k - just a budget set of 4x16GB DDR4-3000 (Micron E-die?) that I had running at 3600-18 on my old system. Can't get it to past POST in 3600 Gear 1 so I've been trying to tighten timings at 3400 Gear 1 instead. Any thoughts on timings below or what I can try to get it to 3600 Gear 1? Tried VCCSA up to 1.35V and it fails to POST/train for 3600 Gear 1 (loose timings).

12700k at 5.0P/4.0E/4.3R @1.275V (E - 1.25V) - Memory 1.390V


----------



## PolRoger

For those running Gigabyte motherboards... It looks like Gigabyte has posted new BIOS for Z690 boards (with 11/19/21 date). There is a new F5a BIOS for my Giga Z690i Ultra DDR4 board. I checked some other Z690 models and saw new BIOS as well.


----------



## GtiJason

chispy said:


> SuperPi 32m world record has been broken by safedisk on a overclock gathering with Elmor and der8auer using Asus Strix Z690-A Gaming Wifi D4 + 12900k + 2x8gb Samsung B-die DDR4 kit ( Alder Lake with ddr4 combo is faster by 10sec on Pi32m than with ddr5 ).


He broke his own record again, nice. Made a little progress this morning myself but still on single (p)rank dimms. Good thing is my IMC and several ram kits can match safedisk's WR OC (4150c12), too bad I have no core to match. Maybe I'll give this "Golden Cache" of mine a go haha


----------



## robertr1

Anyone here pass occt large/avx2 with tuned mem yet? Screenshot of 30mins passed would be ideal.


----------



## elvergon

PolRoger said:


> For those running Gigabyte motherboards... It looks like Gigabyte has posted new BIOS for Z690 boards (with 11/19/21 date). There is a new F5a BIOS for my Giga Z690i Ultra DDR4 board. I checked some other Z690 models and saw new BIOS as well.


Just upgraded to it. Can get it to even boot to windows with quad channel. 

(12700k, 4x8 Gskill 4000 Mhz, CL17-17-17-35 XMP B-die)

I hope future bios updates get better and let me run my 4 sticks. Id hate to sell the 4 sticks.


----------



## jomama22

Stock 12900k 2x16gb (DR)
strix a bios 0707
vccSA 1.32 set (1.3 get)
vdimm 1.531 set (1.525 - 1.545 get)


----------



## bscool

@jomama22 What OS are you running Win10 or 11? Edit I take it 10 from background and taskbar unless you customized it


----------



## jomama22

bscool said:


> @jomama22 What OS are you running Win10 or 11? Edit I take it 10 from background and taskbar unless you customized it


Yeah, win 10. I'll do a win 11 install at some point soon enough.


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

Minor improvement with the strix 0002 bios.
4x8gb B-die 3866mt 14.14.14.32.2t.280 - vccsa 1.28, BCS SVID.
2x8gb B-die 4000mt 14.14.14.32.2t.260 - vccsa 1.37, BCS SVID

Cannot run DR (4x8gb) in anything higher than 3866 in any gear - no matter the volts, timings, etc, etc. None of the bios' so far have allowed this for me.

Edit: Should also add an odd behavior. When DR 4x8gb - the system will not ever _boot_ if VDimm is >1.54v. One of my B-die kits runs XMP at 1.55 - so I'm not really sure why this is a hard limit.


----------



## Cuthalu

I did some preliminary testing with the new Gigabyte bios. This seems to be even WORSE than the previous bios. When I try to boot 3200 xmp 2*single rank b-die the bios has has problems training it, and when it eventually boots, it has magically changed to 2800 yet it still says 3200 in bios. 3333 doesn't boot at all. Previously these worked.

With default cpu profile there's still cpu voltage bug, it cannot be adjusted with the offset. Gamer cpu profile does work. Exactly same thing happened with previous bios.

Saved fan profiles that are supposed to work after bios update cannot be loaded after bios update.

At least there's one positive: idle cpu power consumption dropped slightly.


----------



## ObviousCough




----------



## GtiJason

bscool said:


> @jomama22 What OS are you running Win10 or 11? Edit I take it 10 from background and taskbar unless you customized it


I'm testing W11 with Strix-A D4 and Dragon Ball not working, Turbo VCore bclk messed up, at 100 bclk it shows 100.25 and sometimes locks up if you touch it


----------



## Falkentyne

Cuthalu said:


> I did some preliminary testing with the new Gigabyte bios. This seems to be even WORSE than the previous bios. When I try to boot 3200 xmp 2*single rank b-die the bios has has problems training it, and when it eventually boots, it has magically changed to 2800 yet it still says 3200 in bios. 3333 doesn't boot at all. Previously these worked.
> 
> With default cpu profile there's still cpu voltage bug, it cannot be adjusted with the offset. Gamer cpu profile does work. Exactly same thing happened with previous bios.
> 
> Saved fan profiles that are supposed to work after bios update cannot be loaded after bios update.
> 
> At least there's one positive: idle cpu power consumption dropped slightly.


@shamino1978 is going to love that 

That's what the Gigabyte Bioses were doing on Z490 Aorus Master and a 10900k when I tried to boot basic XMP Settings with 2x16 3200 CL14 B-die _BASIC XMP_ with only 1T command rate set (instead of 2T).
It would either boot loop repeatedly until it gave up and failed with "post code C1", and then recovered in BIOS to safe mode, _OR_ after repeated boot loops, would boot at 2800 mhz 

This was with 2018 year gskill sticks, which oddly enough, were more stable at 3200 XMP + 1T than the 2020 year gskill sticks! But the 2020 year sticks scaled MUCH better on 2T (going up to 4266-4400, while the 2018 year sticks couldn't go past 3733 stable 2T).

AND GET THIS.
the z390 Aorus Master HAD NO PROBLEM BOOTING 1T with these 2018y sticks! NO PROBLEM. NONE.
The exact same sticks on the Maximus 11 Extreme on the same 10900k--no problem whatsoever at 3200 1T XMP.

I pinged hicookie on facebook about what was happening on the Z490 master and 1T not working at all on 2x16 B-die, and he said "Gskill didn't send any kits for testing."


----------



## D-EJ915

Falkentyne said:


> @shamino1978 is going to love that
> 
> That's what the Gigabyte Bioses were doing on Z490 Aorus Master and a 10900k when I tried to boot basic XMP Settings with 2x16 3200 CL14 B-die _BASIC XMP_ with only 1T command rate set (instead of 2T).
> It would either boot loop repeatedly until it gave up and failed with "post code C1", and then recovered in BIOS to safe mode, _OR_ after repeated boot loops, would boot at 2800 mhz
> 
> This was with 2018 year gskill sticks, which oddly enough, were more stable at 3200 XMP + 1T than the 2020 year gskill sticks! But the 2020 year sticks scaled MUCH better on 2T (going up to 4266-4400, while the 2018 year sticks couldn't go past 3733 stable 2T).
> 
> AND GET THIS.
> the z390 Aorus Master HAD NO PROBLEM BOOTING 1T with these 2018y sticks! NO PROBLEM. NONE.
> The exact same sticks on the Maximus 11 Extreme on the same 10900k--no problem whatsoever at 3200 1T XMP.
> 
> I pinged hicookie on facebook about what was happening on the Z490 master and 1T not working at all on 2x16 B-die, and he said "Gskill didn't send any kits for testing."


lol that's pretty funny. A while ago in an MSI stream Michiel mentioned people complained their DDR3 compatibility sucked so starting with DDR4 they were testing tons of kits and it really does make a big difference lol. That's probably why EVGA only works with like 1 type of ram and the rest are horrible.


----------



## Exilon

Professor DumbDumb said:


> Edit: Should also add an odd behavior. When DR 4x8gb - the system will not ever _boot_ if VDimm is >1.54v. One of my B-die kits runs XMP at 1.55 - so I'm not really sure why this is a hard limit.


Try locking VDDQ to a known value. My low-bin 4x8gb B-die doesn't boot with VDDQ too high.

VDIMM 1.5V - VDDQ 1.3V = No boot
VDIMM 1.5V - VDDQ 1.4V = Boots, stable
VDIMM 1.5V - VDDQ 1.45V = Boots, unstable
VDIMM 1.5V - VDDQ 1.50V = No boot


----------



## Exilon

GtiJason said:


> I'm testing W11 with Strix-A D4 and Dragon Ball not working, Turbo VCore bclk messed up, at 100 bclk it shows 100.25 and sometimes locks up if you touch it


I had it stuck at 99.75 but setting Ai Tuner to 'Auto' fixed it for me


----------



## jomama22

Exilon said:


> Seeing you guys yeet the memory in
> 
> 
> Try locking VDDQ to a known value. My low-bin 4x8gb B-die doesn't boot with VDDQ too high.
> 
> VDIMM 1.5V - VDDQ 1.3V = No boot
> VDIMM 1.5V - VDDQ 1.4V = Boots, stable
> VDIMM 1.5V - VDDQ 1.45V = Boots, unstable
> VDIMM 1.5V - VDDQ 1.50V = No boot


Not sure where there is a vddq setting other than for the TX vddq. At least on the strix a


----------



## jomama22

Also, having fun with pcore only oc and bus speed:


----------



## Exilon

jomama22 said:


> Not sure where there is a vddq setting other than for the TX vddq. At least on the strix a


There is only TX VDDQ


----------



## GtiJason

jomama22 said:


> Not sure where there is a vddq setting other than for the TX vddq. At least on the strix a


Directly under DRAM voltage, it's called IVR Transmitter VDDQ Voltage 
As for my recent experience with this voltage and SR BDie 1.5 - 1.6v will not boot, you just end up in OS at like 2133c16 or some sh!t like that. 1.35 - 1.4v seems to be the sweet spot for my 12700kf and 4000c14 Sammies


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

No go so far with Ivr transmitter. I read in a post from shamino on the Asus thread that ivr tx vddq is a fivr’d voltage - so more will only really help with llc and load stability (though there may be some benefit to boot voltage?) I dunno - about ready to get the msi board - it can’t run xmp 4400gear2 so there must be ram slot or secondary controller issues. 

Is there a white paper anywhere that explains how the memory controller interfaces with the ram sockets themselves? (In ddr5 mode there are 2 discreet memory controllers - not sure if both are used in ddr4 mode)


----------



## jomama22

GtiJason said:


> Directly under DRAM voltage, it's called IVR Transmitter VDDQ Voltage
> As for my recent experience with this voltage and SR BDie 1.5 - 1.6v will not boot, you just end up in OS at like 2133c16 or some sh!t like that. 1.35 - 1.4v seems to be the sweet spot for my 12700kf and 4000c14 Sammies


Yeah, that's the tx voltage. I personally didn't notice any change on my 12900k from 1.3-1.4v, won't post 4000 below around 1.275v


----------



## Exilon

Cuthalu said:


> I did some preliminary testing with the new Gigabyte bios. This seems to be even WORSE than the previous bios.


Glad I returned mine 🙃 I don't even know why I went with Gigabyte again after they completely hosed the Z370 Gaming 7 with 9th gen. ASUS Strix is treating me very well right now and the lack of stress was definitely worth the premium.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Here's where I'm at so far. I'd like to lower the latency


----------



## bscool

Professor DumbDumb said:


> No go so far with Ivr transmitter. I read in a post from shamino on the Asus thread that ivr tx vddq is a fivr’d voltage - so more will only really help with llc and load stability (though there may be some benefit to boot voltage?) I dunno - about ready to get the msi board - it can’t run xmp 4400gear2 so there must be ram slot or secondary controller issues.
> 
> Is there a white paper anywhere that explains how the memory controller interfaces with the ram sockets themselves? (In ddr5 mode there are 2 discreet memory controllers - not sure if both are used in ddr4 mode)


I have read your posts, post back if you do get MSI to try.

I still think there is going to be IMC variance on ADL like we saw on RKL Some can do say 4266 DR in gear 1 and some 3866. I would find it hard to believe all ICM would be able to do say 4133. There is always some variance and RKL was the biggest I have seen and it sounds like ADL is similar. JJ from Asus said something like 80-90% of CPUs can do up to 6000 on ddr5 and very small percentage can do 6600. So why wouldn't there be the same variance on DDR4 on ADL?

From what I can see looking at results online ADL scales higher in gear 1 but there is still ICM variance.

Anyway that was me rambling, could be a defective/weak board a dim slot, IMC or who knows what. Always fun comparing and tweaking stuff even though it can be frustrating at times.

Found video time 1:07:00


----------



## Lurifaks

Close but no cigar ! 

Strix Z690-A-D4 | BIOS 0707
i5-12600K P= 52x2-51x4-50x6 , E= 40
2x8GB SR-B-die
DDR4 4600MHz 19-19-19-39-1T Gear2
VDIMM 1.55v, SA 1.35v


----------



## eeeven

in my experience you dont need high SA for Gear 2. 4533 G2 wirth Dual Rank at CL17 i just eneded 1.1 ish.


----------



## RetroWave78

Professor DumbDumb said:


> Minor improvement with the strix 0002 bios.
> 4x8gb B-die 3866mt 14.14.14.32.2t.280 - vccsa 1.28, BCS SVID.
> 2x8gb B-die 4000mt 14.14.14.32.2t.260 - vccsa 1.37, BCS SVID
> 
> Cannot run DR (4x8gb) in anything higher than 3866 in any gear - no matter the volts, timings, etc, etc. None of the bios' so far have allowed this for me.
> 
> Edit: Should also add an odd behavior. When DR 4x8gb - the system will not ever _boot_ if VDimm is >1.54v. One of my B-die kits runs XMP at 1.55 - so I'm not really sure why this is a hard limit.


You have 8GB SR dimms? I was under the impression that all 8GB sticks were SR. Now I'm wondering whether or not the memory I have on the way is SR or DR: https://www.gskill.com/product/165/299/1580449585/F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-Overview




Exilon said:


> Glad I returned mine 🙃 I don't even know why I went with Gigabyte again after they completely hosed the Z370 Gaming 7 with 9th gen. ASUS Strix is treating me very well right now and the lack of stress was definitely worth the premium.


Both the BIOS and memory controller of this board is sub-par. I lost like 100 MHz stability on the CPU between F6 and F7, at one point I too considered updgrading from 8700k to 9900k but given the problems people were having at that time I didn't even want to (looking back this was a good thing as 9900k didn't bring any single core speed improvement and most games could care less about the additional cores). I did try BIOS F15 for ReBar and it destroyed my overclocks and ultimately I reverted to F6. Also Gigabyte utilities are generally trash, EasyTune stopped working and then refused to completely uninstall from my PC and RGB Fusion takes 5 minutes to start and prevents the display from sleeping so it must be killed if you open it. Then when you reach out for help the community is non-existent, the official Gigabyte forum is nearly dead. For all these reasons I went with Strix-A D4 over Gigabyte Extreme D4. Now I'm hearing of BIOS woes from multiple Gigabyte Extreme owners here and elsewhere, apparently they are having way more trouble getting memory above 3800 MHz to work. I'm also excited to finally be able to sync the G-Skill memory RGB with the motherboard and other RGB elements, with Gigabyte this was impossible apparently.



Lurifaks said:


> Close but no cigar !
> 
> Strix Z690-A-D4 | BIOS 0707
> i5-12600K P= 52x2-51x4-50x6 , E= 40
> 2x8GB SR-B-die
> DDR4 4600MHz 19-19-19-39-1T Gear2
> VDIMM 1.55v, SA 1.35v
> 
> View attachment 2533707


This has me somewhat worried that I will not be able to get the memory I have on the way running at XMP in Gear 1:

https://www.gskill.com/product/165/299/1580449585/F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-Overview

(4x8 4000MHz CL15-16-16-36)


----------



## robertr1

Anyone got good results with Asus Prime board and bdie?


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

RetroWave78 said:


> You have 8GB SR dimms? I was under the impression that all 8GB sticks were SR. Now I'm wondering whether or not the memory I have on the way is SR or DR: https://www.gskill.com/product/165/299/1580449585/F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-Overview


yep 8gb Dimms are SR - but 4 of them together makes a DR config.


----------



## Revv23

0451 said:


> Here's where I'm at so far. I'd like to lower the latency



Wow you are really cooking now! Are you still going to bother with an msi board?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Revv23 said:


> Wow you are really cooking now! Are you still going to bother with an msi board?


If it comes back in stock at my Microcenter, I’ll try the MPG DDR4.


----------



## ogider

12900k P5.0 E4.0 4.3 Cache

f4-3200c14D-32GTZ (2x16GB B-die DR)




image1636×1471 323 KB


----------



## gerardfraser

delete wrong thread


----------



## acoustic

Is it not possible to tweak RTL on ASUS?? I'm friggin confused here lol


----------



## geriatricpollywog

acoustic said:


> Is it not possible to tweak RTL on ASUS?? I'm friggin confused here lol


You can change manually, but when I change from 69 to 68 it won't post.


----------



## acoustic

0451 said:


> You can change manually, but when I change from 69 to 68 it won't post.
> 
> View attachment 2533767


I'm honestly not understanding it. If I try setting the Offset to -1, it won't post. Even +1 won't post. If I set RTL Init and Max to 65, I still get 71. It's like the settings don't do anything or they ignore the values I input.

I'm getting CH0 71/71/71 and CH1 73/73/73. I can't change anything or it won't post. Makes no sense.

The values you see at "25" don't mean anything. I've set them all to 1 and they show as "1" in the BIOS but there is no performance difference.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

acoustic said:


> I'm honestly not understanding it. If I try setting the Offset to -1, it won't post. Even +1 won't post. If I set RTL Init and Max to 65, I still get 71. It's like the settings don't do anything or they ignore the values I input.
> 
> I'm getting CH0 71/71/71 and CH1 73/73/73. I can't change anything or it won't post. Makes no sense.
> 
> The values you see at "25" don't mean anything. I've set them all to 1 and they show as "1" in the BIOS but there is no performance difference.


Weird. Mine defaults to 69. Maybe part of the training algorithm is to test the lowest stable RTL.

Perhaps @cstkl1 or @shamino1978 can shed some light on this.

My Tuf is on bios 0707 and I’m running dual rank.


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

Quick note - and maybe a word of warning. I've noticed already a bit of degradation in the imc on my 12900k (or possibly something related to the board in 4x8gb mode - not sure yet). Previously would run flawlessly at 3866mt/100:133/vccsa1.27/14.14.14.26.cmd2.260 - but now will not post with anything less than 1.29vccsa.
Will update with SR 2x8gb data.

Update: In SR the thing will run 3866mt/100:133/14.14.14.26.cmd2.260 with a much lower vccsa (1.15) than DR. I think my board may be defective. Chip seems fine.


----------



## acoustic

0451 said:


> Weird. Mine defaults to 69. Maybe part of the training algorithm is to test the lowest stable RTL.
> 
> Perhaps @cstkl1 or @shamino1978 can shed some light on this.
> 
> My Tuf is on bios 0707 and I’m running dual rank.


I just swapped from 0002 to 0707. Still getting the same weird 71/71/71 CH0 and 73/73/71 CH1, without any ability to edit. I know RTL/IOL changed with RKL, but I thought you could still tune them? On ADL, it appears they cannot be changed. I enabled Round Trip Latency training and allowed the board to train it automatically .. seems like that's all you can do.

I still have no idea what all the "25" values do, as I changed them all to 1 and it posted/runs fine, but there is no performance difference. Seems the value changes but there is no difference.. not sure why.


----------



## RetroWave78

Professor DumbDumb said:


> yep 8gb Dimms are SR - but 4 of them together makes a DR config.


Really? Wow I learned something, thank-you, I suppose I'm in the same boat as you then with 4x8 if 4x8 single sided dimms is the equivalent of Dual Rank. 

Not sure if I should flash my Strix-A D4 to 0707 or 0802.




Professor DumbDumb said:


> Quick note - and maybe a word of warning. I've noticed already a bit of degradation in the imc on my 12900k (or possibly something related to the board in 4x8gb mode - not sure yet). Previously would run flawlessly at 3866mt/100:133/vccsa1.27/14.14.14.26.cmd2.260 - but now will not post with anything less than 1.29vccsa.
> Will update with SR 2x8gb data.
> 
> Update: In SR the thing will run 3866mt/100:133/14.14.14.26.cmd2.260 with a much lower vccsa (1.15) than DR. I think my board may be defective. Chip seems fine.


Accounting for ambient or is ambient nominal? 

My experience overclocking as that when it's cooler in the evenings or mornings I have more stability than during the middle of the day when ambient room temperature is higher. 

If ambient is nominal it could be that there is some silicon degradation related to votlage. 1.54 VDDR? How much SA?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

acoustic said:


> I just swapped from 0002 to 0707. Still getting the same weird 71/71/71 CH0 and 73/73/71 CH1, without any ability to edit. I know RTL/IOL changed with RKL, but I thought you could still tune them? On ADL, it appears they cannot be changed. I enabled Round Trip Latency training and allowed the board to train it automatically .. seems like that's all you can do.
> 
> I still have no idea what all the "25" values do, as I changed them all to 1 and it posted/runs fine, but there is no performance difference. Seems the value changes but there is no difference.. not sure why.


That you can't change RTL on Rocket Lake is a misconception. I can manually set RTL on my AsRock Z590 OC Formula. Everyone else has Asus boards so they assume Asus = everything.


----------



## acoustic

0451 said:


> That you can't change RTL on Rocket Lake is a misconception. I can manually set RTL on my AsRock Z590 OC Formula. Everyone else has Asus boards so they assume Asus = everything.


I think the RTL/IOL screen on this ASUS TUF is an absolute nightmare. It's horrible, honestly. The MSI Z490 ACE RTL/IOL page was extremely easy to read.

The other thing I don't understand is that you cannot see what the values are set to. There were zero, or very few (none that I can even remember) values that I couldn't read in the BIOS. For some reason, I can't see what the mobo is setting ODT values to when it's on Auto .. why? Why can't I see what some of my secondary and tertiary timings are set to on Auto either? Makes zero sense. These were all things I'm really missing going from my MSI Z490 ACE to this ASUS Z690 TUF. I know the ACE was a high-end board vs this low-end crap, but for ****s sake .. for $289 I should be able to see what every value is set to within the BIOS. Don't get me started on no POST CODE LED or Clear CMOS rear-IO button on a nearly $300 board..

blah. I'm not used to running a low/mid-range board, but it's all I could get for DDR4. There was no DDR5 at Microcenter and my MSI board was having some major issues -- putting it in for RMA but can't have the PC down ..


----------



## geriatricpollywog

acoustic said:


> I think the RTL/IOL screen on this ASUS TUF is an absolute nightmare. It's horrible, honestly. The MSI Z490 ACE RTL/IOL page was extremely easy to read.
> 
> The other thing I don't understand is that you cannot see what the values are set to. There were zero, or very few (none that I can even remember) values that I couldn't read in the BIOS. For some reason, I can't see what the mobo is setting ODT values to when it's on Auto .. why? Why can't I see what some of my secondary and tertiary timings are set to on Auto either? Makes zero sense. These were all things I'm really missing going from my MSI Z490 ACE to this ASUS Z690 TUF. I know the ACE was a high-end board vs this low-end crap, but for ****s sake .. for $289 I should be able to see what every value is set to within the BIOS. Don't get me started on no POST CODE LED or Clear CMOS rear-IO button on a nearly $300 board..
> 
> blah. I'm not used to running a low/mid-range board, but it's all I could get for DDR4. There was no DDR5 at Microcenter and my MSI board was having some major issues -- putting it in for RMA but can't have the PC down ..


I might upgrade to the Strix instead of MSI MPG if you are having issues with your MSI board. The back of the CPU socket is completely filled out with capacitors on the Strix and is bare on my Tuf. I have a feeling I can get more stable core overclocks on the Strix. I’m stable st 5.2 all P-core on my 12700k but 5.3 would be nice.

Board issues aside, I think we are better off than people who paid $700 for an Apex and $350+ for DDR5 to get similar or worse gaming performance.


----------



## acoustic

0451 said:


> I might upgrade to the Strix instead of MSI MPG if you are having issues with your MSI board. The back of the CPU socket is completely filled out with capacitors on the Strix and is bare on my Tuf. I have a feeling I can get more stable core overclocks on the Strix. I’m stable st 5.2 all P-core on my 12700k but 5.3 would be nice.
> 
> Board issues aside, I think we are better off than people who paid $700 for an Apex and $350+ for DDR5 to get similar or worse gaming performance.


I'm currently on an ASUS TUF. The MSI Z490 ACE just died on me unfortunately .. won't run RAM anymore - only works at JEDEC 2133. Sad because it was an awesome board and I loved it


----------



## RetroWave78

What's crazy is that 2x16 GB Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR5 is selling for $1k "Buy it Now" and there's basically no performance advantage to DDR5 solely in regards to gaming. I remember having my Formula Z690 pre-ordered and refreshing Ebay, Newegg and Best Buy (before installing Octoshop extension) like 5 times a day and after a week of this I revisited the DDR4 vs DDR5 comparisons and realized there is no point in waiting. I can't believe people are buying DDR5 for 4x MSRP.


----------



## RetroWave78

acoustic said:


> I'm currently on an ASUS TUF. The MSI Z490 ACE just died on me unfortunately .. won't run RAM anymore - only works at JEDEC 2133. Sad because it was an awesome board and I loved it


Wow that's some serious usage, my Z370 gaming 7 from Nov 2017 (8700k) is still going strong. 8700k to 12900k is going to be quite the upgrade for me:

The i5 + i9 Alder Lake review – cache + power scaling, IPC tests, gaming, and more! – AdoredTV

59% increase in single core speed vs 9900k which itself is a smidgen faster than 8700k single core.

The same DDR4 was used for the comparison.


----------



## acoustic

RetroWave78 said:


> Wow that's some serious usage, my Z370 gaming 7 from Nov 2017 (8700k) is still going strong. 8700k to 12900k is going to be quite the upgrade for me:
> 
> The i5 + i9 Alder Lake review – cache + power scaling, IPC tests, gaming, and more! – AdoredTV
> 
> 59% increase in single core speed vs 9900k which itself is a smidgen faster than 8700k single core.


Wasn't really heavy usage -- board just was defective I guess. Something went wrong with the CPU socket pins or the DIMM slots. Nothing visible unfortunately.


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

RetroWave78 said:


> Really? Wow I learned something, thank-you, I suppose I'm in the same boat as you then with 4x8 if 4x8 single sided dimms is the equivalent of Dual Rank.
> 
> Not sure if I should flash my Strix-A D4 to 0707 or 0802.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Accounting for ambient or is ambient nominal?
> 
> My experience overclocking as that when it's cooler in the evenings or mornings I have more stability than during the middle of the day when ambient room temperature is higher.
> 
> If ambient is nominal it could be that there is some silicon degradation related to votlage. 1.54 VDDR? How much SA?


Not much difference here right now it is -10 celcius outside and the house is 19c. My office is ~18c - because I have old windows - but I can crank some oc’s at -40 if I get ambitious. Was #3 all time timespy at this time last year (10980xe individual core oc’s, quad channel at 4kc15, very good 3090 tuf at 2150). Spent days getting that one right. This Strix board just plain operates weird with 4x8gb. Awesome with 2x8gb - but I can’t account for the difference in Vccsa needed to run 4x8. I’d love to see how 2x16gbDR works. Might order a kit when I get around to ordering a new board. Will likely send the strix back though.


----------



## Exilon

In my experience, 2x16GB DR Micron E-die booted easily at 4000 on the same Strix board where I'm stuck at 4xSR 3800 B-die.


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

Exilon said:


> In my experience, 2x16GB DR Micron E-die booted easily at 4000 on the same Strix board where I'm stuck at 4xSR 3800 B-die.


This is good beta. Happy with the board otherwise - but the lack of ability with 4x8gb seems to be common.


----------



## pumex

I have a STRIX Z690-A D4 and a Patriot Stell 4400. But I can't beat the 3800 Cl-16-16-16-38. At 4000 it doesn't even boot  I've tried all the available BIOS, millions of combinations with voltages - What the hell am I doing wrong?


----------



## owikh84

pumex said:


> I have a STRIX Z690-A D4 and a Patriot Stell 4400. But I can't beat the 3800 Cl-16-16-16-38. At 4000 it doesn't even boot  I've tried all the available BIOS, millions of combinations with voltages - What the hell am I doing wrong?


My RAM is 2x8GB Royal Elite 3600 CL14 (SR B-die).
It performs better with BIOS 0002 than 0707 as below:

4000 16-16-16-36-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.4125v, SA and vddq at 1.35v
4000 15-16-16-36-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.475v 1.50v, SA and vddq at 1.40v

With 4x8GB max I could overclock is 3733 14-14-14-34-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.5v, SA vddq auto (~1.35v)


----------



## geriatricpollywog

owikh84 said:


> My RAM is 2x8GB Royal Elite 3600 CL14 (SR B-die).
> It performs better with BIOS 0002 than 0707 as below:
> 
> 4000 16-16-16-36-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.4125v, SA and vddq at 1.35v
> 4000 15-16-16-36-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.475v, SA and vddq at 1.40v
> 
> With 4x8GB max I could overclock is 3733 14-14-14-34-1T Gear1 with set vdimm 1.5v, SA vddq auto (~1.35v)


Can you share your timings? 4000c15 at 1T command rate is insanely good, especially at 1.475v.


----------



## owikh84

0451 said:


> Can you share your timings? 4000c15 at 1T command rate is insanely good, especially at 1.475v.


I don't have access to my test bench atm but the timings are similar to my DR as below. Somehow I haven't run any stress test on it so can't confirm the stability for time being. Edit: it needs 1.50v, not 1.475v though


----------



## OffBeatViBE

RetroWave78 said:


> Wow that's some serious usage, my Z370 gaming 7 from Nov 2017 (8700k) is still going strong. 8700k to 12900k is going to be quite the upgrade for me:
> 
> The i5 + i9 Alder Lake review – cache + power scaling, IPC tests, gaming, and more! – AdoredTV
> 
> 59% increase in single core speed vs 9900k which itself is a smidgen faster than 8700k single core.
> 
> The same DDR4 was used for the comparison.


I just did a similar upgrade coming from 8700k and ASRock Z370 Fatal1ty and got myself and i9 with Z690-P D4 and kept my old 4000Mhz C19 B-die kit which I'm yet to tweak on the new platform and my old Celsius S36 using the lga 1200 bracket and it works flawless.


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

sorry i need your advice, i am about to upgrade my pc, i would like to take 12900k, rog strix z690-a, gskill F4-4000C14D-16GTZR to use in gear1.
Are there any chances that these rams will run xmp at 4000 c14 on that motherboard or it will almost certainly not work?
they work at 1.55 volts, do I have to take a wb and cool the rams with liquid too? (the rest of pc is already liquid cooled).

I am not as experienced as you are and I would like to avoid putting myself to oc on the ram because I am not capable.
Tk


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

IIISLIDEIII said:


> sorry i need your advice, i am about to upgrade my pc, i would like to take 12900k, rog strix z690-a, gskill F4-4000C14D-16GTZR to use in gear1.
> Are there any chances that these rams will run xmp at 4000 c14 on that motherboard or it will almost certainly not work?
> they work at 1.55 volts, do I have to take a wb and cool the rams with liquid too? (the rest of pc is already liquid cooled).
> 
> I am not as experienced as you are and I would like to avoid putting myself to oc on the ram because I am not capable.
> Tk


Good chance it will work though there is still some issues being ironed out in bios revisions. 2x8 seems to work ok at 4000 gear 1 for most on the board.


----------



## shrimpmaster

Professor DumbDumb said:


> Good chance it will work though there is still some issues being ironed out in bios revisions. 2x8 seems to work ok at 4000 gear 1 for most on the board.


I'm doing 4000 15-15-15 1t 1.5vdimm on 2x8gb and need 1.4v SA to pass testmem5 with 0003. My cpu is soo bad, both core and IMC, store doesn't accept returns because the box is opened.
For reference, 3866mhz passes with only 1.15 SA...


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

Professor DumbDumb said:


> Good chance it will work though there is still some issues being ironed out in bios revisions. 2x8 seems to work ok at 4000 gear 1 for most on the board.


great news, then I have hopes.
do you think there may be problems to keep the ram constant at 1.55v?
do you think I have to cool it to liquid?


----------



## MikeGR7

pumex said:


> I have a STRIX Z690-A D4 and a Patriot Stell 4400. But I can't beat the 3800 Cl-16-16-16-38. At 4000 it doesn't even boot  I've tried all the available BIOS, millions of combinations with voltages - What the hell am I doing wrong?


Use only 1.35V dram voltage and stay at cl17 16 16 16 32 start tuning secondaries from there.

Do not go above 1.35 it's not booting atm


----------



## St0ned

Does anyone has results with 64Gb of ram ? I wanted to get an Alder Lake system with DDR4 but I need 64Gb. Wondering what would be the bet memory to get.


----------



## eeeven

Okay, my 12700K is not able to run 4000 MHz Gear 1. It doesn't matter if it is Single or Dual Rank. Both Konfigs throw Errors in Karhu RAM Test <100% Coverage. I Tried AUTO Subs from 1,350 SA up to 1,470 SA. I Also tried CL16 and CL17.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

eeeven said:


> Okay, my 12700K is not able to run 4000 MHz Gear 1. It doesn't matter if it is Single or Dual Rank. Both Konfigs throw Errors in Karhu RAM Test <100% Coverage. I Tried AUTO Subs from 1,350 SA up to 1,470 SA. I Also tried CL16 and CL17.


Is your ram kit rated to 4000 mt/s XMP?


----------



## eeeven

Both of my Kits (2x8 and 2x16GB) are self binned and can both run up to 4500 CL16 on Z490. 2x8Kit is 3200C14 B-Die and 2x16GB Kit is 3600C16 B-Die. My 2x8 can run 4700 C16-16-16. So that should not be the problem.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

eeeven said:


> Both of my Kits (2x8 and 2x16GB) are self binned and can both run up to 4500 CL16 on Z490. 2x8Kit is 3200C14 B-Die and 2x16GB Kit is 3600C16 B-Die. My 2x8 can run 4700 C16-16-16. So that should not be the problem.


Have you tried copying any of the timings provided in this thread?

Z590 and Z690 have lower 1:1 achievable memory speeds than Z490.


----------



## eeeven

Its not about primaries or secondaries or tertiaries. Its about my IMC which is not able to run 4000 1:1 while other 12700K or 12900K are able to. Its the Silicon Lottery.
I wrote about it because you are just seeing Screenshots with 4133+ G1. People are thinking that every CPU is able to run 4000+ G1 which is not the case. I heard some people saying that every ALDL CPu should be able to run 4000 G1. No!


----------



## neteng101

eeeven said:


> I heard some people saying that every ALDL CPu should be able to run 4000 G1. No!


I can't even get 3600 G1 to POST - not sure if its just my el cheapo memory sticks or the IMC. Any ideas? 3400 G1 runs solid with good timings for the sticks I have.


----------



## sneida

hi, i'm switching from a ryzen platform to z690 (asus tuf) + 12700k and will reuse a g.skill 2x16gb dual rank 3200cl14 kit. question: for ryzen, there was a "DRAM Calculator for Ryzen" available (quite comfortable way to have a starting point with all memory related settings, including voltages) - is something similar there for intel? br


----------



## ObviousCough

I streamed my whole tune yesterday after passing tm5 for the 4000C17 Gear 1 "Memory Try it!" profile that wouldn't post consistently before i updated my bios.








eeeven said:


> Its not about primaries or secondaries or tertiaries. Its about my IMC which is not able to run 4000 1:1 while other 12700K or 12900K are able to. Its the Silicon Lottery.
> I wrote about it because you are just seeing Screenshots with 4133+ G1. People are thinking that every CPU is able to run 4000+ G1 which is not the case. I heard some people saying that every ALDL CPu should be able to run 4000 G1. No!


You need to update your bios to the latest beta. I was stuck at 3600 Gear 1 on the launch bios and now i am doing 4000 with ease.


----------



## 2500k_2

New bios for MSI Z690 PRO - A - 114





PRO Z690-A DDR4114.rar - AnonFiles







anonfiles.com









PRO Z690-A WIFI DDR4114.rar - AnonFiles







anonfiles.com




I don’t know what improvements. maybe someone wants to try. Have a nice day!


----------



## eeeven

Where can i find latest Beta for Edge D4


----------



## 2500k_2

eeeven said:


> Where can i find latest Beta for Edge D4








Beta/MP - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## eeeven

Okay, looks already better with 113 Beta  Will Post Results later but it seems like 4000 could be stable so far.

*Edit: Still GSAT finding Errors at 4000. I have the feeling, that 113 is working a bit better on RAM OC but still not stable at 4000 Gear1. TM5 running, Karhu also running but GSAT is finding Errors pretty fast.*


----------



## Smaz

Hello to all !!! 
2x8 patriot 4400 cl19
V 1.5 SA 1.37 
xmp1 1:1 the rest auto
passed the testmem from the asus bios









Any tip for go dawn the latencies???


----------



## grey.clock

ObviousCough said:


> I streamed my whole tune yesterday after passing tm5 for the 4000C17 Gear 1 "Memory Try it!" profile that wouldn't post consistently before i updated my bios.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to update your bios to the latest beta. I was stuck at 3600 Gear 1 on the launch bios and now i am doing 4000 with ease.


I have 2 cpu's I played around with. The i5 12600k could not hit g1 4000mhz. It maxed out (stable) at 3733. With everything else remaining the same, I switched to the i7 and it had no issues booting into 4000mhz xmp2 tweaked to g1 t1. I wonder if other i5 12600k's would run the g1 t1 without any issues? I really dont see the VR/4k gaming performance difference with the i7 over the i5 so the upgrade was sort of a waste for my application.


----------



## ObscureEmpyre

Bottom line up front: Gigabyte needs to address their BIOS memory issue sooner rather than later.

Admittedly, I haven't read through all of the replies, but I have gone over the initial motherboard overview. What I can attest to is that my Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite AX DDR4 performs absolutely horribly when it comes to DDR4 memory.

The DDR4-3600 kit that I was using with my 9900K/Z390 Aorus Master was causing WHEA errors, BSODs, and random game crashes with my new Z690 motherboard and 12900K (no OC). After several hours of troubleshooting, I eventually decided to forgo any kind of RAM OC, whether it be manual or XMP, or messing with the gear modes. To my surprise, no more WHEA errors or game crashes (BIOS F6a fixed the BSOD issue). So, I swapped out my 3600 kit for a 3200 kit, which 3200 is the max rated spec for Alder Lake when using DDR4. It's a 4x8 kit, and my system wouldn't even POST despite POSTing and allowing XMP to be enabled with my 4x8 3600 kit. Keeping daisy chain vs. T-topology in mind, I removed 2 sticks and it POSTed. I tested the XMP profile and, again, it POSTed. Just for grins, I decided to throw the other 2 sticks back in and, surprisingly, it POSTed both with and without XMP. Whenever I cold start the computer, however, it turns off for a brief moment like it's memory training. Quite odd.

To reiterate, Gigabyte really needs to address this memory issue with their next BIOS update. I'm glad version F6a stopped the random BSODs I was getting, but there's obviously still a major issue with running memory even at the 3200 rated spec. With that in mind, I'm also going to recommend steering clear of Gigabyte DDR4 Z690 motherboards for the time being.


----------



## Lurifaks

grey.clock said:


> I have 2 cpu's I played around with. The i5 12600k could not hit g1 4000mhz. It maxed out (stable) at 3733. With everything else remaining the same, I switched to the i7 and it had no issues booting into 4000mhz xmp2 tweaked to g1 t1. I wonder if other i5 12600k's would run the g1 t1 without any issues? I really dont see the VR/4k gaming performance difference with the i7 over the i5 so the upgrade was sort of a waste for my application.


I have same wall with my i5 12600k , can`t boot above 3900 g1 , max stable so far 3733 g1. g2 and 1t is another story, but no point for daily!


----------



## isipisi

How the HELL are you guys getting latency down?!
No matter what i do il get alllllways >52ns.

12900kf, STRX D4, Teamgroupe 2x16GB 3600CL 14

I am running 4000 15 16 16 35 and my latency is like 53ns
bios version is 0707.

And when i try to start "Mem tweak it" i get the error "Cant frind driver" or something like that. Why? Is it not running on Windows 11?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

isipisi said:


> How the HELL are you guys getting latency down?!
> No matter what i do il get alllllways >52ns.
> 
> 12900kf, STRX D4, Teamgroupe 2x16GB 3600CL 14
> 
> I am running 4000 15 16 16 35 and my latency is like 53ns
> bios version is 0707.
> 
> And when i try to start "Mem tweak it" i get the error "Cant frind driver" or something like that. Why? Is it not running on Windows 11?
> 
> View attachment 2534070
> View attachment 2534071
> 
> 
> View attachment 2534072
> View attachment 2534073
> 
> 
> View attachment 2534074
> View attachment 2534075
> 
> 
> View attachment 2534076
> View attachment 2534077
> 
> View attachment 2534078
> View attachment 2534079


Disable e-cores


----------



## GtiJason

isipisi said:


> How the HELL are you guys getting latency down?!
> No matter what i do il get alllllways >52ns.
> 
> 12900kf, STRX D4, Teamgroupe 2x16GB 3600CL 14
> 
> I am running 4000 15 16 16 35 and my latency is like 53ns
> bios version is 0707.
> 
> And when i try to start "Mem tweak it" i get the error "Cant frind driver" or something like that. Why? Is it not running on Windows 11?


Do you maybe have an older version thats installed on your computer? As far as I'm aware there is just the one version going around and it does open just fine on W11.
I have not tried to change any timings though








Asus Tools


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com







Spoiler: MemTweakIT


----------



## acoustic

My current settings that are stable.

12700K @ 5.1 P -- 3.7 E -- 3.6 Cache / ASUS Z690 TUF WIFI D4 BIOS 0003 / GSKILL 2x16 DR 4000CL16 @ 1.4v XMP

Current settings @ 1.38 SA -- 1.55 VDIMM -- 1.55 VDDQ









I'd say this is stable!! Plenty of timings to work on, but this is a very good starting point of stability, imo. BIOS 0003 made this possible, and ODT 80-60-60 as well. With ODT AUTO, these exact settings will pop errors within the first two minutes of HCI MemTestPro.


----------



## isipisi

0451 said:


> Disable e-cores


I tried disabling them, its not affecting the latency ishu. WIth e-cores disabled and 46 on the ring it is still 52ns

Here memtweak:


----------



## Exilon

When I tested it in 8700K, each 100MHz on the ring was only approx 0.2ns L3 latency, so dropping 1ns from +400MHz is the expected range.


----------



## isipisi

Yes, but how do others get 42-48 ns out of their memory? I am confused.


----------



## acoustic

Current settings .. @ 5.1 P / 3.7 E / 3.6 Cache -- really not sure what else to do to get latency down. I can't post at 1T CR or get below 15-15-15


----------



## Vidas

I FIGURED IT OUT ON GIGABYTE Z690
I was using my 3600cl16 single rank bdie which was fine(at 3333) when I built this system and then I upgraded to a brand new 3200 14-14-14-34-48 1.35v dual rank kit yesterday and I had the same problems everyone else. legit nothing works with the ram except 2133 cl14 command rate two(its clearly the worst on 2*2rank 4*1r 4*2r but may be needed for 2x1r >3333 idk) . Doesnt matter what you do to try and fix it: Enter everything manually xmp off, xmp on, VCSSA voltage to the moon, dram volts to the moon, setting up one stick shutting down putting in the other and booting. *NOTHING* works. I've sat here in this chair for the last 10 hours and last night I did the same thing for at least 5 and well look at the attached image. fixed it.
3200 cl14-14-14-34-48 command rate 1 gear 1 and I think it can go higher I just wanted to get this post up asap god forbid theres another soul out there enduring what I just did because you cant get a z690 msi pro in time for gaming on thanksgiving.
So yeah its a bug or a problem with the memory training. This is how you get around it until they fix the bios, I was able to repeat this twice now so I think we're good.
*STEPS 2 FIX TRASH GIGABYTE TRASH*

Clear CMOS completely. It doesn't even do this right every time. Flip psu switch, pull plug, pull battery(that little switch and those jumpers dont do anything for cmos apparently), press power button for a sec, plug back in and flip the switch. Put in the battery and boot.
Set up your OC in the bios but DONT TOUCH XMP. I did this and should work with most bdie I think as its only 8.75ns. Memory speed 3200, gear 1, go to advanced settings then timings and leave it all auto except for the primaries do 14-14-14-34-48(i assume looser also works) and *command rate to 1*. *VCCSA 1.35v* *DRAM voltage 1.36v VDD 1.36v Memory training voltage 1.36* and* Dram termination to 0.68. *
If these settings dont work maybe try the primaries and speed from your xmp profile. take the voltage from your xmp profile add 100mv and cut that in half for termination.

Save and exit BIOS. There are four red lights on the mobo in a square. The two towards the back of the case will alternate while the mobo is failing to train ram. Youll see them alternating. Flip the power switch on the PSU. Flip it back on and boot. This some how trains the memory enough to work but not enough to hit the point of no return and so it works. It's like at a certain point in training the mobo writes a bad bit into the timing table and this skips that letting it get back to fast passthrough mrc. You may have to try power cycling again if it doesnt boot, or repeat the whole process if that fails.
It will go into your os and the overclock should be applied.
I used the gigabyte utility "fastboot" and hit the boot into bios button. Didnt wanna risk a normal reboot, idk if this is required. Once in BIOS go to advanced memory settings and enable fast boot. This will skip training when you boot. note that if you try to change anything while this is on it wont actually take the changes.
Repeat tuning your overclock each time.
HOWS THAT FOR A FIRST POST
_god i hope this works for everyone and i dont get banned _
absolutely ridiculously unacceptable. was even x370 this bad on launch? oh yeah nvme drives dont work with the bios it ships with lmao. I don't know how to work cpu overclocking into this but I think it might just work as long as you dont touch memory settings. I will update this post if I can get the kit further at high volts but this is what its sold as(14-14-14-34). I did these exact settings without the hacky solution and it didnt work so .
*update* was able to do it a third time however i also tried 3600 1.48 and .74, didnt work, 3400 1.48 .74 didnt work, then the exact same settings 3200 except with HIGHER voltage and that also didn't work. which makes 0 sense to me. why would it work with 1.36v and not work with 1.48 or 1.46? gonna turn on mce like a bum, lock it in with fastboot and go to bed. okay actually just tried again, nothing above 3333mhz will work and i confirmed for a fourth time that nothing at all will post without the power cycle.


----------



## isipisi

acoustic said:


> Current settings .. @ 5.1 P / 3.7 E / 3.6 Cache -- really not sure what else to do to get latency down. I can't post at 1T CR or get below 15-15-15


same for me, stuck at 52ns.


----------



## Exilon

acoustic said:


> Current settings .. @ 5.1 P / 3.7 E / 3.6 Cache -- really not sure what else to do to get latency down. I can't post at 1T CR or get below 15-15-15


L2 cache to 1.3v and push ring to 4.2-4.3 for -1ns lol


----------



## OffBeatViBE

I think the current available bioses for these Asus boards are buggy, I have Z690-P D4 and I have trash latency as well


----------



## bscool

Initial setup used AI OC on Realbench run.









Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5100 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR


[cia6pw] Validated Dump by WIN11SATA (2021-11-24 04:57:52) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB




valid.x86.fr


----------



## isipisi

bscool said:


> Initial setup used AI OC on Realbench run.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5100 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
> 
> 
> [cia6pw] Validated Dump by WIN11SATA (2021-11-24 04:57:52) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> valid.x86.fr


0003 Bios? Where can we get that bios?
And 43 ns?! 


Is the 0707 Biod not the latest? Am i missing something?


----------



## Lurifaks

isipisi said:


> 0003 Bios? Where can we get that bios?
> And 43 ns?!
> 
> 
> Is the 0707 Biod not the latest? Am i missing something?











[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


WIP, links to all bioses, tools. https://youtu.be/rhdxPscpAIU https://youtu.be/MiatGZm7ioI https://youtu.be/fBrlgLZrFaI




www.overclock.net


----------



## warbucks

bscool said:


> Initial setup used AI OC on Realbench run.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5100 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
> 
> 
> [cia6pw] Validated Dump by WIN11SATA (2021-11-24 04:57:52) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> valid.x86.fr


E-Cores disabled, right?


----------



## EarlZ

I am looking at getting an MSI Z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 and I plan to migrate my existing DDR4 4000Mhz and I am wondering if this just mostly plug and play and probably set a higher voltage on this mobo?


----------



## isipisi

warbucks said:


> E-Cores disabled, right?


No, the screenshots says enabled and if you look at the multi score it is 11800.
11800 you get with enabled e cores.


----------



## isipisi

bscool said:


> Initial setup used AI OC on Realbench run.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5100 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
> 
> 
> [cia6pw] Validated Dump by WIN11SATA (2021-11-24 04:57:52) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> valid.x86.fr


How the hell is your ring clock running with 45, enabled ecores  is there some magic you are doing ^^


----------



## Sector-z

Someone can tell me where or what happenned with this Dam board, the Z690 Aorus Pro DDR4 not DDR5 ? I see it no where since the release day 😤


----------



## Sarzinski

Just a quick warning not to test only with HCI mem test, Karhu etc. but to use something putting more load on the IMC as well, for example GSAT or OCCT memory.

I thought I had 4000 Gear 1 with 1T stable now, 600% HCI and 10000% Karhu ran without any errors. Turns out GSAT and OCCT both threw errors in minutes. Back to 2T and they both ran through, no errors.


----------



## bscool

warbucks said:


> E-Cores disabled, right?


Nope e cores enabled I think it sets them at 4100 but they clock down according to load or temps? Not sure honestly just got it up and running and haven't really messed with it much.

I can see my voltages are on the high side and so my temps get up there under high all core loads.

I tried some SR Hynix I have that can do 5333-5600 on z590 Apex and Unify X and it barely can do 4600 in the Strix. Maybe it needs an older bios or setting I don't know about. I was hoping for some 5000+ SR. Strix A QVL shows 5133 but I know how QVL goes.


----------



## bscool

isipisi said:


> How the hell is your ring clock running with 45, enabled ecores  is there some magic you are doing ^^


Probably silicon lotto, Asus bios, combo? Also, I have no idea how stable those settings are other than those few benches I ran and a short run of memtest. I wouldn't put too much thought into those # I was just "excited" to post the new toys # 

I know the voltages are way too high the way it is set now to run any long term all core stress tests. It is fine for daily gaming but running heavy stuff it will hit 90c+ quick. I have been messing with memory OC and will probably just stick with DR b die from the looks of it and then mess with lowering voltages and maybe go to a fix CPU OC instead of AI.


----------



## gtz

So now that people have had this for a few weeks, what is the DDR4 board to get?

From my reads looks like Gigabyte struggles and Asus depends on the BIOS revision. MSI seems to be the winner.

What about ASRock or BIOSTAR?


----------



## isipisi

bscool said:


> Nope e cores enabled I think it sets them at 4100 but they clock down according to load or temps? Not sure honestly just got it up and running and haven't really messed with it much.
> 
> I can see my voltages are on the high side and so my temps get up there under high all core loads.
> 
> I tried some SR Hynix I have that can do 5333-5600 on z590 Apex and Unify X and it barely can do 4600 in the Strix. Maybe it needs an older bios or setting I don't know about. I was hoping for some 5000+ SR. Strix A QVL shows 5133 but I know how QVL goes.


you should lap your cpu, i did and get 80°C in cinebench.
Asus AI Oc dose 5,5 5,3 boost and 5,1 all Core cinebench and 5.2 all core gaming. I could set it manuelally to 5,2 but i think Asus AI dose a good job.
Without lapping i was getting 100°C and throtteling.....


----------



## grey.clock

Sarzinski said:


> Just a quick warning not to test only with HCI mem test, Karhu etc. but to use something putting more load on the IMC as well, for example GSAT or OCCT memory.
> 
> I thought I had 4000 Gear 1 with 1T stable now, 600% HCI and 10000% Karhu ran without any errors. Turns out GSAT and OCCT both threw errors in minutes. Back to 2T and they both ran through, no errors.



I am also having the same exact issue as you. What CPU are you using? I dropped my G1 T1 4000mhz setup down to G1 T1 3900mhz at c18. I am probably going to return this kit and just go for a solid 3600mhz 1.35v c16 crucial kit and go for lower timings at stock speed.


----------



## bscool

@isipisi What are you using for cooling? I have an old XSPC Raystorm and the backplate doesn't have holes where it should so it doesn't sit flat on the back of the MB but it works for now. Not sure how much that is affecting temps. I also haven't tried putting washers/spaces in for the lower z height of 1700 vs previous gens.


----------



## isipisi

bscool said:


> @isipisi What are you using for cooling? I have an old XSPC Raystorm and the backplate doesn't have holes where it should so it doesn't sit flat on the back of the MB but it works for now. Not sure how much that is affecting temps. I also haven't tried putting washers/spaces in for the lower z height of 1700 vs previous gens.


I am using an VERY old Eisblock XPX. This block was running on a 5820k its old .
I am using the lga1151 socket mount for it. But the CPU is not flat trust me. i was getting 100°C with that one.

I lapped it and now its getting not hotter than 80. 
I have noticed that the cpu has a rounding in the middle
where is filled with thermal paste. now its flat and is cold.


----------



## grey.clock

I think at least in my case (i7 12700k asus tuf z690 32gb 16x2 ) T1 G1 4000mhz stability is being tweaked by something that AI over clock II mode (extreme) is also messing with. I previously could boot into windows and play games on XMP 2 4000mhz t1 g1 and it worked great for a few days.... then things started crashing. Previously I did this also with a i5 12600k where it was stable at 3733 g1 t1 for a few days then it started crashing.

Taking off the overclock appears to be stable with OCCT cpu load + Test Mem after 2x 30min rounds. Previously it started kicking errors in test mem after a few minutes even though games appeared to be stable..

The lesson is check your AI tune settings if you are a lazy overclocker like me and enjoy the auto functions. I will need to chase down what is making the memory unstable with the asus "extreme" mode overclock....

Bios v.0002


----------



## geriatricpollywog

gtz said:


> So now that people have had this for a few weeks, what is the DDR4 board to get?
> 
> From my reads looks like Gigabyte struggles and Asus depends on the BIOS revision. MSI seems to be the winner.
> 
> What about ASRock or BIOSTAR?


Strix is a good choice because it’s what Shamino and Safedisk are using and developing bioses for weekly.

MSI A Pro for a cheap board for 12600K / 12700K with good ram overclocking.

Gigglebyte ITX should dominate if they can get a proper bios. It has 2 RAM slots and a 10 layer PCB.


----------



## Smaz

patriot 4400cl19 
pass the bios testmen86


----------



## owikh84

12900KF SP 87 - Stock
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0003
2x8GB G.Skill F4-3600C14D-16GTESA

4133 CL16-16-16-36-1T Gear1, VDIMM 1.55v (1.545v), SA 1.45v (1.440v), VDDQ Auto (~1.35v), Algos Auto:


----------



## isipisi

owikh84 said:


> 12900KF SP 87 - Stock
> Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0003
> 2x8GB G.Skill F4-3600C14D-16GTESA
> 
> 4133 CL16-16-16-36-1T Gear1, VDIMM 1.55v (1.545v), SA 1.45v (1.440v), VDDQ Auto (~1.35v), Algos Auto:
> View attachment 2534230


Nice! But i realy dont get it. My CPU dose 5,2 all core same ram settings give me 52,4ns. Is it bcs i am running dual rank 2x16GB? Or is mybe somthing wrong with my setup


----------



## Cuthalu

Finally installed the Msi Z690 A. Testing ram @ 3600 15-15-15-35 and seems like it "just works" 👍, while GB didn't even boot @ 3600 no matter what the timings or volts were, so that's clear improvement.

E-cores don't want to be disabled with the stock bios which is what others have said, but when I selected I want only 1 core active, the mobo refused to boot and CPU debug was red. Clear cmos didn't help. Bios update through the usb button eventually worked. 😣


----------



## owikh84

isipisi said:


> Nice! But i realy dont get it. My CPU dose 5,2 all core same ram settings give me 52,4ns. Is it bcs i am running dual rank 2x16GB? Or is mybe somthing wrong with my setup


To make sure the BCLK running at 100.00 rather than 99.xx, I load XMP profile 1 and then change the settings as desired.

CPU clock if you sync all cores, the cache will not boost to 4.7GHz, so I just leave the P and E-cores at auto. But I do understand that when I do sync all core oc later I will expect higher latency than now. No worries as this AIDA64 benchmark is not an indication of the actual performance in real life. 

Also, I needed to run that AIDA64 latency test for more than 1 times in order to obtain lower ns. First run usually high.


----------



## Impalor

Vidas said:


> I FIGURED IT OUT ON GIGABYTE Z690
> I was using my 3600cl16 single rank bdie which was fine(at 3333) when I built this system and then I upgraded to a brand new 3200 14-14-14-34-48 1.35v dual rank kit yesterday and I had the same problems everyone else. legit nothing works with the ram except 2133 cl14 command rate two(its clearly the worst on 2*2rank 4*1r 4*2r but may be needed for 2x1r >3333 idk) . Doesnt matter what you do to try and fix it: Enter everything manually xmp off, xmp on, VCSSA voltage to the moon, dram volts to the moon, setting up one stick shutting down putting in the other and booting. *NOTHING* works. I've sat here in this chair for the last 10 hours and last night I did the same thing for at least 5 and well look at the attached image. fixed it.
> 3200 cl14-14-14-34-48 command rate 1 gear 1 and I think it can go higher I just wanted to get this post up asap god forbid theres another soul out there enduring what I just did because you cant get a z690 msi pro in time for gaming on thanksgiving.
> So yeah its a bug or a problem with the memory training. This is how you get around it until they fix the bios, I was able to repeat this twice now so I think we're good.
> *STEPS 2 FIX TRASH GIGABYTE TRASH*
> 
> Clear CMOS completely. It doesn't even do this right every time. Flip psu switch, pull plug, pull battery(that little switch and those jumpers dont do anything for cmos apparently), press power button for a sec, plug back in and flip the switch. Put in the battery and boot.
> Set up your OC in the bios but DONT TOUCH XMP. I did this and should work with most bdie I think as its only 8.75ns. Memory speed 3200, gear 1, go to advanced settings then timings and leave it all auto except for the primaries do 14-14-14-34-48(i assume looser also works) and *command rate to 1*. *VCCSA 1.35v* *DRAM voltage 1.36v VDD 1.36v Memory training voltage 1.36* and* Dram termination to 0.68. *
> If these settings dont work maybe try the primaries and speed from your xmp profile. take the voltage from your xmp profile add 100mv and cut that in half for termination.
> 
> Save and exit BIOS. There are four red lights on the mobo in a square. The two towards the back of the case will alternate while the mobo is failing to train ram. Youll see them alternating. Flip the power switch on the PSU. Flip it back on and boot. This some how trains the memory enough to work but not enough to hit the point of no return and so it works. It's like at a certain point in training the mobo writes a bad bit into the timing table and this skips that letting it get back to fast passthrough mrc. You may have to try power cycling again if it doesnt boot, or repeat the whole process if that fails.
> It will go into your os and the overclock should be applied.
> I used the gigabyte utility "fastboot" and hit the boot into bios button. Didnt wanna risk a normal reboot, idk if this is required. Once in BIOS go to advanced memory settings and enable fast boot. This will skip training when you boot. note that if you try to change anything while this is on it wont actually take the changes.
> Repeat tuning your overclock each time.
> HOWS THAT FOR A FIRST POST
> _god i hope this works for everyone and i dont get banned _
> absolutely ridiculously unacceptable. was even x370 this bad on launch? oh yeah nvme drives dont work with the bios it ships with lmao. I don't know how to work cpu overclocking into this but I think it might just work as long as you dont touch memory settings. I will update this post if I can get the kit further at high volts but this is what its sold as(14-14-14-34). I did these exact settings without the hacky solution and it didnt work so .
> *update* was able to do it a third time however i also tried 3600 1.48 and .74, didnt work, 3400 1.48 .74 didnt work, then the exact same settings 3200 except with HIGHER voltage and that also didn't work. which makes 0 sense to me. why would it work with 1.36v and not work with 1.48 or 1.46? gonna turn on mce like a bum, lock it in with fastboot and go to bed. okay actually just tried again, nothing above 3333mhz will work and i confirmed for a fourth time that nothing at all will post without the power cycle.
> View attachment 2534121


Hello, thanks for the post! Been loosing sleep why my stupidly expensive 4000cl14 16x2 could only run 3466cl14. Will try your steps tomorrow. But where do I get the utility "fastboot"? Apps on their support page are in chinese or not wirking...


----------



## grey.clock

Is crucial(micron) memory in general working better with z690 boards v. SK Hynix ? Looking at the option of 2x16gb cl16 1.35v 3600mhz vs 4000mhz cl18 1.4v


----------



## Vidas

Impalor said:


> Hello, thanks for the post! Been loosing sleep why my stupidly expensive 4000cl14 16x2 could only run 3466cl14. Will try your steps tomorrow. But where do I get the utility "fastboot"? Apps on their support page are in chinese or not wirking...


Wait, yours is running 3466cl14 with two dual rank sticks of b-die? In gear 1 command rate 1? Which gigabyte board is this? Which bios? did you turn on xmp and then lower the timings? 
Don't bother following the steps, your ram is working. It is not the same bug and problem I'm experiencing.
My board with two dual rank sticks of b-die cannot run anything, at all. It is completely incapable of training memory and so can only do the default jedec setting of 2133 cl 15 command rate 2. The only way around this bug are the steps I outlined. That's what's required to get to the base line after which I was able to get 3333mhz. I've tried on two different kits of ram. You will not gain anything from this because your board is capable of training. It sounds like your imc is marginally superior to my sample as yours can do 3466.
I was about to try and make a video to show how to fix this but now nothing makes any sense. This problem should be present on all aorus elite ax ddr4 boards and I thought all gigabyte ddr4 boards.
Sorry about the late response, turned on push notifications but wasn't notified of your response. I'll try to monitor the thread closer because I'm very interested in what the hell is going on here.


----------



## Exilon

Additional tuning of REFI and RFC plus tertiaries got my mixed read-write 2:1 bandwidth up to 72.3GB/s in MLC from 70GB/s for an whopping 1% increase in GB5 score. 
I think that's all she wrote for memory tuning with this doubled up bargain B-die kit.


----------



## Nerval

Hi, I've went through most comments in the thread and it seems majority using Strix-A board, as one who have just placed his order on 12900K I'm trying to decide which board to go for
for my 4x8GB 4000Mhz CL15 ram that I'm currently running with a-bit tightened timings/subtimings.

Mostly debating between the MSI Edge and Asus Strix-A, would like to get final thoughts on which one to go for.
I'm planning on running my [email protected] gear1 CL15 2CR (maybe try 1CR aswell which doesnt rly post on the MB I have now)
The ram I have: F4-4000C15-8GVK
also if some1 have any tips for my current subtimings (as I'm quite a beginner and played alil with it)


----------



## Hiikeri

Some have 100usd Rams and 300usd CPU. 
And some have 300-400usd Rams with 600usd CPU and the 1st one owners are asking why my setup wont OC 4000 14-14-14 G1, or even 15-15-15? Or why my latency is over 50ns?


----------



## MerlijnD

Hi, I have the Z690 Tomhawk DDR4 with 4x 8gb Crucial Ballistix Rev-E. My 5 min ram OC config boots instantly and is more stable than on my previous Z390 Aorus Master. But the write speed and latency are dogshit. Any tips?

Gear 1


----------



## eeroo94

MerlijnD said:


> Hi, I have the Z690 Tomhawk DDR4 with 4x 8gb Crucial Ballistix Rev-E. My 5 min ram OC config boots instantly and is more stable than on my previous Z390 Aorus Master. But the write speed and latency are dogshit. Any tips?
> 
> Gear 1
> View attachment 2534262


I don't know what's is the culprit, but you L3 latency is terrible.


----------



## MerlijnD

eeroo94 said:


> I don't know what's is the culprit, but you L3 latency is terrible.











Had multiple programs open. Everything closed fixes it (L3)


----------



## owikh84

12900KF SP 87 - Stock
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0003
2x8GB KLEVV Bolt XR (SR DJR)

5066 20-27-27-31-1T Gear2, VDIMM 1.60v, SA 1.40v, VDDQ 1.40v: 









5333 no boot on this new platform, was able to boot up to 5600 with this kit on 11900K/Z590 Extreme.


----------



## Cuthalu

With Z690A Pro my 4*single rank hits a hard wall at 3700/3733, it doesn't boot with gear 1 @ 1.4v SA, but gear 2 works. Looks like this 12700kf doesn't have the best memory controller, and or it really dislikes 4 sticks.


----------



## ogider

Maybe disable e cores set cache clock to like 36, lower llc like 6, and then try training memory. Also cr2 but g1

SA 1.3 works for me..but I have 12900k


----------



## neteng101

Cuthalu said:


> With Z690A Pro my 4*single rank hits a hard wall at 3700/3733, it doesn't boot with gear 1 @ 1.4v SA, but gear 2 works. Looks like this 12700kf doesn't have the best memory controller, and or it really dislikes 4 sticks.


Try 1.45V SA - I got as far as booting up in 3866 Gear 1 but couldn't stabilize the memory 4 sticks of 16GB SR. Cheap 3000-CL16 memory that doesn't like memory voltage beyond 1.4V. Running 114 bios now.


----------



## Cuthalu

neteng101 said:


> Try 1.45V SA - I got as far as booting up in 3866 Gear 1 but couldn't stabilize the memory 4 sticks of 16GB SR. Cheap 3000-CL16 memory that doesn't like memory voltage beyond 1.4V. Running 114 bios now.


I'll try that later. Previous attempt apparently had too high vddq. I'm testing 3600 14-15-15-33: 1.4 vddq was really unstable, 1.38 was significantly more stable, 1.37 was better and 1.36 looks to be solid. I have 114 bios as well.



ogider said:


> Maybe disable e cores set cache clock to like 36, lower llc like 6, and then try training memory. Also cr2 but g1
> SA 1.3 works for me..but I have 12900k


Disabling E-cores was the first thing I did. Ring is 47.


----------



## MerlijnD

Same here 12700k; 3900 or 4000 gear 1 boots straight away @ 1.32 SA (havent tested lower and 1.3v VDDQ)
4x SR rev-e


----------



## neteng101

Cuthalu said:


> I'll try that later. Previous attempt apparently had too high vddq. I'm testing 3600 14-15-15-33: 1.4 vddq was really unstable, 1.38 was significantly more stable, 1.37 was better and 1.36 looks to be solid. I have 114 bios as well.


That VDDQ testing is helpful - trying to figure out where to set mine. I'm back to 3866 Gear 1 to see if I can make something work with slower timings, might still be better. 3600 for me is a no go - I can't make it work no matter what I do. Maybe 3733 is the same for you - if so try going beyond with the additional SA voltage.


----------



## ViTosS

@Carillo @0451 what mobo are you guys using for DDR4 OC in 12th gen?


----------



## St0ned

Cuthalu said:


> With Z690A Pro my 4*single rank hits a hard wall at 3700/3733, it doesn't boot with gear 1 @ 1.4v SA, but gear 2 works. Looks like this 12700kf doesn't have the best memory controller, and or it really dislikes 4 sticks.


Could it be a motherboard thing ?


----------



## grey.clock

Hiikeri said:


> Some have 100usd Rams and 300usd CPU.
> And some have 300-400usd Rams with 600usd CPU and the 1st one owners are asking why my setup wont OC 4000 14-14-14 G1, or even 15-15-15? Or why my latency is over 50ns?



Well my ram kit (4000mhz cl 18 22 22 45 1.4v 2x16gb) I thought decently would match my CPU for my gaming/light productivity desktop pc but your post inspired me to go for a 3600mhz cl14 14 14 34 1.45v 2x16gb kit instead. I will use this for a year with the 12700k before passing it on to one of my kids and jumping into ddr5. From what I am reading, the timings on it should mean I am getting a good chip with a little room for additional tweaking.


----------



## warbucks

12900K SP 84
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0003
2x16GB G.Skill F4-4000C14D-32GTES

4000 CL14-16-16-32-2T Gear1, VDIMM 1.55v, SA 1.45v, VDDQ 1.50v

Still need to dial in some timings further and then work on lowering voltages where possible.


----------



## neteng101

Managed to overclock my cheapo 4x16GB SR sticks to 3800 Gear 1, even with the slow CL20 it can manage at that speed, finally touched 60k transfers and got it close to 60 ns latency. Pretty happy with these results. Still need to verify and test fully but looks promising. 1.45 SA, 1.36 VDDQ, 1.40 DRAM.


----------



## kingofblog

Finally installed my Z690 STRIX-A into a chassis. Really disappointed that I can't cool prime95 Small FFT at stock voltages/frequencies, but memory is working fine. DDR4-4000 16-16-16-36-2N G.Skill kit is passing TM5-anta at 1.35 VccSA and 1.4 Vddq.

Tip for all of you with who can boot to OS but don't pass TM5 or Karhu or whatever: your core is unstable.


----------



## Cam1

Hello,
I would like to setup my Gaming computer at best, but i don't know much and the informations looks great but it's too hard for me to synthesize !
Could you guide a bit ? 
Here is my setup:
cpu: 12700K
Motherboard: Asus Tuf gaming Z690 plus wifi (Bios 0707)
ddr4: corsair dominator 3600 "CMD16GX4M2B3600C18"

I just tuned up the Ram frequency because the Auto Oc is not doing great, and xmp as well.

Any helps would be greatly appreciated ! ☺

I don't see "VccSA and Vddq" in my Bios


----------



## bscool

@Cam1


----------



## PolRoger

Here is where I'm at currently with my Gigabyte Z690i Ultra (DDR4).

I'm using a low bin i5-12600K and an early Skylake era 2x8GB B-die memory kit.

So far with testing... Up to 3333/3466 with Auto VCCSA (~.0975v), 3600 with ~1.00/1.05v (SA), 3733 with ~1.10v (SA), 3800 with ~1.15v (SA), 3866 with ~1.20v (SA), and 3900 with ~1.25v (SA). I was able to boot to Windows once at 4000 G1 but not stabilized and also booted to Windows with G2 at 4200/4266/4400. I've been able to post just to BIOS at 4533/4600 but not made it into Windows and no further testing at this time. ￼

Thinking of this as a possible daily type OC... @P49/E39 3900C16 G1 with ~1.40v DRAM ~1.250v VCCSA ~ 1.30v VDDQ:


----------



## Cam1

bscool said:


> @Cam1


Now i know where i have to look, i can start tweaking ! 

But i have no idea how far can i go, where should i start, how much latency/frequency can i expect ?

Thanks * bscool !*


----------



## bscool

@Cam1 









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Good luck getting replacement DDR5. I would seriously consider picking up a DDR4 board and memory. For all you know the problem could be with the board, this way you rule everything out. Also, stupid question but was the memory in question on the QVL? Is there a new BIOS? Have you tried the...




www.overclock.net





Here is where I started, I havent finalized anything still playing around but no stability issues so far. But pretty limited use just some benches and surfing the web. Cinebench 23 ws the most stressful and it throttles down because of temps. I dont think I have a good mount and I need to add washer/spacers but havent bothered to test yet.









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


Current settings .. @ 5.1 P / 3.7 E / 3.6 Cache -- really not sure what else to do to get latency down. I can't post at 1T CR or get below 15-15-15 :(




www.overclock.net


----------



## geriatricpollywog

ViTosS said:


> @Carillo @0451 what mobo are you guys using for DDR4 OC in 12th gen?


I just switched from a Tuf to a Strix. No difference in performance so far. I was able to load Safedisk's anime girl profile.


----------



## Carillo

ViTosS said:


> @Carillo @0451 what mobo are you guys using for DDR4 OC in 12th gen?


Been using MSI Edge and Strix while waiting for DDR5 sticks


----------



## ilgello

Some initial testing 4000:1:1 16-20-20 2x16gb Dual Rank - Micron Edie - Gigabyte UD z690 - CPU can do also 5.3 without issues but still needs testing, I would like to work on the RAM first:











Not Much luck with the Bdie Kits I have at home, I will try to split one and try with 16gb only, I use an "healthy" Vdroop, full load voltage is around 1.265 for 5.2 and 1.315 for 5.3


----------



## Hiikeri

I get a new cpu cooler and its now much easier to change different kits. Heres my another B-Die kit and 4-5h tweaking today.









And imo this is better results, 45.9ns on Maxxmem2









My memory controller already says that what the f... there are coming, a lot of data! 👈

Command Rate Real 1N. Theres also normal 1N and N:1 settings.


----------



## Nerval

Hiikeri said:


> I get a new cpu cooler and its now much easier to change different kits. Heres my another B-Die kit and 4-5h tweaking today.
> View attachment 2534414
> 
> 
> And imo this is better results, 45.9ns on Maxxmem2
> View attachment 2534415
> 
> 
> My memory controller already says that what the f... there are coming, a lot of data! 👈
> 
> Command Rate Real 1N. Theres also normal 1N and N:1 settings.
> View attachment 2534416


Looking good! would you advise going for z690 edge overall experience? I'm thinking of getting it for my 12900k arriving soon and hope to OC my 4x8GB 4000CL15 ram and hopefully get somewhat closer to your results xD


----------



## acoustic

Hiikeri said:


> I get a new cpu cooler and its now much easier to change different kits. Heres my another B-Die kit and 4-5h tweaking today.
> View attachment 2534414
> 
> 
> And imo this is better results, 45.9ns on Maxxmem2
> View attachment 2534415
> 
> 
> My memory controller already says that what the f... there are coming, a lot of data! 👈
> 
> Command Rate Real 1N. Theres also normal 1N and N:1 settings.
> View attachment 2534416


I just want 4000 GR1 on 2x16...


----------



## grey.clock

0451 said:


> I just switched from a Tuf to a Strix. No difference in performance so far. I was able to load Safedisk's anime girl profile.


Curious to hear more about your journey. I was wondering if I should do the same thing. Asus tuff with the i7 now, thinking of the strix.


----------



## Cuthalu

Took another shot at 3700/3733/3800/3866 with Z690-A Pro. Nothing. Nada. Tried 1.45 SA, lower VDDQ, increased MC PLL, even slower memory timings, auto timings with manual primaries, lower ring, more CPU voltage, all auto voltages except RAM, nothing works. Not even a hint of booting up. It's incomprehensible how well 3600 works compared to... this with 3700+.


----------



## gerardfraser

Cuthalu said:


> Took another shot at 3700/3733/3800/3866 with Z690-A Pro. Nothing. Nada. Tried 1.45 SA, lower VDDQ, increased MC PLL, even slower memory timings, auto timings with manual primaries, lower ring, more CPU voltage, all auto voltages except RAM, nothing works. Not even a hint of booting up. It's incomprehensible how well 3600 works compared to... this with 3700+.


Here are my setting on MSI PRO z690-A DDR4 on BIOS (E7D25IMS.100) on BIOS (E7D25IMS.114) same settings did not work

Just Primary timings not sub timings
Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz
SA voltage needed to be greater than 1.45v
DRAM Voltage 1.6v


----------



## eeroo94

Cuthalu said:


> Took another shot at 3700/3733/3800/3866 with Z690-A Pro. Nothing. Nada. Tried 1.45 SA, lower VDDQ, increased MC PLL, even slower memory timings, auto timings with manual primaries, lower ring, more CPU voltage, all auto voltages except RAM, nothing works. Not even a hint of booting up. It's incomprehensible how well 3600 works compared to... this with 3700+.


You can try with 2 sticks in the recommend slots, daisy chain mobo doesn't always like 4 sticks.


----------



## Cuthalu

gerardfraser said:


> Here are my setting on MSI PRO z690-A DDR4 on BIOS (E7D25IMS.100) on BIOS (E7D25IMS.114) same settings did not work
> 
> Just Primary timings not sub timings
> Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz
> SA voltage needed to be greater than 1.45v
> DRAM Voltage 1.6v


Tried with 1.46 SA, 1.5 RAM, 3733 18-18-18-38, pretty much everything else on auto - doesn't boot, "memory overclock error". 3600 14-14-14-32 boots with 1.23 SA, 1.45 RAM. 



eeroo94 said:


> You can try with 2 sticks in the recommend slots, daisy chain mobo doesn't always like 4 sticks.


It boots with gear 2, afaik that implies memory controller problem.


----------



## neteng101

Cuthalu said:


> auto timings with manual primaries


This along with additional SA voltage seems to be key to getting past post. Set slower manual primaries, everything else memory timings on auto, SA at 1.45V. Tried 4000 G1 and was able to get it to boot up but unusable - probably need more SA voltage than 1.45V so I'm going to stick to 3800. If you need more than that SA to get anything higher than 3600 its probably not worthwhile.


----------



## acoustic

It's embarrassing how poorly the IMCs are handling Gear1. I'm hoping that we'll see stability get better as we get better BIOS, but I don't have much faith.

The only good thing is that these sticks I have are doing pretty awesome without the CML restrictions. I'm able to tighten up timings much tighter, it's just the IMC instability giving me issues.

BIOS 0803 is still HCI MemTestPro 200% (1800% stable on BIOS 0003) and TM5 ABSOLUT stable @ 4000 15-15-15-28-270 @ 1.55vDIMM / 1.38v SA, but will CTD in Halo Infinite. I know it's not CPU or cache as those are stock with override 1.35v and LLC5 for troubleshooting purposes.

I also still cannot post at 3866 with the same settings that post perfectly (and stress test fine) at 4000. I don't understand why but I have a frequency hole for some reason. 3733 works no problem.


----------



## kingofblog

IMC is working fine for me. VccSA=1.35 V, DDR4-4000-16-16-16-36-2N. You have to accept reality and realize that 2.3 GHz IMC from KBL/CFL/CML isn't coming back.



Code:


> .\mlc.exe --idle_latency -b10000
Intel(R) Memory Latency Checker - v3.9a

Using buffer size of 9.766MiB
Each iteration took 39.4 base frequency clocks (        12.3    ns)

> .\mlc.exe --idle_latency
Using buffer size of 2000.000MiB
Each iteration took 136.0 base frequency clocks (       42.5    ns)

> .\mlc.exe --idle_latency -r
Using buffer size of 2000.000MiB
Each iteration took 169.9 base frequency clocks (       53.5    ns)

> .\mlc.exe --loaded_latency -R -T
Using Read-only traffic type
Inject  Latency Bandwidth
Delay   (ns)    MB/sec
==========================
00000    0.00    59195.6 (Efficiency: 92.5%)

> .\mlc.exe --loaded_latency -W7 -T
Using 2R:1NTW traffic type
00000    0.00    57390.7 (Efficiency: 89.7%)

> .\mlc.exe --loaded_latency -W6 -T
Using NTW traffic type
00000    0.00    58002.6 (Efficiency: 90.6%)


----------



## acoustic

All I'm asking for is 4000 GR1, not a Mhz over that. I'm stress-test stable @ 1.38v SA, but Halo Infinite will crash all the way up to 1.48v SA. I didn't even try going beyond 1.48v because it's pointless - would never run that anyway for daily usage.

3733 seems to be where I have to settle, which is extremely disappointing. In the grand scheme of things, the 277Mhz drop won't mean **** in terms of gaming performance, but it's irritating nonetheless.


----------



## kingofblog

That doesn't sound right. Are you sure it's not your core that's unstable (assuming you overclocked)? If you can pass Karhu/TM5/P95/etc. at 1.4 VccSA, try running Halo with stock frequency (4.9 GHz), which probably won't affect FPS at all. The IMC is on a completely different rail from the core and protected even further by FIVR, so it shouldn't be affected by any core activity. What's more likely is that your core stability is marginal and the faster RAM speed exposes it.

@zhrooms how did your RAM tuning go? Haven't seen an update from you in quite some time now.


----------



## acoustic

kingofblog said:


> That doesn't sound right. Are you sure it's not your core that's unstable (assuming you overclocked)? If you can pass Karhu/TM5/P95/etc. at 1.4 VccSA, try running Halo with stock frequency (4.9 GHz), which probably won't affect FPS at all. The IMC is on a completely different rail from the core and protected even further by FIVR, so it shouldn't be affected by any core activity. What's more likely is that your core stability is marginal and the faster RAM speed exposes it.
> 
> @zhrooms how did your RAM tuning go? Haven't seen an update from you in quite some time now.


I run P + E cores at stock with Cache on Auto with 1.35v manual vcore set @ LLC5 for troubleshooting purposes -- it's definitely the IMC causing it. I've tried raising vCORE (for further troubleshooting) up to 1.4v manual vcore because I thought the same thing, but nope .. it's the IMC. No clue exactly what Halo Infinite is doing that TM5 + HCI MemTestPro aren't, but it's doing something lol


----------



## Exilon

Do you pass x265 slow encoding in handbrake? I thought I had a stable memory timings because memory tests were passing but turns out RFC and REFI were too optimistic. Spent a lot of time trying stabilize a stable CPU OC...


----------



## acoustic

Exilon said:


> Do you pass x265 slow encoding in handbrake? I thought I had a stable memory timings because memory tests were passing but turns out RFC and REFI were too optimistic. Spent a lot of time trying stabilize a stable CPU OC...


I could give Realbench a run. I was using Halo as my "real-world" test for the memory, but could be good to verify it with some Handbrake.


----------



## gamervivek

Anyone running a 12700KF? Getting weird results from AIDA and get a popup on test completion that it's not optimized for the CPU.

The current stable version and beta version results.



















edit - nvm, disabled memory integrity and the results are much better.


----------



## bscool

4133c15


----------



## Cam1

I tried many Voltage frequency combination, nothing is realy stable.
Maybe my ram is too old ?
Or, am i missing something very important to start tuning-up the Ram ?
I'm leaving every thing Auto, only change VCCSA, VDDQ, and DRAM Voltage to try stabilize any manual setting on the Ram, got nothing Better/Stable than full Auto @4000MHz.

( TestMem5 report stable but it's not true... )

Please someone helps me to understand !


----------



## kingofblog

acoustic said:


> I could give Realbench a run. I was using Halo as my "real-world" test for the memory, but could be good to verify it with some Handbrake.


It's worth trying. TM5 only draws 120 W on my rig, whereas gaming could be producing as much as 500 W in the chassis, which depending on airflow direction, could be heating your RAM. Another way to know if the IMC is causing problems is to relax the timings, since IMC quality only affects the bus frequency, # of ranks, etc. The primary and refresh timings are all internal to the DRAM. Another stress test possibility is Furmark + TM5.


----------



## Cuthalu

Might be time to get rid of these 4 sticks and see what 2*dual rank does. Is there any OC difference between 3200 14-14-14-34 1.35v, 3600 16-16-16-36 1.35v and 3600 14-15-15-35 1.45v? B-die availability seems to be quite limited at the moment.


----------



## bscool

@Cam1 I need to set VCCSA, VDDQ manually to get higher frequencys to even boot. 1.45 to 1.5. Not happening unless I do that. Unless you have a golden IMC.

You are only at 1.35 VDDQ in your screenshot. If you want to stay at lower voltages you will probably need to go down to 3600-3733.


----------



## bscool

Cuthalu said:


> Might be time to get rid of these 4 sticks and see what 2*dual rank does. Is there any OC difference between 3200 14-14-14-34 1.35v, 3600 16-16-16-36 1.35v and 3600 14-15-15-35 1.45v? B-die availability seems to be quite limited at the moment.


If those are your choices I would take the 3600c14. From owning most of the high bin 2x16 they are very close and it comes down to lotto. But the higher bins increase your chance of getting a good bin.


----------



## Cam1

bscool said:


> @Cam1 I need to set VCCSA, VDDQ manually to get higher frequencys to even boot. 1.45 to 1.5. Not happening unless I do that. Unless you have a golden IMC.
> 
> You are only at 1.35 VDDQ in your screenshot. If you want to stay at lower voltages you will probably need to go down to 3600-3733.


I tried 1.45 VCCSA and 1.5 VDDQ but i can't get stable ram @4000MHz Gear 1 T1
Is it better going for lower latency with lower frequency ? Or trying to get the highest ram frequency ?

btw T1 in my bios is 1N and i have another choice that is called N:1 and then i can choose between 1 or 2 or 3 or 4
i have no idea what the difference is :|

2T gives better results 

Ram @4000MHz Gear 1 and 2T Using 1.40 VCCSA -> unstable in windows / 1.45 VCCSA -> Bios no report  VDDQ is 1.5

I'm sure there is something other i must tweak idk what !


----------



## Exilon

acoustic said:


> I could give Realbench a run. I was using Halo as my "real-world" test for the memory, but could be good to verify it with some Handbrake.


It turned out to be my ring clock of 4.3 at 1.35v. Handbrake x265 would rapidly cycle the load on the E-cores and the L2 couldn't keep up.


----------



## bscool

@Cam1 You have test it for yourself which is best. I havent tried much 1t but the little I did with DR I had to lower clocks considerably so it wasnt worth it to me.

It could be your memory also. It seems like getting good Corsair ram is harder than say Gskill from what I have seen. I havent personally owned any Corsair ram just seeing other results online.

Hard to say without a bunch of ram and a few CPUs to test if it is memory or IMC.

Edit and when comparing 1t to 2t you need to set all timings manually on auto it might set the 1t timings much looser so it looks worse.


----------



## Cam1

i bought this Ram in 2016 ! ( for 190💶 they cost more than 200 today lol )

Looks like turning Gear to 1 is making a lot of troubles but a big improvement !
So i'm going for the highest Gear 1 stable Ram frequency with Auto timings


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Initial results with the 12900K I picked up today. This is with safedisk's profile for bios 0003. I lowered tCL to 14 and raised these voltage:

Voltages (bios)
CPU 1.33
SA 1.46
Vdimm 1.59
VDDQ 1.52


----------



## HvacGuru

Current settings .. @ 5.2 P / 4.0 E / 3.6 Cache


----------



## ivanch88

gamervivek said:


> Anyone running a 12700KF? Getting weird results from AIDA and get a popup on test completion that it's not optimized for the CPU.
> 
> The current stable version and beta version results.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2534520
> View attachment 2534521


That's mean that aida doesn't support our cpu yet. On some systems it tests e-cores cache instead of p-cores. Try to turn them off to see normal results


----------



## jomama22

Not daily stable by any means but just wanted to see if this chip could boot it.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

jomama22 said:


> View attachment 2534565
> 
> 
> Not daily stable by any means but just wanted to see if this chip could boot it.


What is your daily stable settings and can you share bios profile please?


----------



## chispy

New 12900kf has better imc than my 12700k and 12600k , at this point it is down to silicon lottery with the imc of alder lake cpus :/ .

Best it could do:


----------



## Exilon

chispy said:


> New 12900kf has better imc than my 12700k and 12600k , at this point it is down to silicon lottery with the imc of alder lake cpus :/ .
> 
> Best it could do:
> 
> View attachment 2534568


What did you manage with the i5/i7?


----------



## therealjustin

Probably worrying about nothing, but do you guys think it's safe to order a DDR4 board to use with my 4x8GB 3600 16-19-19-36 kit? 

I'm worried the IMC on my 12700K won't allow Gear 1, and that I'd be better off waiting for DDR5 to restock... someday.


----------



## zhrooms

Finally got my replacement 12900K (after the last one was defective), and was the reason I haven't been contributing to this thread in over a week, not had time to test it yet but results are coming very shortly of an IMC comparison.
To compare the IMC I have to re-test this 12700K first, which I've been doing since early this morning but I could barely boot higher than 4133, I was really scratching my head as to why, I adjusted everything I could in the BIOS, and that simply led me to conclude that it had to be the BIOS, so I reverted back to 0707, and it worked right away, I even hit a new record of 4195 MT/s, that's 2097.5 MHz on the IMC. So, with the '0003' BIOS that @safedisk shared, no matter what I tried, it was absolutely impossible to boot above 4145 MT/s (2072.5 MHz on the IMC).

*BIOS* *0707 (10 Nov)*: 41*95* MT/s, IMC 20*97*.5 MHz
*BIOS* *0003 (22 Nov)*: 41*45* MT/s, IMC 20*72*.5 MHz
on this SP70 rated 12700K, so going to stick with this (0707) BIOS to compare the IMC.

Never shared proof of my previous highest frequency, but now I beat both 4191 and 4195 from 4187, and took this screenshot, in case there's any doubters out there that are struggling on their boards, this *Z690-A Strix* is handling these dual rank sticks like a champ, didn't have to change any voltages or such from last time (SA 1.33V~), the CPU is just running about 10°C lower because it's really cold outside (not turned on any winter heating yet), only explanation as to why I could do slightly better right now (CPU idle temp 25°C down from 32-35°C). ***MC Volt. 1.492 V is DRAM in the screenshot, can be confusing.


----------



## Cam1

Unstable with 1.35 VA but Stable with 1.40V !

I put 1.40V for VDDQ because i read this "Transmitter VDDQ (max to any high limit VDD, VDDQ) " but i have no idea what this improves ?

Reducing the DRAM Voltage to 1.4V ( Bios Auto set 1.5V )

My first step for optimizations


----------



## zhrooms

Cam1 said:


> I put 1.40V for VDDQ because i read this "Transmitter VDDQ (max to any high limit VDD, VDDQ) " but i have no idea what this improves ?


I have tested the *IVR Transmitter VDDQ Voltage* option and it does absolutely nothing _for me_, I can run 4195 MT/s with it on 1.200 (Auto), so I'm guessing it's only useful for like higher frequencies on Gear 2 or something, maybe it'd have some uses on LN2 as well.


----------



## Cam1

ptuga said:


> z690 TUF owners, do you have bad coil whine ?


I do have just a 1 second little noise while running aida64 memory/cache benchmark, is that bad ?


----------



## JoeRambo

Cuthalu said:


> Took another shot at 3700/3733/3800/3866 with Z690-A Pro. Nothing. Nada. Tried 1.45 SA, lower VDDQ, increased MC PLL, even slower memory timings, auto timings with manual primaries, lower ring, more CPU voltage, all auto voltages except RAM, nothing works. Not even a hint of booting up. It's incomprehensible how well 3600 works compared to... this with 3700+.


Same here with 2x16GB DR on Z690 Edge. Tried quite a few things, but can't go any setting above 3600 no matter what. While 3600 can go with whatever timings, 3700/3733 are no go even with ballistic voltages.
Except a single time it booted 4000, that leads me to believe it is latest BIOS issue.


----------



## isipisi

JoeRambo said:


> Same here with 2x16GB DR on Z690 Edge. Tried quite a few things, but can't go any setting above 3600 no matter what. While 3600 can go with whatever timings, 3700/3733 are no go even with ballistic voltages.
> Except a single time it booted 4000, that leads me to believe it is latest BIOS issue.


Had the same problem with my edge, it wa snot going over 3466/3600.
My asus board is doing 4000/4133.

Just replaced it with the asus strix.


----------



## OffBeatViBE

Does any of you guys get weird coil whine when running Aida64 memory benchmark ?


----------



## kmellz

Yeah, you can remove that by changing some settings in the acoustics section, there's a post in a thread here somewhere with the settings.Not sure if that changes performance/stability in any way, I don't really care tbh since I've only heard it in aida so far.

Newest bios:








Not sure if stable yet, but more stable than last time I tried booting this high!
VDIMM 1.525
SA 1.431
VDDQ 1.45


----------



## OffBeatViBE

kmellz said:


> Yeah, you can remove that by changing some settings in the acoustics section, there's a post in a thread here somewhere with the settings.Not sure if that changes performance/stability in any way, I don't really care tbh since I've only heard it in aida so far.
> 
> Newest bios:
> View attachment 2534632
> 
> Not sure if stable yet, but more stable than last time I tried booting this high!
> VDIMM 1.525
> SA 1.431
> VDDQ 1.45


That's good to know that it's not only me


----------



## OffBeatViBE

What I got so far for 24/7 
[email protected]/E3.9/Ring 4.2/[email protected] gear 1(1:1)
1.370v(underload 1.350), 1.300 SA Voltage, 1.420 Dram voltage
My RAM's XMP is 4000 19-21-21 and I could probably push it further than what I got, but not sure how far I can push SA and vddq with my motherboard (Z690-P D4) and also bios seems a bit buggy


----------



## gtz

OffBeatViBE said:


> Does any of you guys get weird coil whine when running Aida64 memory benchmark ?


It's your VRM, similar to GPUs. Some boards are worse than others. You can have one board that has it and another identical one that does not.


----------



## OffBeatViBE

gtz said:


> It's your VRM, similar to GPUs. Some boards are worse than others. You can have one board that has it and another identical one that does not.


I figured it's the VRMs, just wanted to see if it's happening to others


----------



## acoustic

Exilon said:


> It turned out to be my ring clock of 4.3 at 1.35v. Handbrake x265 would rapidly cycle the load on the E-cores and the L2 couldn't keep up.
> View attachment 2534549


I ran Realbench 8hrs last night and it passed no problem. Launched Halo Infinite, and it CTD'd at 4000 GR1 lol. Went back to 3733 and no crash. Halo Infinite is god-tier stability test for the IMC I guess.. LOL


----------



## GtiJason

bscool said:


> @Cam1 I need to set VCCSA, VDDQ manually to get higher frequencys to even boot. 1.45 to 1.5. Not happening unless I do that. Unless you have a golden IMC.
> 
> You are only at 1.35 VDDQ in your screenshot. If you want to stay at lower voltages you will probably need to go down to 3600-3733.


Yes sir same here, need both high to boot. I have been able to lower them once in OS tho so that's hopefull


----------



## Revv23

Carillo said:


> Been using MSI Edge and Strix while waiting for DDR5 sticks


I think I'm going to pull the trigger on the MSI. I'm done waiting for ASRock to fix their board. Strix looks good now but after seeing ppl spending so much time to get them up and going, and after spending so much time trying to get my ASRock up and going, I think I'm just going to go with the boards that look to work best out of box.


----------



## Revv23

Exilon said:


> It turned out to be my ring clock of 4.3 at 1.35v. Handbrake x265 would rapidly cycle the load on the E-cores and the L2 couldn't keep up.
> View attachment 2534549


Process lasso limit Halo to P core? 

Glad you figured it out.


----------



## zhrooms

kmellz said:


> Newest bios: Gear 1 4266 18-20-20-37 1T
> Not sure if stable yet, but more stable than last time I tried booting this high!
> VDIMM 1.525, SA 1.431, VDDQ 1.45


4x8GB? I'm having big issues on the 0803 released yesterday, with 2x16GB Dual Rank, it refuses to even boot 4133, when 4195 works on the 0707 BIOS and 4145 works on the 0003 BIOS, every setting is copied 1:1 between them, and you managed to get 4266 into Windows, like.. how? Same Board, BIOS and CPU, makes no sense.
Managed to boot 4080 through BCLK and 4100 through 100:100, doesn't matter what SA voltage I give it either just like on 0707, 1.3 up to 1.45V, 4133 MT/s is just not possible on 0803 for me.
As a comparison, zero issues on 0707, they do 4195 MT/s at 1.31V~ SA and Auto VDDQ (1.2V). So, after trying everything like I did on 0003, back to 0707 I go 🙏 .


----------



## jayfkay

gerardfraser said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Here are my setting on MSI PRO z690-A DDR4 on BIOS (E7D25IMS.100) on BIOS (E7D25IMS.114) same settings did not work
> 
> Just Primary timings not sub timings
> Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz
> SA voltage needed to be greater than 1.45v
> DRAM Voltage 1.6v
> 
> 
> 
> https://postimg.cc/RJNw6qMS


thats insane, do you use a chiller or a fan? daily stable?
I'm wondering if something a little more conservative like 4000 16/17 is possible on that board without requiring ln2


----------



## jomama22

zhrooms said:


> 4x8GB? I'm having big issues on the 0803 released yesterday, with 2x16GB Dual Rank, it refuses to even boot 4133, when 4195 works on the 0707 BIOS and 4145 works on the 0003 BIOS, every setting is copied 1:1 between them, and you managed to get 4266 into Windows, like.. how? Same Board, BIOS and CPU, makes no sense.
> Managed to boot 4080 through BCLK and 4100 through 100:100, doesn't matter what SA voltage I give it either just like on 0707, 1.3 up to 1.45V, 4133 MT/s is just not possible on 0803 for me.
> As a comparison, zero issues on 0707, they do 4195 MT/s at 1.31V~ SA and Auto VDDQ (1.2V). So, after trying everything like I did on 0003, back to 0707 I go 🙏 .


He's in gear 2....

Also, auto vddq tx is 1.35v (1.32get) on the strix.

Here is gear 1 4266 on 0707:


----------



## geriatricpollywog

jomama22 said:


> He's in gear 2....
> 
> Also, auto vddq tx is 1.35v (1.32get) on the strix.
> 
> Here is gear 1 4266 on 0707:
> View attachment 2534648


Can you please share your bios settings file? I want to see if I can boot this.


----------



## D-EJ915

OffBeatViBE said:


> I figured it's the VRMs, just wanted to see if it's happening to others


usually cache benchmarks cause it on pretty much every platform lol, if you just do memory probably don't get it usually or my fans are too loud.


----------



## bscool

CapFrameX - Alder Lake with fast DDR5 against Ryzen 5000 - Blog


An overclocking duel Alder Lake vs Ryzen 5000. Fast DDR5 makes Alder Lake unbeatable!




www.capframex.com





Looks like updated mem clocks and tighter timings for both ddr4 and ddr5 on z690 for a comparison


----------



## RetroWave78

acoustic said:


> I ran Realbench 8hrs last night and it passed no problem. Launched Halo Infinite, and it CTD'd at 4000 GR1 lol. Went back to 3733 and no crash. Halo Infinite is god-tier stability test for the IMC I guess.. LOL


I asked you this earlier but my post was "awaiting moderator approval" for a few days and I'm not sure if you received it: 

Accounting for ambient? Are your rads set up as positive pressure? I run my rads negative pressure pushing heat out of the case (Thermaltake View 71) with rear 140mm fan as intake bringing cool air directly across chipset and memory and up and out the top rad. I've tried running rads as intake and it increase the temps of all my peripherals by quite a bit, Sabrent Rocket 4TB went from 35C peak to 55C, memory went up 10C.

What may boot and be MemtTest86 stable with no 400w GPU dumping it's heat into the case may not be stable with said GPU dumping it's heat into the case and an increase in ambient and also increasing the water temp that is shared with the CPU (assuming single loop) which will affect IMC stability. 

One of the variables here has to be how hot the dimms and IMC are.


----------



## RetroWave78

(Also posted at Z690 Strix / Maximus thread, posting here for additional visibility as this pertains to DDR4)

Hi everyone, I'm looking for feedback with my upgrade.

My memory and loop parts are scheduled to arrive Monday the 29th and I want to start tomorrow as it's a lot of work. I have to pull both rads and clean them with Mayhems Part 1 due to EKWB Mystic Fog fallout, I also need to disassemble and clean the 3090 FE EKWB as Mystic Crap has aggregated and solidified in the channels there. I am thinking of flashing 0803 to the new motherboard, Asus Strix-A D4, and am considering using the Flashback method, although I've never used this method, it seems like a good idea as 0803 seems to bring some stability over whatever BIOS the mobo shipped with (assuming 0606) for DR memory. I am upgrading from 8700k, looking forward to the elimination of my CPU bottlenecks in Assetto Corsa Competizione (VR, Pimax 8KX), Watch Dogs Legion and Red Dead Redemption 2 (visit Strawberry) to name a few.

Asus BIOS Flashback without proc, memory: Guide: Asus Bios Flashback. No Processor. No RAM. No Problem. - YouTube

Because I'm lazy and deplore having to reinstall Windows (I'm someone who makes a system image religiously every month) I am going to try keeping the current installation of Windows 10 with this method:






I am using this memory, on the QVL: F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)

Trident Z Royal
DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
32GB (4x8GB) 

Processor: 12900k

I also have Safedisk's OC profile "DR_BDIE_4133.CMO" that I will try fairly early on.

I intend to initially boot with 2 dimms in Slots A2 and B2, per the guidance in the manual and if it fails to boot I will try lowering the freq to 3600 MHz and working up from there. I'm looking for general voltage and overclocking advice to try to get this to boot at 4GHz with XMP timings. This is fairly good B-Die from Sept 2020. I will add the other two dimms when I get 2 stable to rule out DR.

I'm coming from a Gigabyte motherboard, the last Asus board I had was Asus RIVBE x79 4930k from 2014, so I'm a bit rusty with Asus settings, I understand that SA (System Agent) is Asus equivalent of VCCIO and VCCSA on Gigabyte?

I also intend to use Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut between the CPU IHS and EKWB (Supremacy 2.0, Acrylic).

I'm looking for feedback and guidance here, if anyone has any issue with anything here please fire away. I start tearing down tomorrow, early afternoon.

Just to confirm, is it true that to update the BIOS that no other files can be on the flash-drive? I have ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0003.CAP renamed SZ690AD4.CAP on a flash drive shared with Windows Repair Media (should I need to clean install Windows if the upgrade in place method fails). With Gigabyte, I've updated the BIOS through BIOS interface with other media on the drive, I can remove the other media on this drive to be safe as I have Windows Installation Media on two drives, I just wanted clarification on this.

I have two separate System Images and a fully cloned boot drive to fall back on should something refuse to work and I need to throw my old motherboard back in.

Just trying to cover all my bases here, a huge thanks in advance for any help and guidance with my preparation.


----------



## slash621

New here to the z690…. i have a strix z690-a and despite my ram being on the QVL for 4 sticks.. I can’t run XMP…. What should I check first? ive got a 12900k. The ram is Corsair CMT64GX4M4K3600C16 it’s a 4x16 kit and default timings are 16-18-18-36 at 1.35v . However at 1.4 set for vdimm I can’t post. All the rest of my settings are auto or AIOC at the moment. What should I be trying?


----------



## bscool

@slash621 What bios are you on? If not the latest I would try that 707 or the latest beta 803.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Stable


----------



## zhrooms

jomama22 said:


> He's in gear 2....
> Also, auto vddq tx is 1.35v (1.32get) on the strix.
> I'm doing gear 1 4266 on 0707


No he's not.. he's in Gear 1. Just look at his latency being close to 50ns at loose timings, in Gear 2 you have ~65 with those timings.

And my VDDQ is certainly not 1.35, I tripled checked and it reads 1.200~ when I leave it on Auto, maybe it's different on some BIOSes.

As for the 4266 screenshot, all you did was what? Set 100:133, 4266 and it just boots like it's nothing? That's crazy to me, when I can't go above 4195, it looks like it's a motherboard issue and not IMC since I can't go above 4100 on 0803, 4145 on 0003 and 4195 on 0707, like, clearly that's a motherboard issue and has nothing to do with my CPUs IMC. If it was IMC, I should be able to influence the max frequency by adjusting the SA voltage (or VDDQ), but I can't, not even a little, for example I can boot 4195 at 1.31~ SA and increasing it up to 1.5V doesn't help at all, to boot 4199, the voltage has zero effect above 1.3 is what it looks like, either I'm missing something or it's just as I suspect, a board/BIOS issue.

At the same time, we can match the Board, BIOS, CPU and the results will vary wildly, they _should_ be similar, almost as if the actual board is different physically (binned board 🤡).

But we'll see, I got my new 12900K I'm going to try now, see if it's actually the CPU quality that prevents me from booting higher than 4195 on 0707.
If it's not that, I also have a brand new TUF board I'm replacing the Strix with, got it on black week sale for $240 pre-tax, so just $20 above MSI Z690-A Pro, will try every BIOS available on it to see which performs the best, start with the oldest and work my way up.


----------



## Exilon

zhrooms said:


> almost as if the actual board is different physically (binned board 🤡).


It's how shiny the pins and contacts are


----------



## jomama22

zhrooms said:


> No he's not.. he's in Gear 1. Just look at his latency being close to 50ns at loose timings, in Gear 2 you have ~65 with those timings.
> 
> And my VDDQ is certainly not 1.35, I tripled checked and it reads 1.200~ when I leave it on Auto, maybe it's different on some BIOSes.
> 
> As for the 4266 screenshot, all you did was what? Set 100:133, 4266 and it just boots like it's nothing? That's crazy to me, when I can't go above 4195, it looks like it's a motherboard issue and not IMC since I can't go above 4100 on 0803, 4145 on 0003 and 4195 on 0707, like, clearly that's a motherboard issue and has nothing to do with my CPUs IMC. If it was IMC, I should be able to influence the max frequency by adjusting the SA voltage (or VDDQ), but I can't, not even a little, for example I can boot 4195 at 1.31~ SA and increasing it up to 1.5V doesn't help at all, to boot 4199, the voltage has zero effect above 1.3 is what it looks like, either I'm missing something or it's just as I suspect, a board/BIOS issue.
> 
> At the same time, we can match the Board, BIOS, CPU and the results will vary wildly, they _should_ be similar, almost as if the actual board is different physically (binned board 🤡).
> 
> But we'll see, I got my new 12900K I'm going to try now, see if it's actually the CPU quality that prevents me from booting higher than 4195 on 0707.
> If it's not that, I also have a brand new TUF board I'm replacing the Strix with, got it on black week sale for $240 pre-tax, so just $20 above MSI Z690-A Pro, will try every BIOS available on it to see which performs the best, start with the oldest and work my way up.


You are probably correct that it is gear 1. I did not notice the timings listed, quite crazy that there could be a 10ns difference just from that alone.

As for vddq tx, on 0707, any memory 4000+ auto sets vddq tx to 1.35v as it does with vccsa, both their get voltages being 1.32v or there abouts according to hwinfo.

And it is absolutely an imc limit. I have tested multiple 12900k' in the motherboard and some can, and some can't, hit 4266 DR. This specific chip will happily do it at 1.35v vccsa. It's just luck of the draw like anything else. Just because you throw more voltage at something doesn't mean it will work. This is not a binned MB.

I just used my stable 4000cl14 timings and pushed it up there, added a bit more vdimm and vccsa, abd that was that, nothing special at all.


----------



## Xacius

gerardfraser said:


> MSI Pro Z690-A DDR4 Dual Rank 4000Mhz Gear 1 with just primary timings changed.
> 
> Need 1.45 SA to Boot and 1.46 stable in Cinebench/PC gaming
> 
> 12900K CPU 1.2v


I've got the same board. I see your bus speed is also 99.8MHz. Any idea how to normalize this to 100? I can't find a spread spectrum setting in the bios.


----------



## zhrooms

jomama22 said:


> Vddq tx, on 0707, any memory 4000+ auto sets vddq tx to 1.35v as it does with vccsa, both their get voltages being 1.32v or there abouts according to hwinfo.


Not sure if I'll flash BIOS again on the Strix but if I do I can test auto voltages, at like 3600, 3866, 4000, 4133 with both on Auto/or SA manual and see what happens, and I can definitely do it on the TUF board since I'm going through all the BIOSes there anyway.


jomama22 said:


> I have tested multiple 12900k' in the motherboard and some can, and some can't, hit 4266 DR.
> This specific chip will happily do it at 1.35v vccsa. Just because you throw more voltage at something doesn't mean it will work..


I agree, but you have to understand why I find it strange, I'm talking about *0.1 BCLK* adjustments (*2 MHz* IMC/DRAM), and SA nor VDDQ has any effect, like literally 2 MHz at *1.3 SA vs 1.5 SA*, it does *nothing*, you would expect *something* to be different no? Also the BIOS difference is perplexing, maybe me being stuck at 4145 on 0003 also changes with a different CPU, I guess I'll have to try it.


Xacius said:


> I've got the same board. I see your bus speed is also 99.8MHz. Any idea how to normalize this to 100? I can't find a spread spectrum setting in the bios.


Just set BCLK from 100.0000 to 100.2000 in BIOS, to compensate for that 0.2 loss, works great.


----------



## jomama22

zhrooms said:


> Not sure if I'll flash BIOS again on the Strix but if I do I can test auto voltages, at like 3600, 3866, 4000, 4133 with both on Auto/or SA manual and see what happens, and I can definitely do it on the TUF board since I'm going through all the BIOSes there anyway.
> 
> I agree, but you have to understand why I find it strange, I'm talking about *0.1 BCLK* adjustments (*2 MHz* IMC/DRAM), and SA nor VDDQ has any effect, like literally 2 MHz at *1.3 SA vs 1.5 SA*, it does *nothing*, you would expect *something* to be different no? Also the BIOS difference is perplexing, maybe me being stuck at 4145 on 0003 also changes with a different CPU, I guess I'll have to try it.
> 
> Just set BCLK from 100.0000 to 100.2000 in BIOS, to compensate for that 0.2 loss, works great.


I mean, yeah, there are diminishing returns if your chip isn't up for it. More voltage = more noise = higher chance of electron excursion. It's just a lottery. We have seen in this thread a multitude of limits hit from the same motherboard.


----------



## kingofblog

It's worth mentioning that IC performance is the sum of transistor/gate delay and wire delay. Adding voltage only makes transistors run faster. It has no effect on wire speed and potentially adds delay by heating wires (conductivity decreases with temperature).

Is the dependency on BIOS version real? Have you done a before/after test?


----------



## slash621

bscool said:


> @slash621 What bios are you on? If not the latest I would try that 707 or the latest beta 803.


I’m on 404 now, I’ll try 707.


----------



## Impalor

Vidas said:


> Wait, yours is running 3466cl14 with two dual rank sticks of b-die? In gear 1 command rate 1? Which gigabyte board is this? Which bios? did you turn on xmp and then lower the timings?
> Don't bother following the steps, your ram is working. It is not the same bug and problem I'm experiencing.
> My board with two dual rank sticks of b-die cannot run anything, at all. It is completely incapable of training memory and so can only do the default jedec setting of 2133 cl 15 command rate 2. The only way around this bug are the steps I outlined. That's what's required to get to the base line after which I was able to get 3333mhz. I've tried on two different kits of ram. You will not gain anything from this because your board is capable of training. It sounds like your imc is marginally superior to my sample as yours can do 3466.
> I was about to try and make a video to show how to fix this but now nothing makes any sense. This problem should be present on all aorus elite ax ddr4 boards and I thought all gigabyte ddr4 boards.
> Sorry about the late response, turned on push notifications but wasn't notified of your response. I'll try to monitor the thread closer because I'm very interested in what the hell is going on here.


Hi, sorry for late reply. XMP did not work, but yes, I got to 3700-14-1t-1g, then changed board to Tuf. Xmp worked there flawlessly, but in 1g I could not get as high. Do you think I should also try MSI Edge or just go back to Aorus?


----------



## dragn09

anyone got a good profile for 4x8GB Micron E-die? im on the strix-a


----------



## 125int

I have gigabyte z690 ud ddr4, 3600 cl16 16gb x2 (KF436C16RB1/16)
XMP1 3600 did not work on the first ram slot(closest to the cpu)


----------



## GtiJason

125int said:


> I have gigabyte z690 ud ddr4, 3600 cl16 16gb x2 (KF436C16RB1/16)
> XMP1 3600 did not work on the first ram slot(closest to the cpu)


You need to use the 2nd and 4th from the cpu


----------



## acoustic

RetroWave78 said:


> I asked you this earlier but my post was "awaiting moderator approval" for a few days and I'm not sure if you received it:
> 
> Accounting for ambient? Are your rads set up as positive pressure? I run my rads negative pressure pushing heat out of the case (Thermaltake View 71) with rear 140mm fan as intake bringing cool air directly across chipset and memory and up and out the top rad. I've tried running rads as intake and it increase the temps of all my peripherals by quite a bit, Sabrent Rocket 4TB went from 35C peak to 55C, memory went up 10C.
> 
> What may boot and be MemtTest86 stable with no 400w GPU dumping it's heat into the case may not be stable with said GPU dumping it's heat into the case and an increase in ambient and also increasing the water temp that is shared with the CPU (assuming single loop) which will affect IMC stability.
> 
> One of the variables here has to be how hot the dimms and IMC are.


The DIMMs get hotter during TM5 than they do playing Halo Infinite. Realbench also is fairly realistic in that it puts a 380watt load on my GPU as well as ~200watt on the CPU.

The only variable is setting the mem frequency to 3733 vs 4000, even at the exact same voltages. It's 100% the IMC - can't really explain why since it'll pass all stress-tests, but it has to be. I even upped vCore to 1.4v manual LLC5 and it crashes the same way. I can make the crash go from CTD to hard-lock by increasing the SA voltage, but as well all know too much SA causes instability as well.

The game is crashing before my loop even hits 33c waterT. DIMMs aren't even hitting 40c and they run 44c the entire time through TM5 without a hiccup. Also, this is with 4000GR1 with tREFI at stock (low as hell), all secondary/tertiary on auto and loose. It's definitely not the DIMMs or the temps. I've actually got fairly good sticks that are cruising 3733 14-14-14-28-270-65500 @ 1.5v vDIMM super stable. I posted at 13-13-13 but I leave for a few months and will not be able to test any longer.


----------



## ogider

acoustic said:


> The DIMMs get hotter during TM5 than they do playing Halo Infinite. Realbench also is fairly realistic in that it puts a 380watt load on my GPU as well as ~200watt on the CPU.


For me tm5 pass tests but for example:
occt ver 10 memory test: errors after 10 sec
y-cruncher test (avx one and can spike quite high watts. For short time but i prefer mention about it))
options for my runing test is 0 after 1 after 7 (7 bc I have 32GB)
And usually error after few sec as well. Worth to run 3 times.

I had to make adjustments to get proper results.


----------



## Cuthalu

acoustic said:


> The DIMMs get hotter during TM5 than they do playing Halo Infinite. Realbench also is fairly realistic in that it puts a 380watt load on my GPU as well as ~200watt on the CPU.
> 
> The only variable is setting the mem frequency to 3733 vs 4000, even at the exact same voltages. It's 100% the IMC - can't really explain why since it'll pass all stress-tests, but it has to be. I even upped vCore to 1.4v manual LLC5 and it crashes the same way. I can make the crash go from CTD to hard-lock by increasing the SA voltage, but as well all know too much SA causes instability as well.
> 
> The game is crashing before my loop even hits 33c waterT. DIMMs aren't even hitting 40c and they run 44c the entire time through TM5 without a hiccup. Also, this is with 4000GR1 with tREFI at stock (low as hell), all secondary/tertiary on auto and loose. It's definitely not the DIMMs or the temps. I've actually got fairly good sticks that are cruising 3733 14-14-14-28-270-65500 @ 1.5v vDIMM super stable. I posted at 13-13-13 but I leave for a few months and will not be able to test any longer.


Are you 100 % sure your GPU is stable? Better processor+ram combination causes increased strain for the GPU, which could make previously stable GPU setup unstable.


----------



## acoustic

Cuthalu said:


> Are you 100 % sure your GPU is stable? Better processor+ram combination causes increased strain for the GPU, which could make previously stable GPU setup unstable.


GPU is set to stock for troubleshooting. This is not my first rodeo guys lol


----------



## bscool

Anyone on Strix d4 if you skipped bios 707 I would try it if you are having issues. I jump right to 003 and 803 and max I could run was 4133. After seeing @raad11 Post about 707 being better I tried it and so far much better.

Need to disable mrc fast boot if changing VSSA and VDDQ @4266c16 DR b die(just a short run of memtest it runs fine @4266c16 DR [email protected] [email protected]) or it wont boot. Boots if VSSA and VDDQ left on auto/1.35v but errors in Memtest.

Also notice a bug with bios 003 were it would crash under light load if I didnt set a static v core voltage when using AI OC.

Edit after a little more messing around I can boot higher clocks and tighter timings on 707 but can only stabilize 4133c15-15-15 so far. Same as 003 and 803. So kind of a wash.


----------



## Mr69

Hello guys been following this, but im still not sure on what memory to buy. I ordered a 12700k+ MSI pro Z690-A.
I dont want to spend much, but at least a ram kit that can take me to 4000mhz gear 1 with 16 or 15 cas stable 24/7.

I want Dual rank so, first would it better for OC on alder lake 2x16 GB or 4x8 GB setup?
Considering these what not expansive option i have?

Example are Crucial Ballistix BL2K16G36C16U4B 3600 MHz 16-18-18-38 - 1.35V on 4x8 able to reach that?
or i need something like Patriot Viper Steel - 4400MHz 19-19-19-39 2x16 or 4x8?

What about this one SK Hynix (dont know if its single or dual rank)
G.Skill Ripjaws F4-4000C18D-32GVK - 4000MHz 18-22-22-42 (2x16gb)


----------



## bscool

@Mr69 I havent seen anyone post high clocks on 4x8(as in 4000 gear 1 range). You want 2x16 and for b die 3200c14 is probabaly best bang for the $$. 4000c16-16-16 Gskill is good too. They are all pretty close and comes down to lotto/luck

If you want something cheaper than b die I dont know, others will know better.


----------



## kingofblog

Mr69 said:


> Hello guys been following this, but im still not sure on what memory to buy. I ordered a 12700k+ MSI pro Z690-A.
> I dont want to spend much, but at least a ram kit that can take me to 4000mhz gear 1 with 16 or 15 cas stable 24/7.
> 
> I want Dual rank so, first would it better for OC on alder lake 2x16 GB or 4x8 GB setup?
> Considering these what not expansive option i have?
> 
> Example are Crucial Ballistix BL2K16G36C16U4B 3600 MHz 16-18-18-38 - 1.35V on 4x8 able to reach that?
> or i need something like Patriot Viper Steel - 4400MHz 19-19-19-39 2x16 or 4x8?
> 
> What about this one SK Hynix (dont know if its single or dual rank)
> G.Skill Ripjaws F4-4000C18D-32GVK - 4000MHz 18-22-22-42 (2x16gb)


2x16 GB only. Samsung B-die. G.Skill has an exact match for what you are asking, which will take the lottery aspect away from your RAM: Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 CL16-16-16-36 1.4V. Nobody can help you with the IMC lottery; that is purely luck.

G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA - Newegg.com


----------



## tzawad

Hi everyone, I just jumped to the z690 platform from AMD (i7 12700K + ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4)
I have DDR4 memory from the previous rig:
Patriot Viper PVS416G440C9 2x8 GB 4400
I can also buy at a reasonable price:
G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 CL14 DC - 32GB; F4-3600C14D-32GTZN
Or
G.Skill TridentZ Neo DDR4-3600 C16 DC - 32GB; F4-3600C16D-32GTZN
Settings for normal daily use. I have average experience with memory overclocking …
Any suggestions for this config will be appreciated


----------



## bscool

@tzawad I would take the 3600c14, in the end they are probably very close and comes down to lotto/luck. The 3600c14 "should" be the better bin.


----------



## Siablo

An example of classic settings for every day


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Siablo said:


> An example of classic settings for every day
> View attachment 2534826


Did you run HCI Memtest and TM5? Aida benchmark is not an “example “ of daily stability.


----------



## Hiikeri

Aida64 L3 Cache 13.1ns + MaxxMem2 @ 61GB/s.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Hiikeri said:


> Aida64 L3 Cache 13.1ns + MaxxMem2 @ 61GB/s.
> View attachment 2534827


Is that with e-cores disabled?


----------



## zhrooms

Jesus Christ *✝*, this new 12900K I got is absolute trash, 69 SP.. my previous defective one was 87, like how is that even possible, **** Intel! Every 12900K I've seen has had 85 or above, this IMC is just *awful*, I'm nowhere close to 4266.. can't get into Windows above *4183 *(83 less than 4266), no matter what SA/VDDQ I feed it, just pure filth. Absolutely blows my mind how some of you guys can run 4266 and even get into Windows, on like random cheap 12700KFs. My SP70 rated 12700K can run just above 4133 stable and this SP69 rated 12900K can only run 4147 max by the looks of it, so basically this 12900K has the same IMC as my 12700K, both same SP rating, though I paid 50% more for this 12900K, thanks Intel, for shipping me a SP87 that was defective, then the new one I get is SP69, like how damn unlucky can you be..

It's interesting that this 12900K can boot 4240~ while my 12700K could only boot 4190~, but when both are tuned to be game stable, they run almost identical max frequency, and their SP rating is basically identical as well, so the fact that it could boot higher, meant absolutely nothing, it got me excited when I first booted 4240, but nope, false hope, didn't perform any better.

Tested it for hours now and 4145~ really is the *absolute max *frequency that is game stable for more than a few minutes. And as said, I can't even get into Windows above 4183.. it's just so bad, I feel ripped off having paid full price for this, like random 12600Ks surely beat this, or, everyone who boots 4266 to Windows got super golden samples (also, if they can get to 4266 that easily they can surely push BCLK to reach 4300 or even above..)

If you have a CPU that runs 4266.. _like it's 4133_, it has to be worth $999+ on the used market.. the smart thing would be to sell it and get a 12700KF, basically free 12th Gen 8C at that point.

The one solace I have, is that I've learned through this testing that SA/VDDQ has little to do with the IMC frequency (it's instead stability), so even if you get a golden sample CPU that can get to desktop at 4300, it *will* require an absolute ton of SA/VDDQ for it to do anything, far above what most people are willing to run daily, there's just no escape. That's the price you have to pay to run fast, so my guess is that a lot of people with these 4266-4300 samples won't be running that as a daily overclock, basically the efficiency is super poor, and everyone suffers from it.

This is my SA/VDDQ requirement, I just matched them 1:1 because why not;

*MT/s**BCLK**Desktop Stable**World of Warcraft Stable**Voltages*4147100.4YesNo, Crash 255 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.415V4147100.4YesNo, BSODSA/VDDQ 1.405V4147100.4YesNo, Crash 45 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.395V4147100.4YesNo, Crash 4 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.385V4147100.4YesNo, Crash 2 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.375V4147100.4YesNo, Crash 2 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.365V

Managed to get into Windows at 1.365 SA (1.35~ actual) but to find stability, had to raise it up to like 1.415-1.425 for complete stability, that's 60mV~, and this is only at 2075~ IMC. So there's no way anyone can run 4266 (2133 IMC), completely game stable, under 1.5V (if they can, that'd be a like diamond sample $1500+ CPU). I think I could probably get 4133 stable at close to 1.3V SA, that'll be my next thing I do, find out what the absolute minimum voltages are for 4133 to be 100% game stable, like 60 minutes in intense Warzone multiplayer, really let the board, processor and sticks heat up.

And, the reason I believe SA/VDDQ is more or less disconnected in a sense (that I mentioned earlier), from the IMC frequency, is because I could boot *4240* MT/s at just *1.33* SA (didn't try lowering it but it could surely do a little lower). Meaning, to just boot the system, I got away with 4240 (2120 IMC), but to actually get it into Windows, 4183, and to get it into the game even though it crashed after 2 seconds, 4147, and only then had to raise SA to 1.365 from the 1.345 I initially booted 4240 with, that's 93 MT/s less than I could actually boot.
Boot BIOS (1.3~ actual SA reading): 4240​Boot Windows (1.3~ actual SA reading): 4183​Game Stable (1.41~ actual SA reading): 4147 (93 less than BIOS, 36 less than Windows)​So let's say these peeps who are running Windows at 4266, that's very unlikely game stable, but they'd probably all do 4200 (100:100) just fine, which is still 50 more than what I can do.. 😡


102.6 = 4240 (BIOS, Stable)102.7 = 4245 (BIOS, Somewhat Stable)102.8 = 4249 (BIOS, Unstable)102.9 = 4253 (Refused)103.0 = 4257 (Untested)103.1 = 4261 (Untested)103.2 = 4265 (Untested)
Testing the max IMC frequency, where the limit was hit.

Screenshot of my record on this 🤡 processor below. But indeed proves that running close to 4266 in BIOS requires, basically nothing, 1.329V SA and VDDQ on Auto (1.35). Getting it windows and game stable is a whole other story and I'm going to be cautious towards people sharing 4266 screenshots moving forward, they better prove it's game stable, like showing OSD with the MT/s and IMC frequency in a CPU/RAM bottlenecked game, or.. be very clear that it's not stable.

One thing I feel confident in saying now, is that if this absolute excrement of a processor, can do 4133, then *any* processor should do it, I refuse to believe there are worse processors out there.


----------



## newls1

Looking for advice from you smart people! Just ordered my 12900K and a MSI Tomahawk Z690 DDR4 board. Gonna bring over my 2x16 CL14 G.skills but was hoping to run another 32gb's of this same ram for 64GB. My question here is my ram settings are setup [email protected] DDR4020 on the z590 as i took DAYS to dial my ram in, can I obviously use the same settings for just using the 2x16 32GB setup, but if i run 4x16gb can I still use the same settings and run same speed of 4020MHz with all 4 sticks. MSI states for a 2R x 2DPC 4133+ so im hoping I have a chance of keeping the same speeds?! Whatcha all think?


----------



## jomama22

zhrooms said:


> Jesus Christ *✝*, this new 12900K I got is absolute trash, 69 SP.. my previous defective one was 87, like how is that even possible, **** Intel! Every 12900K I've seen has had 85 or above, this IMC is just *awful*, I'm nowhere close to 4266.. can't get into Windows above *4183 *(83 less than 4266), no matter what SA/VDDQ I feed it, just pure filth. Absolutely blows my mind how some of you guys can run 4266 and even get into Windows, on like random cheap 12700KFs. My SP70 rated 12700K can run just above 4133 stable and this SP69 rated 12900K can only run 4147 max by the looks of it, so basically this 12900K has the same IMC as my 12700K, both same SP rating, though I paid 50% more for this 12900K, thanks Intel, for shipping me a SP87 that was defective, then the new one I get is SP69, like how damn unlucky can you be..
> 
> It's interesting that this 12900K can boot 4240~ while my 12700K could only boot 4190~, but when both are tuned to be game stable, they run almost identical max frequency, and their SP rating is basically identical as well, so the fact that it could boot higher, meant absolutely nothing, it got me excited when I first booted 4240, but nope, false hope, didn't perform any better.
> 
> Tested it for hours now and 4145~ really is the *absolute max *frequency that is game stable for more than a few minutes. And as said, I can't even get into Windows above 4183.. it's just so bad, I feel ripped off having paid full price for this, like random 12600Ks surely beat this, or, everyone who boots 4266 to Windows got super golden samples (also, if they can get to 4266 that easily they can surely push BCLK to reach 4300 or even above..)
> 
> If you have a CPU that runs 4266.. _like it's 4133_, it has to be worth $999+ on the used market.. the smart thing would be to sell it and get a 12700KF, basically free 12th Gen 8C at that point.
> 
> The one solace I have, is that I've learned through this testing that SA/VDDQ has little to do with the IMC frequency (it's instead stability), so even if you get a golden sample CPU that can get to desktop at 4300, it *will* require an absolute ton of SA/VDDQ for it to do anything, far above what most people are willing to run daily, there's just no escape. That's the price you have to pay to run fast, so my guess is that a lot of people with these 4266-4300 samples won't be running that as a daily overclock, basically the efficiency is super poor, and everyone suffers from it.
> 
> This is my SA/VDDQ requirement, I just matched them 1:1 because why not;
> 
> *MT/s**BCLK**Desktop Stable**World of Warcraft Stable**Voltages*4147100.4YesNo, Crash 255 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.415V4147100.4YesNo, BSODSA/VDDQ 1.405V4147100.4YesNo, Crash 45 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.395V4147100.4YesNo, Crash 4 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.385V4147100.4YesNo, Crash 2 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.375V4147100.4YesNo, Crash 2 SecondsSA/VDDQ 1.365V
> 
> Managed to get into Windows at 1.365 SA (1.35~ actual) but to find stability, had to raise it up to like 1.415-1.425 for complete stability, that's 60mV~, and this is only at 2075~ IMC. So there's no way anyone can run 4266 (2133 IMC), completely game stable, under 1.5V (if they can, that'd be a like diamond sample $1500+ CPU). I think I could probably get 4133 stable at close to 1.3V SA, that'll be my next thing I do, find out what the absolute minimum voltages are for 4133 to be 100% game stable, like 60 minutes in intense Warzone multiplayer, really let the board, processor and sticks heat up.
> 
> And, the reason I believe SA/VDDQ is more or less disconnected in a sense (that I mentioned earlier), from the IMC frequency, is because I could boot *4240* MT/s at just *1.33* SA (didn't try lowering it but it could surely do a little lower). Meaning, to just boot the system, I got away with 4240 (2120 IMC), but to actually get it into Windows, 4183, and to get it into the game even though it crashed after 2 seconds, 4147, and only then had to raise SA to 1.365 from the 1.345 I initially booted 4240 with, that's 93 MT/s less than I could actually boot.
> Boot BIOS (1.3~ actual SA reading): 4240​Boot Windows (1.3~ actual SA reading): 4183​Game Stable (1.41~ actual SA reading): 4147 (93 less than BIOS, 36 less than Windows)​So let's say these peeps who are running Windows at 4266, that's very unlikely game stable, but they'd probably all do 4200 (100:100) just fine, which is still 50 more than what I can do.. 😡
> 
> 
> 102.6 = 4240 (BIOS, Stable)102.7 = 4245 (BIOS, Somewhat Stable)102.8 = 4249 (BIOS, Unstable)102.9 = 4253 (Refused)103.0 = 4257 (Untested)103.1 = 4261 (Untested)103.2 = 4265 (Untested)
> Testing the max IMC frequency, where the limit was hit.
> 
> Screenshot of my record on this 🤡 processor below. But indeed proves that running close to 4266 in BIOS requires, basically nothing, 1.329V SA and VDDQ on Auto (1.35). Getting it windows and game stable is a whole other story and I'm going to be cautious towards people sharing 4266 screenshots moving forward, they better prove it's game stable, like showing OSD with the MT/s and IMC frequency in a CPU/RAM bottlenecked game, or.. be very clear that it's not stable.
> 
> One thing I feel confident in saying now, is that if this absolute excrement of a processor, can do 4133, then *any* processor should do it, I refuse to believe there are worse processors out there.
> 
> View attachment 2534825


It's lottery man, don't get so worked up about it, it literally means next to nothing at the end of the day. 4000cl15 -4200-c16 are going to perform identically at the end of the day, and at least in no actual perceivable way beyond some canned benchmarks.
I clearly stated that the 4266 C14 boot was not even tested for stability. Full stable is 4133 14-15-14-26 or 4200 15-15-15-28 for me. My ddr5 kit is arriving today so I'll be moving onto that anyway and doing comparisons for myself.

And no offense, but you get all up in arms about people being stable when the only literal "stability" you even show or talk about is "game stable". Like *** is that even?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

jomama22 said:


> And no offense, but you get all up in arms about people being stable when the only literal "stability" you even show or talk about is "game stable". Like *** is that even?


HCI memtest is what the industry uses. But if you're happy with your game stability, that's all that matters. Frankly, I don't understand why people don't share their bios settings when asked. Like is it a big secret?


----------



## jomama22

0451 said:


> HCI memtest is what the industry uses. But if you're happy with your game stability, that's all that matters. Frankly, I don't understand why people don't share their bios settings when asked. Like is it a big secret?


They can be as stable as they want to be. That doesn't bother me. Stability tests are for your own comfort and having some easily sharable way of claiming of such. Just saying "I'm stable in battle field and wow" doesn't really define anything behind someone not crashing while playing those specific games.


----------



## bscool

Getting a bad IMC will make a believer that not all IMC are not the same 😁


----------



## Mr69

@bscool @kingofblog sorry to bother, what you would choose between these 2 B-die to reach that(i know luck involved with IMC), option are limited cuz of country and prices
Ripjaws V DDR4-4000MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.40V 32GB (2x16GB) (no tweaks needed?) 
or
Flare X DDR4-3200MHz CL14-14-14-34 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB)


----------



## bscool

@Mr69 Personally I would go for 4000c16 kit of those 2.


----------



## slash621

So I’m on 707 now and while I can boot at xmp with my kit that is in the QVL, it can’t even pass memtest. The QVL says 4 sticks totaling 64 gb with this SKU. What gives? At least I’m not hanging at the DRAM light. I failed memtest with the SA at auto and it tried around 1.33v. What should I be trying now?
Also, in the asus bios what do they call VDDQ? Does VDDQ just matter for post or does it also have stability in the OS impacts?


----------



## zhrooms

jomama22 said:


> It's lottery man, don't get so worked up about it, it literally means next to nothing at the end of the day. 4000cl15 -4200-c16 are going to perform identically at the end of the day, and at least in no actual perceivable way beyond some canned benchmarks. My ddr5 kit is arriving today so I'll be moving onto that anyway and doing comparisons for myself.


Of course I'm going to get worked up about it, I literally paid for it, and I didn't get it, this *i9*-12900K for €650 has the same exact IMC performance as my €429 i7-12700K, and even worse SP score. Though I haven't compared the core overclocking yet, but going to be furious if it performs the same there as well.
Also, are you high? 4200 CL16 is not identical to 4000 CL15. That's 100 faster DRAM/IMC frequency, and I'm assuming you already know, that dual rank B-die hits peak performance around 4400 to 4500, so the higher the better on these sticks. And of course the difference is not going to matter for the average joe, impossible to notice except in benchmarks, but I was planning on comparing the sticks to DDR5 as well, so it's not going to be a good comparison if I'm stuck at 4133, knowing full well that a ton of 12th Gens out there can do 4200, just a **** situation. Basically main reason I got the 12900K over the 12700K/F, other than the 5MB increased L3 Cache (which I've already tested, improves framerate in World of Warcraft by 4.1 to 4.2% in 1% and 0.1% Lows, and 4.45% in Avg).



jomama22 said:


> I clearly stated that the 4266 C14 boot was not even tested for stability.
> Full stable is 4133 14-15-14-26 or 4200 15-15-15-28 for me.


Yes, which I acknowledged by pointing out that I don't believe the 4266 screenshots are game stable, and that 4200 should absolutely be.



jomama22 said:


> And no offense, but you get all up in arms about people being stable when the only literal "stability" you even show or talk about is "game stable". Like *** is that even?


Game stable is the only thing that matters? Unless you do actual work loads on the PC, at which point you should prioritize bandwidth over latency.

I've always been against stress tests because they are always tougher than what you're actually going to use them for (games). Like it's idiotic to sacrifice potentially up to several % performance because of what it essentially comes down to.. OCD, needing the sticks to be workstation stable when you're never ever going to touch any such software. My gaming PC is literally only for.. gaming. The only software that is installed on it: 1. Browser, 2. Discord.. oh, that's it, the rest are: drivers, game launchers and other essentials such as MSI Afterburner, and is the only program that runs on start-up. Now that's a gaming PC! I really couldn't give a rats ass about TestMem5 or similar stress testing software, they don't help me in the least, when I overclock memory I make sure it's stable in the CPU heavy games I play such as _Battlefield_, _Call of Duty_, _World of Warcraft _ and so on. If the overclock is stable playing any or all of those games for hours (under 90% GPU usage), then that overclock is.. game stable, and I get more game performance than anyone overclocking for stress testing software over actual games.

_"Like *** is that even?"_
It's common sense, no? Same goes for CPU overclocking, getting it like R23 stable is so much harder, I could run 1.182V in Warzone, but for it to pass R23 I had to up the voltage to 1.225, that's 43mV, easily up to 20W higher power consumption. Modern games rarely use above 50% of an 8 core processor, so making sure it's stable at 100% usage on all eight cores, is trivial.


----------



## Hiikeri

0451 said:


> Is that with e-cores disabled?


Yes, but on those values, totally no need to baby-cores or DR. Maximum FPS.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Hiikeri said:


> Yes, but on those values, totally no need to baby-cores or DR. Maximum FPS.


Totally agree, just asking for comparison’s sake.


----------



## Smaz

Do you think that with a new BIOS it will be possible to go up from 3800MHz with 4 Dimss. 
I don't know to wait or buy a 2x16


----------



## neteng101

zhrooms said:


> Of course I'm going to get worked up about it, I literally paid for it, and I didn't get it, this *i9*-12900K for €650 has the same exact IMC performance as my €429 i7-12700K, and even worse SP score.


LOL all you paid for was 4 extra E-cores and some L3 cache - the IMCs are rated exactly the same, DDR4-3200 and DDR5-4800, everything else above that is gravy. Guess the joke's really on you for not being able to read a spec sheet correctly. Even overclocking is a toss up - a chip with 8 strong P-cores but some defects with E-cores would end up being relegated to a lesser SKU but would OC really well. More money does not always = better.


----------



## kingofblog

SP score is also a weighted average of 'P-core SP' and 'E-core SP', but only the former matters. Also, as @neteng101 said, there is no IMC SP.


----------



## chispy

Guys i had a nightmare last night all night , testing benchmarking , testing last night 8+ hours trying to run cpu and gpu benchmarks for hwbot points last night on Bios 0803 on my Strix 690A - D4 and a new 12900kf . I have tested all of the bios available for this mobo and all of them behave differently. worst of them all for me and my own opinion experience is Bios 0803 🙁 , lots and lots of problems trying to run my memory ( Trident Z Neo 2x8gb 3800 cas 14 b-die kit ) stable at anything over 4000Mhz on hard cpu benchmarks and 3d. I was able to run 4133Mhz 14-14-14 26 2t tight for a couple of benchmarks but once i reboot it won't even train or boot again , even clearing cmos did not make it boot again at those memory settings and speeds. I made a profile of it but it boots from it 1 out like 10 times and it takes a very , very long time to train. Sometimes It will boot ok run a couple of benchmarks alright when all of the sudden it will bsod :/ . Going down to ddr4 4000Mhz 14-14-14-26 2t with very thight sec and thirt timmings fix the problem and no trouble with it. No matter the volts i push to v.mem , SA or vddq no way i can get them stable at 4133Mhz cas14-13-12 24 again for benchmarks. ( This memory kit is a highly bin b-die kit , it does 4800Mhz Cas 14 on 10900k and 11900k ).

AS before on bios 0707 i could even boot at 4200Mhz cas14 and be stable at 15-15-15-28 2t or 4133Mhz 14-13-12-24 2t and ran like a dream on that bios 0707 , no bsod problem , no long time waiting for it to train , it did always train and boot. Very stable bios for high oc memory and high cpu Mhz ocing. This 0707 bios is Much better than 0202 , 0003 , 0006 , 0803 regarding stability and memory ocing. I'm absolutely exhausted and my mind is completely blank at this moment from all the testing i did last night 8+ hours non stop. I will go back and stay on bios 0707 until they fix this weirdness and huge dispcrepancies from bios to bios. It does not make any sense , it's like making one step forward and two backwards 😖.

And i have said it before since the begining of this thread , it is cpu imc 100% limitation and silicon lottery at this point , yes bios and motherboard has some influence but the imc on this alder lake cpus is a lot weaker than on rocket lake or comet lake cpus.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

neteng101 said:


> LOL all you paid for was 4 extra E-cores and some L3 cache - the IMCs are rated exactly the same, DDR4-3200 and DDR5-4800, everything else above that is gravy. Guess the joke's really on you for not being able to read a spec sheet correctly. Even overclocking is a toss up - a chip with 8 strong P-cores but some defects with E-cores would end up being relegated to a lesser SKU but would OC really well. More money does not always = better.


Guy with air cooled Alder Lake has something to say about overclocking. Do tell.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

chispy said:


> Guys i had a nightmare last night all night , testing benchmarking , testing last night 8+ hours trying to run cpu and gpu benchmarks for hwbot points last night on Bios 0803 on my Strix 690A - D4 and a new 12900kf . I have tested all of the bios available for this mobo and all of them behave differently. worst of them all for me and my own opinion experience is Bios 0803 🙁 , lots and lots of problems trying to run my memory ( Trident Z Neo 2x8gb 3800 cas 14 b-die kit ) stable at anything over 4000Mhz on hard cpu benchmarks and 3d. I was able to run 4133Mhz 14-14-14 26 2t tight for a couple of benchmarks but once i reboot it won't even train or boot again , even clearing cmos did not make it boot again at those memory settings and speeds. I made a profile of it but it boots from it 1 out like 10 times and it takes a very , very long time to train. Sometimes It will boot ok run a couple of benchmarks alright when all of the sudden it will bsod :/ . Going down to ddr4 4000Mhz 14-14-14-26 2t with very thight sec and thirt timmings fix the problem and no trouble with it. No matter the volts i push to v.mem , SA or vddq no way i can get them stable at 4133Mhz cas14-13-12 24 again for benchmarks. ( This memory kit is a highly bin b-die kit , it does 4800Mhz Cas 14 on 10900k and 11990k ).
> 
> AS before on bios 0707 i could even boot at 4200Mhz cas14 and be stable at 15-15-15-28 2t or 4133Mhz 14-13-12-24 2t and ran like a dream on that bios 0707 , no bsod problem , no long time waiting for it to train , it did always train and boot. Very stable bios for high oc memory and high cpu Mhz ocing. This 0707 bios is Much better than 0202 , 0003 , 0006 , 0803 regarding stability and memory ocing. I'm absolutely exhausted and my mind is completely blank at this moment from all the testing i did last night 8+ hours non stop. I will go back and stay on bios 0707 until they fix this weirdness and huge dispcrepancies from bios to bios. It does not make any sense , it's like making one step forward and two backwards 😖.
> 
> And i have said it before since the begining of this thread , it is cpu imc 100% limitation and silicon lottery at this point , yes bios and motherboard has some influence but the imc on this alder lake cpus is a lot weaker than on rocket lake or comet lake cpus.


I’m seeing stronger IMC performance on ADL vs RKL. My 4000c14 DR kit needed 1.55 SA voltage to stabilize 4000c14 on RKL. On ADL it doesn’t need more than 1.35v to stabilize 4100c14 with best performance at 1.45v.


----------



## slash621

Everyone is talking VDDQ and I can’t find a voltage setting with that on my strix? what is that in asus speak? I found SA and vcore and vdimm.


----------



## bscool

slash621 said:


> Everyone is talking VDDQ and I can’t find a voltage setting with that on my strix? what is that in asus speak? I found SA and vcore and vdimm.


It is a trick, they hide it in plain sight 









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


With Z690A Pro my 4*single rank hits a hard wall at 3700/3733, it doesn't boot with gear 1 @ 1.4v SA, but gear 2 works. Looks like this 12700kf doesn't have the best memory controller, and or it really dislikes 4 sticks. Try 1.45V SA - I got as far as booting up in 3866 Gear 1 but couldn't...




www.overclock.net


----------



## slash621

bscool said:


> It is a trick, they hide it in plain sight
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> 
> With Z690A Pro my 4*single rank hits a hard wall at 3700/3733, it doesn't boot with gear 1 @ 1.4v SA, but gear 2 works. Looks like this 12700kf doesn't have the best memory controller, and or it really dislikes 4 sticks. Try 1.45V SA - I got as far as booting up in 3866 Gear 1 but couldn't...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


wow. I searched VDDQ 20 times in the app and they hide it behind this IVR CONTROLLER VDDQ VOLTAGE name.. Jesus asus.….


----------



## Xacius

zhrooms said:


> Just set BCLK from 100.0000 to 100.2000 in BIOS, to compensate for that 0.2 loss, works great.


It only goes in increments of 0.19. I can't seem to force it to 0.2 or 0.24. Either way, 99.95 is better than 99.78. If you have any other ideas, lmk. Thanks!


----------



## neteng101

0451 said:


> Guy with air cooled Alder Lake has something to say about overclocking. Do tell.


Its actually far harder to make something out of lemons but almost get the same performance out of lesser parts that people are throwing money at in hopes of a better overclock. Brute force and more money doesn't win in all instances. Have a look - 3rd ranked but people below me have higher clocks. Its not even a benchmark score run attempt, just a daily overclock score. All done on air too.

Know your objectives - buying a 12900k + 3090 + water blocks and a full custom loop might be great if you want to set world records but for the average person, its not going to matter. But I do want to spend more on quality memory next time around - that actually matters more for my objectives compared to a bit more extra clock on the CPU cores that water cooling might bring.


----------



## owikh84

3733 CL14 is the best that my 4x8GB SR B-die can boot and achieve stability albeit the horrible write bandwidth.
As I posted before, any 2 sticks from the same kits are able to do 4133 CL16 1T Gear1 with 2x8GB.

12900KF SP 87 - Stock
Strix Z690-A | BIOS 0803
4x8GB G.Skill F4-3600C14D-16GTESA

3733 CL14-14-14-28-1T Gear1, VDIMM 1.50v, SA 1.40v, VDDQ 1.425v:


----------



## geriatricpollywog

neteng101 said:


> Its actually far harder to make something out of lemons


How is it harder to dial in an air cooled vs water cooled setup? If you could speak from experience, that would be great.



neteng101 said:


> but almost get the same performance out of lesser parts that people are throwing money at in hopes of a better overclock.
> [Brute force and more money doesn't win in all instances. Have a look - 3rd ranked but people below me have higher clocks. Its not even a benchmark score run attempt, just a daily overclock score. All done on air too.


My score with a watercooled 12700K and 3090 on daily overclock is 13% higher. Being 3rd with a non-competetive parts combination is nice, but not as impressive as what you could achieve on water.











neteng101 said:


> Know your objectives - buying a 12900k + 3090 + water blocks and a full custom loop might be great if you want to set world records but for the average person, its not going to matter. But I do want to spend more on quality memory next time around - that actually matters more for my objectives compared to a bit more extra clock on the CPU cores that water cooling might bring.


The cool thing about cooling (pun intended) is that it doesn't become obsolete like an expensive GPU, CPU, MOBO, and RAM.


----------



## newls1

newls1 said:


> Looking for advice from you smart people! Just ordered my 12900K and a MSI Tomahawk Z690 DDR4 board. Gonna bring over my 2x16 CL14 G.skills but was hoping to run another 32gb's of this same ram for 64GB. My question here is my ram settings are setup [email protected] DDR4020 on the z590 as i took DAYS to dial my ram in, can I obviously use the same settings for just using the 2x16 32GB setup, but if i run 4x16gb can I still use the same settings and run same speed of 4020MHz with all 4 sticks. MSI states for a 2R x 2DPC 4133+ so im hoping I have a chance of keeping the same speeds?! Whatcha all think?


Someone, please shed some light on this, be super appreicated


----------



## kingofblog

chispy said:


> And i have said it before since the begining of this thread , it is cpu imc 100% limitation and silicon lottery at this point , yes bios and motherboard has some influence but the imc on this alder lake cpus is a lot weaker than on rocket lake or comet lake cpus.


It could be silicon lottery, but the IMC is definitely stronger than RKL (weaker than CML is a given). Nobody could run 4000 MT/s on RKL, yet many can on ADL.



0451 said:


> How is it harder to dial in an air cooled vs water cooled setup? If you could speak from experience, that would be great.


It takes longer to test, since you can't sustain as high of a frequency, but it's not "harder" per se. You just need to put some "resting" time in your stress test. Transient response is more important than sustained load for stability testing anyway, so you should be testing this in either case: pause and resume Prime95 or equivalent every few seconds, running it for 1-2 seconds at a time. Liquid vs air cooling doesn't affect instantaneous temperature; only delidding, lapping, etc. does.


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> Someone, please shed some light on this, be super appreicated


Just a guess slim to no chance of running 4x16 at the speeds(4000 if you mean gear 1, maybe gear 2) you want. Maybe more like 3200 to 3600 gear 1 would be my guess. But I have no idea. I do know there is only one way to find out...........

Edit looking at the QVL list I see 4x16 3600 DR b die so I think if you hit 3600 you are doing good. Anything beyond that with decent timings I would be surprised.


----------



## Cam1

I can't get the Ram higher than 4000MHz even with more voltages.
From 3600 to 4000 i have no much gain.

What timings are the most important to start tweaking?


----------



## kingofblog

Cam1 said:


> I can't get the Ram higher than 4000MHz even with more voltages.
> From 3600 to 4000 i have no much gain.
> 
> What timings are the most important to start tweaking?


Going from 3600 to 4000 MT/s should reduce latency by 2-4 ns, not exactly "nothing." The most important timings are the primaries, followed by tRFC. Just by setting these, you can get 90% bus utilization (#502). Tuning tRRDS/L, tFAW, and tWR can extract the remaining % of bandwidth (MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper).


----------



## Exilon

0451 said:


> I’m seeing stronger IMC performance on ADL vs RKL. My 4000c14 DR kit needed 1.55 SA voltage to stabilize 4000c14 on RKL. On ADL it doesn’t need more than 1.35v to stabilize 4100c14 with best performance at 1.45v.


I'm also seeing better performance against Coffee Lake. 3600CL15 maxed out at 1.55v runs at 3733CL15 at 1.5v on Alder Lake.
Plus the Alder Lake system gets a whopping 73GB/s mixed read/write bandwidth in MLC where it was limited to 50GB/s in Coffee Lake.


----------



## slash621

Anyone want to chime in on the "safe 24/7" voltage limits for the Systems Agent? I keep seeing people toss out figures like 1.4SA and 1.45 VDDQ but I'm quite hesitant since on my old 9900KS that would have been "good bye IMC" levels. 

What is everyone using as a "do not exceed" for those figures? I know my B-Die ram is good up to about 1.5v but what levers do I have to pull for VDDQ and SA so I dont burn this thing up trying to get 64GB to their XMP settings...


----------



## kingofblog

I just tried adjusting secondaries/tertiaries according to the old DDR4 OC guide. tRRDS/L=6, tFAW=24, tWR=12 worked fine for me on SKX/X299, but tRRDL won't tolerate any changes from the auto value of 11 on Z690 STRIX-A, so I left it untouched. Surprisingly, I didn't see any performance improvement after doing this tuning, perhaps because ADL IMC doesn't work the same way. Latency decreased ~0.5 ns, but bus efficiency actually declined ~1%.



Exilon said:


> Plus the Alder Lake system gets a whopping 73GB/s mixed read/write bandwidth in MLC where it was limited to 50GB/s in Coffee Lake.


This is an illusion, because the Sunny Cove/Ice Lake core introduced an optimization where it skips a read when doing the 2R1W pattern, and thus the MLC result is exaggerated. You need to use -W7 pattern to defeat this optimization. The performance benefit of the optimization is of course real, but you need to bypass it when benchmarking the IMC.






ICX - What is SpecI2M request and how it differs from RFO?


From IRMA's presentation on Icelake server it said: "Covert RFO to specI2M when memory subsystem is heavily loaded Reduces mem bandwidth demand on streaming WLs that do full cache line writes (25% efficiency increase)" So I would like to understand what is specI2M and how it differs from...



community.intel.com







slash621 said:


> Anyone want to chime in on the "safe 24/7" voltage limits for the Systems Agent? I keep seeing people toss out figures like 1.4SA and 1.45 VDDQ but I'm quite hesitant since on my old 9900KS that would have been "good bye IMC" levels.
> 
> What is everyone using as a "do not exceed" for those figures? I know my B-Die ram is good up to about 1.5v but what levers do I have to pull for VDDQ and SA so I dont burn this thing up trying to get 64GB to their XMP settings...


I'm using 1.35 VccSA. Judging from other remarks in this thread, going for 4 DIMMs, not to mention 4xDR is a lost cause. If you need 64 GB, you might want to buy some new DIMMs based on 16 Gb ICs. Micron Rev. B looks to be popular, although the timings will not be as good as Samsung B. Rev. B can be bought pre-binned at 4000CL19, it seems.


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/overclocking/comments/cpuuee


----------



## slash621

kingofblog said:


> I'm using 1.35 VccSA. Judging from other remarks in this thread, going for 4 DIMMs, not to mention 4xDR is a lost cause. If you need 64 GB, you might want to buy some new DIMMs based on 16 Gb ICs. Micron Rev. B looks to be popular, although the timings will not be as good as Samsung B. Rev. B can be bought pre-binned at 4000CL19, it seems.


Well i've had some success now and all I really wanted was XMP (what I paid for...).. I was able to get XMP-II to work using SA 1.27, Vdimm 1.38 and VDDQ at 1.42v. I also was able to enable AIOC on the CPU and it gave me some... generous clocks of 55x 1-3 54x 4-5 and 52x all core with TVB enabled. It passed about 15 minutes of memtest86, XTU Memory and OCCT Memory AVX2. each. Then I was able to play DCS and MSFS which typically in my past are more unstable than stress tests. 

My voltages under load like CB-R23 seem ok, around 1.38v but now i'm worried about my idle voltage. While my idle temps are in the 26-30 range.. sometimes I see 1.52v for a bit. I can only assume it's trying to thermal velocity boost at 55 or higher? Is this dangerous for the processor to see such high idle voltages? Should I offset and / or tell AIOC to be a bit more pessamistic despite my EK-AIO-360 scoring 182 in the cooler test?


----------



## kingofblog

If you only need to go to 3600 MT/s, 1.3 VccSA should be more than enough. As for your core voltage, 5.5 GHz does indeed require about 1.5 V. You might want to stress-test the single-core boost to confirm whether it's actually stable. Make sure to check all eight cores. 1.5 V should be safe as long as the temperature is low.


----------



## newls1

bscool said:


> Just a guess slim to no chance of running 4x16 at the speeds(4000 if you mean gear 1, maybe gear 2) you want. Maybe more like 3200 to 3600 gear 1 would be my guess. But I have no idea. I do know there is only one way to find out...........
> 
> Edit looking at the QVL list I see 4x16 3600 DR b die so I think if you hit 3600 you are doing good. Anything beyond that with decent timings I would be surprised.


Thank you for looking and giving me an idea… gonna try a 4x16gb setup and if it sucks I’ll just go back to 2x16. Really wanted 64gb for win11


----------



## Revv23

Mr69 said:


> @bscool @kingofblog sorry to bother, what you would choose between these 2 B-die to reach that(i know luck involved with IMC), option are limited cuz of country and prices
> Ripjaws V DDR4-4000MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.40V 32GB (2x16GB) (no tweaks needed?)
> or
> Flare X DDR4-3200MHz CL14-14-14-34 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB)


Are you sure the ripjaws are B Die? If so I'd lean that way.


----------



## bscool

Best list of b die, actually it is the "Ulimate" list  [Übersicht] - Die ultimative HARDWARELUXX Samsung 8Gb B-Die Liste - alle Hersteller (22.11.21)

I think it is better b die finder since it also has actual screenshots from Thaiphoon burner and some OC results. Plus any question about any memory @emissary42 will probably be able to answer if you ask him.


----------



## LionAlonso

Siablo said:


> An example of classic settings for every day
> View attachment 2534826


I have the same kit than u:
Could you put the voltages u used or a screenshot of bios?


----------



## kingofblog

tCL != tRCD sounds like Hynix to me... The problem with "B-die lists" is that resellers freely swap ICs on the same SKU, as long as the same primary timings are met. 3200CL14 is guaranteed B-die, but 4000CL19 could be Hynix. On the other hand, the latter has been guaranteed to run at 4000 MT/s, and as the first post of this thread explains, IMC frequency is at least as important as DRAM timings.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

kingofblog said:


> If you only need to go to 3600 MT/s, 1.3 VccSA should be more than enough. As for your core voltage, 5.5 GHz does indeed require about 1.5 V. You might want to stress-test the single-core boost to confirm whether it's actually stable. Make sure to check all eight cores. 1.5 V should be safe as long as the temperature is low.


1.5V core (bios) is not safe.


----------



## Smaz

This is better then mi viper patriot 4400 cl19????
amazon link

I want to mount 32Gb and with the Patriot 4x8 I don't get good performance


----------



## bscool

@Smaz Yes, good stuff the kit I had 4000c16-16-16. Could do 4400c16-17-17 on CML and 4266c16-16-16 gear 2 rocket lake. Didnt test much gear 1 on RKL but should do [email protected] easy if your IMC can run that.


----------



## eeroo94

Got my TUF Z690 few days ago and 0803 bios was disaster for me, couldn't even post 4000 MHz gear 2 and when it posted 3866 MHz gear 1 it was so unstable that it was freezing in bios menu or blue screening when loading Windows. With 0707 bios 3866 was immediately stable using auto voltages, trying 4000 MHz next.


----------



## fingon82

Smaz said:


> This is better then mi viper patriot 4400 cl19????
> amazon link
> 
> I want to mount 32Gb and with the Patriot 4x8 I don't get good performance


That kit should be able to run 4000 c16-17


----------



## Gardiff

Smaz said:


> This is better then mi viper patriot 4400 cl19????
> amazon link
> 
> I want to mount 32Gb and with the Patriot 4x8 I don't get good performance






I'm running 4x8gb patriot 4400cl19, seems to be doing pretty well. Tertiaries could probably be tweaked a bit.
1.2v Vccsa
1.475v Vdram
1.3v Vddq TX


----------



## bscool

@Gardiff Have you done any memtest? If so I think that is the highest clocking and stable 4x8 I have seen yet.


----------



## Smaz

Gardiff said:


> I'm running 4x8gb patriot 4400cl19, seems to be doing pretty well. Tertiaries could probably be tweaked a bit.
> 1.2v Vccsa
> 1.475v Vdram
> 1.3v Vddq TX
> 
> View attachment 2534988
> View attachment 2534990
> 
> View attachment 2534992


Tomorrow I will test your settings but on my pc the most I get to work is 3777 cl 16 4x8 50 latency and 4100 cl 16 49 latency 2x8


----------



## Gardiff

@bscool ran TestMem5 for 5 cycles (2.5hrs?) and the bios memtest86 for the normal 4(?) cycles. 
Plus have been using it for the past week or so without issues.

I don't have a screenshot of the completed testMem5 run.


----------



## slash621

kingofblog said:


> If you only need to go to 3600 MT/s, 1.3 VccSA should be more than enough. As for your core voltage, 5.5 GHz does indeed require about 1.5 V. You might want to stress-test the single-core boost to confirm whether it's actually stable. Make sure to check all eight cores. 1.5 V should be safe as long as the temperature is low.


By low, do we mean under 95 during load? or under 35 during idle? or what? Overall the condition I was mentioning was 1.47-1.51 at idle with temps at 25-32 degrees. 1-3 core loads up to 50-60 degrees (like microsoft flight simulator) with VIDs in the 1.42-1.47 range. If this is ok, I might re-enable TVB and let it run 5.5ghz with that (The base map is 5.4 1-3 cores).


----------



## chispy

eeroo94 said:


> Got my TUF Z690 few days ago and 0803 bios was disaster for me, couldn't even post 4000 MHz gear 2 and when it posted 3866 MHz gear 1 it was so unstable that it was freezing in bios menu or blue screening when loading Windows. With 0707 bios 3866 was immediately stable using auto voltages, trying 4000 MHz next.
> 
> View attachment 2534989


Exact same behaviour i had on Bios 0803 , same happened to me while testing all of the bios available for Strix D4 , very unstable and picky with ram voltages and settings , lots of bsod , freezing in bios and not training memory settings at all , bios 0803 was a nightmare for me too , went back to bios 0707 and everything works right away and the memory overclocks higher and stable, best bios in my own opinion so far is 0707  , a lot of people are reporting the same with bios 0803.


----------



## kingofblog

slash621 said:


> By low, do we mean under 95 during load? or under 35 during idle? or what? Overall the condition I was mentioning was 1.47-1.51 at idle with temps at 25-32 degrees. 1-3 core loads up to 50-60 degrees (like microsoft flight simulator) with VIDs in the 1.42-1.47 range. If this is ok, I might re-enable TVB and let it run 5.5ghz with that (The base map is 5.4 1-3 cores).


1.5 V is "safe" for 40-50 C and burst operation only. It all comes down to how often you encounter this condition. What did the auto-optimizer set your TVB temperature threshold to? For myself, I don't bother with any TVB tricks, since they are very situational and the benefit is hard to quantify. If you use sub-ambient cooling like the Intel-branded TEC, TVB might be more useful for you.


----------



## Gardiff

bscool said:


> @Gardiff Have you done any memtest? If so I think that is the highest clocking and stable 4x8 I have seen yet.


It wasn't quite finished but you get the idea


----------



## RetroWave78

I apologize if this is a stupid question but where exactly is the setting for Gear 1 and 2 in BIOS? Also, any recommended settings to try to start in terms of VDDQ, SA, VCore and CPU OC settings? Are there any guides up yet? 

Here's the motherboard, CPU and memory combination I will be using. I will be starting the tear down and install tomorrow. I am thinking of flashing to 0707 using BIOS Flashback method with no hardware installed beforehand to both ensure the new PSU works and motherboard POST's and then I intend to use only 2 of the 4 matched sticks (on the QVL, although going by feedback this doesn't seem like it means much) at 3600 MHz and working up from there after I ensure Windows transferred from my old chipset successfully. After I get 4 sticks dialed in at anything between 3600 and 4000 MHz I will move on to dialing in the CPU. 

Any guidance appreciated.

12900k 
Strix-A D4
Trident Z Royal
DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
32GB (4x8GB) 








F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 CL15-16-16-36 1.50V 32GB (4x8GB) Trident Z Royal is the latest addition to the Trident Z flagship family and features a crown jewel design. Meticulously crafted to display just the right amount of light refraction, the patented crystalline light bar scatters the RGB...




www.gskill.com


----------



## kingofblog

RetroWave78 said:


> I apologize if this is a stupid question but where exactly is the setting for Gear 1 and 2 in BIOS? Also, any recommended settings to try to start in terms of VDDQ, SA, VCore and CPU OC settings? Are there any guides up yet?
> 
> Here's the motherboard, CPU and memory combination I will be using. I will be starting the tear down and install tomorrow. I am thinking of flashing to 0707 using BIOS Flashback method with no hardware installed beforehand to both ensure the new PSU works and motherboard POST's and then I intend to use only 2 of the 4 matched sticks (on the QVL, although going by feedback this doesn't seem like it means much) at 3600 MHz and working up from there after I ensure Windows transferred from my old chipset successfully. After I get 4 sticks dialed in at anything between 3600 and 4000 MHz I will move on to dialing in the CPU.
> 
> Any guidance appreciated.
> 
> 12900k
> Strix-A D4
> Trident Z Royal
> DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
> 32GB (4x8GB)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 CL15-16-16-36 1.50V 32GB (4x8GB) Trident Z Royal is the latest addition to the Trident Z flagship family and features a crown jewel design. Meticulously crafted to display just the right amount of light refraction, the patented crystalline light bar scatters the RGB...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com


Gear ratio on ASUS is "memory controller:ddr ratio" or such under "AI Tweaker". It should have 1:1, 1:2, and 1:4 as possible settings.

Set VccSA to 1.4 V, then try posting at DDR4-4000 with your XMP timings entered manually. Lower the frequency by one step until you can POST, then move on to TM5 or w/e. If the memory test passes, lower VccSA until unstable then add a few 10s of mV guardband. For core frequency, very few people achieve any meaningful all-core OC. 5.0-5.2 GHz in light all-core workloads is the consensus from what I've seen. If you aren't bothered by 1.5+ V, you might be able to get your single-core frequency past 5.5 GHz, although whether that's useful is another question. Make sure to disable E-cores for best performance.


----------



## grey.clock

chispy said:


> Exact same behaviour i had on Bios 0803 , same happened to me while testing all of the bios available for Strix D4 , very unstable and picky with ram voltages and settings , lots of bsod , freezing in bios and not training memory settings at all , bios 0803 was a nightmare for me too , went back to bios 0707 and everything works right away and the memory overclocks higher and stable, best bios in my own opinion so far is 0707  , a lot of people are reporting the same with bios 0803.



have you tried 0002 ? it has been the most stable of the lot for me but I have not checked to see if some of the auto voltages are upticking to keep things stable


----------



## zhrooms

neteng101 said:


> LOL all you paid for was 4 extra E-cores and some L3 cache - the IMCs are rated exactly the same, DDR4-3200 and DDR5-4800, everything else above that is gravy. Guess the joke's really on you for not being able to read a spec sheet correctly. Even overclocking is a toss up - a chip with 8 strong P-cores but some defects with E-cores would end up being relegated to a lesser SKU but would OC really well. More money does not always = better.


Are you dense? The 12900K is a higher bin, it offers a higher turbo frequency, twice as many E-cores and 5MB more of the shared L3 cache. A 12900K *will* overclock better than a 12700K, on average, obviously, because there's always exceptions, but that's not even worth bringing up, everyone should be on the same page about that. IMC on average is also stronger on a higher bin processor, spec sheet is completely irrelevant, blows my mind that you even brought that up, like it has any relevancy.. also you pulled the claim about "some 12700Ks having stronger P-cores because the E-cores weren't up to the task", out of your ***.


kingofblog said:


> SP score is also a weighted average of 'P-core SP' and 'E-core SP', but only the former matters. Also, as @neteng101 said, there is no IMC SP.


No one said the IMC can be rated. Also, do you have a source on the SP rating being the average of both P-cores and E-cores?


chispy said:


> And I have said it before, it is 100% an IMC limitation at this point, BIOS and Motherboard has some influence but the IMC on this Alder Lake CPU is a lot weaker than on Rocket Lake CPUs.


Just because you struggled with 4000 tight timings? Negligent of you to make such a claim about the IMC, the Rocket Lake IMC is horrific, most CPUs could barely do 3733, only the best did 3866 (exceptionally rare samples 4000), I was personally stuck at 3600 on my dual rank sticks. So the Alder Lake DDR4 IMC is infinitely stronger, both my 12700K and 12900K can do close to 4150 stable, on dual rank sticks, that's 500+ MT/s more (250 MHz IMC), and the best CPUs can do 4200-4266 stable, that's like 266 to 334 MT/s faster, comparing the best samples.


kingofblog said:


> If you only need to go to 3600 MT/s, 1.3 VccSA should be more than enough.





geriatricpollywog said:


> My 4000c14 DR kit needed 1.55 SA voltage to stabilize 4000c14 on RKL. On ADL it doesn’t need more than 1.35v to stabilize 4100c14 with best performance at 1.45v.


Guessing some people haven't read the whole thread so re-posting this image, might be interesting to some. And I have confirmed on my new CPU that the 4133 requirement is about the same, seems to be universal for everyone, doesn't matter how good your IMC is, it just needs a certain amount of SA voltage to be *stable*, currently I'm running 1.41 and it's rock stable in games, got errors at 1.38 as an example, I'll find the exact voltage it needs later and make a new chart.










Xacius said:


> It only goes in increments of 0.19. I can't seem to force it to 0.2 or 0.24. Either way, 99.95 is better than 99.78. If you have any other ideas, lmk. Thanks!


Yep, I get 4898-4899, so 1-2 MHz under what I set it to, but the software still reads 100.00, not 99.96 or 99.98, so this is normal. Like, *don't bother* trying to make it 100.00.


neteng101 said:


> Brute force and more money doesn't win in all instances.
> Know your objectives - buying a 12900k + 3090 + water blocks and a full custom loop might be great if you want to set world records but for the average person, its not going to matter. But I do want to spend more on quality memory next time around - that actually matters more for my objectives compared to a bit more extra clock on the CPU cores that water cooling might bring.


You have *no idea* what you're talking about. Brute forcing and throwing money at a problem *always work*, the question is how much you gain from it, when it stops being worth it is different for everyone, foolish to say the improvement isn't there. Also, the average person would *greatly benefit* from a custom water cooling loop, you are completely delusional if you believe that someone with a water cooling setup that keeps the water temp at no more than 2°C above ambient, won't be able to overclock (significantly) more than your air (tower) cooler. I hit 100°C on the CPU Package yesterday when pushing 5.3GHz in R23, it pulled up to 253W, you won't get anywhere near that on a tower cooler, you can completely forget about TVB as well. 

12900K on water, we're talking up to 4% more performance from the CPU cores alone, then another 4 to 4.5% from the L3 cache on the 12900K, plus the 12900K being higher bin, so it'd overclock at least another 1.5% from reaching 100 MHz higher, compared to a 12700K. So yeah, we're up to like 10% now, comparing a 12700K on a air cooling versus a 12900K on water cooling. That's 55 to 60 FPS~, 130 to 144 FPS~ or 220 to 240 FPS~, and that is noticeable, especially at 60-144 and with G-Sync (VRR). As for the 3090, water cooling it, makes it possible to run up to 2205 MHz at 700W power consumption, that's also up to 10% faster than an air cooled card, even when cranking it to 100% fan speed. So same difference there but on the games that are bottlenecked on the graphics side.
And, the fact at you bring up water cooling specifically, further shows how little you know, as a 420 AIO (with the best fans) on the CPU is just as good or better than most water cooling loops, same goes for AIOs on the GPU, most of them beat water cooled cards, main difference is that you tend to have to increase the fan speed since the radiator area is smaller (limited radiator capacity). You can absolutely get away dirt cheap by getting AIO over Water, literally one third the price in most cases, for identical performance, barely more than what the expensive air tower coolers cost. 

If we talk about efficiency, then obviously a $20 tower cooler is the best, since you can still overclock on it, and the cheapest possible 3090 since you're going to be reducing the voltage anyway, power limit won't matter, that's peak efficiency/noise but there is a sweet spot depending on what product you're talking about, where investing in a $100 cooler can get you the best price/performance, for example AIO for your air cooled graphics card, we're then talking about lowering temps by up to 30°C, for like $129, that's insane, and the cooler can be re-sold.


geriatricpollywog said:


> The cool thing about cooling (pun intended) is that it doesn't become obsolete like an expensive GPU, CPU, MOBO, and RAM.


Huh? Water cooling is very expensive, most of it can become obsolete with time, literally opposite of what you said. Some parts less than other of course, but you can't re-use GPU blocks, some CPU blocks you can't re-use, since they can go EOL fairly quickly. If you go with an aesthetic build you will use nickel plated blocks and fittings, and those definitely have a limited lifespan, in form of staining and having it literally come off, so Acetal+Copper lasts as a comparison. D5 pumps can go bad if you run them at full RPM for a long time, with some bad luck on top of that, most are obviously fine. Clear tubing will also always be stained.. so if you pick the _right_ products they can last for a long time and if you choose the "aesthetic" products, they might not last for even a year. Overall, water is just very expensive, AIO is not as expensive but they will go bad with time as well, and incompatible on GPUs just like with water blocks, but not always, either way, making AIOs far more costly than air over time, but you definitely get something for your money, like: looks, performance & street cred.


RetroWave78 said:


> I will be starting the tear down and install tomorrow. I am thinking of flashing to 0707 using BIOS Flashback method with no hardware installed beforehand to both ensure the new PSU works and motherboard POST's and then I intend to use only 2 of the 4 matched sticks (on the QVL, although going by feedback this doesn't seem like it means much) at 3600 MHz and working up from there after I ensure Windows transferred from my old chipset successfully. After I get 4 sticks dialed in at anything between 3600 and 4000 MHz I will move on to dialing in the CPU.
> 12900k, Strix-A D4, DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V


See above, you can basically just set 1.42 SA, leave VDDQ on Auto, DRAM on 1.500 and then go straight to 100:133, 1:1 (Gear) and DRAM Frequency to 4133, I can basically guarantee it'll work. And yes, stay away from using those 2 additional sticks, as long as you just game, it's completely meaningless having 32GB over 16GB, like one game would have a problem with 16. And definitely stick to the 0707 BIOS, I don't see any reason to update from it in a long time, it's basically perfect as it is. And disable the E-cores right away, on first boot even, if you don't intend to use them for anything (like if you're just gonna game).


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> Are you dense? The 12900K is a higher bin, it offers a higher turbo frequency, twice as many E-cores and 5MB more of the shared L3 cache. A 12900K *will* overclock better than a 12700K, on average, obviously, because there's always exceptions, but that's not even worth bringing up, everyone should be on the same page about that. IMC on average is also stronger on a higher bin processor, spec sheet is completely irrelevant, blows my mind that you even brought that up, like it has any relevancy.. also you pulled the claim about "some 12700Ks having stronger P-cores because the E-cores weren't up to the task", out of your ***.


12900k will on average overclock P-cores better than 12700k, but there is no broad correlation that unbinned chip elements will also clock better (e.g. IMC and GPU). RKL is the only recent Intel CPU where the i9/top SKU was explicitly binned for higher IMC frequency.

Bin assignment between i5, i7, and i9 can happen due to performance (V/f), but it can also happen due to spot defects. The latter are not correlated with transistor speed, so it is entirely possible to get a "golden" i7. If it were something like the CML 10850k vs 10900k or the RKL 11700k vs 11900k, where both SKUs were fully-enabled, then a "golden" low-shelf chip would be impossible.



> No one said the IMC can be rated. Also, do you have a source on the SP rating being the average of both P-cores and E-cores?


There is a menu in the ASUS BIOS showing the "P-core SP" and "E-core SP" as separate values. In my case, SP=78, P-SP was 85-ish, and E-SP was high-60s. It might be the AI auto-OC sub-menu under "AI Tweaker". At any rate, SP is solely calculated from CPU V/f curve, and from what I've seen, 1.2 V @ 5.3 GHz is the god bin (SP 105), 1.3 V for good (SP 90+), and 1.4 V for bad (SP <80).



> Guessing some people haven't read the whole thread so re-posting this image, might be interesting to some. And I have confirmed on my new CPU that the 4133 requirement is about the same, seems to be universal for everyone, doesn't matter how good your IMC is, it just needs a certain amount of SA voltage to be *stable*, currently I'm running 1.41 and it's rock stable in games, got errors at 1.38 as an example, I'll find the exact voltage it needs later and make a new chart.


I haven't spent the time to test anything else. I'm just saying that 1.35 V was stable for 4000 MT/s DR in my case. 1.18 V is a definite no-boot for me.



> Also, the average person would *greatly benefit* from a custom water cooling loop, you are completely delusional if you believe that someone with a water cooling setup that keeps the water temp at no more than 2°C above ambient, won't be able to overclock (significantly) more than your air (tower) cooler. I hit 100°C on the CPU Package yesterday when pushing 5.3GHz in R23, it pulled up to 253W, you won't get anywhere near that on a tower cooler, you can completely forget about TVB as well.
> 
> And, the fact at you bring up water cooling specifically, further shows how little you know, as a 420 AIO (with the best fans) on the CPU is just as good or better than most water cooling loops, same goes for AIOs on the GPU, most of them beat water cooled cards, main difference is that you tend to have to increase the fan speed since the radiator area is smaller (limited radiator capacity). You can absolutely get away dirt cheap by getting AIO over Water, literally one third the price in most cases, for identical performance, barely more than what the expensive air tower coolers cost.


I find it hard to believe any AIO, even a 420, would achieve 2 degrees dT liquid temperature. I'm using a 280 mm with 3k RPM fans, and it can at best do 15 degrees dT at 200 W. 50% more area would only bring that down to 10 degrees. The only ones with the super-low coolant temperatures are the dual or triple-radiator custom-loop crowd.

By the way, if you did 5.3 GHz all-cores, your P-SP is probably not as bad as you think.


----------



## StarvinMarvinDK

Hello everybody 

Having some trouble with my new Asus Z690 Gaming Plus D4 board and ram.

Cannot use the correct Dimm slots - the system won't boot with ram in B2 and A2 slots as per the manual.
Both stick can boot when placed seperately in B2 but not together - only when placed in B1 and B2 slots.

Bios is 0707 and ram kit is the VENGEANCE® RGB PRO 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 DRAM 4000MHz C19 Memory Kit - SKU CMW16GX4M2K4000C19


----------



## raad11

So does this count as having passed? Log shows no errors either

Anyone figure out what's a safe range for daily SA/VDDQ voltage? I'm running 1.44 SA, 1.48 VDDQ in BIOS for 4000 14-15-15-28-2T, 2x16GB DR B-Die. 14-16-16-29 passed at 1.44/1.44, I'm trying to get it to 14-15-15-28


EDIT: I was able to boot 100:133, 4133 with the same settings I've used at 4000 (14-16-16-29). Latency didn't really improve at all, but bandwidth did. Wondering if the board is training slower timings above 4000-CL 14. With Single Rank sticks I noticed 4100 15-15-15-28 did better in latency than 4000 14-15-15-28


----------



## raad11

To get the BCLK to stay at 100.00, leave AI Tuner on 'Auto' and not Manual


----------



## raad11

StarvinMarvinDK said:


> Hello everybody
> 
> Having some trouble with my new Asus Z690 Gaming Plus D4 board and ram.
> 
> Cannot use the correct Dimm slots - the system won't boot with ram in B2 and A2 slots as per the manual.
> Both stick can boot when placed seperately in B2 but not together - only when placed in B1 and B2 slots.
> 
> Bios is 0707 and ram kit is the VENGEANCE® RGB PRO 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 DRAM 4000MHz C19 Memory Kit - SKU CMW16GX4M2K4000C19


What about one stick in B1?


----------



## raad11

raad11 said:


> View attachment 2535064
> 
> 
> So does this count as having passed? Log shows no errors either
> 
> Anyone figure out what's a safe range for daily SA/VDDQ voltage? I'm running 1.44 SA, 1.48 VDDQ in BIOS for 4000 14-15-15-28-2T, 2x16GB DR B-Die. 14-16-16-29 passed at 1.44/1.44, I'm trying to get it to 14-15-15-28
> 
> 
> EDIT: I was able to boot 100:133, 4133 with the same settings I've used at 4000 (14-16-16-29). Latency didn't really improve at all, but bandwidth did. Wondering if the board is training slower timings above 4000-CL 14. With Single Rank sticks I noticed 4100 15-15-15-28 did better in latency than 4000 14-15-15-28


Ok so I clearly don't understand the relationship between the timings as 4133 14-15-15-28 will boot and run stuff in Windows (not error tested yet) but 4133 15-15-15-28 will not. At the same voltage.


----------



## zhrooms

StarvinMarvinDK said:


> Having some trouble with my new Asus Z690 Gaming Plus D4 board and ram.
> Cannot use the correct Dimm slots - the system won't boot with ram in B2 and A2 slots as per the manual.
> Both stick can boot when placed seperately in B2 but not together - only when placed in B1 and B2 slots.


I bought a 12900K on release that was defective, the A memory channel was dead, I could only boot the system with sticks in B1 and B2, had to send the CPU back to the store to be replaced.
Sounds like you have the same issue I had. I thought it was the motherboard that was the issue, but then put the CPU in another motherboard, same exact problem, refused to boot with a memory stick in A1 or A2, but 2 sticks in B1 and B2 worked fine as said, then I switched the 12900K for my 12700K and A2 & B2 worked perfectly, on both motherboards, thus confirming it wasn't the motherboard or the memory.

So, by the sounds of it, you have to contact the store your purchased it from and tell them you need to have it (the CPU) replaced. 😞


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

In a few days I get 12900k + asus strix z690-a gaming, I use ddr4 but I am not at all an expert in overclocking on the ram as you are, I would like from you some advice on which ram to use using the xmp profile without having to touch anything at the level of voltages.

I would like to be on a high-performance 2x8 ram kit but that has fq, cl and voltages values in xmp that give me the certainty that everything works daily without the need for me to put my hand on the ram values.

Currently on my current pc (10700k and z490 asus hero II) I'm using gskill royal b-die 2x8 F4-4600C18D-16GTRS (18-22-22-42 1.45V).
I have the possibility to replace them with other 2x8 gskill b-die kits to use them in gear1:
-G.Skill Trident Z Neo F4-3800C14D-16GTZN (14-16-16-36 1.50V)
-G.SKILL Trident Z RGB F4-4000C16D-16GTZRA (16-16-16-36 1.40V)

What do you recommend?
Thank you


----------



## kingofblog

IIISLIDEIII said:


> In a few days I get 12900k + asus strix z690-a gaming, I use ddr4 but I am not at all an expert in overclocking on the ram as you are, I would like from you some advice on which ram to use using the xmp profile without having to touch anything at the level of voltages.
> 
> I would like to be on a high-performance 2x8 ram kit but that has fq, cl and voltages values in xmp that give me the certainty that everything works daily without the need for me to put my hand on the ram values.
> 
> Currently on my current pc (10700k and z490 asus hero II) I'm using gskill royal b-die 2x8 F4-4600C18D-16GTRS (18-22-22-42 1.45V).
> I have the possibility to replace them with other 2x8 gskill b-die kits to use them in gear1:
> -G.Skill Trident Z Neo F4-3800C14D-16GTZN (14-16-16-36 1.50V)
> -G.SKILL Trident Z RGB F4-4000C16D-16GTZRA (16-16-16-36 1.40V)
> 
> What do you recommend?
> Thank you


Why buy new RAM? Just run your existing kit (which looks like Hynix btw) at lower speeds. XMP profiles don't guarantee IMC performance, so buying new DIMMs won't take away any of the lottery. Load the XMP profile for your 4600 kit and lower the speed to 4000. If it works, run a memory test. Otherwise, step back to 3866 or 3733. You would have to do this anyway, even if you bought a "3800" or "4000" kit, because IMC performance is not guaranteed.



kingofblog said:


> There is a menu in the ASUS BIOS showing the "P-core SP" and "E-core SP" as separate values. In my case, SP=78, P-SP was 85-ish, and E-SP was high-60s. It might be the AI auto-OC sub-menu under "AI Tweaker". At any rate, SP is solely calculated from CPU V/f curve, and from what I've seen, 1.2 V @ 5.3 GHz is the god bin (SP 105), 1.3 V for good (SP 90+), and 1.4 V for bad (SP <80).


@zhrooms Follow-up here. P and E-core SPs can be viewed in "AI Tweaker -> AI Features". My SP78 i9 is P86 and E63. Regarding VccSA, it turns out you were right, and I am passing at least 5 minutes of TM5 at 1.25 V. However, I learned that my core undervolt (via ACLL=0.05) was unstable, and I had to back off (ACLL=0.05, "Vcore"=1.36). TM5 seems to be the hardest stress test to pass, harder than p95, RealBench, CineBench, etc. so far.


----------



## StarvinMarvinDK

raad11 said:


> What about one stick in B1?


Nopes... That doesn't work either


zhrooms said:


> I bought a 12900K on release that was defective, the A memory channel was dead, I could only boot the system with sticks in B1 and B2, had to send the CPU back to the store to be replaced.
> Sounds like you have the same issue I had. I thought it was the motherboard that was the issue, but then put the CPU in another motherboard, same exact problem, refused to boot with a memory stick in A1 or A2, but 2 sticks in B1 and B2 worked fine as said, then I switched the 12900K for my 12700K and A2 & B2 worked perfectly, on both motherboards, thus confirming it wasn't the motherboard or the memory.
> 
> So, by the sounds of it, you have to contact the store your purchased it from and tell them you need to have it (the CPU) replaced. 😞


Thanks man, will get right on it tomorrow


----------



## Hiikeri

Keep your Royals. I have same specs chips, high binned B-die, totally not Hynix.

Here G.Skill TridentZ RGB 4600 C18-22-22 1.45V without extra bling-bling price and these runs 1.55V @ 4000 141414-28-280-1T Stable.

Benched also on 4000 14-13-13, not stable but also on decent voltages. With tweaked 2nd/3rd latencies get 42.x ns on Aida64.


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

kingofblog said:


> Why buy new RAM? Just run your existing kit (which looks like Hynix btw) at lower speeds. XMP profiles don't guarantee IMC performance, so buying new DIMMs won't take away any of the lottery. Load the XMP profile for your 4600 kit and lower the speed to 4000. If it works, run a memory test. Otherwise, step back to 3866 or 3733. You would have to do this anyway, even if you bought a "3800" or "4000" kit, because IMC performance is not guaranteed.


thanks, are you telling me that among the 3 kits I have proposed, one is worth the other?
if you didn't have any of the 3 kits and had to choose between these 3, which one would you recommend?


Hiikeri said:


> Keep your Royals. I have same specs chips, G.Skill TridentZ RGB 4600 C18-22-22 1.45V without extra bling-bling price and these runs 1.55V @ 4000 141414-28-280-1T Stable.
> 
> Benched also on 4000 14-13-13, not stable but also on decent voltages. With tweaked 2nd/3rd latencies get 42.x ns on Aida64.


thanks, is not 1.55v a bit high to always keep in daily?


----------



## raad11

4000 15-15-15-28 won't boot either but it boots/passes 4000 14-15-15-28, weird


----------



## Smaz

Gardiff said:


> I'm running 4x8gb patriot 4400cl19, seems to be doing pretty well. Tertiaries could probably be tweaked a bit.
> 1.2v Vccsa
> 1.475v Vdram
> 1.3v Vddq TX
> 
> View attachment 2534988
> View attachment 2534990
> 
> View attachment 2534992


I am testing your settings and I am not able to do it the same as you. A 3866 goes well with very bad latency but at 4000 I have errors from the first second.
I do not know if it is the Imc or it is the viper 4400 but I expected a little more seeing the results of the people


----------



## RetroWave78

kingofblog said:


> Gear ratio on ASUS is "memory controller:ddr ratio" or such under "AI Tweaker". It should have 1:1, 1:2, and 1:4 as possible settings.
> 
> Set VccSA to 1.4 V, then try posting at DDR4-4000 with your XMP timings entered manually. Lower the frequency by one step until you can POST, then move on to TM5 or w/e. If the memory test passes, lower VccSA until unstable then add a few 10s of mV guardband. For core frequency, very few people achieve any meaningful all-core OC. 5.0-5.2 GHz in light all-core workloads is the consensus from what I've seen. If you aren't bothered by 1.5+ V, you might be able to get your single-core frequency past 5.5 GHz, although whether that's useful is another question. Make sure to disable E-cores for best performance.


Pardon my ignorance, but how does one access BIOS if the PC cannot POST or does POST happen when the PC successfully makes it past BIOS splash screen and on into WE? I've been using Gigabyte for the past few years, I heard MemTest5 is accessible through newer Asus BIOS, is this correct? I will probably settle for whatever I can get without exceeding 1.4v although youre technically correct, Intel maximum voltage is actually higher than this with newer CPU's (I know 8700k max voltage is similarly 1.52v), the problem is that what is set in BIOS and what the CPU is actually getting can be entirely different accounting for LLC.


----------



## kingofblog

IIISLIDEIII said:


> thanks, are you telling me that among the 3 kits I have proposed, one is worth the other?
> if you didn't have any of the 3 kits and had to choose between these 3, which one would you recommend?
> 
> thanks, is not 1.55v a bit high to always keep in daily?


4000 / 4600 * 18 = 15.6
4000 / 4600 * 22 = 19

3600 / 4600 * 18 = 14
3600 / 4600 * 22 = 17

Your kit can already run 4000-16-19-19 or 3600-14-17-17 with no change in voltage.



RetroWave78 said:


> Pardon my ignorance, but how does one access BIOS if the PC cannot POST or does POST happen when the PC successfully makes it past BIOS splash screen and on into WE?


This is manufacturer-specific. On my ASUS, I use the "Clear CMOS" button on the back and re-enter all my settings whenever I get a boot-failed. Some boards have a safe-boot button that bypasses the stored settings.



> I've been using Gigabyte for the past few years, I heard MemTest5 is accessible through newer Asus BIOS, is this correct?


ASUS has MemTest86 integrated into the BIOS, not TM5. MemTest86 can be used to find stuck bits in your DRAM, but it doesn't put enough load on the IMC to test overclocking.



> I will probably settle for whatever I can get without exceeding 1.4v although youre technically correct, Intel maximum voltage is actually higher than this with newer CPU's (I know 8700k max voltage is similarly 1.52v), the problem is that what is set in BIOS and what the CPU is actually getting can be entirely different accounting for LLC.


VccSA is driven by FIVR on ADL. The board VRM has no influence on it. Most users report a V/f wall past 1.3ish V anyway. 1.4 V is just for the initial boot-up. Once you get into the OS, you can gradually lower it with OC software until the system crashes to find your stable voltage.


----------



## Hiikeri

IIISLIDEIII said:


> thanks, are you telling me that among the 3 kits I have proposed, one is worth the other?
> if you didn't have any of the 3 kits and had to choose between these 3, which one would you recommend?
> 
> thanks, is not 1.55v a bit high to always keep in daily?


Its not too high, there are B-die kits with XMP 1.55V, if i remember right there are some kits default on high 1.60V.

They wont burn, they get crash / errors long time before burning.

1.55V is safe for B-dies. Just a little air flow in case is enough.

I have earlier 4 kits of B-die before current, all driven 1.50-1.55V.


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 One thing I would do is leave everything on defaults/no xmp since I know you are concerned about having issues with your install/transfer. The only thing I would do is disable AC otherwise it will promt you to install it and I dont like it but you may as it will help you install drivers but I prefer to install manually. Also will add a lot of latency if you leave it running but you can unistall it later if you want to.

This is where to get the lastest drivers if you want them. Newer than on Asus support site. [INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads

Edit also discounted ethernet/internet so Windows doesnt auto install missing drivers.


----------



## bscool

StarvinMarvinDK said:


> Hello everybody
> 
> Having some trouble with my new Asus Z690 Gaming Plus D4 board and ram.
> 
> Cannot use the correct Dimm slots - the system won't boot with ram in B2 and A2 slots as per the manual.
> Both stick can boot when placed seperately in B2 but not together - only when placed in B1 and B2 slots.
> 
> Bios is 0707 and ram kit is the VENGEANCE® RGB PRO 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 DRAM 4000MHz C19 Memory Kit - SKU CMW16GX4M2K4000C19


Just a guess defective MB as in bent pins or defective dim slot or defective CPU. Good luck trouble shooting it without having another MB and CPU. My first guess would be MB then CPU if I had to guess.


----------



## StarvinMarvinDK

bscool said:


> Just a guess defective MB as in bent pins or defective dim slot or defective CPU. Good luck trouble shooting it without having another MB and CPU. My first guess would be MB then CPU if I had to guess.


Have ordered a new CPU and it will arrive tomorrow. Checking for bent pins as I remove the first CPU and if there are bent pins, then the unopened CPU goes back


----------



## bscool

IIISLIDEIII said:


> In a few days I get 12900k + asus strix z690-a gaming, I use ddr4 but I am not at all an expert in overclocking on the ram as you are, I would like from you some advice on which ram to use using the xmp profile without having to touch anything at the level of voltages.
> 
> I would like to be on a high-performance 2x8 ram kit but that has fq, cl and voltages values in xmp that give me the certainty that everything works daily without the need for me to put my hand on the ram values.
> 
> Currently on my current pc (10700k and z490 asus hero II) I'm using gskill royal b-die 2x8 F4-4600C18D-16GTRS (18-22-22-42 1.45V).
> I have the possibility to replace them with other 2x8 gskill b-die kits to use them in gear1:
> -G.Skill Trident Z Neo F4-3800C14D-16GTZN (14-16-16-36 1.50V)
> -G.SKILL Trident Z RGB F4-4000C16D-16GTZRA (16-16-16-36 1.40V)
> 
> What do you recommend?
> Thank you


I would do 4000c16 if only doing 2x8.

Edit and as another user said you old kit is a high end b die, very good kit. Should run 4000-4266c15 or c16 [email protected] 1.5 to 1.55

Edit 2 and you asked someone about if you could buy any kit go for 4000c14 either 2x8 or 2x16 for best of best. I dont think the price difference is worth it going from 4000c16 kit to 4000c14 but if $$ no object 4000c14 is best.


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

kingofblog said:


> 4000 / 4600 * 18 = 15.6
> 4000 / 4600 * 22 = 19
> 
> 3600 / 4600 * 18 = 14
> 3600 / 4600 * 22 = 17
> 
> Your kit can already running 4000-16-19-19 or 3600-14-17-17 with no change in voltage.





Hiikeri said:


> Its not too high, there are B-die kits with XMP 1.55V, if i remember right there are some kits default on high 1.60V.
> 
> They wont burn, they get crash / errors long time before burning.
> 
> 1.55V is safe for B-dies. Just a little air flow in case is enough.
> 
> I have earlier 4 kits of B-die before current, all driven 1.50-1.55V.





bscool said:


> I would do 4000c16 if only doing 2x8.
> 
> Edit and as another user said you old kit is a high end b die, very good kit. Should run 4000-4266c15 or c16 [email protected] 1.5 to 1.55
> 
> Edit 2 and you asked someone about if you could buy any kit go for 4000c14 either 2x8 or 2x16 for best of best. I dont think the price difference is worth it going from 4000c16 kit to 4000c14 but if $$ no object 4000c14 is best.


I have the possibility to exchange at par by exchanging my 4600 for these:

F4-4000C14D-16GTRS
Trident Z Royal
DDR4-4000MHz CL14-15-15-35 1.55V
16GB (2x8GB)

what do you think ?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

zhrooms said:


> Are you dense? The 12900K is a higher bin, it offers a higher turbo frequency, twice as many E-cores and 5MB more of the shared L3 cache. A 12900K *will* overclock better than a 12700K, on average, obviously, because there's always exceptions, but that's not even worth bringing up, everyone should be on the same page about that. IMC on average is also stronger on a higher bin processor, spec sheet is completely irrelevant, blows my mind that you even brought that up, like it has any relevancy.. also you pulled the claim about "some 12700Ks having stronger P-cores because the E-cores weren't up to the task", out of your ***.
> 
> No one said the IMC can be rated. Also, do you have a source on the SP rating being the average of both P-cores and E-cores?
> 
> Just because you struggled with 4000 tight timings? Negligent of you to make such a claim about the IMC, the Rocket Lake IMC is horrific, most CPUs could barely do 3733, only the best did 3866 (exceptionally rare samples 4000), I was personally stuck at 3600 on my dual rank sticks. So the Alder Lake DDR4 IMC is infinitely stronger, both my 12700K and 12900K can do close to 4150 stable, on dual rank sticks, that's 500+ MT/s more (250 MHz IMC), and the best CPUs can do 4200-4266 stable, that's like 266 to 334 MT/s faster, comparing the best samples.
> 
> 
> Guessing some people haven't read the whole thread so re-posting this image, might be interesting to some. And I have confirmed on my new CPU that the 4133 requirement is about the same, seems to be universal for everyone, doesn't matter how good your IMC is, it just needs a certain amount of SA voltage to be *stable*, currently I'm running 1.41 and it's rock stable in games, got errors at 1.38 as an example, I'll find the exact voltage it needs later and make a new chart.
> View attachment 2535053
> 
> 
> Yep, I get 4898-4899, so 1-2 MHz under what I set it to, but the software still reads 100.00, not 99.96 or 99.98, so this is normal. Like, *don't bother* trying to make it 100.00.
> 
> You have *no idea* what you're talking about. Brute forcing and throwing money at a problem *always work*, the question is how much you gain from it, when it stops being worth it is different for everyone, foolish to say the improvement isn't there. Also, the average person would *greatly benefit* from a custom water cooling loop, you are completely delusional if you believe that someone with a water cooling setup that keeps the water temp at no more than 2°C above ambient, won't be able to overclock (significantly) more than your air (tower) cooler. I hit 100°C on the CPU Package yesterday when pushing 5.3GHz in R23, it pulled up to 253W, you won't get anywhere near that on a tower cooler, you can completely forget about TVB as well.
> 
> 12900K on water, we're talking up to 4% more performance from the CPU cores alone, then another 4 to 4.5% from the L3 cache on the 12900K, plus the 12900K being higher bin, so it'd overclock at least another 1.5% from reaching 100 MHz higher, compared to a 12700K. So yeah, we're up to like 10% now, comparing a 12700K on a air cooling versus a 12900K on water cooling. That's 55 to 60 FPS~, 130 to 144 FPS~ or 220 to 240 FPS~, and that is noticeable, especially at 60-144 and with G-Sync (VRR). As for the 3090, water cooling it, makes it possible to run up to 2205 MHz at 700W power consumption, that's also up to 10% faster than an air cooled card, even when cranking it to 100% fan speed. So same difference there but on the games that are bottlenecked on the graphics side.
> And, the fact at you bring up water cooling specifically, further shows how little you know, as a 420 AIO (with the best fans) on the CPU is just as good or better than most water cooling loops, same goes for AIOs on the GPU, most of them beat water cooled cards, main difference is that you tend to have to increase the fan speed since the radiator area is smaller (limited radiator capacity). You can absolutely get away dirt cheap by getting AIO over Water, literally one third the price in most cases, for identical performance, barely more than what the expensive air tower coolers cost.
> 
> If we talk about efficiency, then obviously a $20 tower cooler is the best, since you can still overclock on it, and the cheapest possible 3090 since you're going to be reducing the voltage anyway, power limit won't matter, that's peak efficiency/noise but there is a sweet spot depending on what product you're talking about, where investing in a $100 cooler can get you the best price/performance, for example AIO for your air cooled graphics card, we're then talking about lowering temps by up to 30°C, for like $129, that's insane, and the cooler can be re-sold.
> 
> Huh? Water cooling is very expensive, most of it can become obsolete with time, literally opposite of what you said. Some parts less than other of course, but you can't re-use GPU blocks, some CPU blocks you can't re-use, since they can go EOL fairly quickly. If you go with an aesthetic build you will use nickel plated blocks and fittings, and those definitely have a limited lifespan, in form of staining and having it literally come off, so Acetal+Copper lasts as a comparison. D5 pumps can go bad if you run them at full RPM for a long time, with some bad luck on top of that, most are obviously fine. Clear tubing will also always be stained.. so if you pick the _right_ products they can last for a long time and if you choose the "aesthetic" products, they might not last for even a year. Overall, water is just very expensive, AIO is not as expensive but they will go bad with time as well, and incompatible on GPUs just like with water blocks, but not always, either way, making AIOs far more costly than air over time, but you definitely get something for your money, like: looks, performance & street cred.
> 
> See above, you can basically just set 1.42 SA, leave VDDQ on Auto, DRAM on 1.500 and then go straight to 100:133, 1:1 (Gear) and DRAM Frequency to 4133, I can basically guarantee it'll work. And yes, stay away from using those 2 additional sticks, as long as you just game, it's completely meaningless having 32GB over 16GB, like one game would have a problem with 16. And definitely stick to the 0707 BIOS, I don't see any reason to update from it in a long time, it's basically perfect as it is. And disable the E-cores right away, on first boot even, if you don't intend to use them for anything (like if you're just gonna game).


On the subject of water, I agree it depends on component selection. Plastic tubing starts to lose it’s clarity within weeks. I’ve heard pumps can go bad, but I have 2 D5s that I bought in 2016 and are still running. I am still using my EK Supremacy EVO from 2016 since it’s compatible with LGA1700. I will be able to plug my MO-RA into anything I build for the next 20 years or longer. GPU blocks are the only part that need to be replaced every generation. Factory installed waterblocks exist however.

With Alder Lake, water cooling makes more of a difference than it did on previous generations, especially the temperature of the water. At warm temperatures, the CPU is not stable past 5.1. At 5C water temp, it’s stable at 5.4-5.5.

Most water coolers like to change fans like they change underwear. I’m still using all 8 ML140pro fans I bought day 1 and I bought a 9th. think my biggest un-recouped expense has been radiators and fittings I’ve ditched over the last 5 years because I liked other ones better. But that’s not an inherent expense of watercooling, just upgrade bug.


----------



## bscool

@IIISLIDEIII
DDR4-4000MHz CL14-15-15-35 1.55V is about as good as it gets for 2x8


----------



## Hiikeri

IIISLIDEIII said:


> I have the possibility to exchange at par by exchanging my 4600 for these:
> 
> F4-4000C14D-16GTRS
> Trident Z Royal
> DDR4-4000MHz CL14-15-15-35 1.55V
> 16GB (2x8GB)
> 
> what do you think ?


As you can see, that kit XMP is allready 1.55V (default).

On manual tweaking, possibly not better or weaker bin to get them xtreme fast vs. yours Royal B-dies when put them at same voltage (1.45 > 1.55). At performance, 1cl = ~200Mhz bandwidth.⁷

Rest is only silicon lottery on ram chips and IMC is possibly 1st limiting factor, not those rams which are both high-end DDR4.


----------



## GtiJason

IIISLIDEIII said:


> I have the possibility to exchange at par by exchanging my 4600 for these:
> 
> F4-4000C14D-16GTRS
> Trident Z Royal
> DDR4-4000MHz CL14-15-15-35 1.55V
> 16GB (2x8GB)
> 
> what do you think ?


I'd go for it, the 4000c14 kit probably better at Gear 1 if that's what you are shooting for.
Another thing to note the 4600c18 kit you have is already good enough. You are going to be limited by the memory controller on this platform not the ram assuming you use decent B Die.
I have tested 3 Dual Rank kits and at least 12 Single rank (binned for XOC) Samsung B-Die kits on both this board (Strix-A) and the entry level MSI Z690 A Pro and they all max out at the same place. (For booting into OS at 100 BCLK and not raising it in windows) Dual Rank kits at 4000c14 2T and Single Rank 4133c14 1T. I'll try to find some screenshots that show voltages and other useful info



Spoiler: SCREENIES


----------



## mattskiiau

Hey guys,
Can anyone give me a few tweak quick wins from my XMP profile to lower my latency quickly? Finished my CPU OC and 79ns is CRAZY!









EDIT: Manually set 100:133 and 1:1 in BIOS and that seemed to have lowered latency a fair bit. More tweaking required though. Any suggestions welcome!









EDIT 2: Was able to pass a cycle with TM5 anta777 with the below. I think voltages are pretty tame right now, may have plenty room to move if my IMC can hold up?


----------



## raad11

So after I sort of passed that TM5/anta777 run at 14-15-15-28-2T (2x16GB 4000 Gear 1) @ 1.44 SA/1.48 VDDQ, I tried again and it threw errors at 1.44/1.44, so I stepped it back up to 1.48 and it still threw 1 error in the 2nd or 3rd run so it looks like that error in the screenshot was probably legit. I'm sure I could probably run it at that without any problems in the applications I use (1 error and 1 pseudo error out of 6 cycles of anta777) but I figured what the hell and 14-16-15-28-2T passed without any errors so I'll leave it at that as a compromise. I had it at 14-16-16-29-2T at 1.43/1.44 before.

I think I could probably run 4133 on single rank sticks at CL14 or CL15.

I'm okay with this for dual rank. I hope another BIOS comes out which allows more, but it seems like there was some tweaking done specifically to allow for CAS 14 latency in Gear 1 in 0707 and above.

Edit: This is G.Skill Ripjaws 2x16GB DR B-Die 4400 17-18-18-38 1.5v kit that I have at 4000 14-16-15-28-2T 1.6v Gear 1 with 1.44 SA and 1.48 VDDQ. It booted 4133 using 100:133, but I couldn't avoid errors in TM5.


----------



## kingofblog

mattskiiau said:


> Hey guys,
> Can anyone give me a few tweak quick wins from my XMP profile to lower my latency quickly? Finished my CPU OC and 79ns is CRAZY!
> 
> EDIT: Manually set 100:133 and 1:1 in BIOS and that seemed to have lowered latency a fair bit. More tweaking required though. Any suggestions welcome!
> 
> EDIT 2: Was able to pass a cycle with TM5 anta777 with the below. I think voltages are pretty tame right now, may have plenty room to move if my IMC can hold up?


Priority list for Samsung B 1Rx8:

1. Set tRFC to 180 ns or lower
2. Increase frequency to the max: 4000-4266
3. Lower primary timings to 8 ns or below
4. Attempt CR1


----------



## mattskiiau

kingofblog said:


> Priority list for Samsung B 1Rx8:
> 
> 1. Set tRFC to 180 ns or lower
> 2. Increase frequency to the max: 4000-4266
> 3. Lower primary timings to 8 ns or below
> 4. Attempt CR1


Thank you, I'll go through with testing this.

Would you happen to know where VCCIO is on a Asus Z690? Or are we just using DRAM, VDDQ TX and VCCSA for voltage tweaks now?


----------



## Ichirou

Out of curiosity (since I'm upgrading from Z390 to Z690), would I be able to plug in the exact same super-tight timings I have on my kit on the new platform and it should magically run? Or what should I keep in mind?

Golden sample single rank Micron B-die (which nobody here uses lol). A low 1.24V VCCIO and 1.20V VCCSA is all that's needed for my kit on Z390.


----------



## Exilon

Ichirou said:


> Out of curiosity (since I'm upgrading from Z390 to Z690), would I be able to plug in the exact same super-tight timings I have on my kit on the new platform and it should magically run? Or what should I keep in mind?


I did the same upgrade with 4x8 B-die and got +133MHz and -50mV on B-die with better timings for different rank tertiaries. I wouldn't assume anything but you can use your current settings as a baseline and tweak from there.


----------



## Ichirou

Exilon said:


> I did the same upgrade with 4x8 B-die and got +133MHz and -50mV on B-die with better timings for different rank tertiaries. I wouldn't assume anything but you can use your current settings as a baseline and tweak from there.


So you actually managed to reduce VDIMM from the platform change? Nice; that gives me more potential headroom 

Did any timings change in name/function, or are they all the same and intact? IIRC the RTL/IOLs are now handled differently, right?
I'm aware that VCCIO => VDDQ now, but is there anything else I should keep note?


----------



## gamervivek

Had a rollercoaster of emotions last night overclocking my 16x2 3600MHz 17-19-19-39 B-die kit that I had bought before Zen2's release and paid a rather expensive price for. Had it working at 3600MHz 16-16-16-36 since it couldn't do much more than that and stability with higher FCLK was always suspect. 

Now with 12700K, for the first time it booted 4200MHz 18-18-18-36 without any voltage increase and it passed TM5, for five minutes without errors. I was quite happy since all these years I thought I had a dud kit on my hands, it didn't do this well on the Zen and 9900K boards I had earlier( all gigabyte btw ). 

So I load Aida to check for memory latency and to my dismay the latency is >70ns because the memory controller is set on auto for 1:2. Moving it back to 1:1 ratio doesn't boot and gives me BSOD even at 4000MHz. It only seems stable at 3800MHz at which point I'm worse latency-wise since the timings on the kit don't play well with increased voltage and 3800MHz won't do 16-16-16-36

Still trying to figure out if the system agent voltage increase can help. My board is Asus TUF Gaming-Z690-Plus Wifi and hwinfo doesn't recognize the sensors on it for now so can't see what it's set at.


----------



## pt0x-

Can anyone confirm the safe daily voltage for SA? I got my 4x8gb g.skill 4000-15-16-16-32 CR1 @1.5v kit running in gear 2 but cant get it to post at gear 1. Im already at 1.415v SA.

Gear 2 is running fine (tm5 4x runs no errors) @ 1.37 SA

I did tighten the timings compared to XMP. 15-15-15 and secondary timings. Should I go back to XMP before atempting g1?

I have a strix-a with bios 003. 12900k 5.3 / 4.2 @ 1.375v


----------



## sneida

intel noob question - how to best move on from here?

specs: 12700k, asus z690 tuf d4, 2x16gb gskill 3200 cl14 (see screenshot)

working: 

xmp (3200cl14) + manual change to T1, rest auto
xmp + manual change to 3600mhz 16-16-16 T1, DRAM 1.4v, rest auto -> TM5 anata777 no errors in 3 cycles

not working: 

(no xmp) manual set to 3600mhz 16-16-16, DRAM 1.4v, rest auto
anything >3600mhz (e.g. 3700mhz, 3800mhz) -> no boot (various DRAM voltages, e.g. 1.425v)
xmp + manual change to 3600mhz 15-15-15 T1, DRAM 1.4v, rest auto -> TM5 anta777 errors after few seconds

I have troubles finding VDD, VCCSA and MC VDD in the TUF bios, as well as in hwinfo64.

any help would be highly appreciated.


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> @RetroWave78 One thing I would do is leave everything on defaults/no xmp since I know you are concerned about having issues with your install/transfer. The only thing I would do is disable AC otherwise it will promt you to install it and I dont like it but you may as it will help you install drivers but I prefer to install manually. Also will add a lot of latency if you leave it running but you can unistall it later if you want to.
> 
> This is where to get the lastest drivers if you want them. Newer than on Asus support site. [INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads
> 
> Edit also discounted ethernet/internet so Windows doesnt auto install missing drivers.


Is there any other way to control RGB elements without Armory Crate? I looked to see if there is a standalone Aura Sync but apparently it's now integrated into Crate.


----------



## Ichirou

RetroWave78 said:


> Is there any other way to control RGB elements without Armory Crate? I looked to see if there is a standalone Aura Sync but apparently it's now integrated into Crate.


If you have a Corsair product, you can use iCUE, but otherwise, nothing really coming to mind.

You could always just uninstall Armoury Crate and use an older Aura Sync build. I have an old installation kicking around if you want it.


----------



## RetroWave78

Ichirou said:


> If you have a Corsair product, you can use iCUE, but otherwise, nothing really coming to mind.
> 
> You could always just uninstall Armoury Crate and use an older Aura Sync build. I have an old installation kicking around if you want it.


No corsair products, is there difficulty uninstalling Armory Crate later on / should I not install it in the first place? I will try the older version you have, thanks!


----------



## sneida

RetroWave78 said:


> No corsair products, is there difficulty uninstalling Armory Crate later on / should I not install it in the first place? I will try the older version you have, thanks!








OpenRGB


Open source RGB lighting control that doesn't depend on manufacturer software




openrgb.org


----------



## Ichirou

sneida said:


> OpenRGB
> 
> 
> Open source RGB lighting control that doesn't depend on manufacturer software
> 
> 
> 
> 
> openrgb.org


This looks like it might be even better than just installing an old copy of Aura Sync
@RetroWave78 Try that first, and if it doesn't work for you, then I'll upload Aura Sync for you. It's a pretty hefty download; ~300 MB.

In other news, I think I'm going to head out to Canada Computers today to pick up the motherboard.
Anyone have suggestions for top binned Samsung B-die kits that I should look out for, in case they have some lying around?


----------



## Arni90

For everyone with an MSI DDR4 board unable to boot dual rank B-die above DDR4-3600

RttWR to 80
RttNOM to 48 or 60
RttPARK to 80 or 120

No guarantees that it works for you, but it allowed me to reach DDR4-3800 at least. In my case 80-60-80 seems to work pretty well


----------



## bscool

@sneida You need 2t in gear 1 if you want to run higher frequency like 4000-4133 with DR. You will be limited to lower clocks with 1t and gear 1 with DR

@RetroWave78 Yeah AC is all I know of I have seen things like OpenRGB but never tried them. I usually set a static color and then uninstalled AC and it will stick. I mean it will stick for the motherboard and those rgb headers it wont stay if you use it to control memory color.


----------



## Cam1

gamervivek said:


> Still trying to figure out if the system agent voltage increase can help. My board is Asus TUF Gaming-Z690-Plus Wifi and hwinfo doesn't recognize the sensors on it for now so can't see what it's set at.


I think The "system agent voltage" is reported as "SA VID" under Core VIDs, i got the same MB/CPU, when i changed the SA this value changes too...











sneida said:


> intel noob question - how to best move on from here?


I just wait for a Youtube Oc Tuto


----------



## Revv23

I finally got my MSI MPG EDGE today. 

After a month of screwing around with ASROCK waiting for a BIOS. That will be my 1st and last asrock product for sure.

Same ram that wouldnt run DDR 2800 in ASROCK board. havent done any tweaking this is XMP all auto on the board.


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> @RetroWave78 One thing I would do is leave everything on defaults/no xmp since I know you are concerned about having issues with your install/transfer. The only thing I would do is disable AC otherwise it will promt you to install it and I dont like it but you may as it will help you install drivers but I prefer to install manually. Also will add a lot of latency if you leave it running but you can unistall it later if you want to.
> 
> This is where to get the lastest drivers if you want them. Newer than on Asus support site. [INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads
> 
> Edit also discounted ethernet/internet so Windows doesnt auto install missing drivers.


Keeping Ethernet disconnected upon initial boot is best practice? I won't have any issues? I have all the drivers on hand, from what I hear LAN doesn't work with Strix-A D4 without installing the driver first. Thank-you for the help, I will not install Armory Crate.


----------



## bscool

RetroWave78 said:


> Keeping Ethernet disconnected upon initial boot is best practice? I won't have any issues? I have all the drivers on hand, from what I hear LAN doesn't work with Strix-A D4 without installing the driver first. Thank-you for the help, I will not install Armory Crate.


True the newer ethernet driver isnt installed. It will ask you to connect to wifi though. Just old habit I guess 

And if doing a clean install of Win11 you can only do Pro as far as I know offline. Other versions make you connect to make an account last I knew.

Edit if all else fails and it wont let you proceed connect to the internet I guess. 😁

Edit 2 you can install Win11 Home without account Windows 10 question


----------



## Ichirou

If I wanted to separately bench on the Z690 platform, is the motherboard, CPU and cooler, and RAM all that's needed? 12900K so I'm pretty sure it has iGPU.
Just want to test it out separately from main PC in case something goes absolutely wrong and I need to revert back temporarily to use PC.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> If I wanted to separately bench on the Z690 platform, is the motherboard, CPU and cooler, and RAM all that's needed? 12900K so I'm pretty sure it has iGPU.
> Just want to test it out separately from main PC in case something goes absolutely wrong and I need to revert back temporarily to use PC.


Yeah a heads up if using multiple sdd with say one OS Win 10 NVME and another Win11 Sata/Nvme on seperate drives. Some of us had issues. If just using a single OS you should be ok. This is on Asus ddr4 MBs.

I used both to test and compare Win10 to Win11.


----------



## Revv23

Ichirou said:


> If I wanted to separately bench on the Z690 platform, is the motherboard, CPU and cooler, and RAM all that's needed? 12900K so I'm pretty sure it has iGPU.
> Just want to test it out separately from main PC in case something goes absolutely wrong and I need to revert back temporarily to use PC.


power supply/ hard drive - just like any other platform


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Yeah a heads up if using multiple sdd with say one OS Win 10 NVME and another Win11 Sata/Nvme on seperate drives. Some of us had issues. If just using a single OS you should be ok. This is on Asus ddr4 MBs.
> 
> I used both to test and compare Win10 to Win11.





Revv23 said:


> power supply/ hard drive - just like any other platform


Oh right, I completely forgot about the separate Windows install. I'll probably have to take out one of my handful of SSDs to partition it and install a new Windows onto it.
Pretty sure you don't even need to activate if you're just using it to test, which is enough for RAM testing since it might get corrupted anyway.

Any suggestion for cheap but good enough CPU cooler? Something low profile, I'm thinking. Again, solely RAM benching. Just don't want CPU to crash and burn even during TM5 lol


----------



## sneida

bscool said:


> @sneida You need 2t in gear 1 if you want to run higher frequency like 4000-4133 with DR. You will be limited to lower clocks with 1t and gear 1 with DR
> 
> @RetroWave78 Yeah AC is all I know of I have seen things like OpenRGB but never tried them. I usually set a static color and then uninstalled AC and it will stick. I mean it will stick for the motherboard and those rgb headers it wont stay if you use it to control memory color.


thank you, this helped alot!

can boot with 4000cl18 CR2 now, but latency is pretty bad (76ns).


----------



## Revv23

Ichirou said:


> Oh right, I completely forgot about the separate Windows install. I'll probably have to take out one of my handful of SSDs to partition it and install a new Windows onto it.
> Pretty sure you don't even need to activate if you're just using it to test, which is enough for RAM testing since it might get corrupted anyway.
> 
> Any suggestion for cheap but good enough CPU cooler? Something low profile, I'm thinking. Again, solely RAM benching. Just don't want CPU to crash and burn even during TM5 lol


dont need to activate - if not stressing the cpu just get the cheapest 1700 compatible cooler you can find, which TBH probably is pretty limited.


----------



## Ichirou

Is Micron B-die the only die that offers 4,000+ MHz RAM as Single Rank? Honestly makes me think that my kit is a lot more valuable than I thought when I first bought it.
According to Amazon, I paid just under $650 USD for the kit after tax. Managed to get 4,174 MHz @ CL15. Does anyone here think that's good value?

Now I'm even more curious to see how Micron B-die performs on Z690.


----------



## bscool

sneida said:


> thank you, this helped alot!
> 
> can boot with 4000cl18 CR2 now, but latency is pretty bad (76ns).


Sounds like it switched to gear 2. You need to set gear 1 as in 1:1 in bios or it defaults to gear 2 above 3600 I think. 1.5 to 1.55 drams, 1.45v VCCSA and 1.5v VDDQ is roughly what is needed for 4000+ on DR from what I have seen. To be stable under stress/memtests.

Edit added pic


----------



## Revv23

Ichirou said:


> Is Micron B-die the only die that offers 4,000+ MHz RAM as Single Rank? Honestly makes me think that my kit is a lot more valuable than I thought when I first bought it.
> According to Amazon, I paid just under $650 USD for the kit after tax. Managed to get 4,174 MHz @ CL15. Does anyone here think that's good value?
> 
> Now I'm even more curious to see how Micron B-die performs on Z690.



for 2*8? HOLY **** lol.


----------



## Ichirou

Revv23 said:


> for 2*8? HOLY **** lol.


2x8 GB? Nah, it's a 4x16 GB kit ;P








Am curious to see how this performs on Z690, since I was told that the platform actually raises frequency limit and lowers VDIMM requirement.


----------



## pt0x-

bscool said:


> Sounds like it switched to gear 2. You need to set gear 1 as in 1:1 in bios or it defaults to gear 2 above 3600 I think. 1.5 to 1.55 drams, 1.45v VCCSA and 1.5v VDDQ is roughly what is needed for 4000+ on DR from what I have seen. To be stable under stress/memtests.
> 
> Edit added pic


Are these kind of voltages even safe to run for daily? I asked before in a separate question, but its already on the previous page


----------



## bscool

@Ichirou I dont know of anyone else running 4x16 so you can tell us, Might be great or might be a nightmare. 2x8 hynix I could run 5333-5600 on z590 I couldnt get past 4600. But it could have been bios or a setting I missed. I didnt mess with it much but I was expecting 5000+. I did see @owikh84 got his hynix past 5000 so probably bios or me just being noob.


----------



## bscool

@pt0x- You have to decide for yourself. I have ran similar voltages or close the last couple gens for io/sa. z390/z490 I usually stayed under 1.45 and z590 up to 1.5 was required depending on IMC and frequency. Up to each individual to decide what they consider "safe". 

XMP "may" void Intel warranty if that says anything.









Intel® Extreme Memory Profile (Intel® XMP) and Overclock RAM


Intel® XMP allows you to overclock DDR3/DDR4 RAM memory with unlocked Intel® processors to perform beyond standard for the best gaming performance.




www.intel.com


----------



## Ichirou

pt0x- said:


> Are these kind of voltages even safe to run for daily? I asked before in a separate question, but its already on the previous page


Well if it's any indication: You have to consider that for several generations now (since as early as Z390), people have been running 4,000+ MHz kits on the daily.
And a lot of them require at least 1.30-1.40V SA/IO (or more) to be stable.

There hasn't been any notable reports about CPU/IMCs dying as of yet, and it's already been a good 5+ years since Z390. Hence, I believe those are safe voltages to try up to.
Buildzoid said something similar in one of his older videos as well regarding those voltages in particular.

And even if they really aren't safe voltages, you'd probably swap the CPU within a generation or two anyway.


bscool said:


> @Ichirou I dont know of anyone else running 4x16 so you can tell us, Might be great or might be a nightmare. 2x8 hynix I could run 5333-5600 on z590 I couldnt get past 4600. But it could have been bios or a setting I missed. I didnt mess with it much but I was expecting 5000+. I did see @owikh84 got his hynix past 5000 so probably bios or me just being noob.


Well I'm obviously not going to be _too_ optimistic; I doubt that 1T will work (it already doesn't as it is) and G1 too. But I'm fine with that as long as there's an improvement either way. My kit's already pretty maxed out as it is and I wouldn't mind if it just maintains its current status.


----------



## ObviousCough

My 12600k must have the worst IMC.

4x8GB will post and boot at 3900. Patriot Viper Steel 4400C19
2x8GB will post and boot at 4100 Patriot Viper Steel 4400C19
2x16GB won't post above 3600. G.Skill Trident Z Neo F4-3800C14D


MSI PRO vanilla
1.45 SA
1.5 VDDQ
1.55 Vdimm


----------



## Revv23

gerardfraser said:


> Here are my setting on MSI PRO z690-A DDR4 on BIOS (E7D25IMS.100) on BIOS (E7D25IMS.114) same settings did not work
> 
> Just Primary timings not sub timings
> Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz
> SA voltage needed to be greater than 1.45v
> DRAM Voltage 1.6v


Can you point me to where you find dragon power? Evidently google is not capable of finding anything other than ad revenue these days.


----------



## bscool

Post about it here [Sammelthread] - OC Prozessoren Intel 12th Gen. Sockel 1700 (Alder Lake-S)

Go up a bit he compares Asus to MSI on mem oc.

Edit some info deleted as I believe it is inaccurate


----------



## ObviousCough

I'm in windows right now at 1.5v VDDQ so i don't think it applies 🙃


----------



## eeeven

After i switched from the MSI Edge to the ASUS Strix Z690-A i could mange to get 4000C15 stable with DR Modules no problem. With the MSI i could not even get 4000C15 to post.

This is with E-Cores off for testing Latency Differences. It also runs with E-Cores on.


----------



## bscool

@ObviousCough I think it is someone that read specs for ddr5.


----------



## Ichirou

eeeven said:


> After i switched from the MSI Edge to the ASUS Strix Z690-A i could mange to get 4000C15 stable with DR Modules no problem. With the MSI i could not even get 4000C15 to post.
> 
> This is with E-Cores off for testing Latency Differences. It also runs with E-Cores on.
> 
> View attachment 2535234


Looks like more evidence that the Strix is just the better board for DDR4 on Z690 then.

So, the Z690 platform has Performance, Efficiency, *and* Cache cores? Or does it not quite work like that?


----------



## Hiikeri

Cam1 said:


> I think The "system agent voltage" is reported as "SA VID" under Core VIDs, i got the same MB/CPU, when i changed the SA this value changes too...


I dont think so. My MSI mobo with (Hwinfo) has 2 SA voltages. VID and real.
That VID is like an CPU VID, it is what component, IMC or CPU is asking from power supply and thinks what is needed. Real voltage is different than VID.

Offtopic. Like an GPU clocks, example you oc your GPU to 2200Mhz... WOOO..

Just to realize that it wont give even at 1fps more than earlier 2150Mhz GPU.

Becouse all OC softwares, like an Afterburner, just show to you GPU "give me those clocks" and they wont show whats your real clockspeed are on GPU. 

So you can OC your GPU to example 2125Mhz and it can be actually faster than 2150/2200Mhz GPU. The magic thing is real clockspeed = real power of GPU. And end-results are depending how you OC GPU.

And Hwinfo shows it, its called GPU Effective clocks = real Mhz.


----------



## grey.clock

A little sad that my new chips look to have C die...... but they are at least running at stock speeds with auto AI tuning. Not certain how to feel about them.... this is my 2nd ram kit and I am not certain I want to go through the hassle to try for a better set. Anyone have success with C die?


----------



## eeeven

lul, of course this is not C-Die  This is B-Die 100%. Thaiphoon Burner can not read 100% correct on all module types and manufacturers.


----------



## GtiJason

grey.clock said:


> A little sad that my new chips look to have C die...... but they are at least running at stock speeds with auto AI tuning. Not certain how to feel about them.... this is my 2nd ram kit and I am not certain I want to go through the hassle to try for a better set. Anyone have success with C die?
> View attachment 2535244


Um yeah, I don't think that is right. C die is not 3600c14 good


----------



## grey.clock

Hah thank you for the feedback. It is a pretty new kit, cannot find much online about it.


----------



## Ichirou

grey.clock said:


> Hah thank you for the feedback. It is a pretty new kit, cannot find much online about it.


Usually the timings are a huge giveaway in terms of what kind of die it is

It's usually only Samsung B-die that gets flat 14's


----------



## gtz

grey.clock said:


> A little sad that my new chips look to have C die...... but they are at least running at stock speeds with auto AI tuning. Not certain how to feel about them.... this is my 2nd ram kit and I am not certain I want to go through the hassle to try for a better set. Anyone have success with C die?
> View attachment 2535243
> View attachment 2535244


Like others stated you have b die.


----------



## LionAlonso

Hi 
With 12900k at 4000Mhz dram gear 1 at 1,45V and 1.19 SA it passes all test but sometimes during testing ram (for example OCCT) the screen freezes for a bit, but no errors, is that some kind of instability?


----------



## kingofblog

LionAlonso said:


> Hi
> With 12900k at 4000Mhz dram gear 1 at 1,45V and 1.19 SA it passes all test but sometimes during testing ram (for example OCCT) the screen freezes for a bit, but no errors, is that some kind of instability?


This is probably caused by swapping. Your memory test is allocating almost all of the system RAM, so if anything else needs RAM (e.g. scheduled task), you will get thrashing.


----------



## LionAlonso

kingofblog said:


> This is probably caused by swapping. Your memory test is allocating almost all of the system RAM, so if anything else needs RAM (e.g. scheduled task), you will get thrashing.


Thanks for the answer!
No need to worry so? If no errors there is no problem? I dont remember well but i think it didnt happened with my 5900x.


----------



## Ichirou

LionAlonso said:


> Hi
> With 12900k at 4000Mhz dram gear 1 at 1,45V and 1.19 SA it passes all test but sometimes during testing ram (for example OCCT) the screen freezes for a bit, but no errors, is that some kind of instability?


Can be caused by too tight tRFC, so try loosening it a little.


----------



## LionAlonso

Ichirou said:


> Can be caused by too tight tRFC, so try loosening it a little.


Will try, but i have it at 160ns with bdie (320 at 4000Mhz)
It shouldnt give errors at TM5?


----------



## Ichirou

LionAlonso said:


> Will try, but i have it at 160ns with bdie (320 at 4000Mhz)
> It shouldnt give errors at TM5?


Freezing issues caused by tRFC isn't always reported in TM5. It's just something that can happen during PC use.
Try loosening it by like, somewhere +20 to +50 and retest. You can retighten later.


----------



## eeeven

i recommend not to allocate all the available system memory for testing stability. for example when you have 32 gig system memory, you should only allocate like 27000 for MemTest. otherwise windows will automatically outsource the missing memory to your ssd which causes heavy stuttering and sometimes the stability tools will test your SSD space which is simply stupid.


----------



## JoeRambo

Arni90 said:


> For everyone with an MSI DDR4 board unable to boot dual rank B-die above DDR4-3600
> 
> RttWR to 80
> RttNOM to 48 or 60
> RttPARK to 80 or 120
> 
> No guarantees that it works for you, but it allowed me to reach DDR4-3800 at least. In my case 80-60-80 seems to work pretty well


No luck for me, tried these and quite a few more.
Kinda funny to be able to run DDR4 3600 13-14-14-30 1T, but unable to boot DDR4 3700 or 3733 with any settings 

Hopefully MSI will come up with a BIOS that can break this training barrier on DR DRAM.


----------



## HyperMatrix

Is there a trick to being able to run 4000 CL15 with 1T timing on B-Die or is it just not possible with an 8x4GB config? Can barely even boot with 1T atm regardless of DRAM, VDDQ, or SA voltage. Even dropping down to 3600MHz CL14 wouldn't allow it.


----------



## eeeven

1T in generell is hard to run in G1. It gets harder with Dual Rank and Dual Dimm configs.


----------



## JoeRambo

Z690 Edge DDR4 has no problems running 1T @3600, but 2T or whatever relaxed timings, auto or manually set just won't train anything higher currently.


----------



## eeeven

im talking about 4000+ MT/s


----------



## neteng101

Has anyone tried the 115 beta Bios for MSI?






Beta/MP - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## robertr1

What’s the best bios for asus Prime-P?


----------



## Arni90

neteng101 said:


> Has anyone tried the 115 beta Bios for MSI?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beta/MP - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Yes, no noticeable difference from 113 or 114 in terms of dual rank B-die


----------



## JoeRambo

Arni90 said:


> Yes, no noticeable difference from 113 or 114 in terms of dual rank B-die


Ouch, and here I was waiting gor 115 to appear for Edge  Thanks for hint, i will skip it now.


----------



## Hiikeri

oh boy, DR setup has been always much harder load to IMC than SR setup and it will never run at same speeds than SR. Ever-Ever.

You all wait something mystic-Uber-bios that 4000 141414 32Gb works SA/VDDQ/DIMM voltage at 1.35V on every CPU/MB/Cooling combination, it will never happen.

Official Jedec memory support is DDR4 3200, thats it. Rest is overclocking and MB manufacturers dont have to use theirs resourses to tweak some users possibly DR 4000 overclockability. But they do it on small-level, becouse manuf. competion.

Release days bioses was pretty crappy but most of huge bugs are already fixed on beta-bioses.

Memory controller is inside the CPU and something magic bios wont make it faster or working at remarkable lower voltages to get example DR 4000 141414 32Gb or 64Gb...

Let's say that every IMC runs 4000 141414-1T DR gear1 with Liquid Nitrogen (LN2) + 1.8-2.0V.

Its only cooling, voltages and little luck to get decent silicon IMC.


----------



## ObviousCough

Arni90 said:


> Yes, no noticeable difference from 113 or 114 in terms of dual rank B-die


+1


----------



## raad11

Hiikeri said:


> oh boy, DR setup has been always much harder load to IMC than SR setup and it will never run at same speeds than SR. Ever-Ever.
> 
> You all wait something mystic-Uber-bios that 4000 141414 32Gb works SA/VDDQ/DIMM voltage at 1.35V on every CPU/MB/Cooling combination, it will never happen.
> 
> Official Jedec memory support is DDR4 3200, thats it. Rest is overclocking and MB manufacturers dont have to use theirs resourses to tweak some users possibly DR 4000 overclockability. But they do it on small-level, becouse manuf. competion.
> 
> Release days bioses was pretty crappy but most of huge bugs are already fixed on beta-bioses.
> 
> Memory controller is inside the CPU and something magic bios wont make it faster or working at remarkable lower voltages to get example DR 4000 141414 32Gb or 64Gb...
> 
> Let's say that every IMC runs 4000 141414-1T DR gear1 with Liquid Nitrogen (LN2) + 1.8-2.0V.
> 
> Its only cooling, voltages and little luck to get decent silicon IMC.


I don't understand why the manufacturers don't favor t-topology layouts then. 4x8GB worked wonderfully in my old Z390 Aorus Master. Lots of people need more than 16 gigs of RAM.


----------



## JoeRambo

Hiikeri said:


> Memory controller is inside the CPU and something magic bios wont make it faster or working at remarkable lower voltages to get example DR 4000 141414 32Gb or 64Gb...


So DDR4 3600 141414T1 at low volts is not taxing controller, and 3733CL202020T2 is ? Kinda hard to believe when multiple users have exact same wall @3600 on same mobos? More like MB BIOS has bugs and problems with training that have nothing to do with IMC limits, esp when users move from MSI to Asus and somehow can do 4133 with same CPU and Memory ( on same high volts where 3733 does not post ).

The real question is and always was will manufacturers invest into BIOS. The result might not be positive for us users, but we vote with our wallets after all and users tend to have long memories too.


----------



## postem

zhrooms said:


> Hm, tried my Dual Rank kit, at 3600 it booted just fine, then when I tried 3733, absolutely impossible, tried 3866 as well just in case the ratio messed up, all the way up to 1.45 SA, and it flat out refuses. I've heard Dual Rank is much harder to run, but also seen screenshots of CPU-Z at 3866, though maybe they were on exceptionally good 12900K bins.
> 
> So I resorted to BCLK tuning instead, with 3600 MT/s set, I changed BCLK to 103 which increased the memory to 3700 MT/s, and it booted right away, tested a few more values below;
> BCLK 103.2 = 3707 MT/s (1853 MHz on the IMC)​BCLK 103.6 = 3721 MT/s (1861 MHz on the IMC)​BCLK 100.0 = 3733 MT/s (Fail)​BCLK 103.8 = 3737 MT/s (Fail)​BCLK 104.2 = 3751 MT/s (Fail)​So not looking good for Dual Rank sticks, IMC at 1860 is ~200 MHz lower than on my Single Rank sticks (2050). This particular i7-12700K with SP70 rating really did not like 3733, but 3720 worked, thus can easily see a decent i9-12900K with stronger IMC do 3733, and maybe even 3866 if it's a god tier bin, but that's still far from the 4100-4200 on Single Rank sticks. With this limited data I'd recommend Dual Rank owners to consider switching to Single Rank, and don't get me wrong, you can still go 3600-3700 MT/s at 13-13-13 on Dual Rank, which is very fast, it'd beat most DDR5 kits, but not all, the lower IMC (1800) simply won't cut it if you want a chance to beat the highest performing DDR5 sticks, since there's a significant amount of performance left on the table from the 2050-2100 IMC frequency possible on Single Rank kits, that's how DDR4 really beats DDR5.


12700K Tuf z690, Ballistix 3600 16-18-18-38 32gb DR, just changed to 3900, all else by xmp profile. Did post and run AIda64, but latency still a bit high, 56ns.


----------



## Ichirou

raad11 said:


> I don't understand why the manufacturers don't favor t-topology layouts then. 4x8GB worked wonderfully in my old Z390 Aorus Master. Lots of people need more than 16 gigs of RAM.


Like this person sitting here with 4x16 GB


----------



## postem

kingofblog said:


> @zhrooms
> 
> CapFrameX claims to achieve 4000 MT/s dual-rank (?) on ASUS BIOS 0707:
> 
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458486529681240074
> Will flash 0707 tomorrow and try again. Not believing so far.


Considering my poor asus tuf managed to post into windows and let me run aida tests without errors on 3900 DR, it is probably true, 707 bios here too. Gonna try 4000 with default timings today


----------



## Frozburn

Can someone smarter than me explain how my DR 16 16 16 36 B die boots and benches at 14 14 14 28 (or even lower) 4000 gear 1 / CR2 but it doesn't ever boot on 15 15 15 28/30/whatever

Is this a bios bug or me being dumb? MSI Z690-A Pro non Wi-Fi.


----------



## Ichirou

Frozburn said:


> Can someone smarter than me explain how my DR 16 16 16 36 B die boots and benches at 14 14 14 28 (or even lower) 4000 gear 1 / CR2 but it doesn't ever boot on 15 15 15 28/30/whatever
> 
> Is this a bios bug or me being dumb? MSI Z690-A Pro non Wi-Fi.


Had it happen to myself (on Z390); it's just bad training most of the time.
Fiddling around with tRAS can help but it isn't guaranteed.


----------



## JoeRambo

Frozburn said:


> Can someone smarter than me explain how my DR 16 16 16 36 B die boots and benches at 14 14 14 28 (or even lower) 4000 gear 1 / CR2 but it doesn't ever boot on 15 15 15 28/30/whatever
> 
> Is this a bios bug or me being dumb? MSI Z690-A Pro non Wi-Fi.


Same problem as everyone else with MSI DDR4 board, hard limit of 3600, You can see for Yourself, try booting 3733 at any timings or voltages.


----------



## Frozburn

Ichirou said:


> Had it happen to myself (on Z390); it's just bad training most of the time.
> Fiddling around with tRAS can help but it isn't guaranteed.





JoeRambo said:


> Same problem as everyone else with MSI DDR4 board, hard limit of 3600, You can see for Yourself, try booting 3733 at any timings or voltages.


I can confirm for example CR1 doesnt boot at that frequency for me as well.

Are these things fixable by bios updates? If not, gonna return everything. Really awful.


----------



## raad11

Frozburn said:


> Can someone smarter than me explain how my DR 16 16 16 36 B die boots and benches at 14 14 14 28 (or even lower) 4000 gear 1 / CR2 but it doesn't ever boot on 15 15 15 28/30/whatever
> 
> Is this a bios bug or me being dumb? MSI Z690-A Pro non Wi-Fi.


I posted about that on the Asus Strix Z690-A D4. It will work on CL14 but not CL15 at the limit of its frequency. Weird, right? I think the manufacturers made tweaks to the BIOS specifically for CL14. But when I got it to work, 4100 2xsingle rank 15-15-15-28, it had better latency than 4000 CL14. So I think CL14 is working at the expense of training looser timings than it otherwise would. I'm not sure if that's optimal even though CL 14 sounds nice. I still can't see IOL timings in anything.


----------



## HyperMatrix

JoeRambo said:


> Same problem as everyone else with MSI DDR4 board, hard limit of 3600, You can see for Yourself, try booting 3733 at any timings or voltages.


I don't have an MSI board but for anyone who may be curious...I couldn't get higher than 3600MHz in Gear 1 at first on my Asus board. Tried auto voltage. Also tried anywhere from SA and VDDQ 1.3V up to 1.5V. None worked. But at 1.25V for SA/VDDQ I was able to go up to even 4000MHz so far in Gear 1. So higher voltage isn't always a good thing.


----------



## Frozburn

HyperMatrix said:


> I don't have an MSI board but for anyone who may be curious...I couldn't get higher than 3600MHz in Gear 1 at first on my Asus board. Tried auto voltage. Also tried anywhere from SA and VDDQ 1.3V up to 1.5V. None worked. But at 1.25V for SA/VDDQ I was able to go up to even 4000MHz so far in Gear 1. So higher voltage isn't always a good thing.


Thanks, I'll try that.


----------



## Cam1

What timings should i change 1st to try improving ?


----------



## ObviousCough

w00t!

my DJR 5333 kit is back from RMA

edit: boots into windows at xmp but instant memory errors. :|


----------



## Pato__128

My DR B-Die 4400 wont go over 3800mhz using Asus Strix Z690-a d4 ... I can't get my RAM stable no matter what I do(Tried every Bios,Voltages,Gears,Timings)
Is this an Asus specific problem? First time using Asus and I am overall very unhappy... should I send it back and get a Z690 Tomahawk or Edge?


----------



## HyperMatrix

Pato__128 said:


> My DR B-Die 4400 wont go over 3800mhz using Asus Strix Z690-a d4 ... I can't get my RAM stable no matter what I do(Tried every Bios,Voltages,Gears,Timings)
> Is this an Asus specific problem? First time using Asus and I am overall very unhappy... should I send it back and get a Z690 Tomahawk or Edge?


Read my comment above regarding finding the correct voltage for SA and VDDQ with both low and high voltage causing instability and failure to post 3733MHz+. I'm on an Asus Z690 ROG Strix Gaming-A D4.


----------



## postem

HyperMatrix said:


> I don't have an MSI board but for anyone who may be curious...I couldn't get higher than 3600MHz in Gear 1 at first on my Asus board. Tried auto voltage. Also tried anywhere from SA and VDDQ 1.3V up to 1.5V. None worked. But at 1.25V for SA/VDDQ I was able to go up to even 4000MHz so far in Gear 1. So higher voltage isn't always a good thing.


I dont even know now what kind of voltage tuf z690 is applying on auto to vccsa, i cant get any readings on hwinfo nor on bios, its a magical number


----------



## Jscs1992

Pato__128 said:


> My DR B-Die 4400 wont go over 3800mhz using Asus Strix Z690-a d4 ... I can't get my RAM stable no matter what I do(Tried every Bios,Voltages,Gears,Timings)
> Is this an Asus specific problem? First time using Asus and I am overall very unhappy... should I send it back and get a Z690 Tomahawk or Edge?


If you are going over 4000 you will need between 1.39 to 1.41 VCCSA to boot or be stable. You should be able to get 4000 with around 1.21 VCCSA to boot you can keep vddq on auto and start off with 1.5 dram and start from there. Go back in the thread and you will see zhrooms charts about vccsa and they were a massive help. I was able to get 16-16-16-36 4133 stable with trfc 320 and treffi 65535 stable no problem with VCCSA 1.41 DRAM 1.5 and VDDQ on auto.


----------



## Jscs1992

Pato__128 said:


> My DR B-Die 4400 wont go over 3800mhz using Asus Strix Z690-a d4 ... I can't get my RAM stable no matter what I do(Tried every Bios,Voltages,Gears,Timings)
> Is this an Asus specific problem? First time using Asus and I am overall very unhappy... should I send it back and get a Z690 Tomahawk or Edge?


If you are going over 4000 you will need between 1.39 to 1.41 VCCSA to boot or be stable. You should be able to get 4000 with around 1.21 VCCSA to boot you can keep vddq on auto and start off with 1.5 dram and start from there. Go back in the thread and you will see zhrooms charts about vccsa and they were a massive help. I was able to get 16-16-16-36 4133 stable with trfc 320 and treffi 65535 stable no problem with VCCSA 1.41 DRAM 1.5 and VDDQ on auto.


----------



## HyperMatrix

postem said:


> I dont even know now what kind of voltage tuf z690 is applying on auto to vccsa, i cant get any readings on hwinfo nor on bios, its a magical number


Apply manual voltage. For me I believe it was pulling about 1.37v on auto.


----------



## slash621

bscool said:


> @Ichirou I dont know of anyone else running 4x16 so you can tell us, Might be great or might be a nightmare. 2x8 hynix I could run 5333-5600 on z590 I couldnt get past 4600. But it could have been bios or a setting I missed. I didnt mess with it much but I was expecting 5000+. I did see @owikh84 got his hynix past 5000 so probably bios or me just being noob.


JFYI that's the config i'm working on also. Currently I'm at XMP 3600 gear 1, 100:100 with 16-18-18-36 Auto. It takes me 1.2v SA and 1.3SA @ boot with VDIMM at 1.365 (levels at 1.35v in HWINFO) and 1.4 VDDQ.


----------



## LionAlonso

For me 12900k is stable at 1.2 SA and 1.35 VDQQ at 4000Mhz gear 1 (Bdie)


----------



## Cam1

4000Mhz is not stable for me but i can boot to windows with VDDQ 1.4 and others on Auto TM5 report errors,
i try to increase voltages but when i set VDDQ to 1.5 the system doesn't even boot.

i tried 1.48 VDDQ, boot to Windows, but after i restart it doesn't post at all.  

What's wrong with the VDDQ ?


----------



## Ichirou

Cam1 said:


> 4000Mhz is not stable for me but i can boot to windows with VDDQ 1.4 and others on Auto TM5 report errors,
> i try to increase voltages but when i set VDDQ to 1.5 the system doesn't even boot.
> 
> i tried 1.48 VDDQ, boot to Windows, but after i restart it doesn't post at all.
> 
> What's wrong with the VDDQ ?


VDDQ seems to be the new VCCIO, so I would assume it has a sweet spot effect like VCCIO did for many generations into the past.


----------



## O-VIZ

I'm quite satisfied with the MSI Edge - 4133 - 14-15-15-28 CR1


----------



## ogider

Btw working atc for z690

example











AsrTCSetup(v4.0.13).zip beim Filehorst - filehorst.de


----------



## Frozburn

Current settings that seem to work. The kit is dual rank (G.Skill B-Die 16 16 16 36). Next I'll try 300 trfC or so and tRaS to 30. Lowering my SA voltage from 1.4-something to 1.2 is what made all of this stable. It was giving me errors before. So I'd suggest trying this as well (as the person suggested it to me a page or two back). Also I can't seem to be able to do CR1 (tho I haven't tried with lower SA, will check) think CR1 just doesn't work for dual rank at the moment or maybe ever because of gear 1. Or maybe I'm just lost, idk.

Think I am kinda done, ram overclocking is incredibly tedious. Maybe I'll sell this RAM and buy single rank to push higher in CR1 because CR1 is atrocious on dual rank.


----------



## Impalor

How do I find a limit of my IMC? Trying very loose timings 20-20-20-50 gear1 but hit a brick wall at 3900...


----------



## LionAlonso

Impalor said:


> How do I find a limit of my IMC? Trying very loose timings 20-20-20-50 gear1 but hit a brick wall at 3900...


What cpu? 
try more voltage in SA and VDDQ


----------



## Impalor

LionAlonso said:


> What cpu?
> try more voltage in SA and VDDQ


12900k, tuf w/707, 803, 003, now 002, gskill 16x2 4000-14 kit. Tried SA upto 1.5, DRAM/DDQ upto 1.65. Runs stable 3866-14-15-15-35-2T-1G 1.35v, 1.55v. 3900 no post with any settings...


----------



## LionAlonso

Impalor said:


> 12900k, tuf w/707, 803, 003, now 002, gskill 16x2 4000-14 kit. Tried SA upto 1.5, DRAM/DDQ upto 1.65. Runs stable 3866-14-15-15-35-2T-1G 1.35v, 1.55v. 3900 no post with any settings...


I have same setup as you i get 4000 cl 16 with bdie at 1.2 SA and 1.35 VDDQ.
Bad imc quality.


----------



## eeroo94

Impalor said:


> 12900k, tuf w/707, 803, 003, now 002, gskill 16x2 4000-14 kit. Tried SA upto 1.5, DRAM/DDQ upto 1.65. Runs stable 3866-14-15-15-35-2T-1G 1.35v, 1.55v. 3900 no post with any settings...


Does it post if you try gear 2?


----------



## isipisi

Can someone pls help me? My Windows 10 is parking my cores. 
Someone hase the same problem?
I dont whant to park any sht.


----------



## Impalor

eeroo94 said:


> Does it post if you try gear 2?


Yes, it works at XMP 4000-14-15-15-35-50-1T-2G


----------



## Impalor

Is there a thing like CPU break-in? A week ago I could not post beyound 3700 gear 1, now it works at 3866, same voltages...


----------



## isipisi

Impalor said:


> Is there a thing like CPU break-in? A week ago I could not post beyound 3700 gear 1, now it works at 3866, same voltages...


Mybe if you hammer it a while (heat and gaming) the atoms on the chip get aliegned better, just a theory


----------



## gentlemang

O-VIZ said:


> I'm quite satisfied with the MSI Edge - 4133 - 14-15-15-28 CR1
> 
> View attachment 2535431


sweet numbers your dram voltage is quite high, how hot does it get? Do you have 2 sticks or 4?

I’m at the below wondering if I should push it some more. Ram gets quite hot at 1.5v currently.


----------



## Arni90

raad11 said:


> I don't understand why the manufacturers don't favor t-topology layouts then. 4x8GB worked wonderfully in my old Z390 Aorus Master. Lots of people need more than 16 gigs of RAM.


The Z390 Aorus Master is the worst motherboard I've ever had the displeasure of working with. Broken VRM-configuration, broken RTL/IOL training, broken BIOS profiles, and broken BIOS flashing. And the memory compatibility was atrocious, 4x8GB B-die worked, 2x8GB didn't.

Also, daisy chain is better for 4 DIMMs on modern motherboards than all 4 DIMM boards ever were. The problem with Alder Lake and 32GB B-die is related to BIOS problems and/or memory controller limitations, (which is why Gigabyte's Z690 DDR4 boards are so bad.)


----------



## Ichirou

O-VIZ said:


> I'm quite satisfied with the MSI Edge - 4133 - 14-15-15-28 CR1
> 
> View attachment 2535431


Base BIOS or newer? Also, does MSI Dragon Ball/Power allow live changes, or is it just a readout? Would like a download for it if you can provide.


ogider said:


> Btw working atc for z690
> 
> example
> View attachment 2535435
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AsrTCSetup(v4.0.13).zip beim Filehorst - filehorst.de


Nice, thanks for the new ATC


Frozburn said:


> Current settings that seem to work. The kit is dual rank (G.Skill B-Die 16 16 16 36). Next I'll try 300 trfC or so and tRaS to 30. Lowering my SA voltage from 1.4-something to 1.2 is what made all of this stable. It was giving me errors before. So I'd suggest trying this as well (as the person suggested it to me a page or two back). Also I can't seem to be able to do CR1 (tho I haven't tried with lower SA, will check) think CR1 just doesn't work for dual rank at the moment or maybe ever because of gear 1. Or maybe I'm just lost, idk.
> 
> Think I am kinda done, ram overclocking is incredibly tedious. Maybe I'll sell this RAM and buy single rank to push higher in CR1 because CR1 is atrocious on dual rank.
> 
> View attachment 2535436
> 
> View attachment 2535437


IMCs and sweet spot effects lol. I've never needed more than 1.20/1.24 SA/IO on Z390 for my kit, so I imagine it's not really necessary in general for low 4,000's.
But people are used to jacking it up because... Yeah . I don't think insane VCCSA/VDDQ is needed until at least 4,200 MHz or so, but YMMV.

Also, I'm having some supply issues here where I am. Should I just bite on the MSI EDGE Wi-Fi instead of the Strix D4? There's also some ongoing MIR that I can take advantage of. Would be easier to get the board rather than having to source the Strix. And it seems many here are using MSI just fine for 4,000+ CL14, so I imagine there might just be an IMC difference as opposed to board. But that German forum claims that that is not the case in an all-else-equal test. If the Strix D4 really is marginally better, I can hold off until I find one. Opinions and experiences?


----------



## nimachoopani

my board model's is asus strix z690-A bios v.707 and I have four Spectrix d50 8g 4133. I tried 4133 gear 2 and 4000 gear 1 and 2 but I got no stability. now my system is somehow stable on 3600 on gear 1 and 16 19 19 40 2T but I get 1 to 3 error in each test .when I use 2 dimm 4133 and 4400 on gear 2 are stable. Do you have any idea how can I get stability on 4 dimm on 4000?


----------



## Ichirou

nimachoopani said:


> my board model's is asus strix z690-A bios v.707 and I have four Spectrix d50 8g 4133. I tried 4133 gear 2 and 4000 gear 1 and 2 but I got no stability. now my system is somehow stable on 3600 on gear 1 and 16 19 19 40 2T but I get 1 to 3 error in each test .when I use 2 dimm 4133 and 4400 on gear 2 are stable. Do you have any idea how can I get stability on 4 dimm on 4000?


Two DIMMs are fine? Might be weak IMC on the CPU. You could try raising VCCSA/VDDQ and maybe VDIMM, but don't expect too much.

According to error code readouts, it can imply tRFC being too tight, which in turn can imply overheating. Will have to experiment.


----------



## Frozburn

Ichirou said:


> Base BIOS or newer? Also, does MSI Dragon Ball/Power allow live changes, or is it just a readout? Would like a download for it if you can provide.
> 
> Nice, thanks for the new ATC
> 
> IMCs and sweet spot effects lol. I've never needed more than 1.20/1.24 SA/IO on Z390 for my kit, so I imagine it's not really necessary in general for low 4,000's.
> But people are used to jacking it up because... Yeah . I don't think insane VCCSA/VDDQ is needed until at least 4,200 MHz or so, but YMMV.
> 
> Also, I'm having some supply issues here where I am. Should I just bite on the MSI EDGE Wi-Fi instead of the Strix D4? There's also some ongoing MIR that I can take advantage of. Would be easier to get the board rather than having to source the Strix. And it seems many here are using MSI just fine for 4,000+ CL14, so I imagine there might just be an IMC difference as opposed to board. But that German forum claims that that is not the case in an all-else-equal test. If the Strix D4 really is marginally better, I can hold off until I find one. Opinions and experiences?


Yeah it got me curious. Will try messing with VCSSA more.

I can get the Strix for 345* EUR here, maybe I should try that as well. But so far this board for 200 EUR has been good to me.


----------



## nimachoopani

Ichirou said:


> Two DIMMs are fine? Might be weak IMC on the CPU.
> You could try raising VCCSA/VDDQ and maybe VDIMM, but don't expect too much.


don't know maybe imc is week i have 12700k
i try vccsa on 1.35 and Vdimm on 1.52 windows will boot but i get +200 errors on memtest


----------



## Ichirou

Frozburn said:


> Yeah it got me curious. Will try messing with VCSSA more.
> 
> I can get the Strix for 315 EUR here, maybe I should try that as well. But so far this board for 200 EUR has been good to me.


Oof, that's a massive price difference. Over here, it's around $50 CAD cheaper but only after the mail-in rebate.

...And what do you know, Newegg has the Strix back in stock again, lol. Let's go


----------



## Frozburn

Ichirou said:


> Oof, that's a massive price difference. Over here, it's around $50 CAD cheaper but only after the mail-in rebate.
> 
> ...And what do you know, Newegg has the Strix back in stock again, lol. Let's go


It's 345 EUR actually, my bad. I see in most of EU it's 375 idk what's:s with these price differences.

Kinda wanna see if my ram would run higher and to see the cpu's suggested vid per core + SP but the price difference from my current 200 EUR board is probably not worth it.


----------



## zhrooms

kingofblog said:


> 12900k will on average overclock P-cores better than 12700k, but there is no broad correlation that unbinned chip elements will also clock better (e.g. IMC and GPU).
> RKL is the only recent Intel CPU where the i9/top SKU was explicitly binned for higher IMC frequency.


Yes, that's what I said. And no, the only reason you noticed the higher IMC bin on Rocket Lake was because it was absurdly low, it was there on older architectures, but even the poor ones handled 4600, far exceeding most DDR4 kits, _so_ _you never noticed_.


kingofblog said:


> There is a menu in the ASUS BIOS showing the "P-core SP" and "E-core SP" as separate values. In my case, SP=78, P-SP was 85-ish, and E-SP was high-60s. If you did 5.3 GHz all-cores, your P-SP is probably not as bad as you think.


Thanks, I found it in the 'AI Features' menu that is only available on Strix and above, said this 12900K SP69 had: P-Core SP: 84 and E-Core SP: 41, so really awful E-Core "efficiency", dragging my overall SP score down significantly, so P-Core SP84 is really solid 🙏.


kingofblog said:


> I find it hard to believe any AIO, even a 420, would achieve 2 degrees dT liquid temperature. I'm using a 280 mm with 3k RPM fans, and it can at best do 15 degrees dT at 200 W. 50% more area would only bring that down to 10 degrees. The only ones with the super-low coolant temperatures are the dual or triple-radiator custom-loop crowd.


What I'm saying is that the water temperature doesn't increase by more than 2°C after let's say R23 for 20 minutes. An AIO (420) cooler with 3/6x 140mm in Push/Pull "up to" 2000RPM can easily dissipate that heat as well, like 200W is nothing really, games pull around half that, the difference is my custom water loop is triple radiator, so I can get away with the same low temp difference but at a much lower fan speed (<1000RPM).


bscool said:


> This is where to get the lastest drivers if you want them. Newer than on Asus support site. [INDEX] All My Firmware/Drivers/Software Threads


Get your drivers over at Station-Drivers instead, they post new drivers daily and their collection is absolutely massive. Planning on adding every relevant driver to the original post.


geriatricpollywog said:


> With Alder Lake, water cooling makes more of a difference than it did on previous generations, especially the temperature of the water. At warm temperatures, the CPU is not stable past 5.1. At 5C water temp, it’s stable at 5.4-5.5.


Huh, not true at all, Alder Lake overclocking (P-Cores) is identical to previous architectures. Also the temperature of the water has nothing to do with stability or any such thing?? Like it's irrelevant if it's 15°C or 35°C, the reason it won't do X frequency is if the cores hit like 100°C, which, no ****, it doesn't hit if you can cool the water down to 5°C?


GtiJason said:


> Another thing to note the 4600c18 kit you have is already good enough. You are going to be limited by the memory controller on this platform not the ram assuming you use decent B Die.
> I have tested 3 Dual Rank kits and at least 12 Single rank (binned for XOC) Samsung B-Die kits on both this board (Strix-A) and the entry level MSI Z690 A Pro and they all max out at the same place.


Well yes, because like 6 year old B-die can do 4400-4600, and these CPUs can't do more than ~4300 (2150 MHz IMC). Also, there is no such thing as "decent" or "bad" B-die, just putting it out there, worst ones can still do 4133 CL16 @ 1.45V which is more than what many Motherboards/Processors can do since B-die released.


raad11 said:


> I think I could probably run 4133 on single rank sticks at CL14 or CL15.
> I'm okay with this for dual rank. I hope another BIOS comes out which allows more, but it seems like there was some tweaking done specifically to allow for CAS 14 latency in Gear 1 in 0707 and above.


From my testing on Page-6. In World of Warcraft, Dual Rank is: +0.8% faster Average, +1.2% faster in 5% Lows, +0.9% faster in 1% Lows
Switching to Single Rank is not worth it unless you can get it more than 1% faster, which is difficult, since 1 lower CL is *not* 1%.


gamervivek said:


> So I load Aida to check for memory latency and to my dismay the latency is >70ns because the memory controller is set on auto for 1:2. Moving it back to 1:1 ratio doesn't boot and gives me BSOD even at 4000MHz. It only seems stable at 3800MHz at which point I'm worse latency-wise since the timings on the kit don't play well with increased voltage and 3800MHz won't do 16-16-16-36
> Still trying to figure out if the system agent voltage increase can help. My board is Asus TUF Gaming-Z690-Plus Wifi and hwinfo doesn't recognize the sensors on it for now so can't see what it's set at.





mattskiiau said:


> Can anyone give me a few tweak quick wins from my XMP profile to lower my latency quickly? Finished my CPU OC and 79ns is CRAZY! Manually set 100:133 and 1:1 in BIOS and that seemed to have lowered latency a fair bit. I think voltages are pretty tame right now, may have plenty room to move if my IMC can hold up?





pt0x- said:


> Can anyone confirm the safe daily voltage for SA? I got my 4x8gb g.skill 4000-15-16-16-32 CR1 @1.5v kit running in gear 2 but cant get it to post at gear 1. Im already at 1.415v SA.
> I have a strix-a with bios 003. 12900k 5.3 / 4.2 @ 1.375v





LionAlonso said:


> With 12900k at 4000Mhz dram gear 1 at 1,45V and 1.19 SA it passes all test but sometimes during testing ram (for example OCCT) the screen freezes for a bit, but no errors, is that some kind of instability?





JoeRambo said:


> Kinda funny to be able to run DDR4 3600 13-14-14-30 1T, but unable to boot DDR4 3700 or 3733 with any settings  Hopefully MSI will come up with a BIOS that can break this training barrier on DR DRAM.
> So DDR4 3600 141414T1 at low volts is not taxing controller, and 3733CL202020T2 is ? Kinda hard to believe when multiple users have exact same wall @3600 on same mobos? More like MB BIOS has bugs and problems with training that have nothing to do with IMC limits, esp when users move from MSI to Asus and somehow can do 4133 with same CPU and Memory ( on same high volts where 3733 does not post). Same problem as everyone else with MSI DDR4 board, hard limit of 3600, You can see for Yourself, try booting 3733 at any timings or voltages.





Hiikeri said:


> Oh boy, DR setup has been always much harder load to IMC than SR setup and it will never run at same speeds than SR. Ever-Ever.
> You all wait something mystic-Uber-bios that 4000 141414 32Gb works SA/VDDQ/DIMM voltage at 1.35V on every CPU/MB/Cooling combination, it will never happen.





Frozburn said:


> I can confirm for example CR1 doesnt boot at that frequency for me as well.
> Are these things fixable by bios updates? If not, gonna return everything. Really awful.


For the love of god, me and others have mentioned it multiple times now, but people don't seem to bother reading the thread, just the last page/few pages.
*If you just got your board and processor*, the first thing you should do, is to set *System Agent* voltage to *1.42*, *DRAM* voltage to *1.5*, leave *VDDQ* on Auto or set it manually to *1.35V*, then *100:133* Ratio and Gear *1:1*, *2T/N* in the DRAM timing section, *now*  you can start overclocking the memory, it'll be guaranteed to work up to 4133, if you have good enough sticks (any B-die) and the correct motherboard+BIOS combination.
For example @pt0x-, that's your first mistake, going with the wrong BIOS (0003), 0707 is significantly better at RAM overclocking, it's the *only* BIOS any ASUS owner should use (Strix/TUF) as of now, unless you desperately need the legacy game toggle (E-Core parking, because you refuse to disable E-Cores altogether), but then you have to settle for a lower DRAM frequency (IMC).


Arni90 said:


> For everyone with an MSI DDR4 board unable to boot dual rank B-die above DDR4-3600
> No guarantees that it works for you, but it allowed me to reach DDR4-3800 at least. In my case 80-60-80 seems to work pretty well


No idea how some of you can have issues on MSI boards, we have like a mountain of evidence that shows MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks, like are you completely forgetting about changing SA voltages or something? If that's the case no wonder you can't boot/run above 3600.


Ichirou said:


> Is Micron B-die the only die that offers 4,000+ MHz RAM as 16GB Single Rank? Honestly makes me think that my kit is a lot more valuable than I thought when I first bought it.
> According to Amazon, I paid just under $650 USD for the kit after tax. Managed to get 4,174 MHz @ CL15. Does anyone here think that's good value?


Horrific value, that's $160 (+ tax) per 16GB stick, meanwhile you can pick up a used kit of 2x8GB B-die from 2016 for $75 that can do 4000 CL15 @ 1.55V, now *that* is value. 


bscool said:


> You need to set gear 1 as in 1:1 in bios or it defaults to gear 2 above 3600 I think. 1.5 to 1.55 drams, 1.45v VCCSA and 1.5v VDDQ is roughly what is needed for 4000+ on DR from what I have seen. To be stable under stress/memtests.





pt0x- said:


> Are these kind of voltages even safe to run for daily? I asked before in a separate question, but its already on the previous page





bscool said:


> You have to decide for yourself. I have ran similar voltages or close the last couple gens for io/sa. z390/z490 I usually stayed under 1.45 and z590 up to 1.5 was required depending on IMC and frequency. Up to each individual to decide what they consider "safe".





Ichirou said:


> You have to consider that for several generations now, people have been running 4,000+ MHz kits on the daily. And a lot of them require at least 1.30-1.40V SA/IO (or more) to be stable.
> There hasn't been any notable reports about CPU/IMCs dying as of yet, and it's already been a good 5+ years since Z390. Hence, I believe those are safe voltages to try up to.
> And even if they really aren't safe voltages, you'd probably swap the CPU within a generation or two anyway.


Yes, we have no idea what SA voltages are safe/unsafe, most of us only have 2-3 weeks on these CPUs, so like 100 hours rough guess, not nearly enough time to see a degradation at just 1.4V SA, even pushing it to 1.5 it would be highly unlikely to see any difference in just 100 hours, my guess is maybe 1.6-1.7V you could see something. Even if 1.4 is "unsafe", like, define unsafe, it's 99% likely to not degrade at 1.4V under the first year, and I'm planning on replacing my 12900K to the 13900K Raptor Lake in a year, I will likely end up pushing 1.45V daily, or as much as it requires for me to be 4150-4200~ stable, which would be between 1.4 and 1.5V.


ObviousCough said:


> My 12600k must have the worst IMC.
> 2x8GB will post and boot at 4100 Patriot Viper Steel 4400C19
> 2x16GB won't post above 3600. G.Skill Trident Z Neo F4-3800C14D
> MSI Z690-A Pro with 1.45 SA, 1.5 VDDQ, 1.55 Vdimm


Again, as I stated above, we know with complete certainty the MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, and even higher on Single Rank, so you must be doing something wrong. Like, what timings? I run these when I test IMC: 17-18-18-38-2N, 12/8 RRDL/S, 747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL & 1.5V DRAM, these secondary timings are auto trained at 4266 Gear 2, and also tested them to actually be 100% stable in Gear 2, *then and only then* do I check what frequency (DRAM Frequency) I can run in Gear 1 and what SA voltage it needs for X frequency. Like there is no way your 12600K can't do above 3600 with Dual Rank, if it's not user error it's the wrong BIOS.


Revv23 said:


> Can you point me to where you find dragon power? Evidently google is not capable of finding anything other than ad revenue these days.


It's linked near the top of the original post.


eeeven said:


> After i switched from the MSI Edge to the ASUS Strix Z690-A i could mange to get 4000C15 stable with DR Modules no problem. With the MSI i could not even get 4000C15 to post.





Ichirou said:


> Looks like more evidence that the Strix is just the better board for DDR4 on Z690 then.


As said, there's no difference between MSI Z690-A Pro and TUF/Strix A. They have *all* proven to run 4300+ MT/s on Single Rank sticks and 4266 MT/s+ on Dual Rank sticks, so I highly doubt that you managed to get increased stability on the Strix, if anything, it was something you set up slightly different in the BIOS.


Cam1 said:


> 4000Mhz is not stable for me but i can boot to windows with VDDQ 1.4 and others on Auto TM5 report errors,
> i try to increase voltages but when i set VDDQ to 1.5 the system doesn't even boot.
> i tried 1.48 VDDQ, boot to Windows, but after i restart it doesn't post at all.
> What's wrong with the VDDQ ?


I have seen no evidence of VDDQ helping anything, I can boot 4240 MT/s with it on Auto (1.35V) and 4187 MT/s to Windows with again, 1.35V. And I'm currently running 4133 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, completely stable, with 1.35V (which is default/Auto). Increasing it just doesn't affect anything from what I've seen, and at the same time I've heard it's a remnant setting from the DDR5 boards, I (or someone else) should be able to test it by simply lowering it below default, see if it changes stability or anything else.


ogider said:


> Working ASRock Timing Configurator for Z690


Nice, added to the original post.


Frozburn said:


> Current settings that seem to work. The kit is dual rank (G.Skill B-Die 16 16 16 36). Next I'll try 300 trfC or so and tRaS to 30. Lowering my SA voltage from 1.4-something to 1.2 is what made all of this stable. It was giving me errors before. So I'd suggest trying this as well (as the person suggested it to me a page or two back). Also I can't seem to be able to do CR1 (tho I haven't tried with lower SA, will check) think CR1 just doesn't work for dual rank at the moment or maybe ever because of gear 1. Or maybe I'm just lost, idk.
> Think I am kinda done, ram overclocking is incredibly tedious. Maybe I'll sell this RAM and buy single rank to push higher in CR1 because CR1 is atrocious on dual rank.


Why are you obsessed with CR1? I have never seen someone benchmark it in games because it's so small, if you have some solid data that shows how big of an impact it has, please share it with us. I tested it many years ago now so need to re-test it, but from what I remember, the difference was insignificant, almost immeasurable, basically only go for it if you can, don't sacrifice anything (IMC) for it.


Impalor said:


> 12900k, tuf w/707, 803, 003, now 002, gskill 16x2 4000-14 kit. Tried SA upto 1.5, DRAM/DDQ upto 1.65. Runs stable 3866-14-15-15-35-2T-1G 1.35v, 1.55v. 3900 no post with any settings...
> Is there a thing like CPU break-in? A week ago I could not post beyound 3700 gear 1, now it works at 3866, same voltages...


Stick to the 0707 BIOS and set SA to 1.40V, DRAM 1.5V and you should be able to run 4000 just fine. Like I could game with 4000 Dual Rank at 1.2 SA, 1.40+ is for 4133 and above, but just to be sure you're not running into SA issues, it's always better to set it too high than too low, once you find a your memory overclock, lower the SA down gradually until you find the voltage that it needs.


Arni90 said:


> The Z390 Aorus Master is the worst motherboard I've ever had the displeasure of working with, and the memory compatibility was atrocious, 4x8GB B-die worked, 2x8GB didn't.
> Also, daisy chain is better for 4 DIMMs on modern motherboards than all 4 DIMM boards ever were. The problem with Alder Lake and 32GB B-die is related to BIOS problems and/or memory controller limitations, (which is why Gigabyte's Z690 DDR4 boards are so bad.)


Huh, T-Topology on Z390 AORUS Ultra as an example, was _legendary_. And welcome to the club, IMC is only a "problem" *above* 4133 and some boards haven't been updated yet like Gigabyte, ASUS was updated within a week after release that completely unlocked the DRAM overclocking, and MSI already had BIOS available on release that could handle any memory kit.


Ichirou said:


> IMCs and sweet spot effects lol. I've never needed more than 1.20/1.24 SA/IO on Z390 for my kit, so I imagine it's not really necessary in general for low 4,000's.
> But people are used to jacking it up because... Yeah . I don't think insane VCCSA/VDDQ is needed until at least 4,200 MHz or so, but YMMV.


No one cares what you "think". We have like 10 people in this thread *telling* you what SA is *required* for X frequency.


Ichirou said:


> Should I just bite on the MSI EDGE Wi-Fi instead of the Strix D4?


There is no difference between MSI Pro/Tomahawk/Edge and the ASUS TUF/Strix in terms of overclocking.* They all do Dual Rank 4300 MT/s and 5.5GHz+ on a 12900K.*
Both ASUS and MSI has great BIOS interfaces, it's basically all up to what you want to pay, no one should buy the Strix though, TUF is literally just as good. Like if you can find Edge or TUF cheap, get one of those, if not, then just get the MSI Z690-A Pro.


nimachoopani said:


> don't know maybe imc is week i have 12700k
> i try vccsa on 1.35 and Vdimm on 1.52 windows will boot but i get +200 errors on memtest


Motherboard?​BIOS?​Which memory sticks?​How many memory sticks?​In which slots? (If 2)​Gear 1 or Gear 2?​What frequency are you trying to run?​What timings are you trying to run?​.. all of that matters, only takes a single bad one and it all falls apart. 💥


----------



## nimachoopani

zhrooms said:


> Yes, that's what I said. And no, the only reason you noticed the higher IMC bin on Rocket Lake was because it was absurdly low, it was there on older architectures, but even the poor ones handled 4600, far exceeding most DDR4 kits, _so_ _you never noticed_.
> 
> Thanks, I found it in the 'AI Features' menu that is only available on Strix and above, said this 12900K SP69 had: P-Core SP: 84 and E-Core SP: 41, so really awful E-Core "efficiency", dragging my overall SP score down significantly, so P-Core SP84 is really solid 🙏.
> 
> What I'm saying is that the water temperature doesn't increase by more than 2°C after let's say R23 for 20 minutes. An AIO (420) cooler with 3/6x 140mm in Push/Pull "up to" 2000RPM can easily dissipate that heat as well, like 200W is nothing really, games pull around half that, the difference is my custom water loop is triple radiator, so I can get away with the same low temp difference but at a much lower fan speed (<1000RPM).
> 
> Get your drivers over at Station-Drivers instead, they post new drivers daily and their collection is absolutely massive. Planning on adding every relevant driver to the original post.
> 
> Huh, not true at all, Alder Lake overclocking (P-Cores) is identical to previous architectures. Also the temperature of the water has nothing to do with stability or any such thing?? Like it's irrelevant if it's 15°C or 35°C, the reason it won't do X frequency is if the cores hit like 100°C, which, no ****, it doesn't hit if you can cool the water down to 5°C?
> 
> Well yes, because like 6 year old B-die can do 4400-4600, and these CPUs can't do more than ~4300 (2150 MHz IMC). Also, there is no such thing as "decent" or "bad" B-die, just putting it out there, worst ones can still do 4133 CL16 @ 1.45V which is more than what many Motherboards/Processors can do since B-die released.
> 
> From my testing on Page-6. In World of Warcraft, Dual Rank is: +0.8% faster Average, +1.2% faster in 5% Lows, +0.9% faster in 1% Lows
> Switching to Single Rank is not worth it unless you can get it more than 1% faster, which is difficult, since 1 lower CL is *not* 1%.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the love of god, me and others have mentioned it multiple times now, but people don't seem to bother reading the thread, just the last page/few pages.
> *If you just got your board and processor*, the first thing you should do, is to set *System Agent* voltage to *1.42*, *DRAM* voltage to *1.5*, leave *VDDQ* on Auto or set it manually to *1.35V*, then *100:133* Ratio and Gear *1:1*, *2T/N* in the DRAM timing section, *now*  you can start overclocking the memory, it'll be guaranteed to work up to 4133, if you have good enough sticks (any B-die) and the correct motherboard+BIOS combination.
> For example @pt0x-, that's your first mistake, going with the wrong BIOS (0003), 0707 is significantly better at RAM overclocking, it's the *only* BIOS any ASUS owner should use (Strix/TUF) as of now, unless you desperately need the legacy game toggle (E-Core parking, because you refuse to disable E-Cores altogether), but then you have to settle for a lower DRAM frequency (IMC).
> 
> No idea how some of you can have issues on MSI boards, we have like a mountain of evidence that shows MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks, like are you completely forgetting about changing SA voltages or something? If that's the case no wonder you can't boot/run above 3600.
> 
> Horrific value, that's $160 (+ tax) per 16GB stick, meanwhile you can pick up a used kit of 2x8GB B-die from 2016 for $75 that can do 4000 CL15 @ 1.55V, now *that* is value.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, we have no idea what SA voltages are safe/unsafe, most of us only have 2-3 weeks on these CPUs, so like 100 hours rough guess, not nearly enough time to see a degradation at just 1.4V SA, even pushing it to 1.5 it would be highly unlikely to see any difference in just 100 hours, my guess is maybe 1.6-1.7V you could see something. Even if 1.4 is "unsafe", like, define unsafe, it's 99% likely to not degrade at 1.4V under the first year, and I'm planning on replacing my 12900K to the 13900K Raptor Lake in a year, I will likely end up pushing 1.45V daily, or as much as it requires for me to be 4150-4200~ stable, which would be between 1.4 and 1.5V.
> 
> Again, as I stated above, we know with complete certainty the MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, and even higher on Single Rank, so you must be doing something wrong. Like, what timings? I run these when I test IMC: 17-18-18-38-2N, 12/8 RRDL/S, 747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL & 1.5V DRAM, these secondary timings are auto trained at 4266 Gear 2, and also tested them to actually be 100% stable in Gear 2, *then and only then* do I check what frequency (DRAM Frequency) I can run in Gear 1 and what SA voltage it needs for X frequency. Like there is no way your 12600K can't do above 3600 with Dual Rank, if it's not user error it's the wrong BIOS.
> 
> It's linked near the top of the original post.
> 
> 
> As said, there's no difference between MSI Z690-A Pro and TUF/Strix A. They have *all* proven to run 4300+ MT/s on Single Rank sticks and 4266 MT/s+ on Dual Rank sticks, so I highly doubt that you managed to get increased stability on the Strix, if anything, it was something you set up slightly different in the BIOS.
> 
> I have seen no evidence of VDDQ helping anything, I can boot 4240 MT/s with it on Auto (1.35V) and 4187 MT/s to Windows with again, 1.35V. And I'm currently running 4133 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, completely stable, with 1.35V (which is default/Auto). Increasing it just doesn't affect anything from what I've seen, and at the same time I've heard it's a remnant setting from the DDR5 boards, I (or someone else) should be able to test it by simply lowering it below default, see if it changes stability or anything else.
> 
> Nice, added to the original post.
> 
> Why are you obsessed with CR1? I have never seen someone benchmark it in games because it's so small, if you have some solid data that shows how big of an impact it has, please share it with us. I tested it many years ago now so need to re-test it, but from what I remember, the difference was insignificant, almost immeasurable, basically only go for it if you can, don't sacrifice anything (IMC) for it.
> 
> Stick to the 0707 BIOS and set SA to 1.40V, DRAM 1.5V and you should be able to run 4000 just fine. Like I could game with 4000 Dual Rank at 1.2 SA, 1.40+ is for 4133 and above, but just to be sure you're not running into SA issues, it's always better to set it too high than too low, once you find a your memory overclock, lower the SA down gradually until you find the voltage that it needs.
> 
> Huh, T-Topology on Z390 AORUS Ultra as an example, was _legendary_. And welcome to the club, IMC is only a "problem" *above* 4133 and some boards haven't been updated yet like Gigabyte, ASUS was updated within a week after release that completely unlocked the DRAM overclocking, and MSI already had BIOS available on release that could handle any memory kit.
> 
> No one cares what you "think". We have like 10 people in this thread *telling* you what SA is *required* for X frequency.
> 
> There is no difference between MSI Pro/Tomahawk/Edge and the ASUS TUF/Strix in terms of overclocking.* They all do Dual Rank 4300 MT/s and 5.5GHz+ on a 12900K.*
> Both ASUS and MSI has great BIOS interfaces, it's basically all up to what you want to pay, no one should buy the Strix though, TUF is literally just as good. Like if you can find Edge or TUF cheap, get one of those, if not, then just get the MSI Z690-A Pro.
> 
> Motherboard?​BIOS?​Which memory sticks?​How many memory sticks?​In which slots? (If 2)​Gear 1 or Gear 2?​What frequency are you trying to run?​What timings are you trying to run?​.. all of that matters, only takes a single bad one and it all falls apart. 💥


my board model's is asus strix z690-A bios v.707 and I have four Spectrix d50 8g 4133. I tried 4133 gear 2 and 4000 gear 1 and 2 but I got no stability. now my system is somehow stable on 3600 on gear 1 and 16 19 19 40 2T but I get 1 to 3 error in each test .when I use 2 dimm 4133 and 4400 on gear 2 are stable. Do you have any idea how can I get stability on 4 dimm on 4000 best timing?


----------



## JoeRambo

zhrooms said:


> No idea how some of you can have issues on MSI boards, we have like a mountain of evidence that shows MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks, like are you completely forgetting about changing SA voltages or something? If that's the case no wonder you can't boot/run above 3600.


Please. I have tried so many combinations, but i was unable to boot above 3600. Nor 3733, nor 3700 nor 3866 nor 4000 work with any combination of SA/VDDQ, manual or auto timings and like 30 different combinations of manual ODT settings. NONE of them even POST.

The fun thing, is that 3600 is working 13-14-14 CR1 and gives like 45ns latency and great performance. I find it hard to believe that 3733 20-20-20 CR2 700RFC would not boot at 1.5V SA and 1.2-1.45V of VDDQ ?

MSI Z690 EDGE is different board from Z690-A Pro, and there is probably quite some luck involved, but i know at least 2 guys from this thread that have same stone wall @3600 with same not a step above, that it is hard for me to believe in some sort of mass user error.

Most likely BIOS sucks in training DR above 3600 and that's it.


----------



## raad11

Increasing VDDQ directly helped me get rid of errors in TM5. I got 1 error during 3 cycles of TM5 (anta777) on average with 1.44 VDDQ (1.44 SA as well), which went away when I increased VDDQ to 1.48.


----------



## zhrooms

raad11 said:


> Increasing VDDQ directly helped me get rid of errors in TM5. I got 1 error during 3 cycles of TM5 (anta777) on average with 1.44 VDDQ (1.44 SA as well), which went away when I increased VDDQ to 1.48.


Then I ask you to re-run that test, but this time instead of *increasing* the VDDQ to reduce errors, *lower* the VDDQ to see if it increases the error count!
Report back to us how many errors you get at let's say: 1.40, 1.35 and 1.30V.


JoeRambo said:


> I was unable to post above 3600. Nor 3733, nor 3700 nor 3866 nor 4000 work with any combination of SA/VDDQ, manual or auto timings and like 30 different combinations of manual ODT settings. The fun thing, is that 3600 is working 13-14-14 CR1 and gives like 45ns latency and great performance.
> 
> MSI Z690 EDGE is different board from Z690-A Pro, and there is probably quite some luck involved, but i know at least 2 guys from this thread that have same stone wall @3600 with same not a step above, that it is hard for me to believe in some sort of mass user error. Most likely BIOS sucks in training DR above 3600 and that's it.


So, what I'm hearing is that you tried a bunch of combinations, and nothing let you boot/post above 3600. Then assuming you tested all the correct values together, that only leaves one possible explanation: The BIOS. Then I ask you, have you tried all of the available BIOSes for that board? Also, can you point me to any other user with the same board that has the same issue?
I have a very hard time believing MSI managed to screw up the far more expensive Edge board, while having the budget Z690-A Pro running like clockwork. 

ASUS had all of their boards screwed up, but also fixed them all _simultaneously_ a few days after launch, like let me remind you, TUF and Strix could *not* boot/post above 3600 MT/s using 2x16GB Dual Rank on the launch BIOSes, but on 0707 created 6 days post-launch, both boards now did 4300 MT/s. This means that whatever the issue was, likely training, was simply "fixed" on all boards at once. What you're saying is that MSI randomly got the correct "training" figured out on the budget Z690-A Pro but *didn't* figure it out on Z690 Edge that costs 50% more, and they *still* haven't figured it out after more than 3 weeks after launch?
There is just no way they are that incompetent, _although_, Gigabyte still isn't fixed, so maybe they are that lost, but again, it really does not make any sense considering the Z690-*A Pro*.. works.


----------



## nimachoopani

zhrooms said:


> Then I ask you to re-run that test, but this time instead of *increasing* the VDDQ to reduce errors, *lower* the VDDQ to see if it increases the error count!
> Report back to us how many errors you get at let's say: 1.40, 1.35 and 1.30V.
> 
> So, what I'm hearing is that you tried a bunch of combinations, and nothing let you boot/post above 3600. Then assuming you tested all the correct values together, that only leaves one possible explanation: The BIOS. Then I ask you, have you tried all of the available BIOSes for that board? Also, can you point me to any other user with the same board that has the same issue?
> I have a very hard time believing MSI managed to screw up the far more expensive Edge board, while having the budget Z690-A Pro running like clockwork.
> 
> ASUS had all of their boards screwed up, but also fixed them all _simultaneously_ a few days after launch, like let me remind you, TUF and Strix could *not* boot/post above 3600 MT/s using 2x16GB Dual Rank on the launch BIOSes, but on 0707 created 6 days post-launch, both boards now did 4300 MT/s. This means that whatever the issue was, likely training, was simply "fixed" on all boards at once. What you're saying is that MSI randomly got the correct "training" figured out on the budget Z690-A Pro but *didn't* figure it out on Z690 Edge that costs 50% more, and they *still* haven't figured it out after more than 3 weeks after launch?
> There is just no way they are that incompetent, _although_, Gigabyte still isn't fixed, so maybe they are that lost, but again, it really does not make any sense considering the Z690-*A Pro*.. works.


my board model's is asus strix z690-A bios v.707 and I have four Spectrix d50 8g 4133. I tried 4133 gear 2 and 4000 gear 1 and 2 but I got no stability. now my system is somehow stable on 3600 on gear 1 and 16 19 19 40 2T but I get 1 to 3 error in each test .when I use 2 dimm 4133 and 4400 on gear 2 are stable. Do you have any idea how can I get stability on 4 dimm on 4000good timing 
the rams are micron but i don't know which die they are .
if they don't work i will sell them and get 2x16 4000 crucial balestix max


----------



## neteng101

JoeRambo said:


> The fun thing, is that 3600 is working 13-14-14 CR1 and gives like 45ns latency and great performance. I find it hard to believe that 3733 20-20-20 CR2 700RFC would not boot at 1.5V SA and 1.2-1.45V of VDDQ ?


I ran into something similar on the Z690-A Pro but instead of a wall, it was just broken at 3600 and only 3600... no POST. Has got to be some memory training issue not being able to set the timings right. Once I tried past 3600 - 3733/3800/3866/4000 all would POST fine. Only modify primary timings (slower primaries like you tried), leave the other timings on auto, have some added voltage for memory, SA, VDDQ. If it doesn't POST its got to be some issue with memory training. Try the beta bios out there if you haven't - not sure how many they released so far for yours.

3600 is still broken for me - I can't POST regardless of what I've tried - don't have a different set of RAM sticks to try though. Yet lower/higher works - looks like memory timings/training is just hard at 3600 for some reason.


----------



## Revv23

JoeRambo said:


> Z690 Edge DDR4 has no problems running 1T @3600, but 2T or whatever relaxed timings, auto or manually set just won't train anything higher currently.


Is that what happened to me? I had 3733 @ 1T 14-14-14 decided to try 2T and go 4000, then i couldnt even back down to 3733.... I never switched back to 1T!


----------



## zhrooms

nimachoopani said:


> I have the Strix A with BIOS 0707 and four 8GB 4133 MT/s CL19 sticks. I have tried;
> 4x8GB 4133 in Gear 2
> 4x8GB 4000 in Gear 1 and Gear 2, but neither is stable.
> When I use 2x8GB in 4133 and 4400 using Gear 2, it's stable.
> How do I get 4x8GB stable at 4000 or above using either Gear 1 or Gear 2?
> If I can't get them stable I'll just buy a new 2x16GB 4000 MT/s kit.


Translated it for you 🙏. So, yes, running 4 sticks is very hard on the IMC, I don't know much about running it (4) because I only use 2, but from what I've seen in this thread, there are multiple users that have gotten 4x8GB or even 4x16GB Single Rank to be stable at 4000. But it requires higher voltages, that's all I know. And by voltages I mean System Agent and VDDQ, like up to 1.45-1.50V each.
There is at least nothing wrong with the motherboard or BIOS, if anything it's the CPU IMC or bad voltages or timings.

Then I have to ask, why do you want 32GB? And I really have to ask because a lot of people use 32GB because they've been mislead that it's needed or increases performance in some games, which is completely false. 16GB is more than enough for literally every game on the market. The only reason someone would want to use 2x16GB sticks is because they bought the sticks for the 10th Gen CPUs which let you run the sticks at up to 4600 MT/s (the Dual Rank B-die was really fast compared to the old Single Rank B-die), and is the reason I have mine, so I couldn't give two ****s about having 32GB, I *just* wanted the better ICs. The 1% performance increase from having Dual Rank sticks is just a small bonus.

Also, at no point should you ever run Gear 2, the latency penalty is up to 10ns, it's absolutely catastrophic for gaming performance, and like, if you wanted bandwidth from higher frequency that Gear 2 can provide, then you should be on DDR5 and not DDR4.

Back to your issue, I don't know what you can try other than loosening the timings and increasing the SA and VDDQ voltage, for example, set only the primary timings to 20-26-26-46-2T, DRAM voltage 1.45V, System Agent voltage 1.45V and VDDQ 1.45V. Then try to boot 3733 using Gear 1 and 100:133 Ratio, with just 2 sticks in A2 and B2 (slot 2 and 4), if that works try to boot 3866, then 4000, and lastly 4133, then let us know how it goes, if/when you run into an issue. Next step would then be to repeat the test but with all 4 sticks, and start lower, from like 3466, then 3600, 3733, 3866, 4000. (And an advanced extra step for later, if nothing else works, is to manually set every single secondary and tertiary timing, which I do when I push IMC, works fantastic and eliminates all doubt).

(Although, I have experienced _strange_ boot issues when voltages were set too high, I can't tell you the exact combination I used at the time, but the one instance I remember is when I tried to push the IMC, it refused to run above 4200 MT/s in BIOS with more than 1.4V, while 1.32-1.36 worked, which is not the case at 4133 in Windows, then 1.4 is needed for stability and does not cause these issues, so I can absolutely say with certainty that I've had.. _strange_ issues regarding SA voltage. So I can't rule out that 1.45 might actually *cause more issues than it'd prevent*, but start with that.)


neteng101 said:


> I ran into something similar on the Z690-A Pro but instead of a wall, it was just broken at 3600 and *only 3600*... no POST. Once I tried past it, 3733/3800/3866 and 4000, they would all post fine.


That's good to know, can you confirm it happens on every BIOS available for the board? It'd be good to know if it was a specific BIOS that caused it or not. (It sounds like it's all but confirmation would be good.)


----------



## neteng101

zhrooms said:


> That's good to know, can you confirm it happens on every BIOS available for the board? It'd be good to know if it was a specific BIOS that caused it or not. (It sounds like it's all but confirmation would be good.)


100 (release), 113/114 (beta). Haven't tried 115 yet.


----------



## Revv23

O-VIZ said:


> I'm quite satisfied with the MSI Edge - 4133 - 14-15-15-28 CR1
> 
> View attachment 2535431


Can you share dragon power app please?


----------



## Cam1

*@zhrooms*

I just tried "again" :
Set Bios default -> restart -> Disable E-Cores -> *1.5V* *DRAM*, *System Agent* *1.42V,* *100:133* Ratio and Gear *1:1*, *2N* @4133 ( as you mentioned )
Bios doesn't post after Saving/restart.

12700K on Asus Z690 Tuf Gaming plus wifi Bios 0707 With 2x8Gb of Samsung B-die "CMD16GX4M2B3600C18"

Thaiophoon reports an error idk what does that mean.


----------



## Revv23

Ichirou said:


> Base BIOS or newer? Also, does MSI Dragon Ball/Power allow live changes, or is it just a readout? Would like a download for it if you can provide.



Someone earlier in thread shared link for dragonball, ive yet to find dragon power. 



MSI Dragon Ball1.0.0.08.zip beim Filehorst - filehorst.de


----------



## kingofblog

> @zhrooms Then I have to ask, why do you want 32GB? And I really have to ask because a lot of people use 32GB because they've been mislead that it's needed or increases performance in some games, which is completely false. 16GB is more than enough for literally every game on the market.


Believe it or not, some people do work *and* play games. I'd like 64 GB, but that's impossible with B-die, so I'm waiting on DDR5 for my next upgrade. For anyone that wants 32 GB though, dual-rank is definitely the way to go. Definitely not worth it to try and push 4000 MT/s at 1.5 VccSA or whatever on 4 DIMMs.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

zhrooms said:


> Yes, that's what I said. And no, the only reason you noticed the higher IMC bin on Rocket Lake was because it was absurdly low, it was there on older architectures, but even the poor ones handled 4600, far exceeding most DDR4 kits, _so_ _you never noticed_.
> 
> Thanks, I found it in the 'AI Features' menu that is only available on Strix and above, said this 12900K SP69 had: P-Core SP: 84 and E-Core SP: 41, so really awful E-Core "efficiency", dragging my overall SP score down significantly, so P-Core SP84 is really solid 🙏.
> 
> What I'm saying is that the water temperature doesn't increase by more than 2°C after let's say R23 for 20 minutes. An AIO (420) cooler with 3/6x 140mm in Push/Pull "up to" 2000RPM can easily dissipate that heat as well, like 200W is nothing really, games pull around half that, the difference is my custom water loop is triple radiator, so I can get away with the same low temp difference but at a much lower fan speed (<1000RPM).
> 
> Get your drivers over at Station-Drivers instead, they post new drivers daily and their collection is absolutely massive. Planning on adding every relevant driver to the original post.
> 
> Huh, not true at all, Alder Lake overclocking (P-Cores) is identical to previous architectures. Also the temperature of the water has nothing to do with stability or any such thing?? Like it's irrelevant if it's 15°C or 35°C, the reason it won't do X frequency is if the cores hit like 100°C, which, no ****, it doesn't hit if you can cool the water down to 5°C?
> 
> Well yes, because like 6 year old B-die can do 4400-4600, and these CPUs can't do more than ~4300 (2150 MHz IMC). Also, there is no such thing as "decent" or "bad" B-die, just putting it out there, worst ones can still do 4133 CL16 @ 1.45V which is more than what many Motherboards/Processors can do since B-die released.
> 
> From my testing on Page-6. In World of Warcraft, Dual Rank is: +0.8% faster Average, +1.2% faster in 5% Lows, +0.9% faster in 1% Lows
> Switching to Single Rank is not worth it unless you can get it more than 1% faster, which is difficult, since 1 lower CL is *not* 1%.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the love of god, me and others have mentioned it multiple times now, but people don't seem to bother reading the thread, just the last page/few pages.
> *If you just got your board and processor*, the first thing you should do, is to set *System Agent* voltage to *1.42*, *DRAM* voltage to *1.5*, leave *VDDQ* on Auto or set it manually to *1.35V*, then *100:133* Ratio and Gear *1:1*, *2T/N* in the DRAM timing section, *now*  you can start overclocking the memory, it'll be guaranteed to work up to 4133, if you have good enough sticks (any B-die) and the correct motherboard+BIOS combination.
> For example @pt0x-, that's your first mistake, going with the wrong BIOS (0003), 0707 is significantly better at RAM overclocking, it's the *only* BIOS any ASUS owner should use (Strix/TUF) as of now, unless you desperately need the legacy game toggle (E-Core parking, because you refuse to disable E-Cores altogether), but then you have to settle for a lower DRAM frequency (IMC).
> 
> No idea how some of you can have issues on MSI boards, we have like a mountain of evidence that shows MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks, like are you completely forgetting about changing SA voltages or something? If that's the case no wonder you can't boot/run above 3600.
> 
> Horrific value, that's $160 (+ tax) per 16GB stick, meanwhile you can pick up a used kit of 2x8GB B-die from 2016 for $75 that can do 4000 CL15 @ 1.55V, now *that* is value.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, we have no idea what SA voltages are safe/unsafe, most of us only have 2-3 weeks on these CPUs, so like 100 hours rough guess, not nearly enough time to see a degradation at just 1.4V SA, even pushing it to 1.5 it would be highly unlikely to see any difference in just 100 hours, my guess is maybe 1.6-1.7V you could see something. Even if 1.4 is "unsafe", like, define unsafe, it's 99% likely to not degrade at 1.4V under the first year, and I'm planning on replacing my 12900K to the 13900K Raptor Lake in a year, I will likely end up pushing 1.45V daily, or as much as it requires for me to be 4150-4200~ stable, which would be between 1.4 and 1.5V.
> 
> Again, as I stated above, we know with complete certainty the MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, and even higher on Single Rank, so you must be doing something wrong. Like, what timings? I run these when I test IMC: 17-18-18-38-2N, 12/8 RRDL/S, 747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL & 1.5V DRAM, these secondary timings are auto trained at 4266 Gear 2, and also tested them to actually be 100% stable in Gear 2, *then and only then* do I check what frequency (DRAM Frequency) I can run in Gear 1 and what SA voltage it needs for X frequency. Like there is no way your 12600K can't do above 3600 with Dual Rank, if it's not user error it's the wrong BIOS.
> 
> It's linked near the top of the original post.
> 
> 
> As said, there's no difference between MSI Z690-A Pro and TUF/Strix A. They have *all* proven to run 4300+ MT/s on Single Rank sticks and 4266 MT/s+ on Dual Rank sticks, so I highly doubt that you managed to get increased stability on the Strix, if anything, it was something you set up slightly different in the BIOS.
> 
> I have seen no evidence of VDDQ helping anything, I can boot 4240 MT/s with it on Auto (1.35V) and 4187 MT/s to Windows with again, 1.35V. And I'm currently running 4133 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, completely stable, with 1.35V (which is default/Auto). Increasing it just doesn't affect anything from what I've seen, and at the same time I've heard it's a remnant setting from the DDR5 boards, I (or someone else) should be able to test it by simply lowering it below default, see if it changes stability or anything else.
> 
> Nice, added to the original post.
> 
> Why are you obsessed with CR1? I have never seen someone benchmark it in games because it's so small, if you have some solid data that shows how big of an impact it has, please share it with us. I tested it many years ago now so need to re-test it, but from what I remember, the difference was insignificant, almost immeasurable, basically only go for it if you can, don't sacrifice anything (IMC) for it.
> 
> Stick to the 0707 BIOS and set SA to 1.40V, DRAM 1.5V and you should be able to run 4000 just fine. Like I could game with 4000 Dual Rank at 1.2 SA, 1.40+ is for 4133 and above, but just to be sure you're not running into SA issues, it's always better to set it too high than too low, once you find a your memory overclock, lower the SA down gradually until you find the voltage that it needs.
> 
> Huh, T-Topology on Z390 AORUS Ultra as an example, was _legendary_. And welcome to the club, IMC is only a "problem" *above* 4133 and some boards haven't been updated yet like Gigabyte, ASUS was updated within a week after release that completely unlocked the DRAM overclocking, and MSI already had BIOS available on release that could handle any memory kit.
> 
> No one cares what you "think". We have like 10 people in this thread *telling* you what SA is *required* for X frequency.
> 
> There is no difference between MSI Pro/Tomahawk/Edge and the ASUS TUF/Strix in terms of overclocking.* They all do Dual Rank 4300 MT/s and 5.5GHz+ on a 12900K.*
> Both ASUS and MSI has great BIOS interfaces, it's basically all up to what you want to pay, no one should buy the Strix though, TUF is literally just as good. Like if you can find Edge or TUF cheap, get one of those, if not, then just get the MSI Z690-A Pro.
> 
> Motherboard?​BIOS?​Which memory sticks?​How many memory sticks?​In which slots? (If 2)​Gear 1 or Gear 2?​What frequency are you trying to run?​What timings are you trying to run?​.. all of that matters, only takes a single bad one and it all falls apart. 💥


Somebody woke up on the wrong side of the bed.


----------



## nimachoopani

zhrooms said:


> Translated it for you 🙏. So, yes, running 4 sticks is very hard on the IMC, I don't know much about running it (4) because I only use 2, but from what I've seen in this thread, there are multiple users that have gotten 4x8GB or even 4x16GB Single Rank to be stable at 4000. But it requires higher voltages, that's all I know. And by voltages I mean System Agent and VDDQ, like up to 1.45-1.50V each.
> There is at least nothing wrong with the motherboard or BIOS, if anything it's the CPU IMC or bad voltages or timings.
> 
> Then I have to ask, why do you want 32GB? And I really have to ask because a lot of people use 32GB because they've been mislead that it's needed or increases performance in some games, which is completely false. 16GB is more than enough for literally every game on the market. The only reason someone would want to use 2x16GB sticks is because they bought the sticks for the 10th Gen CPUs which let you run the sticks at up to 4600 MT/s (the Dual Rank B-die was really fast compared to the old Single Rank B-die), and is the reason I have mine, so I couldn't give two ****s about having 32GB, I *just* wanted the better ICs. The 1% performance increase from having Dual Rank sticks is just a small bonus.
> 
> Also, at no point should you ever run Gear 2, the latency penalty is up to 10ns, it's absolutely catastrophic for gaming performance, and like, if you wanted bandwidth from higher frequency that Gear 2 can provide, then you should be on DDR5 and not DDR4.
> 
> Back to your issue, I don't know what you can try other than loosening the timings and increasing the SA and VDDQ voltage, for example, set only the primary timings to 20-26-26-46-2T, DRAM voltage 1.45V, System Agent voltage 1.45V and VDDQ 1.45V. Then try to boot 3733 using Gear 1 and 100:133 Ratio, with just 2 sticks in A2 and B2 (slot 2 and 4), if that works try to boot 3866, then 4000, and lastly 4133, then let us know how it goes, if/when you run into an issue. Next step would then be to repeat the test but with all 4 sticks, and start lower, from like 3466, then 3600, 3733, 3866, 4000. (And an advanced extra step for later, if nothing else works, is to manually set every single secondary and tertiary timing, which I do when I push IMC, works fantastic and eliminates all doubt).
> 
> (Although, I have experienced _strange_ boot issues when voltages were set too high, I can't tell you the exact combination I used at the time, but the one instance I remember is when I tried to push the IMC, it refused to run above 4200 MT/s in BIOS with more than 1.4V, while 1.32-1.36 worked, which is not the case at 4133 in Windows, then 1.4 is needed for stability and does not cause these issues, so I can absolutely say with certainty that I've had.. _strange_ issues regarding SA voltage. So I can't rule out that 1.45 might actually *cause more issues than it'd prevent*, but start with that.)
> 
> That's good to know, can you confirm it happens on every BIOS available for the board? It'd be good to know if it was a specific BIOS that caused it or not. (It sounds like it's all but confirmation would be good.)


i use 32 gb for maya and blender not for gaming 
i will test the timing and let you know


----------



## neteng101

Revv23 said:


> Someone earlier in thread shared link for dragonball, ive yet to find dragon power.








MSI Dragon Power1.0.0.6-intel.zip







drive.google.com





Dragon Power - I wonder if its really that useful though, probably can get the same readings/change them in IXTU too.


----------



## Revv23

neteng101 said:


> MSI Dragon Power1.0.0.6-intel.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dragon Power - I wonder if its really that useful though, probably can get the same readings/change them in IXTU too.


Thank you! 

I just realized they've added it to the 1st post too LOL DOH!


----------



## notearlyadoptr

gtz said:


> So now that people have had this for a few weeks, what is the DDR4 board to get?
> 
> From my reads looks like Gigabyte struggles and Asus depends on the BIOS revision. MSI seems to be the winner.
> 
> What about ASRock or BIOSTAR?
> [/QUOTE
> 
> 
> gtz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Gigabyte
> 
> 
> 
> Okay then finally!!! We have a consensus, MSI it is!!! So I am returning my Gigabyte PRO DDR5 board today, BIOS lousy and DDR5 sucks for at least 2-3 years. Going to return the G-gaming X when it arrives tomorrow from the egg. Guess I'll just get the MSI Pro-A and call it a day.
Click to expand...


----------



## O-VIZ

Ichirou said:


> Base BIOS or newer? Also, does MSI Dragon Ball/Power allow live changes, or is it just a readout? Would like a download for it if you can provide.


It's still the base bios - didn't try any other yet.
Got the working MSI tools from here: MSI Dragon Ball / Dragon Power Tools for Z690


----------



## O-VIZ

Revv23 said:


> Can you share dragon power app please?


MSI Dragon Ball / Dragon Power Tools for Z690


----------



## GQNerd

Board: MSI Pro Z690 A (no wifi) on latest BIOS (1.15)
CPU: 12900k (no idea on SP, but runs beautifully at 5.2P, 4.1E, 4.1Cache - with 360mm EVGA AIO)
RAM: F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB (2x16GB DR)

Easily get Gear 2 up to 4266Mhz with 16-16-16-36 timings but couldn't get it to boot in Gear 1. Until....

*I set VDDQ to AUTO... SA - 1.41, VDIMM - 1.52 *

Now I'm able to run 4000Mhz 14-14-14-34 CR2 at Gear 1!!! -_ Still testing/tuning, but it's looking GOOD
















_


----------



## ObviousCough

VQQD on _*auto*_ and i bsod as soon as TM5 starts.

VDDQ set to *1.5v* and i can watch the errors roll in.


----------



## Hiikeri

ObviousCough said:


> w00t!
> 
> my DJR 5333 kit is back from RMA
> 
> edit: boots into windows at xmp but instant memory errors. :|


My 5133 is stable 5200 cl20-1T @XMP voltage (1.55V).


----------



## Ichirou

kingofblog said:


> Believe it or not, some people do work *and* play games. I'd like 64 GB, but that's impossible with B-die, so I'm waiting on DDR5 for my next upgrade. For anyone that wants 32 GB though, dual-rank is definitely the way to go. Definitely not worth it to try and push 4000 MT/s at 1.5 VccSA or whatever on 4 DIMMs.


Same. My computer use (and it's almost like most of the day), is over 90% workstation. 16 GB might be enough for gaming, but definitely is not otherwise.

Micron B-die should be possible with 4x16 GB SR DIMMs, but I'll confirm once I've swapped from Z390 to Z690. A bit hard to find, though. My VCCSA on Z390 is only 1.20V.


Miguelios said:


> Board: MSI Pro Z690 A (no wifi) on latest BIOS (1.15)
> CPU: 12900k (no idea on SP, but runs beautifully at 5.2P, 4.1E, 4.1Cache - with 360mm EVGA AIO)
> RAM: F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB (2x16GB DR)
> 
> Easily get Gear 2 up to 4266Mhz with 16-16-16-36 timings but couldn't get it to boot in Gear 1. Until....
> 
> *I set VDDQ to AUTO... SA - 1.41, VDIMM - 1.52 *
> 
> Now I'm able to run 4000Mhz 14-14-14-34 CR2 at Gear 1!!! -_ Still testing/tuning, but it's looking GOOD
> 
> View attachment 2535487
> _


Care to get a readout of real VDDQ? Would provide an idea for what it Auto'd to.

In other news, I'm guessing the first thing to try is Gear 1, and then 1T afterwards (which I highly doubt would work for my kit). Also, I'm ready:








All that's left is to wait for the CPU... Luckily managed to price match the NH-D15 for about $100, and the WD's on sale for $125 CAD. MB was $420 CAD.
Funny story though; I actually bought a D15 before, sold it, and now I've bought another.


----------



## ObviousCough

Hiikeri said:


> My 5133 is stable 5200 cl20-1T @XMP voltage.


i'm using xmp voltage for my kit, it's the cpu that seems to be struggling.


----------



## Impalor

JoeRambo said:


> Please. I have tried so many combinations, but i was unable to boot above 3600. Nor 3733, nor 3700 nor 3866 nor 4000 work with any combination of SA/VDDQ, manual or auto timings and like 30 different combinations of manual ODT settings. NONE of them even POST.
> 
> The fun thing, is that 3600 is working 13-14-14 CR1 and gives like 45ns latency and great performance. I find it hard to believe that 3733 20-20-20 CR2 700RFC would not boot at 1.5V SA and 1.2-1.45V of VDDQ ?
> 
> MSI Z690 EDGE is different board from Z690-A Pro, and there is probably quite some luck involved, but i know at least 2 guys from this thread that have same stone wall @3600 with same not a step above, that it is hard for me to believe in some sort of mass user error.
> 
> Most likely BIOS sucks in training DR above 3600 and that's it.


I got my Edge today and am stuck at 3700. Bios 1.00 and 1.14. Just earlier the same CPU and RAM were running on TUF upto 3866 (with wall at 3900). I remember a week ago TUF was also stuck at the same 3700, and Aorus Elite before it. I have a theory that new boards need some time to "break-in", before they can run faster.


----------



## Hiikeri

O-VIZ said:


> I'm quite satisfied with the MSI Edge - 4133 - 14-15-15-28 CR1
> 
> View attachment 2535431


VDimm 1.65V. 🔥


----------



## Ichirou

Hiikeri said:


> VDimm 1.65V. 🔥


VDIMM of 1.65V should be fine; I daily'd 1.63V for a year now, and the PC's online like 16+ hours a day. Mixed use, mostly workstation.


----------



## Hiikeri

raad11 said:


> Increasing VDDQ directly helped me get rid of errors in TM5. I got 1 error during 3 cycles of TM5 (anta777) on average with 1.44 VDDQ (1.44 SA as well), which went away when I increased VDDQ to 1.48.


Same for me but Karhu RamTest. 4000-141414 28 280...on 2x8Gb SR high-bin B-die.

SA 1.40V & Vdimm 1.55V.

VDDQ 1.35V no post.
VDDQ 1.40V Win11 + 3-4min Karhu > error (tryed 3 times, Win restarted before 3rd test).

VDDQ 1.42V > Over 1 hour Karhu stable at 1st try until i stopped it, games on 3-4h, casual browsing 2-3h, mining 2 days..


----------



## 2500k_2

New bios for MSI PRO Z690 A DDR4 *115U3* 





PRO Z690-A DDR4115U3.zip - AnonFiles







anonfiles.com





I do not know what are the improvements compared to 115, but in the description it says
* improved compatibility from DR to Gear 1
*adjusts the default SA voltage (slight drop)

maybe I was wrong with the translation. Who knows Chinese, please help translate.


Spoiler: toppc


----------



## GQNerd

Ichirou said:


> Care to get a readout of real VDDQ? Would provide an idea for what it Auto'd to.


VDDQ TX @ 1.2V


----------



## Frozburn

2500k_2 said:


> New bios for MSI PRO Z690 A DDR4 *115U3*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRO Z690-A DDR4115U3.zip - AnonFiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anonfiles.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know what are the improvements compared to 115, but in the description it says
> * improved compatibility from DR to Gear 1
> *adjusts the default SA voltage (slight drop)
> 
> maybe I was wrong with the translation. Who knows Chinese, please help translate.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: toppc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535512


Thanks. Where do MSI post these things? I wanna bookmark it so I can check what they say


----------



## Ichirou

2500k_2 said:


> New bios for MSI PRO Z690 A DDR4 *115U3*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRO Z690-A DDR4115U3.zip - AnonFiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anonfiles.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know what are the improvements compared to 115, but in the description it says
> * improved compatibility from DR to Gear 1
> *adjusts the default SA voltage (slight drop)
> 
> maybe I was wrong with the translation. Who knows Chinese, please help translate.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: toppc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535512


Can you paste the text instead of a screenshot?


----------



## zhrooms

Cam1 said:


> I reset BIOS -> Disabled E-Cores -> Set *1.5V* *DRAM*, *System Agent* *1.42V,* *100:133* Ratio and Gear *1:1*, *2N* @4133
> Doesn't post after Saving & Restarting.
> 12700K on TUF with BIOS 0707 and 2x8GB of Samsung B-die "CMD16GX4M2B3600C18"


That makes no sense, since that's Single Rank B-die, it's 3600 MT/s CL18 which is not typically B-die but I confirmed it by finding screenshots of people running them at 4000 MT/s CL16 just fine. Anyhow, Single Rank is easy to run, 4133 should be a joke, especially 4000, considering that bad CPUs can post 4200 Dual Rank, so 4000 should run 1.45V DRAM, System Agent 1.25V and 100:133/1:1 & 2N, then like primary timings 17-17-17-37-2T, rest auto. If that doesn't work then I am at a complete loss, at that point I'd actually suspect some people seem to have borderline broken IMC, like actually disastrous. Then the only way to verify that (if IMC is the issue), would be if someone simply bought another CPU to test with.
What I can confirm: My 12700K could post 4195 on my 2x16GB Dual Rank on the ASUS 0707 BIOS and my 12900K can post 4240 on the same sticks and board. So there's a clear difference on the "posting" capability between my 12700K and 12900K, roughly 50 MT/s difference (25 MHz IMC). That's not a lot, so let's say someone was unlucky, and got a CPU with terrible IMC that was 100 MT/s worse than my 12700K, that'd still make it post close to 4100, and guarantee that it would post and run 4000 just fine.. but there are multiple users here who complain about 3600-3733, that just doesn't make any sense, the IMC would be unbelievably bad, like literally so bad you can't believe it. Again, only way to get to the bottom of that would be to get another CPU (IMC). 


kingofblog said:


> Believe it or not, some people do work *and* play games. I'd like 64 GB, but that's impossible with B-die, so I'm waiting on DDR5 for my next upgrade. For anyone that wants 32 GB though, dual-rank is definitely the way to go. Definitely not worth it to try and push 4000 MT/s at 1.5 VccSA or whatever on 4 DIMMs.


Believe it or not, that's why I asked 🤦‍♂️, to make sure it wasn't just for gaming, since in that case it'd have been problem solved, by selling off 2 of the 4 sticks.


nimachoopani said:


> i use 32 gb for maya and blender not for gaming


Got it, that's fine, 2x16GB would be an option if you really wanted to push the memory overclock, but before that's even an option, you should make sure the Motherboard/BIOS & CPU works as they should (basically 4133 stable with 2x8GB).


notearlyadoptr said:


> Okay then finally!!! We have a consensus, MSI it is!!! So I am returning my Gigabyte PRO DDR5 board today, BIOS lousy and DDR5 sucks for at least 2-3 years. Going to return the G-gaming X when it arrives tomorrow from the egg. Guess I'll just get the MSI Pro-A and call it a day.


Yes, the MSI Z690-A Pro is a solid choice, very cheap and is great at overclocking both CPU and Memory. 🙏
I personally recommend TUF above all other boards but only if you can find it for like less than $50 above the MSI Z690-A Pro, for example I got mine (Non Wi-Fi) for $239.99 pre-tax, that's just $20 above the MSI, during the black week.


Miguelios said:


> I'm using the MSI Z690-A Pro on the latest 1.15 BIOS, got a 12900K and 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die, ran 4266 in Gear 2 just fine but couldn't get Gear 1 to boot, until I set VDDQ to Auto, SA to 1.41V and DRAM to 1.52V, now I'm able to run 4000 CL14 in Gear 1!


😇👍


Impalor said:


> I got my Edge (BIOS 1.14) today and am stuck at 3700. Just earlier the same CPU and RAM were running on TUF upto 3866 (with wall at 3900). I remember a week ago TUF was also stuck at the same 3700, and Aorus Elite before it. I have a theory that new boards need some time to "break-in", before they can run faster.


Ok.. so you got AORUS Elite, then TUF, now Edge.. why? TUF is like $30 cheaper than Edge and is better in every way except for the VRM, but it's hard to say if even that is better, more like it's _different_. You should probably only be using the TUF right now, as that's the one board (and Strix) that we know with absolute certainty are problem free when it comes to memory overclocking. And no, there is absolutely no such thing as a break-in period. I would stay away from Edge until we have confirmation that it can run 4200+ in Dual Rank, which I haven't seen yet, and if anyone has, please share it.


Ichirou said:


> VDIMM of 1.65V should be fine; I daily'd 1.63V for a year now, and the PC's online like 16+ hours a day. Mixed use, mostly workstation.


Yes, 1.65V daily is completely fine, it just runs hot and thus easily gets unstable, as long as you keep temps reasonable, it's fine.
I'm on water now and I'll likely end up running 1.60 to 1.65 daily moving forward, or whatever is required, I doubt I'll need 1.65, the frequency/timing sweet spot will probably end up wanting around 1.55-1.60.


Hiikeri said:


> Karhu RamTest at 4000 MT/s 14-14-14-28, 280 RFC
> VDDQ 1.35V No Post
> VDDQ 1.40V Error after 3-4min
> VDDQ 1.42V No error (let it run 1hour+)


🏆 That's what we like to see, _some_ actual stats. I believe the reason VDDQ has no effect for me, is because I run loose timings, I haven't had time to overclock my memory yet, I've just been running 4133 17-18-18-38-2T (XMP 4266 but 4133 because IMC limit) and it's completely game stable at 1.35 VDDQ for me, so I'll keep a close eye on stability issues moving forward, once I reduce timings, will increase VDDQ when needed.


2500k_2 said:


> I do not know what are the improvements compared to 115, but in the description it says
> * improved compatibility from DR to Gear 1


🤞 that it helps the potential issues that Edge has.


----------



## Cam1

*@zhrooms*

Edit: No my computer is not able to post Bios with DDR @4133 with any possible tweakings !

Trying to get 4000MHz Gear Mode 1 stable atm. But it is just not stable.

So there is not SA voltage reported in HWinfo with the Tuf motherboard as som1 said, but still the Value is the exact same as the one i put in the bios ( SA VID )


----------



## ogider

2500k_2 said:


> I do not know what are the improvements compared to 115, but in the description it says


Testing atm. But I see progress. I can do 4000 c 14 14 14 1t g1 now. Before was 2t ,,and 1t ended at 3800 for me.
b-die 2x16GB DR


----------



## Arni90

zhrooms said:


> No idea how some of you can have issues on MSI boards, we have like a mountain of evidence that shows MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks, like are you completely forgetting about changing SA voltages or something? If that's the case no wonder you can't boot/run above 3600.
> 
> Again, as I stated above, we know with complete certainty the MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, and even higher on Single Rank, so you must be doing something wrong. Like, what timings? I run these when I test IMC: 17-18-18-38-2N, 12/8 RRDL/S, 747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL & 1.5V DRAM, these secondary timings are auto trained at 4266 Gear 2, and also tested them to actually be 100% stable in Gear 2, *then and only then* do I check what frequency (DRAM Frequency) I can run in Gear 1 and what SA voltage it needs for X frequency. Like there is no way your 12600K can't do above 3600 with Dual Rank, if it's not user error it's the wrong BIOS.
> 
> As said, there's no difference between MSI Z690-A Pro and TUF/Strix A. They have *all* proven to run 4300+ MT/s on Single Rank sticks and 4266 MT/s+ on Dual Rank sticks, so I highly doubt that you managed to get increased stability on the Strix, if anything, it was something you set up slightly different in the BIOS.


This applies to dual rank G.Skill B-die on my MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4 and 12900K with BIOS v 1.13, 1.14, and 1.15
I've tried changing VCCSA from 0.95V to 1.45V in 0.05V steps, the first wall at DDR4-3600 was overcome by setting RttPark to 60 and RttNom to 80, the next wall was then reached at DDR4-3800.
VCCSA requirement for booting DDR4-3600: 1.00V
VCCSA requirement for booting DDR4-3800: 1.05V

VCCSA 1.05V doesn't boot DDR4-3866, neither does 1.10V, 1.15V, 1.20V, 1.25V, 1.30V, 1.35V, 1.40V, 1.45V, 1.50V, or 1.52V

Single rank B-die will boot DDR4-4300 with everything auto except DRAM voltage 1.45V and 17-17-17-28
Single rank DJR will boot DDR4-4400 with everything auto, except DRAM voltage 1.45V and 19-26-26-32

If I go back to release BIOS v1.00, I can boot and stabilize Dual Rank just fine, but performance is worse than even DDR4-3600 with newer BIOS due to microcode changes.



zhrooms said:


> There is no difference between MSI Pro/Tomahawk/Edge and the ASUS TUF/Strix in terms of overclocking.* They all do Dual Rank 4300 MT/s and 5.5GHz+ on a 12900K.*
> Both ASUS and MSI has great BIOS interfaces, it's basically all up to what you want to pay, no one should buy the Strix though, TUF is literally just as good. Like if you can find Edge or TUF cheap, get one of those, if not, then just get the MSI Z690-A Pro.
> 
> Motherboard?​BIOS?​Which memory sticks?​How many memory sticks?​In which slots? (If 2)​Gear 1 or Gear 2?​What frequency are you trying to run?​What timings are you trying to run?​.. all of that matters, only takes a single bad one and it all falls apart. 💥


5.5 GHz on a 12900K? Wut? I can barely run the SotTR benchmark at 5.3 GHz with hyperthreading and E-cores disabled. That's at 1.35V VCore with LLC4, because 1.25V and 1.30V crashed.
And I can't get anything reasonably better in terms of cooling, a MO-RA3 and Eisblock XPX should be pretty close to the limit of ambient cooling.


----------



## JoeRambo

ogider said:


> Testing atm. But I see progress. I can do 4000 c 14 14 14 1t g1 now. Before was 2t ,,and 1t ended at 3800 for me.
> b-die 2x16GB DR


Music to my ears!  The wait for Edge bios starts in 3-2-1


----------



## Arni90

2500k_2 said:


> New bios for MSI PRO Z690 A DDR4 *115U3*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRO Z690-A DDR4115U3.zip - AnonFiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anonfiles.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know what are the improvements compared to 115, but in the description it says
> * improved compatibility from DR to Gear 1
> *adjusts the default SA voltage (slight drop)
> 
> maybe I was wrong with the translation. Who knows Chinese, please help translate.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: toppc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535512


Completely different experience with this BIOS for me. I can now boot DDR4-4133 in gear 1 with VCCSA 1.25V into Windows, previous limit was DDR4-3800 with VCCSA 1.15V and manually set RTTs


----------



## pt0x-

zhrooms said:


> Yes, that's what I said. And no, the only reason you noticed the higher IMC bin on Rocket Lake was because it was absurdly low, it was there on older architectures, but even the poor ones handled 4600, far exceeding most DDR4 kits, _so_ _you never noticed_.
> 
> Thanks, I found it in the 'AI Features' menu that is only available on Strix and above, said this 12900K SP69 had: P-Core SP: 84 and E-Core SP: 41, so really awful E-Core "efficiency", dragging my overall SP score down significantly, so P-Core SP84 is really solid 🙏.
> 
> What I'm saying is that the water temperature doesn't increase by more than 2°C after let's say R23 for 20 minutes. An AIO (420) cooler with 3/6x 140mm in Push/Pull "up to" 2000RPM can easily dissipate that heat as well, like 200W is nothing really, games pull around half that, the difference is my custom water loop is triple radiator, so I can get away with the same low temp difference but at a much lower fan speed (<1000RPM).
> 
> Get your drivers over at Station-Drivers instead, they post new drivers daily and their collection is absolutely massive. Planning on adding every relevant driver to the original post.
> 
> Huh, not true at all, Alder Lake overclocking (P-Cores) is identical to previous architectures. Also the temperature of the water has nothing to do with stability or any such thing?? Like it's irrelevant if it's 15°C or 35°C, the reason it won't do X frequency is if the cores hit like 100°C, which, no ****, it doesn't hit if you can cool the water down to 5°C?
> 
> Well yes, because like 6 year old B-die can do 4400-4600, and these CPUs can't do more than ~4300 (2150 MHz IMC). Also, there is no such thing as "decent" or "bad" B-die, just putting it out there, worst ones can still do 4133 CL16 @ 1.45V which is more than what many Motherboards/Processors can do since B-die released.
> 
> From my testing on Page-6. In World of Warcraft, Dual Rank is: +0.8% faster Average, +1.2% faster in 5% Lows, +0.9% faster in 1% Lows
> Switching to Single Rank is not worth it unless you can get it more than 1% faster, which is difficult, since 1 lower CL is *not* 1%.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> For the love of god, me and others have mentioned it multiple times now, but people don't seem to bother reading the thread, just the last page/few pages.
> *If you just got your board and processor*, the first thing you should do, is to set *System Agent* voltage to *1.42*, *DRAM* voltage to *1.5*, leave *VDDQ* on Auto or set it manually to *1.35V*, then *100:133* Ratio and Gear *1:1*, *2T/N* in the DRAM timing section, *now*  you can start overclocking the memory, it'll be guaranteed to work up to 4133, if you have good enough sticks (any B-die) and the correct motherboard+BIOS combination.
> For example @pt0x-, that's your first mistake, going with the wrong BIOS (0003), 0707 is significantly better at RAM overclocking, it's the *only* BIOS any ASUS owner should use (Strix/TUF) as of now, unless you desperately need the legacy game toggle (E-Core parking, because you refuse to disable E-Cores altogether), but then you have to settle for a lower DRAM frequency (IMC).
> 
> No idea how some of you can have issues on MSI boards, we have like a mountain of evidence that shows MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks, like are you completely forgetting about changing SA voltages or something? If that's the case no wonder you can't boot/run above 3600.
> 
> Horrific value, that's $160 (+ tax) per 16GB stick, meanwhile you can pick up a used kit of 2x8GB B-die from 2016 for $75 that can do 4000 CL15 @ 1.55V, now *that* is value.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, we have no idea what SA voltages are safe/unsafe, most of us only have 2-3 weeks on these CPUs, so like 100 hours rough guess, not nearly enough time to see a degradation at just 1.4V SA, even pushing it to 1.5 it would be highly unlikely to see any difference in just 100 hours, my guess is maybe 1.6-1.7V you could see something. Even if 1.4 is "unsafe", like, define unsafe, it's 99% likely to not degrade at 1.4V under the first year, and I'm planning on replacing my 12900K to the 13900K Raptor Lake in a year, I will likely end up pushing 1.45V daily, or as much as it requires for me to be 4150-4200~ stable, which would be between 1.4 and 1.5V.
> 
> Again, as I stated above, we know with complete certainty the MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, and even higher on Single Rank, so you must be doing something wrong. Like, what timings? I run these when I test IMC: 17-18-18-38-2N, 12/8 RRDL/S, 747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL & 1.5V DRAM, these secondary timings are auto trained at 4266 Gear 2, and also tested them to actually be 100% stable in Gear 2, *then and only then* do I check what frequency (DRAM Frequency) I can run in Gear 1 and what SA voltage it needs for X frequency. Like there is no way your 12600K can't do above 3600 with Dual Rank, if it's not user error it's the wrong BIOS.
> 
> It's linked near the top of the original post.
> 
> 
> As said, there's no difference between MSI Z690-A Pro and TUF/Strix A. They have *all* proven to run 4300+ MT/s on Single Rank sticks and 4266 MT/s+ on Dual Rank sticks, so I highly doubt that you managed to get increased stability on the Strix, if anything, it was something you set up slightly different in the BIOS.
> 
> I have seen no evidence of VDDQ helping anything, I can boot 4240 MT/s with it on Auto (1.35V) and 4187 MT/s to Windows with again, 1.35V. And I'm currently running 4133 on 2x16GB Dual Rank, completely stable, with 1.35V (which is default/Auto). Increasing it just doesn't affect anything from what I've seen, and at the same time I've heard it's a remnant setting from the DDR5 boards, I (or someone else) should be able to test it by simply lowering it below default, see if it changes stability or anything else.
> 
> Nice, added to the original post.
> 
> Why are you obsessed with CR1? I have never seen someone benchmark it in games because it's so small, if you have some solid data that shows how big of an impact it has, please share it with us. I tested it many years ago now so need to re-test it, but from what I remember, the difference was insignificant, almost immeasurable, basically only go for it if you can, don't sacrifice anything (IMC) for it.
> 
> Stick to the 0707 BIOS and set SA to 1.40V, DRAM 1.5V and you should be able to run 4000 just fine. Like I could game with 4000 Dual Rank at 1.2 SA, 1.40+ is for 4133 and above, but just to be sure you're not running into SA issues, it's always better to set it too high than too low, once you find a your memory overclock, lower the SA down gradually until you find the voltage that it needs.
> 
> Huh, T-Topology on Z390 AORUS Ultra as an example, was _legendary_. And welcome to the club, IMC is only a "problem" *above* 4133 and some boards haven't been updated yet like Gigabyte, ASUS was updated within a week after release that completely unlocked the DRAM overclocking, and MSI already had BIOS available on release that could handle any memory kit.
> 
> No one cares what you "think". We have like 10 people in this thread *telling* you what SA is *required* for X frequency.
> 
> There is no difference between MSI Pro/Tomahawk/Edge and the ASUS TUF/Strix in terms of overclocking.* They all do Dual Rank 4300 MT/s and 5.5GHz+ on a 12900K.*
> Both ASUS and MSI has great BIOS interfaces, it's basically all up to what you want to pay, no one should buy the Strix though, TUF is literally just as good. Like if you can find Edge or TUF cheap, get one of those, if not, then just get the MSI Z690-A Pro.
> 
> Motherboard?​BIOS?​Which memory sticks?​How many memory sticks?​In which slots? (If 2)​Gear 1 or Gear 2?​What frequency are you trying to run?​What timings are you trying to run?​.. all of that matters, only takes a single bad one and it all falls apart. 💥


Hey man. No offense, I have been reading the thread for over 10 days and have also read your advise about the voltages some pages back. What I missed is any fundamental details or considerations in regards to daily use of these voltages. (I mean, this is the daily oc thread).

I can yeet voltages, its not hard. hell I have destroyed AMD tbirds back in the day doing that. But as of today, I just want to mellow it down a bit. I'm personally looking for a 2 a 3 week period of getting to know the limits of a new platform when I start using it, and from that point on just find a stable that is the highest performance I can achieve, without breaking stuff or tweaking to much. 

Understandable that this is not always possible. And the z690 platform is very new. It's just that I come from a 9700k and maximus x (z370) that has been running for years straight on VCCSA 1.32v. No problem at all, at the same time, in that era, 1.35v was about the max for daily safe SA, also stability wise above 1.35v didn't work well for some.

So yeah to find a good answer to my question, I did search, did read the tread (not every page in detail, true) also external sources, but no conclusive answer to be found. 

That in itself is also an answer! And im fine with that.

Thanks for the bios tip as well. I was waiting on a new version (newer than 0707). Reason? Im stable right now on 003, and I read many many mixed results with 003 and 0707 as well. But if you realy think it could help. I'll give it a go!


----------



## ogider

z690 msi a-pro ddr4 bios .115U3
4000 14 14 14 c1 g1 very unstable. even when changing bios parameters, it can freeze. ddrV vddq sa not helping.

but 4000 14 15 15 c1 g1 for now 25 min tm5 extreme and no errors.
2x16GB b-die DR


----------



## nimachoopani

zhrooms said:


> That makes no sense, since that's Single Rank B-die, it's 3600 MT/s CL18 which is not typically B-die but I confirmed it by finding screenshots of people running them at 4000 MT/s CL16 just fine. Anyhow, Single Rank is easy to run, 4133 should be a joke, especially 4000, considering that bad CPUs can post 4200 Dual Rank, so 4000 should run 1.45V DRAM, System Agent 1.25V and 100:133/1:1 & 2N, then like primary timings 17-17-17-37-2T, rest auto. If that doesn't work then I am at a complete loss, at that point I'd actually suspect some people seem to have borderline broken IMC, like actually disastrous. Then the only way to verify that (if IMC is the issue), would be if someone simply bought another CPU to test with.
> What I can confirm: My 12700K could post 4195 on my 2x16GB Dual Rank on the ASUS 0707 BIOS and my 12900K can post 4240 on the same sticks and board. So there's a clear difference on the "posting" capability between my 12700K and 12900K, roughly 50 MT/s difference (25 MHz IMC). That's not a lot, so let's say someone was unlucky, and got a CPU with terrible IMC that was 100 MT/s worse than my 12700K, that'd still make it post close to 4100, and guarantee that it would post and run 4000 just fine.. but there are multiple users here who complain about 3600-3733, that just doesn't make any sense, the IMC would be unbelievably bad, like literally so bad you can't believe it. Again, only way to get to the bottom of that would be to get another CPU (IMC).
> 
> Believe it or not, that's why I asked 🤦‍♂️, to make sure it wasn't just for gaming, since in that case it'd have been problem solved, by selling off 2 of the 4 sticks.
> 
> Got it, that's fine, 2x16GB would be an option if you really wanted to push the memory overclock, but before that's even an option, you should make sure the Motherboard/BIOS & CPU works as they should (basically 4133 stable with 2x8GB).
> 
> Yes, the MSI Z690-A Pro is a solid choice, very cheap and is great at overclocking both CPU and Memory. 🙏
> I personally recommend TUF above all other boards but only if you can find it for like less than $50 above the MSI Z690-A Pro, for example I got mine (Non Wi-Fi) for $239.99 pre-tax, that's just $20 above the MSI, during the black week.
> 
> 😇👍
> 
> Ok.. so you got AORUS Elite, then TUF, now Edge.. why? TUF is like $30 cheaper than Edge and is better in every way except for the VRM, but it's hard to say if even that is better, more like it's _different_. You should probably only be using the TUF right now, as that's the one board (and Strix) that we know with absolute certainty are problem free when it comes to memory overclocking. And no, there is absolutely no such thing as a break-in period. I would stay away from Edge until we have confirmation that it can run 4200+ in Dual Rank, which I haven't seen yet, and if anyone has, please share it.
> 
> Yes, 1.65V daily is completely fine, it just runs hot and thus easily gets unstable, as long as you keep temps reasonable, it's fine.
> I'm on water now and I'll likely end up running 1.60 to 1.65 daily moving forward, or whatever is required, I doubt I'll need 1.65, the frequency/timing sweet spot will probably end up wanting around 1.55-1.60.
> 
> 🏆 That's what we like to see, _some_ actual stats. I believe the reason VDDQ has no effect for me, is because I run loose timings, I haven't had time to overclock my memory yet, I've just been running 4133 17-18-18-38-2T (XMP 4266 but 4133 because IMC limit) and it's completely game stable at 1.35 VDDQ for me, so I'll keep a close eye on stability issues moving forward, once I reduce timings, will increase VDDQ when needed.
> 
> 🤞 that it helps the potential issues that Edge has.


I tried what you said .
With 4 stick i can get 3733 19 21 21 42 2c sa on 1.25 and dim on 1.45 anything more give some errors on memtest
With. 2 stick i can get 3866 19 20 20 40 2c sa on 1.2 and dim on 1.5
Even system agent on 1.5 won't help to get 4000 stable on gear 1 with 2 stick and 20 26 26 46 2c time. Now i don't know it's my imc that is bad or my memory sticks


----------



## Cam1

Must be my ram kit which is just not able to do more, i'm thinking getting something better. 
I can get "G.Skill Trident Z Royal F4-4000C14D-16GTEG" for 300euros, do you think they will run properly with xmp enabled ?

What is your Ram kit nimachoopani ?


----------



## notearlyadoptr

zhrooms said:


> I can yes, and I am. I did mention it previously, the latency doesn't really matter, but the lower it is, the higher framerate you will have in games, that's really all we gamers need to know, but I'm taking a leap and use the latency number the best we can, and it's working out pretty well after all the math and comparisons are done. So yes I understand it's not as correct as it it could be, but good enough for me (us gamers) is all I'm saying.
> 
> And yes, first thing I did was to disable E-cores, been running 8C/16T 5.0 GHz and 4.7GHz on the Cache, at about 1.225 load so it's R23 stable, to ensure complete stability in game tests for the memory. I did some brief testing and I should be able to get this 12700K up to 5.2 GHz at 1.36V load~, just not gotten to it yet, with that voltage it should also do higher cache (ring), maybe 4.9.
> 
> If the 0707 is legit, then I'd be going from 1860 IMC on Dual Rank to 2050, that's ~200, absolutely massive latency decrease, at 2050 IMC with CL16-16-16 I got 45.0ns, 360 RFC and 32000 REFI, while at 1800 14-15-15 (535 RFC, 14055 REFI and more lowered from Auto) I got 51.4ns, that's a 6.4ns decrease, big improvement in gaming performance, far bigger than 1-2% lol. But you mentioned 50 MHz, then perhaps up to 2% sounds reasonable, that's something I'm testing very soon.
> 
> Dude, 16x 60A (960) Direct Stages is insanely overkill, 8C/16T 9900K ran on 8x50A (400), I pulled 250W from that like it's nothing, VRM hit like 60°C with the case fan pulling in from the back, at like 1000 RPM. As you say _"Maybe Gigabyte boards are just significantly overkill this generation"_, that's exactly it.. everything is overkill, the budget boards are no longer budget, they're like mid-tier.
> The Gigabyte Gaming X board (same board as Elite AX but no Wi-Fi module) for $229 has the same 16x 60A Direct Stages as the Elite AX at $269, same 20-Phase PWM Controller (RAA229131) as the Apex for christ sake, these boards pack some serious VRM, especially the Pro model with 90A stages (1440), that's borderline insane, and I guess Strix A with 16x 80A (1280) in Parallel as well.
> 
> But that's why I got multiple boards, I'm currently on the Strix A, with 16x80A, but I have the Gaming X and Elite AX at 16x60A (and TUF), and I've got multiple temperature sensor (thermistor) cables as well as a FLIR thermal camera, so I'm going to max out my 12600K, 12700K and 12900K, push them to the absolute limit with P & E-cores overclocked, and see how hot they really get, I'm thinking none of the boards will exceed 50°C with a 120mm fan somewhere near the VRM, even at just 600 RPM, will probably end up removing the heatsink on the Strix A to prove it can game at 150W without even breaking a sweat.
> 
> Yeah that's what a lot of people are thinking right now, DDR4 is supported on Raptor Lake next year, for Z790, there's a good chance we will get higher end boards at that point, maybe even before for Z690 once they see there's a demand, for example ASUS had the Strix E with Q-CODE and stronger VRM listed with DDR4, even including a price, in their own official reveal, it was then removed quietly, happened to a few more boards I believe, don't recall which, so it's not impossible they'll find their way out over the next year. I would be very excited about a Strix ITX D4 as well as a Strix E D4, or one of those "lower end" Dual DIMM boards like Unify X (it's the cheapest one by far, at $499), I'd definitely get it, no hesitation, if it was available, they're all losing big money by not giving us what we want.


Based on everything everyone has said in this entire forum, I sent back the Gigabyte Aorus Pro DDR5 today (got the ddr5 version by mistake), will send back the Gigabyte Gaming X when received tomorrow from the egg. Will go ahead and get the MSI Edge as a replacement, since it has been determined by all the information provided by the forum members in here, the Gigabyte's are suckier than all hell'n back due to lousy shipping BIOS's and other weaknesses. Still thinking about trying out the Gaming X but don't have the gall to open the box, and test out the hardware, then return it. All the reviews on the EGG LOVE the edge, although it doesn't have all the goodies like the gigabyte pro with 13 USB on the rear IO and other stuff, keeping it is not an option. When you cannot deliver the goods in a timely matter it tells me , you, gigabyte are more interested in $$$ than delivering a decent product out of the box. Thanks to all of you for all the great advice and testing. Really regret trying to be an early adopter, especially during such a varied and confusing Alder release, but my P67 Ivy is showing it's age, so got a little over excited and started pulling the trigger too early.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

notearlyadoptr said:


> Based on everything everyone has said in this entire forum, I sent back the Gigabyte Aorus Pro DDR5 today (got the ddr5 version by mistake), will send back the Gigabyte Gaming X when received tomorrow from the egg. Will go ahead and get the MSI Edge as a replacement, since it has been determined by all the information provided by the forum members in here, the Gigabyte's are suckier than all hell'n back due to lousy shipping BIOS's and other weaknesses. Still thinking about trying out the Gaming X but don't have the gall to open the box, and test out the hardware, then return it. All the reviews on the EGG LOVE the edge, although it doesn't have all the goodies like the gigabyte pro with 13 USB on the rear IO and other stuff, keeping it is not an option. When you cannot deliver the goods in a timely matter it tells me , you, gigabyte are more interested in $$$ than delivering a decent product out of the box. Thanks to all of you for all the great advice and testing. Really regret trying to be an early adopter, especially during such a varied and confusing Alder release, but my P67 Ivy is showing it's age, so got a little over excited and started pulling the trigger too early.


Or maybe just get the MSI PRO-A and wait for the "Raptor Lake next year, for Z790, there's a good chance we will get higher end board". Yes! Now leaning towards the PRO-A Bro!


----------



## Ichirou

notearlyadoptr said:


> Based on everything everyone has said in this entire forum, I sent back the Gigabyte Aorus Pro DDR5 today (got the ddr5 version by mistake), will send back the Gigabyte Gaming X when received tomorrow from the egg. Will go ahead and get the MSI Edge as a replacement, since it has been determined by all the information provided by the forum members in here, the Gigabyte's are suckier than all hell'n back due to lousy shipping BIOS's and other weaknesses. Still thinking about trying out the Gaming X but don't have the gall to open the box, and test out the hardware, then return it. All the reviews on the EGG LOVE the edge, although it doesn't have all the goodies like the gigabyte pro with 13 USB on the rear IO and other stuff, keeping it is not an option. When you cannot deliver the goods in a timely matter it tells me , you, gigabyte are more interested in $$$ than delivering a decent product out of the box. Thanks to all of you for all the great advice and testing. Really regret trying to be an early adopter, especially during such a varied and confusing Alder release, but my P67 Ivy is showing it's age, so got a little over excited and started pulling the trigger too early.


Well to be fair, it's probably only a matter of time before Gigabyte eventually releases BIOS updates that'll allow people to XMP to 4,000 MHz or higher. But whether or not you want to wait is a whole different matter altogether. (And this is still excluding any potential manual overclocking.)

Most ordinary folk don't bother overclocking beyond XMP, and most stay around the 3,000 - 3,600 MHz area, so they generally won't encounter any issues on any Z690 board. In many generations, people have discovered that Gigabyte can install some very good hardware onto their products, but bundle it with poor software. They are aware that they don't sell well, hence they tend to price their products a bit cheaper than the competition to garner sales.

Now, I've personally had experience with Gigabyte in the past, and can attest that their software (BIOS) is lacking. But can it run stuff at stock? Sure.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

Ichirou said:


> Well to be fair, it's probably only a matter of time before Gigabyte eventually releases BIOS updates that'll allow people to XMP to 4,000 MHz or higher. But whether or not you want to wait is a whole different matter altogether. (And this is still excluding any potential manual overclocking.)
> 
> Most ordinary folk don't bother overclocking beyond XMP, and most stay around the 3,000 - 3,600 MHz area, so they generally won't encounter any issues on any Z690 board. In many generations, people have discovered that Gigabyte can install some very good hardware onto their products, but bundle it with poor software. They are aware that they don't sell well, hence they tend to price their products a bit cheaper than the competition to garner sales.
> 
> Now, I've personally had experience with Gigabyte in the past, and can attest that their software (BIOS) is lacking. But can it run stuff at stock? Sure.


Plan to go with the sweet spot @ 3600MHz on 16-16-16-36, nothing radical & might play around a little but. . .With rumours of a broken a broken XMP?, moving on, nothing to see here.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

notearlyadoptr said:


> Plan to go with the sweet spot @ 3600MHz on 16-16-16-36, nothing radical & might play around a little but. . .With rumours of a broken a broken XMP?, moving on, nothing to see here.











G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-16GTZSW - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-16GTZSW with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com


----------



## notearlyadoptr

From the info in the www, there's over 50% chance 3600 c-16 won't post when using the broken XMP on any G-Z690 mobo out of the box, currently available on the market.


----------



## neteng101

115U3 has made my previous stable settings not work reliably. Going back for now.

^ Apparently something changed sometime after 114 or in Windows 11 - had to lower the tm5 anta777 configs to Test Window Size 1476. I thought it was something in the newer bios causing me to not be able to launch tm5.









Memory Testing with TestMem5 TM5 with custom configs


I cannot understand what TM5 is saying. How can I fix this? Am I missing a language pack?




www.overclock.net


----------



## notearlyadoptr

*zhrooms: *Did you ever get the G-gaming x up and running? Searched thread but didn't find anything about results & figured you were waiting for new BIOS update. Can you confirm or deny the broken XMP issue? Will it post using everyday 3600MHz ram, or can i starting my build tomorrow when the gaming x arrives. This 12700k sitting here is ready to rock! Just want XMP to automagically set basic ram timings and handle the v setting. Would love to know what your final prognosis was on the gaming x.


----------



## GtiJason

neteng101 said:


> 115U3 has made my previous stable settings not work reliably. Going back for now.
> 
> ^ Apparently something changed sometime after 114 or in Windows 11 - had to lower the tm5 anta777 configs to Test Window Size 1476. I thought it was something in the newer bios causing me to not be able to launch tm5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Memory Testing with TestMem5 TM5 with custom configs
> 
> 
> I cannot understand what TM5 is saying. How can I fix this? Am I missing a language pack?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Pretty sure it is SA voltage since this bios supposedly puts this and maybe other voltages more in line with actual voltage. On my MSI Z690-A PRO the DRAM overvolts .017 - .025v from what is entered in bios. Tested with set voltages 1.45v to 1.6 v using a decent $80 AMProbe DMM, so no Fluke for sure


----------



## Muut

Hello,

Just providing some of my insight in overclocking my DDR4 on my recently acquired Alder lake setup.
I have been struggling at the beginning, not being able to boot past 3600 (14-14-14-28-42) GEAR 1, CR1, whatever voltage I would input, nothing worked. It was frustrating since these sticks would easily do 3866 cl 14 14 14 28 42 stable on my ryzen setup (b550-f / 5600x).


Going nowhere, I decided to try the "memory try it" feature from the msi bios. Never thought of doing this but just chose the 4000 cl17 gear profile and it booted. I then realised Vdimm voltage was only 1.40v when I would be in the 1.5v - 1.55v range.

So I decided to try again with lower voltage and I found 1.47v being my sweet spot, as long as 1.35v SA (although I was using 1.45v SA at first).

So I'm in Gear 1, CR2 (Cannot boot in CR1 but I will stry my single rank b-dies this afternoon to see what I can do with them).

I also started a 4000 cl15 @ 1.48v in Gear 1, CR2, but I haven't finished yet.

As for my settings, everything is here : (setting the RTL and Skews as soon as I had my primary timings set up, helped me).

RTTWR 80/ RTTNOM 48/ RTTPARK 60
Never had to touch VDDQ though (saw a lot of you writting about it).

Motherboard : MSI Z690 a pro (non wifi) bios : 115
Cpu : 12600kf
RAM : 2x16 G.Skill 3200cl14 DR (F4-3200c14-16GTZKW)


----------



## ObviousCough

Life isn't hard enough, so I am playing with 64GB on my i5

Everything is on [Auto] except SA (1.42v) Vdimm (1.5v) and VDDQ (1.4v)









With VDDQ on [Auto] I could barely post into windows, never mind trying to run TM5. Bumped it up to 1.4v and now i have rock solid stability. I can probably lower it, i just went straight to 1.4v
The highest i've posted with 4x16GB sticks is 3466, but that was with VDDQ still on auto.


----------



## Ichirou

Muut said:


> Hello,
> 
> Just providing some of my insight in overclocking my DDR4 on my recently acquired Alder lake setup.
> I have been struggling at the beginning, not being able to boot past 3600 (14-14-14-28-42) GEAR 1, CR1, whatever voltage I would input, nothing worked. It was frustrating since these sticks would easily do 3866 cl 14 14 14 28 42 stable on my ryzen setup (b550-f / 5600x).
> 
> 
> Going nowhere, I decided to try the "memory try it" feature from the msi bios. Never thought of doing this but just chose the 4000 cl17 gear profile and it booted. I then realised Vdimm voltage was only 1.40v when I would be in the 1.5v - 1.55v range.
> 
> So I decided to try again with lower voltage and I found 1.47v being my sweet spot, as long as 1.35v SA (although I was using 1.45v SA at first).
> 
> So I'm in Gear 1, CR2 (Cannot boot in CR1 but I will stry my single rank b-dies this afternoon to see what I can do with them).
> 
> I also started a 4000 cl15 @ 1.48v in Gear 1, CR2, but I haven't finished yet.
> 
> As for my settings, everything is here : (setting the RTL and Skews as soon as I had my primary timings set up, helped me).
> 
> RTTWR 80/ RTTNOM 48/ RTTPARK 60
> Never had to touch VDDQ though (saw a lot of you writting about it).
> 
> Motherboard : MSI Z690 a pro (non wifi) bios : 115
> Cpu : 12600kf
> RAM : 2x16 G.Skill 3200cl14 DR (F4-3200c14-16GTZKW)
> 
> View attachment 2535582


So basically, you had to redo your voltages in order to get it working again, since the old ones no longer worked.


ObviousCough said:


> Life isn't hard enough, so I am playing with 64GB on my i5
> 
> Everything is on [Auto] except SA (1.42v) Vdimm (1.5v) and VDDQ (1.4v)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With VDDQ on [Auto] I could barely post into windows, never mind trying to run TM5. Bumped it up to 1.4v and now i have rock solid stability. I can probably lower it, i just went straight to 1.4v
> The highest i've posted with 4x16GB sticks is 3466, but that was with VDDQ still on auto.


It really does seem that everyone has issues booting with VDDQ beneath 1.40V. Maybe it's not quite the same as VCCIO and is akin to another VCCSA voltage. I'll keep this in mind for myself.

Does anyone want to ELI5 how RTTs and ODTs work?


----------



## ogider

Ichirou said:


> It really does seem that everyone has issues booting with VDDQ beneath 1.40V.


For me is diffrent

2x16GB DR b-die
4000 c 14 15 15 cr2 g1 and I have 1.250 vddq
for 4000 c 14 15 15 cr1 g1 1.340 vddq


----------



## Muut

Ichirou said:


> So basically, you had to redo your voltages in order to get it working again, since the old ones no longer worked.


Well not really, since on ryzen, I could never reach 4000 mt/s with that kit (even going up to 1.7v with loose timings, max was 3933 mt/s cl14 but I needed 1.6v for this and for daily usage, I did not want so much). 

If I up vdimm voltage I don't boot. Whereas on, Ryzen I was at 1.55v daily. For me it does not make much sense, I'll do more tests with some single ranks this afternoon. 

As for VDDQ, it's on auto and according to hwinfo it's at 1.2v


----------



## Ichirou

ogider said:


> For me is diffrent
> 
> 2x16GB DR b-die
> 4000 c 14 15 15 cr2 g1 and I have 1.250 vddq
> for 4000 c 14 15 15 cr1 g1 1.340 vddq


I stand corrected.
I guess it's just that for VDDQ, you want to keep raising it until things start to boot on G1.

But how would one isolate VDDQ or VCCSA to test the other? Just leave VDDQ or VCCSA on Auto to begin with?


----------



## ogider

For me this is quite complicated. 
Example:

1.24SA 1.25 Vddq working every time for 4000 c14 15 15 cr2 g1
1.28SA 1.34 vddq setting for my 4100 c15 15 15 cr2 g1

1.28SA and 1.34 vddq it wont even boot to bios with 4000 c14 15 15 cr2 g1

it looks like some values are almost assigned to ddr clock or cr.
It is possible that it has to do with the RTT the board is trying to set for a given setting


----------



## Cam1

Got 3800 Gear 1 Stable.


----------



## Impalor

@zhrooms I have 30-day window to return, money is no problem, so I just bought three boards for testing. Aorus Elite was already sent back. Edge cannot so far get to where TUF was memory-wise (3700 vs 3866 gear 1), but overall FPS in the game that I care about (DCS in VR) is on par. I see better GPU score in the tests, not sure how or why. ReBar enabled on both. Hopefully, the next bios will fix my RAM on Edge and I'll keep it.

Update: I gave up trying 3730 and just skipped to 3800 and then directly to 4000-14-15-15-35-2N-1.25v-1.55v and my Edge booted in gear 1! Unstable in tm5, but at least some progress. I maintain my theory that the more time one spends with the hardware, the better it runs!


----------



## flashkillpro

I have a Gigabyte Aorus Elite z690 board and I can confirm that my b-die 3600mhz 16-16-16-36 XMP profile didn't even post. Luckily I was able to get it running manually at those timings, but with worse sub-timings in the bios. I left those on auto and eventually it worked. 3600mhz is the limit though right now, 3700mhz not fully stable.


http://imgur.com/a/lc5Kd8W


----------



## ObviousCough

64GB at 3600 Gear 1. It automatically applied the XMP profile for 3800.

1.5 Vdimm
1.42 SA
1.4 VDDQ











edit: I've dropped SA down to 1.25v and still have tm5 stability.
edit2: Dropping SA lower than 1.25v caused errors in TM5. I've successfully dropped VDDQ to 1.35v

edit3: I tried flat 14s and it wouldn't stop throwing errors, even with more vdimm. 14-15-15-28 passed at 1.5v though


----------



## Cuthalu

Installed new z690-a pro bios (115) and 2*16 GB 3600 14-15 ram kit. That previous massive brick wall aka 37xx was shattered instantly.  Now I'm running 4000 16-16-16-35 2T G1, 1.35v SA, 1.4v VDDQ, 1.5v DIMM. Latency 52 ns, so room for further tuning.

With new bios I still have that increasing vid problem with increasing load. Suitable voltage for load results in instant freeze upon win login - not exactly ideal.


----------



## Impalor

What I learned today is that memory training is path-dependent process. Trying to do 4000-14-cr1 I broke the whole thing and could not return to where I was. Had to start again from 3800-14-cr2 sa/ddq 1.25 -> 4000-14-cr2-1.25v, then boosted sa/ddq to 1.3v and DISABLED training on boot. Now I run stable.


----------



## VGeorge

Hi everyone,
I bought a 12900K and an Asus Strix Z690-A D4. I know this isn't really an overclocking question, but what cooler do you/would you use in this case, since this particular mb is incompatible with most Noctua coolers? I plan on using a waterblock in the future when I do my custom loop, but right now I need an air cooler to do a decent job cause I will of course be overclocking this thing.
I was thinking of getting the NH-U9S, since I know that there won't be a compatibility issue with this one, cause I am afraid that bigger coolers like the NH-D15S are not going to have enough ram clearance (ram is g.skill trident z royal) when rotated 180° (this is the only way of installing this cooler on this mb according to Noctua).


----------



## Ichirou

VGeorge said:


> Hi everyone,
> I bought a 12900K and an Asus Strix Z690-A D4. I know this isn't really an overclocking question, but what cooler do you/would you use in this case, since this particular mb is incompatible with most Noctua coolers? I plan on using a waterblock in the future when I do my custom loop, but right now I need an air cooler to do a decent job cause I will of course be overclocking this thing.
> I was thinking of getting the NH-U9S, since I know that there won't be a compatibility issue with this one, cause I am afraid that bigger coolers like the NH-D15S are not going to have enough ram clearance (ram is g.skill trident z royal) when rotated 180° (this is the only way of installing this cooler on this mb according to Noctua).


Incompatible? The Strix D4 has LGA1200 support, which most Noctuas have.


----------



## pt0x-

I switched from bios 003 to 0707 (strix z690-a D4). Tried all day, buy no difference in memory oc for me so far. Maybe in the higher voltage ranges, but haven't tried that on 003 so cant compare.

Memory im talking about is:
4 x 8GB
g.skill f4-4000c15d-16gtzr (2 kits) (rgb off)

What I achieved on G2 - 100
4000Mhz 15-15-15-32-CR1-300-36000
mem 1.525v
Vccsa 1.375v
Vddq 1.35v (auto)

I stopped there and focused on G1. Very stable though (tm5 x 4 runs)

What I achieved on G1 - 133
3733Mhz 15-16-16-36-CR1-700-16000
(Loaded the xmp timings and set the freq) (CR1/CR2 doesnt mather)
mem 1.53v
Vccsa 1.39v
Vddq 1.45v

Tm5 stable (1 run)

No way I could post anything more than that.
3866, 4000 (100/133) etc.
I went up to 1.58v for the ram
Vccsa 1.47v
Vddq 1.52v
All with xmp primary timings and the rest auto.

Tried training by building freq slow, tried different training algos, MRC fast.. etc etc.

My 12900k is locked in at 1.375v - p - 5x54 to 8x53 - e 8x42 ring @ 4.4. Didn't tweak the cpu clocks for the mem oc but its rock solid.

Seems like my limit, any other suggestions are welcome though. Otherwise I hope a fresh improved bios can improve my frequencies in G1.


----------



## VGeorge

Ichirou said:


> Incompatible? The Strix D4 has LGA1200 support, which most Noctuas have.


Sorry I wasn't clear enough. The incompatibility is not due to mounting (Noctua has released an LGA1700 mounting kit for all its coolers), but due to the height of the VRM heatsink on the mb.


----------



## Arni90

Ichirou said:


> Does anyone want to ELI5 how RTTs and ODTs work?


I'm far from an expert, but I'll add what I know

The electrical signals vary slightly depending on memory IC, memory controller, and motherboard. On-Die Termination (ODT) settings allow the memory IC to adjust it's signal characteristics to better match the CPU and motherboard's traces, potentially increasing stability.

I doubt you could make any reasonable assumptions without a proper lab with expensive measuring equipment, so my approach is simply trial and error:

Adjust one ODT at a time at a frequency which boots on auto
Note down which ODT values allow for booting
Try to increase frequency, and use the ODT values which worked earlier


----------



## eeroo94

4000 wasn't stable for me in stress testing, so I settled for 3900.

mem 1.49v
Vccsa 1.26v
Vddq 1.35v auto


----------



## notearlyadoptr

flashkillpro said:


> I have a Gigabyte Aorus Elite z690 board and I can confirm that my b-die 3600mhz 16-16-16-36 XMP profile didn't even post. Luckily I was able to get it running manually at those timings, but with worse sub-timings in the bios. I left those on auto and eventually it worked. 3600mhz is the limit though right now, 3700mhz not fully stable.
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/lc5Kd8W





Impalor said:


> @zhrooms I have 30-day window to return, money is no problem, so I just bought three boards for testing. Aorus Elite was already sent back. Edge cannot so far get to where TUF was memory-wise (3700 vs 3866 gear 1), but overall FPS in the game that I care about (DCS in VR) is on par. I see better GPU score in the tests, not sure how or why. ReBar enabled on both. Hopefully, the next bios will fix my RAM on Edge and I'll keep it.
> 
> Update: I gave up trying 3730 and just skipped to 3800 and then directly to 4000-14-15-15-35-2N-1.25v-1.55v and my Edge booted in gear 1! Unstable in tm5, but at least some progress. I maintain my theory that the more time one spends with the hardware, the better it runs!


Thank for the report...I am seriously considering sending back my gaming x, arriving today, and getting the edge. Also I have reason the believe that a new chipset has to have time for burn-in before it can OC to it's full potential. But throw in all the broken XMP and Alder Lake memory issues and we have a major problem on our hands.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

flashkillpro said:


> I have a Gigabyte Aorus Elite z690 board and I can confirm that my b-die 3600mhz 16-16-16-36 XMP profile didn't even post. Luckily I was able to get it running manually at those timings, but with worse sub-timings in the bios. I left those on auto and eventually it worked. 3600mhz is the limit though right now, 3700mhz not fully stable.
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/lc5Kd8W


Nice work, this confirms the broken G-mobo XMP issue. Never had any response to any emails to Gigabyte regarding product availability questions, so my questions about BIOS update plans / dates will probably go unanswered as well..


----------



## ObviousCough

I just spent quite a while trying to get 3600 CR1 to post in gear1 and it just won't. I tried raising one voltage at a time, and then everything at once and nothing. nada, zilch.



Going hard with 4x16GB is probably asking too much out of an i5.


----------



## crpcookie

Does anyone with MSI Edge motherboard hear nasty coil whine while running Aida64 Memory benchmark?


----------



## Arni90

crpcookie said:


> Does anyone with MSI Edge motherboard hear nasty coil whine while running Aida64 Memory benchmark?


I get some on the PRO Z690-A as well, though that's a different (slightly less overdimensioned) VRM


----------



## notearlyadoptr

ObviousCough said:


> I just spent quite a while trying to get 3600 CR1 to post in gear1 and it just won't. I tried raising one voltage at a time, and then everything at once and nothing. nada, zilch.
> 
> 
> 
> Going hard with 4x16GB is probably asking too much out of an i5.


Just received the Gigabyte Gaming X at my front door. Tempted set it up for a bench test , and check my ram compatibility and XMP functionality, before returning (30 day return policy) and getting the MSI Edge or Tuff maybe, depending on what else we find out between now and 30 days from now. But, according to all the reports, I must first update the BIOS jsut to make the NVMe visible, so returning the X will be void after BIOS update. Guess I could just swap in a sata SSD for the testing. Still waiting for my Arctic LGA 1700 mounting kit, so testing will have to wait.


----------



## Ichirou

notearlyadoptr said:


> Just received the Gigabyte Gaming X at my front door. Tempted set it up for a bench test , and check my ram compatibility and XMP functionality, before returning (30 day return policy) and getting the MSI Edge or Tuff maybe, depending on what else we find out between now and 30 days from now. But, according to all the reports, I must first update the BIOS jsut to make the NVMe visible, so returning the X will be void after BIOS update. Guess I could just swap in a sata SSD for the testing. You can't win for lose in this debacle.


Most manufacturers upload their base BIOS files on their websites as well. Check to see if the first version is there.


----------



## Impalor

crpcookie said:


> Does anyone with MSI Edge motherboard hear nasty coil whine while running Aida64 Memory benchmark?


I did not notice that. But I have a bug that LAN won't do 1 gbps even if I set it explicitly. Switches to 100 mbps. All motherboards before it could do 1 gbps on my home network...


----------



## notearlyadoptr

Ichirou said:


> Most manufacturers upload their base BIOS files on their websites as well. Check to see if the first version is there.


Checked and yes it is thanks.


----------



## notearlyadoptr




----------



## flashkillpro

notearlyadoptr said:


> Just received the Gigabyte Gaming X at my front door. Tempted set it up for a bench test , and check my ram compatibility and XMP functionality, before returning (30 day return policy) and getting the MSI Edge or Tuff maybe, depending on what else we find out between now and 30 days from now. But, according to all the reports, I must first update the BIOS jsut to make the NVMe visible, so returning the X will be void after BIOS update. Guess I could just swap in a sata SSD for the testing. Still waiting for my Arctic LGA 1700 mounting kit, so testing will have to wait.


Not finding the NVME wasn't the issue in my case. My PC just insta bluescreened when booting into windows from an NVME. Something storage error related, so I knew how to fix it immediately.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

flashkillpro said:


> Not finding the NVME wasn't the issue in my case. My PC just insta bluescreened when booting into windows from an NVME. Something storage error related, so I knew how to fix it immediately.


So other than that how is the Gaming X working for you? Do you recommend I just start the build, run it, and wait for the BIOS updates?


----------



## crpcookie

I remember someone reported the 0 ns memory latency bug in AIDA64 but I can’t find the post anymore. I am seeing this today even with default BIOs settings. Google, forum search, Bing… can’t find anything about this. Anyone know the resolution to this?

Edit: nevermind. I found it. Virtual Machine Platform is conflicting with AIDA64. Turning off this feature fixed it.


----------



## Ichirou

notearlyadoptr said:


> So other than that how is the Gaming X working for you? Do you recommend I just start the build, run it, and wait for the BIOS updates?


Nobody knows when Gigabyte will push out new BIOS updates. It could be a day, a week, a month, hell, even a year. Best not to hold your breath.

If you're anxious to test out the board, do so, and then just refund claiming that it doesn't work with your RAM. If you bought it from a physical store, you can have them test it for proof.


----------



## Hiikeri

Cam1 said:


> *@zhrooms*
> 
> Edit: No my computer is not able to post Bios with DDR @4133 with any possible tweakings !
> 
> Trying to get 4000MHz Gear Mode 1 stable atm. But it is just not stable.
> 
> So there is not SA voltage reported in HWinfo with the Tuf motherboard as som1 said, but still the Value is the exact same as the one i put in the bios ( SA VID )


12700K has weaker IMC than 12900K.


----------



## LegendaryAura

Can anyone help me out? These numbers seem weak for 3800 CL14? (Yes I will buy aida eventually)
I was running 2 SR sticks and getting 62GB reads and 48ns latency. Adding the extra two sticks dropped me down to 57GB/53ns. 

Am I missing something? 

Using the MSI Edge Board 1CR, Gear 1.


----------



## crpcookie

Impalor said:


> I did not notice that. But I have a bug that LAN won't do 1 gbps even if I set it explicitly. Switches to 100 mbps. All motherboards before it could do 1 gbps on my home network...


I had the same problem as well until I installed the Intel LAN driver that came from the MSI flash drive. Have u done this yet?


----------



## Impalor

crpcookie said:


> I had the same problem as well until I installed the Intel LAN driver that came from the MSI flash drive. Have u done this yet?


Yes, I did that immediately from the MSI website. But I only intalled the driver initially, without the controlling software. Now uninstalled and installed again with the software, now it works.

Edit: judged too soon, problem persists. Posted on Reddit.


----------



## grey.clock

Hiikeri said:


> 12700K has weaker IMC than 12900K.



4000 gear 1 t1 does work though on the 12700k for single rank, no idea about dual.


----------



## Middleman

How do you fix Aida64 to show memory latency, it says 0.0ns , "Aida64 not fully optimized for your cpu". I bought the latest version fyi.


----------



## gamervivek

Got 4600MHz chasing higher frequencies, timings were loosened 20-20-20-40 CR2, couldn't work with CR1 while 4400 could. Best with G1 seems to be 3900MHz, currently running 3800MHz 16-17-16-36 CR2 1.38V, SA 1.25V VDDQ 1.25V

Previous post:









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


@RetroWave78 One thing I would do is leave everything on defaults/no xmp since I know you are concerned about having issues with your install/transfer. The only thing I would do is disable AC otherwise it will promt you to install it and I dont like it but you may as it will help you install...




www.overclock.net


----------



## crpcookie

Middleman said:


> How do you fix Aida64 to show memory latency, it says 0.0ns , "Aida64 not fully optimized for your cpu". I bought the latest version fyi.


Make sure *Virtual Machine Platform* is disabled. If you're using GSAT, you're gonna need that enabled.


----------



## Middleman

crpcookie said:


> Make sure *Virtual Machine Platform* is disabled. If you're using GSAT, you're gonna need that enabled.
> View attachment 2535688


Thanks for the suggestion, I took a look and its off by default. - I did a clean install of Windows 11. 

Trying to find out my latency lol

12900k Asus Strix Z690-A DDR4 4000mhz 1.45v 17-17-17-37 T2 Gear1 Single Rank B-Die


----------



## jsz

Hiikeri said:


> 12700K has weaker IMC than 12900K.


Is it really a weaker IMC? I assumed these are just binned/disabled E-cores.

I'm just questioning the notion of what happens to a high leakage/poor clocking chip that happens to have a top tier IMC. Certainly wouldn't be binned as a 12900k.

I'd argue more RNG factor than anything, but sure.. 12900k should be better on average.


----------



## newls1

whew, just read this post for over an hour! So much awesome info in here. After reading this post to mostly its entirety, here is my project for tomorrow once my waterblock comes in. On my MSI Z690 Tomahawk D4 I have 2 sets of 2x16GB G.Skills 3600 CL14 sticks (so 4x16GB for 64GB) to "TRY" to get stable at CL15 4000MT/s. On my Comet Lake Z590 PC I have just 2x16 @ 4030 CL15 with a 37ns score and complete stabilty 24/7 @ 1.49v. So im hoping in my attempt to complicate my life further by adding another 2x16Gb set for a total of 64Gb, im gonna apply VDDQ @ 1.4v SA @ 1.35 and VDimm @ 1.5 and hope it will post... Any tips from would be amazing and appreciated.


----------



## acoustic

newls1 said:


> whew, just read this post for over an hour! So much awesome info in here. After reading this post to mostly its entirety, here is my project for tomorrow once my waterblock comes in. On my MSI Z690 Tomahawk D4 I have 2 sets of 2x16GB G.Skills 3600 CL14 sticks (so 4x16GB for 64GB) to "TRY" to get stable at CL15 4000MT/s. On my Comet Lake Z590 PC I have just 2x16 @ 4030 CL15 with a 37ns score and complete stabilty 24/7 @ 1.49v. So im hoping in my attempt to complicate my life further by adding another 2x16Gb set for a total of 64Gb, im gonna apply VDDQ @ 1.4v SA @ 1.35 and VDimm @ 1.5 and hope it will post... Any tips from would be amazing and appreciated.


I wouldn't get your hopes up .. lol.


----------



## newls1

acoustic said:


> I wouldn't get your hopes up .. lol.


hopes are up, but im used to getting let down constantly, so im good . might have a fighting chance, MSI has been good to me before


----------



## postem

Middleman said:


> How do you fix Aida64 to show memory latency, it says 0.0ns , "Aida64 not fully optimized for your cpu". I bought the latest version fyi.


That is caused by core isolation feature you need to disable it.


----------



## zhrooms

Cam1 said:


> So there is not SA voltage reported in HWinfo with the Tuf motherboard as som1 said, but still the Value is the exact same as the one i put in the bios ( SA VID )


That is the correct reading, SA VID, just rename it to "System Agent Voltage".


Arni90 said:


> 5.5 GHz on a 12900K? Wut? I can barely run the SotTR benchmark at 5.3 GHz with hyperthreading and E-cores disabled. That's at 1.35V VCore with LLC4, because 1.25V and 1.30V crashed.
> And I can't get anything reasonably better in terms of cooling, a MO-RA3 and Eisblock XPX should be pretty close to the limit of ambient cooling.


TVB, and with a MO-RA you should be able to get 5.4 game stable all-core like me.


pt0x- said:


> What I missed is any fundamental details or considerations in regards to daily use of these voltages. I mean, this is the daily oc thread. I can yeet voltages, its not hard. But as of today, I just want to mellow it down a bit. I'm personally looking for a 2 a 3 week period of getting to know the limits of a new platform when I start using it, and from that point on just find a stable that is the highest performance I can achieve, without breaking stuff or tweaking to much. And the z690 platform is very new. It's just that I come from a 9700k and maximus x (z370) that has been running for years straight on VCCSA 1.32v. No problem at all, at the same time, in that era, 1.35v was about the max for daily safe SA, also stability wise above 1.35v didn't work well for some.


These 12th Gen processors have very different IMCs compared to 9th Gen, you absolutely cannot compare them. And no one is asking you to yeet the voltages, Rocket Lake officially supports up to 1.5V from what I recall, so 1.4 on Alder Lake should not be a problem.


nimachoopani said:


> I tried what you said .
> With 4 stick i can get 3733 19 21 21 42 2c sa on 1.25 and dim on 1.45 anything more give some errors on memtest
> With. 2 stick i can get 3866 19 20 20 40 2c sa on 1.2 and dim on 1.5
> Even system agent on 1.5 won't help to get 4000 stable on gear 1 with 2 stick and 20 26 26 46 2c time. Now i don't know it's my imc that is bad or my memory sticks


Yes that is very strange, I think the only way to get to the bottom of this is to simply test another processor, if no one else has some other suggestion. Also if you are curious about the memory, all you have to do is run them in Gear 2, and you should be able to run 4266 just fine, that'd prove that it's not the memory sticks.


Cam1 said:


> Must be my ram kit which is just not able to do more, i'm thinking getting something better.
> I can get "G.Skill Trident Z Royal F4-4000C14D-16GTEG" for 300euros, do you think they will run properly with xmp enabled ?


You should only get sticks that good if you play FPS games competitively, you (and everyone else) are more than fine with a used 2x8GB Single Rank B-die kit from 2015, that can do 4133 16-16-16-28 at 1.45V. Which you have, I checked your kit earlier and it's indeed B-die and I found this person running them at 4000 MT/s CL16. The only upgrade you should do if you so choose, is 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die, the cheapest you can find, which should be €240 max, so €120 per 16GB, and you can sell your 2x8GB sticks for like €60-80. But even then, *if* it is your IMC that is the issue, it won't matter much, then any new kit would have been (largely) a waste.


notearlyadoptr said:


> Really regret trying to be an early adopter, especially during such a varied and confusing Alder release, but my P67 Ivy is showing it's age, so got a little over excited and started pulling the trigger too early. Or maybe just get the MSI PRO-A and wait for the "Raptor Lake next year, for Z790, there's a good chance we will get higher end board". Yes! Now leaning towards the PRO-A Bro!


Well we knew about a week in that both the MSI Pro and ASUS Strix/TUF could do 4266+, so to avoid any issues just get one of those boards, but after having seen some people have issues with the MSI Pro, I'd recommend the TUF as of now, simply the safest bet there is, guaranteed to work perfectly with high frequency memory in Gear 1 (4266+) and costs is in between the MSI Pro and MSI Edge/ASUS Strix.


Ichirou said:


> Well to be fair, it's probably only a matter of time before Gigabyte eventually releases BIOS updates that'll allow people to XMP to 4,000 MHz or higher.
> In many generations, people have discovered that Gigabyte can install some very good hardware onto their products, but bundle it with poor software. They are aware that they don't sell well, hence they tend to price their products a bit cheaper than the competition to garner sales.


Let me remind everyone, MSI A Pro and ASUS TUF/Strix can all boot up to 4300 MT/s in Gear 1, which of course depends on your IMC, but the boards has no issue with those speeds.
Also, your comment about Gigabyte boards not selling well and thus being priced cheaper, is not true at all, no clue where you got that idea from.


notearlyadoptr said:


> From the info in the www, there's over 50% chance 3600 c-16 won't post when using the broken XMP on any G-Z690 mobo out of the box, currently available on the market.


Buildzoid mentioned that he could run 4000 Single Rank and 3600 Dual Rank on his (unreleased) AORUS Pro DDR4, so the BIOS is still crap even on that board, but I'm fairly sure Gaming X and Elite also do 4000 Single Rank, as I've seen both do 3600 in Dual Rank, but only like 3733-3866 on Single, but that I suspect is because the people who tried it (4000) wasn't experienced enough to get it to work, sadly I returned both my Gigabyte boards last week, so I never got to push them on the latest BIOSes to confirm what they could and couldn't do.


notearlyadoptr said:


> Can i starting my build tomorrow when the gaming x arrives. This 12700k sitting here is ready to rock! Just want XMP to automagically set basic ram timings and handle the v setting. Would love to know what your final prognosis was on the gaming x.


Like, yes it's still highly restricted in terms of memory frequency in Gear 1, but it will be fixed eventually, and at that point the Gigabyte boards will be the best boards (price/performance). But I'm not waiting, that's why I got the TUF during the black week sale for $240 pre-tax.
Also, nothing is stopping you from running 3600 at like 13-13-13-28-1T, that's very fast too, but 4133 is even faster because of the much higher IMC frequency, so the Gigabyte boards are by no means slow, just not as fast as the competition.


Muut said:


> MSI Pro with BIOS 1.15, 12600KF and 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die
> Running 4000 MT/s 16-16-16-32-2T, 270 RFC, 65K REFI in Gear 1


🙏


Ichirou said:


> It really does seem that everyone has issues booting with VDDQ beneath 1.40V. Maybe it's not quite the same as VCCIO and is akin to another VCCSA voltage.


No, no idea where you got that from, I can boot 4240 MT/s at VDDQ 1.35V (Auto), and get into windows at 4187 MT/s. IO voltage is now part of the SA voltage if I'm not mistaken, someone correct me if I am.


ogider said:


> 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die, at 4000 14-15-15 in Gear 1 and CR2 I can do 1.25 VDDQ but for CR1 I have to use 1.34V


Yeah, from what I've seen only some people run into issues with low VDDQ, don't know the reason yet, you allude to it being CR related but I've seen people struggle with CR2 as well, but I'm planning on testing out a bunch of frequencies and see where it's needed, get to the bottom of it.


Impalor said:


> I maintain my theory that the more time one spends with the hardware, the better it runs!
> Also I have reason the believe that a new chipset has to have time for burn-in before it can OC to it's full potential.


This is not true, stop saying it .


Cuthalu said:


> Flashed the 1.15 BIOS on my MSI Pro board, I had issues at 3733 previously and now my 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks run at 4000 MT/s 16-16-16-35-2T Gear 1 with 1.35V SA,1.4V VDDQ and 1.5V DRAM.


🙏


Impalor said:


> What I learned today is that memory training is path-dependent process. Trying to do 4000-14-cr1 I broke the whole thing and could not return to where I was. Had to start again from 3800-14-cr2 sa/ddq 1.25 -> 4000-14-cr2-1.25v, then boosted sa/ddq to 1.3v and DISABLED training on boot. Now I run stable.


Yes, sometimes you have to start from scratch, load your desired timings but at a lower frequency as an example, to let the board re-train, then move up in frequency for it to work. Obviously depends on board and BIOS though.


VGeorge said:


> I was thinking of getting the NH-U9S, since I know that there won't be a compatibility issue with this one, cause I am afraid that bigger coolers like the NH-D15S are not going to have enough ram clearance (ram is g.skill trident z royal) when rotated 180° (this is the only way of installing this cooler on this mb according to Noctua).


Yes, get the cheapest one possible, that isn't "double" like the D15, make sure it's compatible by looking through the list over at the Noctua website. But absolutely no need to get a more expensive one, my 12700K with only P-cores enabled can run 5.0GHz all-core at just 1.187V which only pulled like 85-90W in gaming (Battlefield and Call of Duty, both CPU/Memory bottlenecked of course), max core temp was *45°C* 😇, actually ridiculously efficient processors.


pt0x- said:


> I switched from BIOS 0003 to 0707 on my Strix. Using 4x8GB Single Rank 4000 MT/s CL15 sticks.
> I got 4000 stable in Gear 2 (100:100) at 1.525V DRAM, 1.375V SA and VDDQ Auto (1.35V)
> Couldn't get anything above 3733 to work, even at XMP and CR2. 3866 wouldn't boot with up to 1.58V DRAM, 1.47V SA and 1.52V VDDQ.


Those DRAM voltages are way too high, you should be able to run like 1.40V for 4000, 1.45V for 4133 and 1.50V for 4266. Your timings are so loose it shouldn't matter much. You are probably making it much harder on yourself by running those high voltages, like regular Samsung B-die can run 4133 16-16-16 at 1.45V, I usually have bunch of stability issues when pushing to 1.5 and above.
Also I've seen at least one person mention that too high VDDQ caused his OC not to even boot, so if that is true that might be another reason you can't run it.
I think the best way for people to overclock on Z690 is to ensure their DRAM configuration and overclock is stable in Gear 2 first, then move on to Gear 1 once they know everything is working and what voltage the DRAM needs and such.


VGeorge said:


> Sorry I wasn't clear enough. It's due to the height of the VRM heatsink on the ASUS motherboards.


Not your fault he completely missed the memo about ASUS boards having ridiculously big VRM heatsinks, I can barely screw in my water block (thumb screws) because it's so damn tight. I should sue for having my thumb being sore for days after removing/installing the cooler on both TUF and Strix boards like 10+ times, absolutely dreadful. 😂


Arni90 said:


> I doubt you could make any reasonable assumptions without a proper lab with expensive measuring equipment, so my approach is simply trial and error:
> 
> Adjust one ODT at a time at a frequency which boots on auto
> Note down which ODT values allow for booting
> Try to increase frequency, and use the ODT values which worked earlier


Well, that's not needed for some of us, I can boot straight to 4240 MT/s and there are several people in this thread that got god tier IMC that runs 4266 game stable, absolutely nuts. No tweaking of any kind.


eeroo94 said:


> 4000 wasn't stable for me in stress testing, so I settled for 3900. DRAM 1.49V, SA 1.26V, VDDQ 1.35V Auto


You have the TUF on 0707, I suggest you try increasing DRAM to 1.52, SA to 1.41 and VDDQ to 1.41. Then try 4000 again, or even 4133, at 16-16-16. Actually I think you should start from scratch, set very loose timings to test your IMC before you tighten anything.

On my 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die in A2/B2 slot on both TUF and Strix boards with the 0707 BIOS:
17-18-18-38-2T, 12-8 RRDL/S,747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL
7-4-16-16-7-4-42-32-16-16-20-20-16-16-14-14-44, 144 REFIX9, Gear 1, 100:133, DDR4-4000/4133/4266, BCLK 100.2
With those timings and *1.35V SA*, 1.35V VDDQ (*Auto*), *DRAM 1.4875V* I can boot to BIOS at *4240 MT/s*, which is 2120 MHz on the IMC (12900K), and on my 12700K I could boot ~4195 MT/s (2100 MHz IMC), so even on a considerably worse IMC you should *at the very least* boot 4133 MT/s.

By doing it this way I know with* absolute certainty* that my Board, my BIOS, my IMC and my RAM works. From this point I can start tweaking timings at 4133 while keeping SA/VDDQ/DRAM fairly high at 1.42/1.42/1.52, then when the timings are good enough, I can start to lower the voltages one by one, in that same order SA>VDDQ>DRAM.

Like people don't seem to understand yet, that 12th Gen can do 4266+ game stable with golden IMC, and average IMC 4133+ game stable, yet 90% of the results shared here so far are all at just 4000.. which is almost a joke, both my i7 and i9 can *easily* do 4133, my IMC is almost on the bad side compared to the 4266 results in this thread, I refuse to believe like almost all of you got a worse IMC than my crap SP i7 and i9.

The only way for DDR4 to stand a chance against DDR5 is if you push the IMC to the max, that's the *one* trick that DDR4 still has up its sleeve, which only works by increasing DRAM frequency, like, you gain more from IMC than you do timings, like, screw timings (to an extent), IMC is what you should go for first, even use BCLK to push an extra 20 MT/s, it's worth it. Don't go into this thinking you want 14-14-14, and adjust frequency up after setting those timings, you should start with frequency and then lower the timings as much as possible. 

So, you lower timings to lower latency, but increasing IMC also lowers latency.. then why aren't you doing it? As a bonus, when you're increasing IMC you also increase bandwidth (DRAM frequency) which can be helpful in some games as shown by the latest CapFrameX testing, timings just aren't primary, they're secondary. I thought most people knew that but apparently not. For example I would never have gotten DDR4 if it still had the same 3600-3733 IMC as Rocket Lake, DDR5 would have steamrolled it, but Alder Lake IMC at 4133-4266? Now that's a *serious threat* to DDR5 when it comes to gaming performance. Like 4266 IMC is 14.3% faster than 3733, that's huge, and I'm really bothered that my CPUs can't do 4266 or even 4200, IMC is only good for 4150~ by the limited testing I've done, but I fully intend to push every single MHz I can get out of it.

To further clarify to avoid misunderstandings of what I mean;
*DDR4-3966 13-14-14 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
DDR4-4000 14-14-14 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary
*DDR4-4100 14-15-15 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
DDR4-4133 15-15-15 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary
*DDR4-4200 15-16-16 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
DDR4-4266 16-16-16 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary

That's the gist of it, basically, don't be afraid of using BCLK to tweak memory frequency in-between 4000 and 4266. Anything goes, 4025, 4040, 4066, 4080, 4120, 4150, 4166, 4190 and so on, it's all up to you. Do *not* settle for 4000, that's some p*** a* s***.


ObviousCough said:


> Going hard with 4x16GB is probably asking too much out of an i5.


No, we have a user in this thread with a 12600KF doing 4266, lucked out on the IMC, as I keep repeating, *there are always exceptions*.


flashkillpro said:


> Not finding the NVME wasn't the issue in my case. My PC just insta bluescreened when booting into windows from an NVME. Something storage error related, so I knew how to fix it immediately.


I had that issue on the Gigabyte AORUS Elite (I never fixed it, swapped back to ASUS within like 30 minutes), but from what I recall it's a BIOS setting you have to change, I believe the same issue happens on the MSI Pro board, I forgot what the setting was called there, but it basically ships with a bad (to some users) storage setting (the way we installed Windows), could be related to RST, anyway, worked perfectly fine out of box on both my ASUS boards, did not adjust anything and my previous W10 Z590 (and Z370) OS install works like it should.


Hiikeri said:


> 12700K has weaker IMC than 12900K.





jsz said:


> Is it really a weaker IMC? I assumed these are just binned/disabled E-cores.
> I'd argue more RNG factor than anything, but sure.. 12900k should be better on average.





grey.clock said:


> 4000 gear 1 t1 does work though on the 12700k for single rank, no idea about dual.


As mentioned, we have a member here with a 12600KF that can benchmark at 4266, there are always exceptions but on average, the higher end chips should feature a stronger IMC, but absolutely cannot be guaranteed, every processor needs to be tested. My i9 overclocks 100MHz higher on the cores, at the same exact voltage as my i7 (the i7 required 1.380 in the BIOS for 5.1 and my i9 required 1.380 for 5.2), and my i9 can boot to BIOS with 2x16GB Dual Rank at about 45 MT/s faster (22.5 MHz IMC). 

The IMC definitely appears to be very unpredictable, like the odds of you getting a higher overclocking processor is *very high* when going from an i7 to i9, but the odds seem *slim to none* that you get a stronger IMC moving up to an i9, but I definitely do _believe_ that on *average it still leans in favour of the i9. *The only way to know for sure is if someone binned like 100x of the i5, i7 and i9, then you'd see a clear pattern of how many CPUs of each did like 4266, for example it could look like this; 15x i5, 35x i5 and 45x i9. If someone can take one for the team and do it, we're waiting 😂.


----------



## Muut

Hey, 

So as promised did some tests with my B-die single rank (patriot viper steel 4400cl19).
Booted straight away with xmp profile but in gear 2, so latency was terrible.
Managed to boot at 4800 cl17 CR1 in gear 2 but broke my OS 😅

So after foolinga around, worked on a daily profile and managed to get something nice
Could still lower my TWR.

Was stable at 4000cl14 aswell but had better performance with 4100cl15 CR1 Gear 1.
SA : 1.35v
VDDQ: Auto (1.35v)


----------



## Cam1

Finally back at 3600 with good timings the computer feels realy good !
Voltage Auto VDD 1.5, VA 1.35, VDDQ, 1.35
Cooling the ram for stability.

Maybe i can lower tRAS and tRFC


----------



## flashkillpro

zhrooms said:


> I had that issue on the Gigabyte AORUS Elite (I never fixed it, swapped back to ASUS within like 30 minutes), but from what I recall it's a BIOS setting you have to change, I believe the same issue happens on the MSI Pro board, I forgot what the setting was called there, but it basically ships with a bad (to some users) storage setting (the way we installed Windows), could be related to RST, anyway, worked perfectly fine out of box on both my ASUS boards, did not adjust anything and my previous W10 Z590 (and Z370) OS install works like it should.


I also have the Aorus elite z690 and a simple bios update to the release (Novemeber) bios fixed the issue completely without any other changes.


----------



## neteng101

Either my MSI Z690-A board or 12700k CPU is not working right anymore - kept getting a CPU/memory changed error on cold boot, it would detect no SPD readings from the memory until a warm reboot, then next time around I can save memory settings and it will boot. Works fine until the next cold boot. Tried a brand new set of memory thinking I might have fried the old RAM from past OC attempts, but exactly the same behavior.

Any ideas? New board is probably what I'm thinking to try next - I can still return the board easily.


----------



## Forsaken1

neteng101 said:


> Either my MSI Z690-A board or 12700k CPU is not working right anymore - kept getting a CPU/memory changed error on cold boot, it would detect no SPD readings from the memory until a warm reboot, then next time around I can save memory settings and it will boot. Works fine until the next cold boot. Tried a brand new set of memory thinking I might have fried the old RAM from past OC attempts, but exactly the same behavior.
> 
> Any ideas? New board is probably what I'm thinking to try next - I can still return the board easily.


Its on the edge
Bios
OC
Other Settings
CPU Memory Change Detected. Disabled.


----------



## neteng101

Forsaken1 said:


> CPU Memory Change Detected. Disabled.


Tried multiple BIOS versions, no OC, same problem. Keeps detecting memory/CPU changes because it can't read SPDs for XMP. Tried XMP disabled as well, makes no difference. Totally reproducible exact behavior each time. Can work around it by rebooting a 2nd time (warm boot) and setting XMP to enabled again, then multiple warm boots after that are all fine. OC settings after warm boot fix all work as they did before too.


----------



## kingofblog

What I previously thought was stable turned out to be unstable. I was getting periodic application crashes and blue screens, started TM5, and instant error. I tried changing some voltages, which didn't fix anything, then I changed the voltages back and couldn't reproduce the error in TM5 again. Has anyone seen behavior like this before?


----------



## Ichirou

kingofblog said:


> What I previously thought was stable turned out to be unstable. I was getting periodic application crashes and blue screens, started TM5, and instant error. I tried changing some voltages, which didn't fix anything, then I changed the voltages back and couldn't reproduce the error in TM5 again. Has anyone seen behavior like this before?


Depends on how you changed the voltages. Did you revert them back higher or lower?


----------



## anubis1127

neteng101 said:


> Either my MSI Z690-A board or 12700k CPU is not working right anymore - kept getting a CPU/memory changed error on cold boot, it would detect no SPD readings from the memory until a warm reboot, then next time around I can save memory settings and it will boot. Works fine until the next cold boot. Tried a brand new set of memory thinking I might have fried the old RAM from past OC attempts, but exactly the same behavior.
> 
> Any ideas? New board is probably what I'm thinking to try next - I can still return the board easily.


I get that behavior too on bios 1.15, which bios version are you using? My work around is to just enter setup with F1, change one setting so it registers a change, and F10 to save and boot.


----------



## 2500k_2

neteng101 said:


> Any ideas?


just reinstall the BIOS - the error should be found.


----------



## newls1

acoustic said:


> I wouldn't get your hopes up .. lol.


Why is it so difficult to get 4x16GB to run @ 4000MT/s? Is it just a z690 thing or did Z590/490 have same issues?


----------



## Ichirou

newls1 said:


> Why is it so difficult to get 4x16GB to run @ 4000MT/s? Is it just a z690 thing or did Z590/490 have same issues?


Might be a Z690 thing. Or die. Or dual rank. I'm on Z390 and can do 4x16 GB at 4,174 MHz CL15. But it's Micron B-die, not Samsung B-die.

Waiting on a 12900k to arrive to test it out first-hand myself on Z690.


----------



## newls1

Ichirou said:


> Might be a Z690 thing. Or die. Or dual rank. I'm on Z390 and can do 4x16 GB at 4,174 MHz CL15. But it's Micron B-die, not Samsung B-die.
> 
> Waiting on a 12900k to arrive to test it out first-hand myself on Z690.


i should find out tomorrow i hope... obviously ill post back with my results.


----------



## postem

newls1 said:


> Why is it so difficult to get 4x16GB to run @ 4000MT/s? Is it just a z690 thing or did Z590/490 have same issues?


Is this SR or DR? On my loose timings, well at least for now i cant tight the timings, ballistix 3600 16-18-18-38 DR i can go to 4000mt just increasing ram voltage to 1.40, seen stable on memtest.
Anyway, just trying to reduce any of the timings i cant post.


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> Is this SR or DR? On my loose timings, well at least for now i cant tight the timings, ballistix 3600 16-18-18-38 DR i can go to 4000mt just increasing ram voltage to 1.40, seen stable on memtest.
> Anyway, just trying to reduce any of the timings i cant post.


Maybe the Z690 platform is nicer with Micron dies for high capacities?


----------



## Middleman

Ok - resolved latency not displaying by using the beta version of AIDA64
https://www.aida64.com/downloads/latesta64xebeta

I tried to tinker with my single rank kit, best i can do that is stable is the following
F4-3600C16-8GTZSW @ DDR4 4000MHZ , 17-17-17-37 T2 G1

DRAM: 1.456 V
CPU VCCSA: 1.344 V
VDDQ TX: 1.375 V

51.3ns lowest i saw for latency, Myy X299 is able to do around 49ns T1, Quad Channel.

Ultimately liking the single thread performance, and latency at this point.
pics.


----------



## Middleman

newls1 said:


> Why is it so difficult to get 4x16GB to run @ 4000MT/s? Is it just a z690 thing or did Z590/490 have same issues?


Its because of memory tracing, generally dual channel motherboards need to share the trace/lane with the extra slot.
Different motherboard manufacturers address it in different ways. Asus implements it the best, from what i've seen.

Also the Apex boards have dedicated ram slots / memory tracing channels to allow greater overclocking/performance potential.


----------



## HvacGuru

My Oloy 120.00 sticks working hard. Bios Memtest stable.


----------



## postem

Ichirou said:


> Maybe the Z690 platform is nicer with Micron dies for high capacities?


Dunno, it seen i get a wall trying to change any of the primary subtimings, even at 3600


----------



## anubis1127

neteng101 said:


> Tried multiple BIOS versions, no OC, same problem. Keeps detecting memory/CPU changes because it can't read SPDs for XMP. Tried XMP disabled as well, makes no difference. Totally reproducible exact behavior each time. Can work around it by rebooting a 2nd time (warm boot) and setting XMP to enabled again, then multiple warm boots after that are all fine. OC settings after warm boot fix all work as they did before too.


Actually try setting "CPU Memory Change Detect" to disable.


----------



## kingofblog

I decided to go back to the basics and try to root cause the failure. I started from my baseline of stock core frequency/voltage with memory timings from XMP.

BIOS:
ASUS Z690 STRIX-A D4 0707

Mem:
DDR4-4000 16-16-16-36-2N tRFC=180ns
1.4125 V (BIOS), 1.403 V (readback)

CPU:
"Enforce all limits", auto frequency, auto voltage
LLC 3 (auto), DC_LL=1.1, AC_LL auto

For testing, I'm using TM5-anta (1 pass) and a custom x264 setup. I also set my GPU to mine coins for extra heat.



Code:


                Vdimm   VccSA   Gear    Tdimm   Vtm5    Ftm5    Ptm5    TM5     Vx264   Fx264   Px264   x264
G2 SAauto       1.403   1.152   2       47.7    1.35    4.9     91      Pass1
G1 SA1.25       1.403   1.248   1       51.4    1.35    4.9     99      Pass1
Turned off GPU -->
G1 SA1.20       1.403   1.200   1       45.7    1.35    4.9     101     Pass1   1.394   4.88    195     Pass2
G1 SA1.15       1.403   1.152   1       --      1.35    4.9     --      [email protected]
G1 SA1.20       1.403   1.200   1       45.9    1.35    4.9     100     Pass1

After the first two runs, I was confident that the failures weren't coming from the DRAM itself, so I turned my GPU off to stop wasting power. The results so far agree with @zhrooms 's findings, namely that VccSA is relatively unimportant. 1.2 VccSA passes both tests at least twice, whereas 1.15 VccSA instantly fails TM5. I also ran the Tomb Raider benchmark several times, so this is "game stable," although concerningly I saw artifacts in the menu screen when the fps was above 300ish. That was probably GPU/VRAM instability.

I still haven't had any luck reproducing the previous failures, but the testing so far shows that it's not likely to be on the IMC or RAM side. The next step is to confirm once and for all whether SP P86 is actually capable of running 5.0 GHz all-core. So far, ADL has been surprisingly resilient to instability-related crashes or lockups, producing data errors instead. To test ADL, it's not enough to run CineBench and see if it crashes. Proper output validation is needed.


----------



## Bakka

Wondering if I am doing something wrong or is the gigabyte bios really this messed up.

MB: Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite AX DDR4
Memory: G.skill (4x8G) 4000 - 15-16-16-36 (f4-4000c15q-32gvk)

Cant seem to get it past 3200 @ 1.3VRAM (auto set for everything else)
I've tried 3400 @1.35V but I get memory errors in memtest.

I'm not looking to cross 4000, just be able to get what I paid for.

Thanks!


----------



## neteng101

anubis1127 said:


> Actually try setting "CPU Memory Change Detect" to disable.


OMG!!! That worked - meanwhile, dumbass me found another 12700k/Z690 and picked those up, just got done installing and testing, upgraded BIOS, saw the same behavior come back. Doing what you said is the fix.

At least I have great return policy working in my favor, but just spent hours swapping - guess I get to see if the new CPU is any better.


----------



## Ichirou

kingofblog said:


> After the first two runs, I was confident that the failures weren't coming from the DRAM itself, so I turned my GPU off to stop wasting power. The results so far agree with @zhrooms 's findings, namely that VccSA is relatively unimportant. 1.2 VccSA passes both tests at least twice, whereas 1.15 VccSA instantly fails TM5. I also ran the Tomb Raider benchmark several times, so this is "game stable," although concerningly I saw artifacts in the menu screen when the fps was above 300ish. That was probably GPU/VRAM instability.


So... VCCSA still functions the same as it did in the past?
That means the main factor would be VDDQ then, where you'd just keep raising it until things work out.



Bakka said:


> Wondering if I am doing something wrong or is the *gigabyte* bios really this messed up.


^ The bolded is your problem. Swap motherboards.


----------



## ObviousCough

Bakka said:


> is the gigabyte bios really this messed up.


yes


----------



## StarvinMarvinDK

StarvinMarvinDK said:


> Have ordered a new CPU and it will arrive tomorrow. Checking for bent pins as I remove the first CPU and if there are bent pins, then the unopened CPU goes back


Sooo that didn't work - so the board goes back today :/


----------



## marty76

Wondering if anyone can confirm this ram kit will work with a Strix Z690-A / 12700K?

F4-3600C14D-32GTZR 

Thankyou in advance.


----------



## ogider

2500k_2 said:


> New bios for MSI PRO Z690 A DDR4 *115U3*


Do you have perhaps a link to the 113U4 bios somewhere? MSI PRO Z690 A DDR4
I also wanted to test this version


----------



## nimachoopani

zhrooms said:


> That is the correct reading, SA VID, just rename it to "System Agent Voltage".
> 
> TVB, and with a MO-RA you should be able to get 5.4 game stable all-core like me.
> 
> These 12th Gen processors have very different IMCs compared to 9th Gen, you absolutely cannot compare them. And no one is asking you to yeet the voltages, Rocket Lake officially supports up to 1.5V from what I recall, so 1.4 on Alder Lake should not be a problem.
> 
> Yes that is very strange, I think the only way to get to the bottom of this is to simply test another processor, if no one else has some other suggestion. Also if you are curious about the memory, all you have to do is run them in Gear 2, and you should be able to run 4266 just fine, that'd prove that it's not the memory sticks.
> 
> You should only get sticks that good if you play FPS games competitively, you (and everyone else) are more than fine with a used 2x8GB Single Rank B-die kit from 2015, that can do 4133 16-16-16-28 at 1.45V. Which you have, I checked your kit earlier and it's indeed B-die and I found this person running them at 4000 MT/s CL16. The only upgrade you should do if you so choose, is 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die, the cheapest you can find, which should be €240 max, so €120 per 16GB, and you can sell your 2x8GB sticks for like €60-80. But even then, *if* it is your IMC that is the issue, it won't matter much, then any new kit would have been (largely) a waste.
> 
> Well we knew about a week in that both the MSI Pro and ASUS Strix/TUF could do 4266+, so to avoid any issues just get one of those boards, but after having seen some people have issues with the MSI Pro, I'd recommend the TUF as of now, simply the safest bet there is, guaranteed to work perfectly with high frequency memory in Gear 1 (4266+) and costs is in between the MSI Pro and MSI Edge/ASUS Strix.
> 
> Let me remind everyone, MSI A Pro and ASUS TUF/Strix can all boot up to 4300 MT/s in Gear 1, which of course depends on your IMC, but the boards has no issue with those speeds.
> Also, your comment about Gigabyte boards not selling well and thus being priced cheaper, is not true at all, no clue where you got that idea from.
> 
> Buildzoid mentioned that he could run 4000 Single Rank and 3600 Dual Rank on his (unreleased) AORUS Pro DDR4, so the BIOS is still crap even on that board, but I'm fairly sure Gaming X and Elite also do 4000 Single Rank, as I've seen both do 3600 in Dual Rank, but only like 3733-3866 on Single, but that I suspect is because the people who tried it (4000) wasn't experienced enough to get it to work, sadly I returned both my Gigabyte boards last week, so I never got to push them on the latest BIOSes to confirm what they could and couldn't do.
> 
> Like, yes it's still highly restricted in terms of memory frequency in Gear 1, but it will be fixed eventually, and at that point the Gigabyte boards will be the best boards (price/performance). But I'm not waiting, that's why I got the TUF during the black week sale for $240 pre-tax.
> Also, nothing is stopping you from running 3600 at like 13-13-13-28-1T, that's very fast too, but 4133 is even faster because of the much higher IMC frequency, so the Gigabyte boards are by no means slow, just not as fast as the competition.
> 
> 🙏
> 
> No, no idea where you got that from, I can boot 4240 MT/s at VDDQ 1.35V (Auto), and get into windows at 4187 MT/s. IO voltage is now part of the SA voltage if I'm not mistaken, someone correct me if I am.
> 
> Yeah, from what I've seen only some people run into issues with low VDDQ, don't know the reason yet, you allude to it being CR related but I've seen people struggle with CR2 as well, but I'm planning on testing out a bunch of frequencies and see where it's needed, get to the bottom of it.
> 
> This is not true, stop saying it .
> 
> 🙏
> 
> Yes, sometimes you have to start from scratch, load your desired timings but at a lower frequency as an example, to let the board re-train, then move up in frequency for it to work. Obviously depends on board and BIOS though.
> 
> Yes, get the cheapest one possible, that isn't "double" like the D15, make sure it's compatible by looking through the list over at the Noctua website. But absolutely no need to get a more expensive one, my 12700K with only P-cores enabled can run 5.0GHz all-core at just 1.187V which only pulled like 85-90W in gaming (Battlefield and Call of Duty, both CPU/Memory bottlenecked of course), max core temp was *45°C* 😇, actually ridiculously efficient processors.
> 
> Those DRAM voltages are way too high, you should be able to run like 1.40V for 4000, 1.45V for 4133 and 1.50V for 4266. Your timings are so loose it shouldn't matter much. You are probably making it much harder on yourself by running those high voltages, like regular Samsung B-die can run 4133 16-16-16 at 1.45V, I usually have bunch of stability issues when pushing to 1.5 and above.
> Also I've seen at least one person mention that too high VDDQ caused his OC not to even boot, so if that is true that might be another reason you can't run it.
> I think the best way for people to overclock on Z690 is to ensure their DRAM configuration and overclock is stable in Gear 2 first, then move on to Gear 1 once they know everything is working and what voltage the DRAM needs and such.
> 
> Not your fault he completely missed the memo about ASUS boards having ridiculously big VRM heatsinks, I can barely screw in my water block (thumb screws) because it's so damn tight. I should sue for having my thumb being sore for days after removing/installing the cooler on both TUF and Strix boards like 10+ times, absolutely dreadful. 😂
> 
> Well, that's not needed for some of us, I can boot straight to 4240 MT/s and there are several people in this thread that got god tier IMC that runs 4266 game stable, absolutely nuts. No tweaking of any kind.
> 
> You have the TUF on 0707, I suggest you try increasing DRAM to 1.52, SA to 1.41 and VDDQ to 1.41. Then try 4000 again, or even 4133, at 16-16-16. Actually I think you should start from scratch, set very loose timings to test your IMC before you tighten anything.
> 
> On my 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die in A2/B2 slot on both TUF and Strix boards with the 0707 BIOS:
> 17-18-18-38-2T, 12-8 RRDL/S,747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL
> 7-4-16-16-7-4-42-32-16-16-20-20-16-16-14-14-44, 144 REFIX9, Gear 1, 100:133, DDR4-4000/4133/4266, BCLK 100.2
> With those timings and *1.35V SA*, 1.35V VDDQ (*Auto*), *DRAM 1.4875V* I can boot to BIOS at *4240 MT/s*, which is 2120 MHz on the IMC (12900K), and on my 12700K I could boot ~4195 MT/s (2100 MHz IMC), so even on a considerably worse IMC you should *at the very least* boot 4133 MT/s.
> 
> By doing it this way I know with* absolute certainty* that my Board, my BIOS, my IMC and my RAM works. From this point I can start tweaking timings at 4133 while keeping SA/VDDQ/DRAM fairly high at 1.42/1.42/1.52, then when the timings are good enough, I can start to lower the voltages one by one, in that same order SA>VDDQ>DRAM.
> 
> Like people don't seem to understand yet, that 12th Gen can do 4266+ game stable with golden IMC, and average IMC 4133+ game stable, yet 90% of the results shared here so far are all at just 4000.. which is almost a joke, both my i7 and i9 can *easily* do 4133, my IMC is almost on the bad side compared to the 4266 results in this thread, I refuse to believe like almost all of you got a worse IMC than my crap SP i7 and i9.
> 
> The only way for DDR4 to stand a chance against DDR5 is if you push the IMC to the max, that's the *one* trick that DDR4 still has up its sleeve, which only works by increasing DRAM frequency, like, you gain more from IMC than you do timings, like, screw timings (to an extent), IMC is what you should go for first, even use BCLK to push an extra 20 MT/s, it's worth it. Don't go into this thinking you want 14-14-14, and adjust frequency up after setting those timings, you should start with frequency and then lower the timings as much as possible.
> 
> So, you lower timings to lower latency, but increasing IMC also lowers latency.. then why aren't you doing it? As a bonus, when you're increasing IMC you also increase bandwidth (DRAM frequency) which can be helpful in some games as shown by the latest CapFrameX testing, timings just aren't primary, they're secondary. I thought most people knew that but apparently not. For example I would never have gotten DDR4 if it still had the same 3600-3733 IMC as Rocket Lake, DDR5 would have steamrolled it, but Alder Lake IMC at 4133-4266? Now that's a *serious threat* to DDR5 when it comes to gaming performance. Like 4266 IMC is 14.3% faster than 3733, that's huge, and I'm really bothered that my CPUs can't do 4266 or even 4200, IMC is only good for 4150~ by the limited testing I've done, but I fully intend to push every single MHz I can get out of it.
> 
> To further clarify to avoid misunderstandings of what I mean;
> *DDR4-3966 13-14-14 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
> DDR4-4000 14-14-14 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary
> *DDR4-4100 14-15-15 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
> DDR4-4133 15-15-15 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary
> *DDR4-4200 15-16-16 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
> DDR4-4266 16-16-16 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary
> 
> That's the gist of it, basically, don't be afraid of using BCLK to tweak memory frequency in-between 4000 and 4266. Anything goes, 4025, 4040, 4066, 4080, 4120, 4150, 4166, 4190 and so on, it's all up to you. Do *not* settle for 4000, that's some p*** a* s***.
> 
> No, we have a user in this thread with a 12600KF doing 4266, lucked out on the IMC, as I keep repeating, *there are always exceptions*.
> 
> I had that issue on the Gigabyte AORUS Elite (I never fixed it, swapped back to ASUS within like 30 minutes), but from what I recall it's a BIOS setting you have to change, I believe the same issue happens on the MSI Pro board, I forgot what the setting was called there, but it basically ships with a bad (to some users) storage setting (the way we installed Windows), could be related to RST, anyway, worked perfectly fine out of box on both my ASUS boards, did not adjust anything and my previous W10 Z590 (and Z370) OS install works like it should.
> 
> 
> 
> As mentioned, we have a member here with a 12600KF that can benchmark at 4266, there are always exceptions but on average, the higher end chips should feature a stronger IMC, but absolutely cannot be guaranteed, every processor needs to be tested. My i9 overclocks 100MHz higher on the cores, at the same exact voltage as my i7 (the i7 required 1.380 in the BIOS for 5.1 and my i9 required 1.380 for 5.2), and my i9 can boot to BIOS with 2x16GB Dual Rank at about 45 MT/s faster (22.5 MHz IMC).
> 
> The IMC definitely appears to be very unpredictable, like the odds of you getting a higher overclocking processor is *very high* when going from an i7 to i9, but the odds seem *slim to none* that you get a stronger IMC moving up to an i9, but I definitely do _believe_ that on *average it still leans in favour of the i9. *The only way to know for sure is if someone binned like 100x of the i5, i7 and i9, then you'd see a clear pattern of how many CPUs of each did like 4266, for example it could look like this; 15x i5, 35x i5 and 45x i9. If someone can take one for the team and do it, we're waiting 😂.


You are right i think it is bad imc on my 12700k
With 2stick on gear 2 they can go to 4500 no problem and on 4800 19 23 23 45 with some errors
any timing i touch even higher it will not boot.
On 4 of them it's simple wont boot 4266 and cant get it stable on 4000 xmp1 it show 3 error on memtest in just 2 min


----------



## Frozburn

2500k_2 said:


> New bios for MSI PRO Z690 A DDR4 *115U3*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRO Z690-A DDR4115U3.zip - AnonFiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anonfiles.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I do not know what are the improvements compared to 115, but in the description it says
> * improved compatibility from DR to Gear 1
> *adjusts the default SA voltage (slight drop)
> 
> maybe I was wrong with the translation. Who knows Chinese, please help translate.
> 
> 
> Spoiler: toppc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535512


Where do MSI post these? I can never find them.


----------



## JoeRambo

Frozburn said:


> Where do MSI post these? I can never find them.


Same, waiting for Edge DDR4 BIOS, and it's not here:

Beta/MP - Google Drive 

neither is that 115U3


----------



## zhrooms

Bakka said:


> Wondering if I am doing something wrong or is the gigabyte bios really this messed up.


Yes, currently all DDR4 boards from Gigabyte has a BIOS issue, specifically regarding memory overclocking, you just have to wait until Gigabyte releases an updated BIOS that fixes it, could take weeks or months, no one knows. So until then you have to settle for a much lower memory frequency, or return the Gigabyte board and get an ASUS or MSI board (Pro/Tomahawk/Edge/TUF/Strix).


marty76 said:


> Wondering if anyone can confirm this ram kit will work with a Strix Z690-A / 12700K? F4-3600C14D-32GTZR


They will work perfectly, I have the same memory, motherboard and processor, with the 0707 BIOS I can easily run the memory at 4133.


newls1 said:


> Why is it so difficult to get 4x16GB to run @ 4000MT/s? Is it just a z690 thing or did Z590/490 have same issues?


Because 4x Dual Rank sticks is much harder to run for the CPU memory controller (IMC).

Easiest to Hardest (8 to 16GB sticks are available in both Single and Dual Rank, so you can find 4x16GB Single Rank, significantly easier to run than 4x16GB Dual Rank)
2x Single Rank
2x Dual Rank
4x Single Rank
4x Dual Rank

It has always been difficult to overclock 4x16GB Dual Rank, regardless of architecture, that's why almost no one uses it, especially gamers, zero benefit performance wise, and if you really need it for work then that's your choice, you can't have both peak gaming performance and peak work performance, it's either or, but I guess 4x16GB Single Rank is the closest you'll get to peak performance in both.

Also a word of advice, to anyone with 4 sticks, please *don't *put in all 4 sticks as soon as you get your new Z690 motherboard and processor, start with 2 sticks and make sure it all works, find the highest memory frequency it will boot into windows with, *then* put in the other 2 sticks, and re-test it, then you'll know your max frequency on 2 and 4 sticks (you'll be confident everything is working as it should and the only thing to blame for poor 4 stick frequency is the IMC and not anything else like the board or sticks).


nimachoopani said:


> You are right I think it is bad IMC on my 12700k, with *2* sticks in Gear 2 they run 4500 no problem and even 4800 19 23 23 45 with some errors.
> With 4 sticks it won't boot 4266 Gear 2 and cant get it stable on 4133 Gear 2 XMP1, and no post at all on 4133 Gear 2 XMP2.


Yeah as said, 4 sticks are much harder to run, but I've seen several users run 4x8 Single Rank and 4x16GB Single Rank at 4000 Gear 1 and tight timings, so it works, as long as you have a decent/good IMC and a good BIOS/Motherboard.


----------



## VGeorge

zhrooms said:


> Yes, get the cheapest one possible, that isn't "double" like the D15, make sure it's compatible by looking through the list over at the Noctua website. But absolutely no need to get a more expensive one, my 12700K with only P-cores enabled can run 5.0GHz all-core at just 1.187V which only pulled like 85-90W in gaming (Battlefield and Call of Duty, both CPU/Memory bottlenecked of course), max core temp was *45°C* 😇, actually ridiculously efficient processors.


Thank you so much for the response! You are like a machine btw, answering to so many people in one comment.



zhrooms said:


> I should sue for having my thumb being sore for days after removing/installing the cooler on both TUF and Strix boards like 10+ times, absolutely dreadful. 😂


Hahaha... Wait one or two months and we'll probably be suing together, cause I will also be using a waterblock on that bad boy. Btw, what are you using? Is it an LGA1200 block, cause I read somewhere that LGA1200 blocks might have a pressure distribution issue or sth when used on LGA1700 MBs, but I could be wrong of course.


----------



## zhrooms

VGeorge said:


> I will also be using a waterblock on that bad boy. Btw, what are you using? Is it an LGA1200 block, cause I read somewhere that LGA1200 blocks might have a pressure distribution issue.


I am using this block for the processor, it was previously used on a Z370 and Z590 board, ordered the LGA1700 backplate from the EK shop at launch, fits perfectly and no issues (like pressure distribution), it has been installed on ASUS TUF, Strix and Gigabyte AORUS Elite, all with the same results. You can see some of my temperatures here. For example 9°C delta between the coldest and warmest core at 5.1GHz (~1.21V), which is completely normal (expected).


----------



## 2500k_2

ogider said:


> Do you have perhaps a link to the 113U4 bios somewhere? MSI PRO Z690 A DDR4
> I also wanted to test this version


no I don't have it.


Frozburn said:


> Where do MSI post these? I can never find them.


bilibili → Toppc


----------



## raad11

zhrooms said:


> That is the correct reading, SA VID, just rename it to "System Agent Voltage".
> 
> TVB, and with a MO-RA you should be able to get 5.4 game stable all-core like me.
> 
> These 12th Gen processors have very different IMCs compared to 9th Gen, you absolutely cannot compare them. And no one is asking you to yeet the voltages, Rocket Lake officially supports up to 1.5V from what I recall, so 1.4 on Alder Lake should not be a problem.
> 
> Yes that is very strange, I think the only way to get to the bottom of this is to simply test another processor, if no one else has some other suggestion. Also if you are curious about the memory, all you have to do is run them in Gear 2, and you should be able to run 4266 just fine, that'd prove that it's not the memory sticks.
> 
> You should only get sticks that good if you play FPS games competitively, you (and everyone else) are more than fine with a used 2x8GB Single Rank B-die kit from 2015, that can do 4133 16-16-16-28 at 1.45V. Which you have, I checked your kit earlier and it's indeed B-die and I found this person running them at 4000 MT/s CL16. The only upgrade you should do if you so choose, is 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die, the cheapest you can find, which should be €240 max, so €120 per 16GB, and you can sell your 2x8GB sticks for like €60-80. But even then, *if* it is your IMC that is the issue, it won't matter much, then any new kit would have been (largely) a waste.
> 
> Well we knew about a week in that both the MSI Pro and ASUS Strix/TUF could do 4266+, so to avoid any issues just get one of those boards, but after having seen some people have issues with the MSI Pro, I'd recommend the TUF as of now, simply the safest bet there is, guaranteed to work perfectly with high frequency memory in Gear 1 (4266+) and costs is in between the MSI Pro and MSI Edge/ASUS Strix.
> 
> Let me remind everyone, MSI A Pro and ASUS TUF/Strix can all boot up to 4300 MT/s in Gear 1, which of course depends on your IMC, but the boards has no issue with those speeds.
> Also, your comment about Gigabyte boards not selling well and thus being priced cheaper, is not true at all, no clue where you got that idea from.
> 
> Buildzoid mentioned that he could run 4000 Single Rank and 3600 Dual Rank on his (unreleased) AORUS Pro DDR4, so the BIOS is still crap even on that board, but I'm fairly sure Gaming X and Elite also do 4000 Single Rank, as I've seen both do 3600 in Dual Rank, but only like 3733-3866 on Single, but that I suspect is because the people who tried it (4000) wasn't experienced enough to get it to work, sadly I returned both my Gigabyte boards last week, so I never got to push them on the latest BIOSes to confirm what they could and couldn't do.
> 
> Like, yes it's still highly restricted in terms of memory frequency in Gear 1, but it will be fixed eventually, and at that point the Gigabyte boards will be the best boards (price/performance). But I'm not waiting, that's why I got the TUF during the black week sale for $240 pre-tax.
> Also, nothing is stopping you from running 3600 at like 13-13-13-28-1T, that's very fast too, but 4133 is even faster because of the much higher IMC frequency, so the Gigabyte boards are by no means slow, just not as fast as the competition.
> 
> 🙏
> 
> No, no idea where you got that from, I can boot 4240 MT/s at VDDQ 1.35V (Auto), and get into windows at 4187 MT/s. IO voltage is now part of the SA voltage if I'm not mistaken, someone correct me if I am.
> 
> Yeah, from what I've seen only some people run into issues with low VDDQ, don't know the reason yet, you allude to it being CR related but I've seen people struggle with CR2 as well, but I'm planning on testing out a bunch of frequencies and see where it's needed, get to the bottom of it.
> 
> This is not true, stop saying it .
> 
> 🙏
> 
> Yes, sometimes you have to start from scratch, load your desired timings but at a lower frequency as an example, to let the board re-train, then move up in frequency for it to work. Obviously depends on board and BIOS though.
> 
> Yes, get the cheapest one possible, that isn't "double" like the D15, make sure it's compatible by looking through the list over at the Noctua website. But absolutely no need to get a more expensive one, my 12700K with only P-cores enabled can run 5.0GHz all-core at just 1.187V which only pulled like 85-90W in gaming (Battlefield and Call of Duty, both CPU/Memory bottlenecked of course), max core temp was *45°C* 😇, actually ridiculously efficient processors.
> 
> Those DRAM voltages are way too high, you should be able to run like 1.40V for 4000, 1.45V for 4133 and 1.50V for 4266. Your timings are so loose it shouldn't matter much. You are probably making it much harder on yourself by running those high voltages, like regular Samsung B-die can run 4133 16-16-16 at 1.45V, I usually have bunch of stability issues when pushing to 1.5 and above.
> Also I've seen at least one person mention that too high VDDQ caused his OC not to even boot, so if that is true that might be another reason you can't run it.
> I think the best way for people to overclock on Z690 is to ensure their DRAM configuration and overclock is stable in Gear 2 first, then move on to Gear 1 once they know everything is working and what voltage the DRAM needs and such.
> 
> Not your fault he completely missed the memo about ASUS boards having ridiculously big VRM heatsinks, I can barely screw in my water block (thumb screws) because it's so damn tight. I should sue for having my thumb being sore for days after removing/installing the cooler on both TUF and Strix boards like 10+ times, absolutely dreadful. 😂
> 
> Well, that's not needed for some of us, I can boot straight to 4240 MT/s and there are several people in this thread that got god tier IMC that runs 4266 game stable, absolutely nuts. No tweaking of any kind.
> 
> You have the TUF on 0707, I suggest you try increasing DRAM to 1.52, SA to 1.41 and VDDQ to 1.41. Then try 4000 again, or even 4133, at 16-16-16. Actually I think you should start from scratch, set very loose timings to test your IMC before you tighten anything.
> 
> On my 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die in A2/B2 slot on both TUF and Strix boards with the 0707 BIOS:
> 17-18-18-38-2T, 12-8 RRDL/S,747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL
> 7-4-16-16-7-4-42-32-16-16-20-20-16-16-14-14-44, 144 REFIX9, Gear 1, 100:133, DDR4-4000/4133/4266, BCLK 100.2
> With those timings and *1.35V SA*, 1.35V VDDQ (*Auto*), *DRAM 1.4875V* I can boot to BIOS at *4240 MT/s*, which is 2120 MHz on the IMC (12900K), and on my 12700K I could boot ~4195 MT/s (2100 MHz IMC), so even on a considerably worse IMC you should *at the very least* boot 4133 MT/s.
> 
> By doing it this way I know with* absolute certainty* that my Board, my BIOS, my IMC and my RAM works. From this point I can start tweaking timings at 4133 while keeping SA/VDDQ/DRAM fairly high at 1.42/1.42/1.52, then when the timings are good enough, I can start to lower the voltages one by one, in that same order SA>VDDQ>DRAM.
> 
> Like people don't seem to understand yet, that 12th Gen can do 4266+ game stable with golden IMC, and average IMC 4133+ game stable, yet 90% of the results shared here so far are all at just 4000.. which is almost a joke, both my i7 and i9 can *easily* do 4133, my IMC is almost on the bad side compared to the 4266 results in this thread, I refuse to believe like almost all of you got a worse IMC than my crap SP i7 and i9.
> 
> The only way for DDR4 to stand a chance against DDR5 is if you push the IMC to the max, that's the *one* trick that DDR4 still has up its sleeve, which only works by increasing DRAM frequency, like, you gain more from IMC than you do timings, like, screw timings (to an extent), IMC is what you should go for first, even use BCLK to push an extra 20 MT/s, it's worth it. Don't go into this thinking you want 14-14-14, and adjust frequency up after setting those timings, you should start with frequency and then lower the timings as much as possible.
> 
> So, you lower timings to lower latency, but increasing IMC also lowers latency.. then why aren't you doing it? As a bonus, when you're increasing IMC you also increase bandwidth (DRAM frequency) which can be helpful in some games as shown by the latest CapFrameX testing, timings just aren't primary, they're secondary. I thought most people knew that but apparently not. For example I would never have gotten DDR4 if it still had the same 3600-3733 IMC as Rocket Lake, DDR5 would have steamrolled it, but Alder Lake IMC at 4133-4266? Now that's a *serious threat* to DDR5 when it comes to gaming performance. Like 4266 IMC is 14.3% faster than 3733, that's huge, and I'm really bothered that my CPUs can't do 4266 or even 4200, IMC is only good for 4150~ by the limited testing I've done, but I fully intend to push every single MHz I can get out of it.
> 
> To further clarify to avoid misunderstandings of what I mean;
> *DDR4-3966 13-14-14 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
> DDR4-4000 14-14-14 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary
> *DDR4-4100 14-15-15 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
> DDR4-4133 15-15-15 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary
> *DDR4-4200 15-16-16 < this is optimal, pushing as high frequency as you possibly can while maintaining that CL*
> DDR4-4266 16-16-16 < this is not optimal, losing 1 on every primary
> 
> That's the gist of it, basically, don't be afraid of using BCLK to tweak memory frequency in-between 4000 and 4266. Anything goes, 4025, 4040, 4066, 4080, 4120, 4150, 4166, 4190 and so on, it's all up to you. Do *not* settle for 4000, that's some p*** a* s***.
> 
> No, we have a user in this thread with a 12600KF doing 4266, lucked out on the IMC, as I keep repeating, *there are always exceptions*.
> 
> I had that issue on the Gigabyte AORUS Elite (I never fixed it, swapped back to ASUS within like 30 minutes), but from what I recall it's a BIOS setting you have to change, I believe the same issue happens on the MSI Pro board, I forgot what the setting was called there, but it basically ships with a bad (to some users) storage setting (the way we installed Windows), could be related to RST, anyway, worked perfectly fine out of box on both my ASUS boards, did not adjust anything and my previous W10 Z590 (and Z370) OS install works like it should.
> 
> 
> 
> As mentioned, we have a member here with a 12600KF that can benchmark at 4266, there are always exceptions but on average, the higher end chips should feature a stronger IMC, but absolutely cannot be guaranteed, every processor needs to be tested. My i9 overclocks 100MHz higher on the cores, at the same exact voltage as my i7 (the i7 required 1.380 in the BIOS for 5.1 and my i9 required 1.380 for 5.2), and my i9 can boot to BIOS with 2x16GB Dual Rank at about 45 MT/s faster (22.5 MHz IMC).
> 
> The IMC definitely appears to be very unpredictable, like the odds of you getting a higher overclocking processor is *very high* when going from an i7 to i9, but the odds seem *slim to none* that you get a stronger IMC moving up to an i9, but I definitely do _believe_ that on *average it still leans in favour of the i9. *The only way to know for sure is if someone binned like 100x of the i5, i7 and i9, then you'd see a clear pattern of how many CPUs of each did like 4266, for example it could look like this; 15x i5, 35x i5 and 45x i9. If someone can take one for the team and do it, we're waiting 😂.


I think they're binning IMCs.



> On my 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die in A2/B2 slot on both TUF and Strix boards with the 0707 BIOS:
> 17-18-18-38-2T, 12-8 RRDL/S,747 RFC, 16641 REFI, 12 RTP, 45 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL
> 7-4-16-16-7-4-42-32-16-16-20-20-16-16-14-14-44, 144 REFIX9, Gear 1, 100:133, DDR4-4000/4133/4266, BCLK 100.2
> With those timings and *1.35V SA*, 1.35V VDDQ (*Auto*), *DRAM 1.4875V* I can boot to BIOS at *4240 MT/s*, which is 2120 MHz on the IMC (12900K), and on my 12700K I could boot ~4195 MT/s (2100 MHz IMC), so even on a considerably worse IMC you should *at the very least* boot 4133 MT/s.


Mine does boot at 4133 with those timings/voltages, but not 4266 (2x16GB DR). Is it okay if I try CL 14 with all that just to see if it will be possible? Or will tightening timings down (tertiaries, secondaries, then primaries last) change the outcome? Also, some of those speeds are for 100:100 and I thought 100:133 was more stable at higher frequencies (so, just 4000, 4133, 4266).


----------



## Ichirou

Frozburn said:


> Where do MSI post these? I can never find them.


They're probably beta drivers being shared among Chinese/Taiwanese forums that MSI participates in.


----------



## Bakka

Thanks for the responses. Very sad to hear it is this bad. Any recommendations on a replacement? When I was looking I didn't see that the MSI Pro came with a SPDIF for audio (which is how my speaker system connects). I see that TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 | Motherboards | ASUS Gloabl has my required features wifi6+spdif. But I thought I recall seeing people having similar issues with Asus (though not to the same degree). Have these been resolved and is this a solid choice for being able to get the ram to its XMP settings?

Thanks again!


----------



## raad11

raad11 said:


> I think they're binning IMCs.
> 
> 
> 
> Mine does boot at 4133 with those timings/voltages, but not 4266 (2x16GB DR). Is it okay if I try CL 14 with all that just to see if it will be possible? Or will tightening timings down (tertiaries, secondaries, then primaries last) change the outcome? Also, some of those speeds are for 100:100 and I thought 100:133 was more stable at higher frequencies (so, just 4000, 4133, 4266).


I changed CL to 15 and it's in Windows running TM5 with 1.44 SA, 1.48 VDDQ. 1.42/1.42 threw errors within a few minutes.

If it needs that much voltage for 15-18-18-38-2T, I don't have high hopes for arriving at timings which would outperform 4000 14-16-15-28-2T.

So, the reason so many of us are "settling" for 4000 is because the voltages required to stabilize 4100 or higher are really high. The IMCs seem to vary enough. I think most of us are just waiting for better memory overclocking in a future bios.

Btw, these are the timings I'm using for secondaries/tertiaries. They were tuned on a different (far worse) board. Are any of these perhaps too tight for Z690? I did pass TM5 with this.










EDIT: CL15 didn't pass at 1.44/1.48 voltage. So I'm going back to 4000 CL14.

Until a better BIOS comes out or someone has knowledge of what voltages are safe for daily use.


----------



## zhrooms

raad11 said:


> Mine does boot at 4133 with those timings/voltages


That is great to hear, what you can do from there is increase BCLK from 100.0, in steps of .2, to like 100.2, 100.4, 100.6 and so on, eventually it will not load you into Windows, and just not boot, that's where you find your IMC limit. I could boot to BIOS up to 4240, so 4133 frequency and BCLK set to 102.6, so I passed:
100.0 = 4133 (Windows)
100.2 = 4141 (Windows)
100.4 = 4150 (Windows)
100.6 = 4158 (Windows)
100.8 = 4166 (Windows)
101.0 = 4174 (Windows)
101.2 = 4183 (Windows)
101.4 = 4191 (Windows)
101.6 = 4199 (BIOS)
101.8 = 4207 (BIOS)
102.0 = 4216 (BIOS)
102.2 = 4224 (BIOS)
102.4 = 4232 (BIOS)
*102.6 = 4240* (BIOS, unstable)
102.8 = 4249 (No boot)

I tested every .1 BCLK though, but to save time you can just go every other.


raad11 said:


> Is it okay if I try CL 14 with all that just to see if it will be possible? Or will tightening timings down (tertiaries, secondaries, then primaries last) change the outcome? Also, some of those speeds are for 100:100 and I thought 100:133 was more stable at higher frequencies (so, just 4000, 4133, 4266).


Do whatever you want if you feel 4133 is enough, or you continue testing the IMC like I did above, using BCLK.
As for the ratio, I haven't noticed any difference yet, I saw early reports that 100:133 performed significantly better, but there's been a lot of BIOS updates since then, and I've as said not had any issues at all with 100:100 so far (4000).


Bakka said:


> Thanks for the responses. Very sad to hear it is this bad. Any recommendations on a replacement? When I was looking I didn't see that the MSI Pro came with a SPDIF for audio (which is how my speaker system connects). I see that TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 | Motherboards | ASUS Gloabl has my required features wifi6+spdif. But I thought I recall seeing people having similar issues with Asus (though not to the same degree). Have these been resolved and is this a solid choice for being able to get the ram to its XMP settings?


ASUS TUF is arguably the best board right now, runs up to 4300 with 2x16GB Dual Rank, just like the Strix, but cheaper. MSI boards are also a choice but it's a bit of hit and miss from people on them, but should run the same as the TUF and Strix.


raad11 said:


> I changed CL to 15 and it's in Windows running TM5 with 1.44 SA, 1.48 VDDQ. 1.42/1.42 threw errors within a few minutes.


Yeah 4133 requires one hell of a bump to SA over 4000, but it's worth it if you can run it. Also just because TM5 throws a few errors after *minutes* (especially), that's guaranteed to be game stable, lots of room left to tweak.


----------



## Jscs1992

Hey zhrooms do you have any suggestions i am running 4000 at 15-15-15 30 trfc 320 and treffi 65535 my dram is at 1.56 vccsa 1.26 and vddq on auto im getting errors on tm5 extreme anta777 you have any suggestions on what voltages to make it stable. I feel like it should be stable off 1.55 dram and vccsa at 1.26.


----------



## Ichirou

Bakka said:


> Thanks for the responses. Very sad to hear it is this bad. Any recommendations on a replacement? When I was looking I didn't see that the MSI Pro came with a SPDIF for audio (which is how my speaker system connects). I see that TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 | Motherboards | ASUS Gloabl has my required features wifi6+spdif. But I thought I recall seeing people having similar issues with Asus (though not to the same degree). Have these been resolved and is this a solid choice for being able to get the ram to its XMP settings?
> 
> Thanks again!


Most 12th Gen overclockers here have an ASUS, followed by MSI.


Jscs1992 said:


> Hey zhrooms do you have any suggestions i am running 4000 at 15-15-15 30 trfc 320 and treffi 65535 my dram is at 1.56 vccsa 1.26 and vddq on auto im getting errors on tm5 extreme anta777 you have any suggestions on what voltages to make it stable. I feel like it should be stable off 1.55 dram and vccsa at 1.26.


What are the error code numbers?


----------



## Jscs1992

Ichirou said:


> Most 12th Gen overclockers here have an ASUS, followed by MSI.
> 
> What are the error code numbers?


Error 9 and 10 and occasionally 7 on extreme anta777


----------



## Ichirou

Jscs1992 said:


> Error 9 and 10 and occasionally 7 on extreme anta777


Try increasing VDIMM and/or loosening tRFC


----------



## Jscs1992

Ichirou said:


> Try increasing VDIMM and/or loosening tRFC


its funny when i increased vdimm to 1.56 and 1.57 i was getting errors earlier in tm5 like a couple mins. Compared to 30mins with 1.55 dimm.


----------



## Ichirou

Jscs1992 said:


> its funny when i increased vdimm to 1.56 and 1.57 i was getting errors earlier in tm5 like a couple mins. Compared to 30mins with 1.55 dimm.


Then try pulling it down instead
Also try fiddling with VCCSA/VDDQ by very miniscule amounts, like ±0.01V on them.


----------



## Gardiff

Jscs1992 said:


> its funny when i increased vdimm to 1.56 and 1.57 i was getting errors earlier in tm5 like a couple mins. Compared to 30mins with 1.55 dimm.


I agree with @Ichirou

i'm running 4x8gb at 4000 15-15-15-30 2t g1
vdimm 1.475
vcssa 1.2
VDDQ/TX 1.3


----------



## Jscs1992

Gardiff said:


> I agree with @Ichirou
> 
> i'm running 4x8gb at 4000 15-15-15-30 2t g1
> vdimm 1.475
> vcssa 1.2
> VDDQ/TX 1.3
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535915


thanks guys i will give it a go what stress test did you use @Gardiff ?


----------



## raad11

@zhrooms I got into Windows with 4100CL14, but promptly threw errors at 14-18-18-38-2T with my tightened secondaries/tertiaries. It may be stable at looser timings at 4100 but I'm not sure if it's worth the effort since 4000 with same CAS and tighter timings won't be much behind if any. Voltage was 1.5 SA (1.488 in HWInfo64) and 1.48 VDDQ.

Of course, 15-18-18-38-2T won't boot at all, so maybe Asus will fix CL15 in the next BIOS. I ran 4100 15-15-15-28 on single rank and it did very well (better than 4000CL14). It's almost like CL14 is really Cas 15.5


----------



## marty76

zhrooms said:


> Yes, currently all DDR4 boards from Gigabyte has a BIOS issue, specifically regarding memory overclocking, you just have to wait until Gigabyte releases an updated BIOS that fixes it, could take weeks or months, no one knows. So until then you have to settle for a much lower memory frequency, or return the Gigabyte board and get an ASUS or MSI board (Pro/Tomahawk/Edge/TUF/Strix).
> 
> They will work perfectly, I have the same memory, motherboard and processor, with the 0707 BIOS I can easily run the memory at 4133.
> 
> Because 4x Dual Rank sticks is much harder to run for the CPU memory controller (IMC).
> 
> Easiest to Hardest (8 to 16GB sticks are available in both Single and Dual Rank, so you can find 4x16GB Single Rank, significantly easier to run than 4x16GB Dual Rank)
> 2x Single Rank
> 2x Dual Rank
> 4x Single Rank
> 4x Dual Rank
> 
> It has always been difficult to overclock 4x16GB Dual Rank, regardless of architecture, that's why almost no one uses it, especially gamers, zero benefit performance wise, and if you really need it for work then that's your choice, you can't have both peak gaming performance and peak work performance, it's either or, but I guess 4x16GB Single Rank is the closest you'll get to peak performance in both.
> 
> Also a word of advice, to anyone with 4 sticks, please *don't *put in all 4 sticks as soon as you get your new Z690 motherboard and processor, start with 2 sticks and make sure it all works, find the highest memory frequency it will boot into windows with, *then* put in the other 2 sticks, and re-test it, then you'll know your max frequency on 2 and 4 sticks (you'll be confident everything is working as it should and the only thing to blame for poor 4 stick frequency is the IMC and not anything else like the board or sticks).
> 
> Yeah as said, 4 sticks are much harder to run, but I've seen several users run 4x8 Single Rank and 4x16GB Single Rank at 4000 Gear 1 and tight timings, so it works, as long as you have a decent/good IMC and a good BIOS/Motherboard.


Thankyou for the reply 😁


----------



## newls1

So using this MSI Tomahawk DDR4 board I cant even get my 2x16GB CL14 3600 ram to operate at even 3733. On Z590 I was @ 4133 CL15.. *** is going on here? Ive tried the new beta bios, and the factory shipped one, all suck. Tips please> Ive tried VDDQ @ 1.30-1.45, SA Voltage 1.30-.1.40 and Vdimm up to 1.50. Z590 needed 1.30SA, 1.25 IO, and 1.48Vdimm... Not a happy camper so far. Please help


----------



## neteng101

newls1 said:


> So using this MSI Tomahawk DDR4 board I cant even get my 2x16GB CL14 3600 ram to operate at even 3733.


Have you tried anything beyond 3733? It could magically work - just enter some slower primary timings, and see what will POST. I had weirdness at 3600 - and 3733 to 4000 would get past POST, but 3600 was a dead no go.


----------



## bscool

@newls1 Bump up VSSA and VDDQ and then later you can tune them down Oh wait I see you are on MSI. I haven't used MSI this gen and I know they can vary a little between Asus and MSI. Anyway what I did on z690 Strix A d4 was try different SA and DQ voltages and it is picky as too high or too low wont boot.

Also too low might boot but wont be stable in Windows under stress testing. SA try from 1.35 up to 1.5v. VDDQ from 1.35 up to 1.6v. I ended up at 1.45sa and 1.55 VDDQ for 4133c15 2x16. dram v 1.55

Need to get MSI users to help you since I don't have the board to give first hand experience. I know the first bios on my Asus board I could only boot 3800 or something in that range, cant remember as I updated to newer one quickly.

Ill post a screen of my timings and Aida you can use as a guide. I have tested under memtest pro, various benches, stress test and it has been stable for the couple weeks I have been using it. But your lucky may vary.

Edit for CPU OC I am just using Asus AI OC. Nothing disabled with e cores. Just set 1.35v and llc6.

Definitely the simplest OC experience I have had in the last few gens of owning MSI and Asus top/upper end boards. Getting a good IMC and CPU bin makes life so much easier. Past gens I spent months trying to hit mem OC other had and couldn't because of weak IMC.


----------



## JoeRambo

Nothing will help with MSI DR wall above 3600 till they release a new BIOS like they did with PRO-A, don't even waste time, board won't train.
Edge, Tomahawk are in same boat, need to wait for new BIOS from MSI.


----------



## weyden

Hey guys. I have an Aorus Elite DDR4. And 2x 16gb 4133mhz Adata xpg Micron B-die. The default timings are 19 23 23 45 1t gear2 1.4v

I got 4600mhz 19 23 23 45 1t gear2 1.5v. Can you improve anything? I can't lowering the primary timings. And when I put it on 4000mhz to get gear 1. The latencies don't go down from 19-23-23-45. I need to know if the motherboard is bad anyway, or micron b die is not good with lower timings?


----------



## Revv23

JoeRambo said:


> Same, waiting for Edge DDR4 BIOS, and it's not here:
> 
> Beta/MP - Google Drive
> 
> neither is that 115U3


I'm confused about the naming scheme? It looks like 2 files for MPG EDGE released today but one is called 
"MPG Z690 EDGE WIFIH11"
VS
"MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFIM11
VS on november 26th they released
"MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFI DDR4A14"
&
"MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4A14"

As far as I know, MSI only makes one version of MPG Z690 EDGE - but this list seems to imply otherwise?


----------



## bass junkie xl

hey guys i have a few questions on whats the best z690 dd4 over clocking board with 12th gen
i have 8gb x 4 sticks of 4133 mhz cl 16-16-16-36 stable on my 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz stable now on z390 gigabyte pro wifi
i was hoping for 4000 mhz - 4133 gear 1 , what of those 4 would be the best i was thinking on going msi edgeor the asus rog strix but you guyslet me know thanks ! 


*ASUS TUF Gaming Z690-Plus WiFi
ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi
MSI MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4 
MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4*

current specs 
i have 8gb x 4 sticks of 4133 mhz cl 16-16-16-36 stable on my 9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz stable now on z390 gigabyte pro wifi

current specs 

gigabyte z390 pro wifi
9900 ks @ 5.2 ghz / 4.9 cache delided
32 gb 8 gb x 4 sticks of team group xtreme 4133 cl 18- 18 -18-38 1.4v xmp @ 4133 mhz cl-16-16-16-36 1.5v 64k read / 37 ns latency
3 x samsung m.2 slots needed ( i need 2 m.2 heat syncs included ) 
rtx 3080 
1000w psu

i need to know today ito make the purchase ! thanks


----------



## bscool

@Revv23 They make ddr4 and ddr5 version of the MB.


----------



## JoeRambo

Revv23 said:


> As far as I know, MSI only makes one version of MPG Z690 EDGE - but this list seems to imply otherwise?


They have plenty of versions, but what we need is Edge DDR4



bscool said:


> @Revv23 They make ddr4 and ddr5 version of the MB.


And also some Edge TI model in DDR5 and DDR4


----------



## bscool

@bass junkie xl I have owned both MSI and ASUS boards the last few gens. I went with z690 Strix A d4 this time and I am happy. 41333c15 DR. Not sure how 4x8 will do for you but I myself would still go Strix.

Edit if you want to save a few $$ or for esthetic reasons then I would go Tuf.


----------



## Revv23

bscool said:


> @Revv23 They make ddr4 and ddr5 version of the MB.


Not according to their website?

EDIT - I figured it out; the ddr5 versions are not available in US market.


----------



## Revv23

JoeRambo said:


> Nothing will help with MSI DR wall above 3600 till they release a new BIOS like they did with PRO-A, don't even waste time, board won't train.
> Edge, Tomahawk are in same boat, need to wait for new BIOS from MSI.



i literally just went to memory try it and pick 4000 gear 1 and it boots right up 1st try. I haven't optimized this kit was running 3600mts 14/14/14 i just did this RN to prove there isnt a wall.


----------



## dbuilt

New to the forum (and also new to overclocking/pc building).
After some woes with gigabytes board, heres my latest "stable" with MSI Edge DDR4. Open to any optimizations as I have no idea what I'm doing... but thankful for this threads existence.


----------



## Revv23

dbuilt said:


> New to the forum (and also new to overclocking/pc building).
> After some woes with gigabytes board, heres my latest "stable" with MSI Edge DDR4. Open to any optimizations as I have no idea what I'm doing... but thankful for this threads existence.


this is great. also more proof that the edge is just fine going over 3600. 

what dram voltage?


----------



## dbuilt

Revv23 said:


> this is great. also more proof that the edge is just fine going over 3600.
> 
> what dram voltage?


1.42 SA
1.52 DRAM.
auto VDDQ as per @zhrooms findings.
I have not attempted to lower any voltages and have simply kept these as listed above throughout my testing.

I also was able to load default bios, set these voltages, set gear 1, select 4100, untouched timings and post. However I have not played with 4100 yet.

Also, question… I am able to POST 4000 gear 1 with 16-16-16-32 set in bios but NOT if I change to 14-15-15-22.
I need to do that manually in MSI dragon ball. Is there a reason for that?


----------



## pt0x-

Gardiff said:


> I agree with @Ichirou
> 
> i'm running 4x8gb at 4000 15-15-15-30 2t g1
> vdimm 1.475
> vcssa 1.2
> VDDQ/TX 1.3
> 
> 
> View attachment 2535915


Crazy, this is what im chasing, but cant get past 3733Mhz @ g1. Might try again tomorrow by reflasing the bios. Low/high vdd/vddsa/vddq tried everything. I'm thinking about reflashing because when I was done trying to push G1 again today, I went back to my working G2 profile by loading that previously saved profile from usb. All of a sudden my pc crashed when entering the bios. What I saw there is that my sa was at 1.58v(!) Never ever touched that voltage, and the G2 profile I loaded set 1.36v so something is off. Had to clear cmos to get around it.

I have a 4x8gb gskill 4000 15-16-16 1.5v On G2 it's all fine, tightened timing further as well. Same mobo, same cpu, same cpu clock actually. What is with that ring though? 800mhz?

Only other difference is im running 0707. Never tried 002. Have you tried 0707, and why are you using 002? And what ram do you use?


----------



## VGeorge

zhrooms said:


> I am using this block for the processor, it was previously used on a Z370 and Z590 board, ordered the LGA1700 backplate from the EK shop at launch, fits perfectly and no issues (like pressure distribution), it has been installed on ASUS TUF, Strix and Gigabyte AORUS Elite, all with the same results. You can see some of my temperatures here. For example 9°C delta between the coldest and warmest core at 5.1GHz (~1.21V), which is completely normal (expected).


Thanks so much for your detailed response!


----------



## newls1

JoeRambo said:


> Nothing will help with MSI DR wall above 3600 till they release a new BIOS like they did with PRO-A, don't even waste time, board won't train.
> Edge, Tomahawk are in same boat, need to wait for new BIOS from MSI.


exact issue im having, thank you.. ill quit waisting my time then. If the PRO has this fixed bios, can i assume other boards will get this soon?


----------



## dbuilt

newls1 said:


> exact issue im having, thank you.. ill quit waisting my time then. If the PRO has this fixed bios, can i assume other boards will get this soon?


I have the edge ddr4 and am not having any problems related to posting over 3600…


----------



## gerardfraser

MSI PRO z-690-A DDR4 on release BIOS I could do Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz with High SA voltage.


----------



## newls1

dbuilt said:


> I have the edge ddr4 and am not having any problems related to posting over 3600…


well damn it..... ive have spent with 100% honesty.... the last 5ish hours trying EVERYTHING possible to get my 2x16GB CL14 g.skills to post with even 50MHz past 3600 and its impossible. Gear2 it will, but im not doing gear2, F-THAT! plus with gear 2 enabled, posting takes FOREVER... Once it posts, ill disable training, and it posts super fast like my z590 with this ram did, but Im not settling for 3600, andcertainly not in G2 mode. MSI PLEASE FIX THIS


----------



## dbuilt

newls1 said:


> well damn it..... ive have spent with 100% honesty.... the last 5ish hours trying EVERYTHING possible to get my 2x16GB CL14 g.skills to post with even 50MHz past 3600 and its impossible. Gear2 it will, but im not doing gear2, F-THAT! plus with gear 2 enabled, posting takes FOREVER... Once it posts, ill disable training, and it posts super fast like my z590 with this ram did, but Im not settling for 3600, andcertainly not in G2 mode. MSI PLEASE FIX THIS


I am with you all the way. Thankfully with the holidays work is slow and I’ve been able to dedicate some extra time to this. I don’t know what im talking about but I am certainly confident in talking about what I have done and know about thus far…
If you can do me a favor..

post your RAM serial number here. 
what PSU do you have?
What cpu do you have?

next..
Open up bios for me and press F6 to load optimized defaults. 
(if windows 11 enable secure boot, otherwise…)
DO NOTHING ELSE.

reboot into bios. Go into voltage settings and change “CPU SA voltage” to 1.42. Scroll down and set DRAM voltage to 1.52.
DO NOTHING ELSE
save and reboot.

boot into bios again, navigate to voltage settings and ensure that MSI voltage readouts are consistent with the voltages you just set.

if so, scroll up to DRAM setting.
Set: 
DRAM reference clock to 133mhz.
DRAM frequency to option: 4000(30x100.00x1.33) G1

Save changes and (IMPORTANT) review changes. Make sure the selected dram frequency is not altering voltages in any way.
Reboot.

These are the steps I took and had no issues booting. You should not have issues booting doing so.
I am on version E7D31IMS.114 downloaded from MSI’s website for the EDGE ddr4.

my ram is 2x16 Corsair dominator platinum 3466

If this doesn’t work… I would recommend ensuring that your RAM is set in the correct dimms (for my MSI board it is slots 2 and 4). Fresh install of windows, fresh flash of bios and download all of the necessary drivers.
Gone through hell and back with this memory stuff over the past few weeks. I would be extremely surprised if the above didn’t work.

A small edge case could be that your ram is not b-die or is bad in some way.. but I would assume that you would know if this was the case by now.

If this doesn’t help in any way, or you’ve tried this and it didn’t work.. I’m sorry! These are just the steps I took and ultimately was able to have success. I however, did not have any issues with the MSI board after finding this thread (setting the proper voltages) and also referring to the memory overclock guide on the internet.


----------



## newls1

dbuilt said:


> I am with you all the way. Thankfully with the holidays work is slow and I’ve been able to dedicate some extra time to this. I don’t know what im talking about but I am certainly confident in talking about what I have done and know about thus far…
> If you can do me a favor..
> 
> post your RAM serial number here.
> what PSU do you have?
> What cpu do you have?
> 
> next..
> Open up bios for me and press F6 to load optimized defaults.
> (if windows 11 enable secure boot, otherwise…)
> DO NOTHING ELSE.
> 
> reboot into bios. Go into voltage settings and change “CPU SA voltage” to 1.42. Scroll down and set DRAM voltage to 1.52.
> DO NOTHING ELSE
> save and reboot.
> 
> boot into bios again, navigate to voltage settings and ensure that MSI voltage readouts are consistent with the voltages you just set.
> 
> if so, scroll up to DRAM setting.
> Set:
> DRAM reference clock to 133mhz.
> DRAM frequency to option: 4000(30x100.00x1.33) G1
> 
> Save changes and (IMPORTANT) review changes. Make sure the selected dram frequency is not altering voltages in any way.
> Reboot.
> 
> These are the steps I took and had no issues booting. You should not have issues booting doing so.
> I am on version E7D31IMS.114 downloaded from MSI’s website for the EDGE ddr4.
> 
> my ram is 2x16 Corsair dominator platinum 3466
> 
> If this doesn’t work… I would recommend ensuring that your RAM is set in the correct dimms (for my MSI board it is slots 2 and 4). Fresh install of windows, fresh flash of bios and download all of the necessary drivers.
> Gone through hell and back with this memory stuff over the past few weeks. I would be extremely surprised if the above didn’t work.
> 
> A small edge case could be that your ram is not b-die or is bad in some way.. but I would assume that you would know if this was the case by now.
> 
> If this doesn’t help in any way, or you’ve tried this and it didn’t work.. I’m sorry! These are just the steps I took and ultimately was able to have success. I however, did not have any issues with the MSI board after finding this thread (setting the proper voltages) and also referring to the memory overclock guide on the internet.


thank you for the detailed reply sir, really appreciate the time you took to type all that out, however YES... Ive done all this and done it to the exact "T". to no avail. This 1000)% has to be a bios issue, and your "EDGE" has bios version 114, tomahawk is 115.. has to be a difference there. your bios obviously isnt effected by this bios bug where as 115 is. Something is severely crippling this board with anything over 3600. Funny though, I bought an MSI board to avoid memory issues as I kept seeing gigabyte, asus, asrock having terrible mem issues, and here i am with a MSI and mem issues... F.M.L


----------



## dbuilt

newls1 said:


> thank you for the detailed reply sir, really appreciate the time you took to type all that out, however YES... Ive done all this and done it to the exact "T". to no avail. This 1000)% has to be a bios issue, and your "EDGE" has bios version 114, tomahawk is 115.. has to be a difference there. your bios obviously isnt effected by this bios bug where as 115 is. Something is severely crippling this board with anything over 3600. Funny though, I bought an MSI board to avoid memory issues as I kept seeing gigabyte, asus, asrock having terrible mem issues, and here i am with a MSI and mem issues... F.M.L


have you tried with version 100?


----------



## weyden

weyden said:


> Hey guys. I have an Aorus Elite DDR4. And 2x 16gb 4133mhz Adata xpg Micron B-die. The default timings are 19 23 23 45 1t gear2 1.4v
> 
> I got 4600mhz 19 23 23 45 1t gear2 1.5v. Can you improve anything? I can't lowering the primary timings. And when I put it on 4000mhz to get gear 1. The latencies don't go down from 19-23-23-45. I need to know if the motherboard is bad anyway, or micron b die is not good with lower timings?



Nobody?

In my tests the memory at 4600mhz 19-23-23-45 N1 Gear2 is faster than at 4000mhz 19-23-23-45 N1 Gear1. Although latency drops by 10ms with gear 1, I get more fps in gear 2 mode in games. I can't lower these times on Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4 motherboard. My memories are Micron B-die and they say they are very good! But I can only lower the secondary and tertiary timings.


----------



## crpcookie

Best I can do with these 5 years old Corsair 4x16GB b-dies... finally got sub 50 ns by enabling RTL on MSI Edge. 1.15v SA and 1.37v memory voltage.


----------



## Ichirou

weyden said:


> Nobody?
> 
> In my tests the memory at 4600mhz 19-23-23-45 N1 Gear2 is faster than at 4000mhz 19-23-23-45 N1 Gear1. Although latency drops by 10ms with gear 1, I get more fps in gear 2 mode in games. I can't lower these times on Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4 motherboard. My memories are Micron B-die and they say they are very good! But I can only lower the secondary and tertiary timings.


Micron B-die loves voltage. Pump it to 1.60-1.65V with a dedicated fan and pull the primaries down.


----------



## weyden

Ichirou said:


> Micron B-die loves voltage. Pump it to 1.60-1.65V with a dedicated fan and pull the primaries down.



I don't know where to put a fan dedicated just for the memories. The only fans that blow air into the memories are the 3 from the front of the cabinet!

Is it enough?

Do you think 1.6v is safe to use 24h? I'm using 1.5v and everything is working fine. Even with only 1.25 SA. I've already tried raising the SA tension didn't help much.


----------



## bass junkie xl

question so in terms of memory over clocking 4000 mhz geaar 1 am i better off with


*ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi
MSI MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4* 

? since thsoe 2 seem to be the best so far in this forum ? im putting theorder in tonight guys


----------



## Ichirou

weyden said:


> I don't know where to put a fan dedicated just for the memories. The only fans that blow air into the memories are the 3 from the front of the cabinet!
> 
> Is it enough?
> 
> Do you think 1.6v is safe to use 24h? I'm using 1.5v and everything is working fine. Even with only 1.25 SA. I've already tried raising the SA tension didn't help much.


No, case fans won't be enough. You need an actual fan blowing on the RAM, or water cooling, or use some house fan or desk fan to blow straight onto it.

I work basically 16+ hours a day, and I've ran my Micron B-die kit at 1.63V for about a year now. 1.20V VCCSA. 4x16 GB kit.

I think my CPU/motherboard is more likely to die before my RAM would, lol.

(Disclaimer: I'm still on Z390 since my 12900k hasn't arrived yet, so it might not be a 1:1 exact comparison with the Z690 platform)


bass junkie xl said:


> question so in terms of memory over clocking 4000 mhz geaar 1 am i better off with
> 
> 
> *ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi
> MSI MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4*
> 
> ? since thsoe 2 seem to be the best so far in this forum ? im putting theorder in tonight guys


The general consensus is that the Strix is slightly better than the Edge for RAM overclocking, but you wouldn't really miss out on much with the Edge anyway.
You can get whichever is cheaper, if they aren't just the same price. Hell, some of their lower end boards have been found to perform very well too.


----------



## weyden

Ichirou said:


> No, case fans won't be enough. You need an actual fan blowing on the RAM, or water cooling, or use some house fan or desk fan to blow straight onto it.
> 
> I work basically 16+ hours a day, and I've ran my Micron B-die kit at 1.63V for about a year now. 1.20V VCCSA. 4x16 GB kit.
> 
> I think my CPU/motherboard is more likely to die before my RAM would, lol.
> 
> (Disclaimer: I'm still on Z390 since my 12900k hasn't arrived yet, so it might not be a 1:1 exact comparison with the Z690 platform)


Is that really there are memories adata 5000mhz with 1.6v voltage. So I believe it should work even without a fan on top of the memories. Of course only a thorough test could show, because the problem would be more memory temperatures than anything else?

I read that Gigabyte's bios are all broken. I don't know how much it interferes. Because this overclock from 4133mhz to 4600mhz with 19-23-23-45 N1 is very good! I get an absurd Aida64 score even though the latency is between 62 to 60ms vs 50 to 52 on 4000mhz gear 1. I get more fps with gear2 in this case.


----------



## newls1

dbuilt said:


> have you tried with version 100?


ive tried with the only 2 available. The factory shipped version (dont know what number it was) and this 115. Both same issue


----------



## digitalfrost

Is there any consensus as to the optimal DDR4 RAM speed for Alder Lake? For example, for Ryzen 3000/5000 3600Mhz seemed to be the sweet spot. I have this Samsung B-die kit, 3200CL14. I tuned it for a long time on X370 so I have all the values and to my surprise the Alder Lake system just worked with those, effortlessly.










So I wonder if I should try to push further. Is it worth it? How does Alder Lake scale with DDR4 speeds?

e: Looking at the benchmarks here DDR4 vs. DDR5 on Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Review

For gaming memory speed seems to be pretty irrelevant, especially compared to Ryzen?


----------



## bass junkie xl

guess I'll buy the Asus Strix A tonight and a 12900k tonight. my team group extreme ddr4 8gb x 4 @ 4133 cl-18-18-18-38 1.4v xmp @ 4133 cl-16-16-16-36 1.5v now on my 9900ks @ 5.2 GHz and z390 gigabyte run beautiful . there also on the Asus z690 Strix A ram qvl so it should work . I'll try 4000 MHz @ cl 16-16-16-36 gear 1 first when they arrive after a quik boot up of no xmp . 


kinda sux the Asus Strix z690 A doesn't have audio optical out put .... my PC hooked to my home theater 7.1 in living room now . guess I could run a analog green to RCA adapter if I had to ..... 

the edge MSI has optical but I would rather have Asus over MSI edge tbh .


----------



## newls1

While I wait for MSI to release a BIOS to fix this absolute brick wall @ 3600... What is y'alls opinioin on a DDR4 board that clocks mem well sub 300$?


----------



## LionAlonso

digitalfrost said:


> Is there any consensus as to the optimal DDR4 RAM speed for Alder Lake? For example, for Ryzen 3000/5000 3600Mhz seemed to be the sweet spot. I have this Samsung B-die kit, 3200CL14. I tuned it for a long time on X370 so I have all the values and to my surprise the Alder Lake system just worked with those, effortlessly.
> 
> View attachment 2536036
> 
> 
> So I wonder if I should try to push further. Is it worth it? How does Alder Lake scale with DDR4 speeds?
> 
> e: Looking at the benchmarks here DDR4 vs. DDR5 on Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Review
> 
> For gaming memory speed seems to be pretty irrelevant, especially compared to Ryzen?


I have that kit and with my 12900k in WZ the difference is notable between 3600 cl14 and 4000cl16.


----------



## newls1

is the 115 bios post in this MSI Google drive the same 115 bios on the website for the tomahawk? Beta/MP - Google Drive


----------



## kingofblog

Ichirou said:


> So... VCCSA still functions the same as it did in the past?
> That means the main factor would be VDDQ then, where you'd just keep raising it until things work out.


Following up on my comment #903: VccSA is not very important for passing TM5 under normal temperature conditions (max package temp 60 C), but it may need adjustment for stability at higher package temperatures. I was getting crashes when trying to push my core frequency up. After spending a lot of time fighting Asus' SVID bullshit (voltage settings completely change behavior when "overclocking", even if you don't raise the frequency), I reverted to stock frequency and managed to reproduce a crash. The difference from my previous test was that I intentionally restricted my fan speed to keep the CPU near Tjmax. When I compared the runs that passed and failed in x264, the difference was the package temperature, regardless of the voltage or core frequency used.

Unfortunately, there is no temperature sensor for the IMC, and raising VccSA is not guaranteed to keep it stable when the cores are running hot, because it might heat the IMC enough to be counterproductive. I recommend validating IMC stability by doing sustained tests at the highest package temperature you will encounter. I will report back on whether 1.25 or 1.3 VccSA is suitable to maintain stability at 85 C package temperature and 40 C liquid temperature. At the temperatures produced in TM5 (60 C max), 1.2 VccSA was rock solid, over >10 cumulative passes.


----------



## zhrooms

Jscs1992 said:


> I am running 4000 at 15-15-15 30 trfc 320 and treffi 65535 my dram is at 1.56 vccsa 1.26 and vddq on auto im getting errors on tm5 extreme anta777 you have any suggestions on what voltages to make it stable. I feel like it should be stable off 1.55 dram and vccsa at 1.26.


Impossible for me to give you recommendations, you simply have to test what works yourself, as your BIOS, Cooling, CPU IMC and Memory sticks all make a difference, what works for me will not work for you, just in the ballpark, so you asking for slight adjustments, impossible. And depending on what you actually do on your PC, it might not matter at all, there are only like 3 games I know for certain that actually benefit from faster memory, which is Battlefield, Call of Duty and World of Warcraft, every other game like Apex Legends, Overwatch, Rainbow Six Siege and so on, already run at 240FPS+ locked, you're not going to see a single FPS going from 3600 to 4266, if you lock framerate with G-Sync. And even in the games where it matters like Warzone, if you're already at 4000 14-15-14 as an example, going 4100 or CL13 will obviously be such a small gain that you can barely measure it, it'll be within margin of error almost, but that's what you paid for if you have expensive memory kits, might as well get the most out of them, or if you actually play competitively where 2 FPS+ over time could win you actual money in like tournaments. I personally do it because I'm an enthusiast, and I play those exact games (BF,CoD,WoW) where memory matters. I'm currently cooling my memory sticks with a €450 water cooling setup as an example, just because I was curious of how effective it would really be, still testing it now but temps are far better than what you can achieve with just a fan, like at least 5°C lower. Got lots of results coming in the next few days, graphs and such.










Jscs1992 said:


> its funny when i increased vdimm to 1.56 and 1.57 i was getting errors earlier in tm5 like a couple mins. Compared to 30mins with 1.55 dimm.


See this post, at the bottom there's a graph with memory temperatures while gaming in Warzone, the sticks can reach above 50°C, and that's at just 1.5V, so, warmer than the CPU VRM.


Ichirou said:


> Then try pulling it down instead


Yes, people absolutely need to understand that too high can cause* just as many issues* as too low, like brute forcing voltages can lead to silicon instability, bad training and unstable temperatures.


Gardiff said:


> I'm running 4x8GB at 4000 15-15-15-30 2T Gear 1, DRAM 1.475V, SA 1.2V, VDDQ 1.3V


Yes, 4000 is really easy to run (the frequency itself, 4 sticks is debatable, works perfectly on some motherboards/BIOSes), so no need to push SA/VDDQ for that, unless you go super tight timings _perhaps_.


raad11 said:


> I got into Windows with 4100CL14, but promptly threw errors at 14-18-18-38-2T with my tightened secondaries/tertiaries. It may be stable at looser timings at 4100 but I'm not sure if it's worth the effort since 4000 with same CAS and tighter timings won't be much behind if any. Voltage was 1.5 SA (1.488 in HWInfo64) and 1.48 VDDQ. I ran 4100 15-15-15-28 on single rank and it did very well (better than 4000CL14)


Good to hear, guessing you could get it game stable though, 4100C14 that is, with some more tweaking. 1.5 SA sounds way too high, I'm running 4133 at 1.41 SA, but I have temporary XMP timings still so that's probably why, I can't imagine you'd need that much SA though, by lowering the timings from there. Also yes, 4100 CL15 can be faster than 4000 CL14, sadly I don't have the numbers on that yet but I intend to test it all.


newls1 said:


> So using this MSI Tomahawk DDR4 board I cant even get my 2x16GB CL14 3600 ram to operate at even 3733. On Z590 I was @ 4133 CL15.. *** is going on here? Ive tried the new beta bios, and the factory shipped one, all suck. Tips please> Ive tried VDDQ @ 1.30-1.45, SA Voltage 1.30-.1.40 and Vdimm up to 1.50. Z590 needed 1.30SA, 1.25 IO, and 1.48Vdimm... Not a happy camper so far. Please help


You're not the first person having issues with the Tomahawk, or any of the MSI boards actually, it seems that just like on ASUS, the boards are highly BIOS dependant. But if you run the same BIOS as someone else who showed a great memory overclock, the simple explanation as to why you can't do the same, is that your CPU has a really poor IMC, in other words, not the motherboards fault, just bad luck.


bscool said:


> What I did on my Strix was to try different SA and VDDQ voltages, and it is picky as too high, or too low, won't boot. Try SA from 1.35 up to 1.5, VDDQ from 1.35 up to 1.6.
> *I'm running 4133 MT/s CL15 with 1.55V DRAM, 1.45V SA and 1.55V VDDQ.*
> Definitely the simplest OC experience I have had in the last few gens of owning MSI and Asus top/upper end boards. Getting a good IMC and CPU bin makes life so much easier. Past gens I spent months trying to hit mem OC other had and couldn't because of weak IMC.


💪


JoeRambo said:


> Nothing will help with MSI DR wall above 3600 till they release a new BIOS like they did with PRO-A, don't even waste time, board won't train. Edge, Tomahawk are in same boat, need to wait for new BIOS from MSI.


That is not true at all. See this image below that @2500k_2 shared a while back.
The MSI Z690-A Pro has proven time and time again to run up to 4300 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks.
This particular user ran 4189 MT/s 16-16-16-38-2T with 1.371V SA, 1.340V VDDQ and unknown DRAM voltage, on the 1.00 BIOS, this was basically right after launch, a month ago.
Timings 6-4 RRDL/S, 388 RFC, 65K REFI, 8 RTP, 16 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL.
The people who has issues on MSI boards (at least Pro) are either not on the best BIOS or their CPU IMC is just terrible, so far no evidence of anything else being the cause of the problems, except for maybe running 4 sticks might be better on some other BIOS version, that's for them to test though.










weyden said:


> Hey guys. I have an Aorus Elite DDR4.


I saw you noticed it in a later reply and yes, Gigabyte BIOS is a mess right now, on all DDR4 boards, just have to wait until they fix it, until then all you can do is run Gear 2 or settle for lower frequency Gear 1.


bass junkie xl said:


> Which board is the best, TUF, Strix, Pro or Edge?
> Kinda sux the Strix doesn't have optical audio. The edge MSI has optical but I would rather have ASUS over MSI.


TUF, no meaningful difference against the Strix, it's essentially the same board but cheaper. Identical processor and memory overclocking.
Pro is generally $50 cheaper than TUF, and for some people it works perfectly, just as good as the TUF, but because of those few people that are having issues on it, as of now my top recommendation is thus TUF. (And yes I have/I've had both TUF and Strix, and I can confirm they are identical, there's like 15 lines missing in the BIOS on TUF, that's it, and none of it is important.
But yeah, absolutely do not get Strix or Edge, you're paying for nothing except looks, like sure the Strix has a big ass RGB I/O Cover compared to the TUF, but paying $150 for it, over the MSI Pro? No thanks. So if you want to waste your money that's up to you.


bscool said:


> I have owned both MSI and ASUS boards the last few gens. I went with Strix this time and I am happy. 41333c15 DR. Not sure how 4x8 will do for you but I myself would still go Strix.
> *Edit:* If you want to save a few $$ or for aesthetic reasons then I would go TUF.


☝ TUF 👌


pt0x- said:


> I have a 4x8gb gskill 4000 15-16-16 1.5v On G2 it's all fine, tightened timing further as well. Same mobo, same cpu, same cpu clock actually.
> Only other difference is im running 0707. Never tried 002. Have you tried 0707, and why are you using 002? And what ram do you use?


Either it's IMC or some other BIOSes are better for 4 sticks, all I can say for certain is that 0707 works best for high frequency (4266+). But 4000 works fine on 0003 and 0803 when I tried them, they might have an easier time running 4 sticks, so, try them.


newls1 said:


> MSI, please fix this.


It's not their fault if other people run it just fine, maybe your IMC is just the worst on the planet? If you tried everything, then that's the only explanation.


Ichirou said:


> The general consensus is that the Strix is slightly better than the Edge for RAM overclocking, but you wouldn't really miss out on much with the Edge anyway.
> You can get whichever is cheaper, if they aren't just the same price. Hell, some of their lower end boards have been found to perform very well too.


There's no consensus yet, very very few have the Edge board, as it wasn't available on launch, maybe later this month when we've seen more results we can come to a conclusion. ASUS is also spitting out way more BIOSes, they have a great motherboard team over at ASUS, and they have people active all over the world in communities. From what I've seen the MSI support is not nearly as vast, and mostly located to non-english speaking communities. Like if we look to the past, ASUS is the clear winner when it comes to support, ASUS is just crazy overall, insane marketing, insane design team, insane motherboards, insane community reach, insane support, there's nothing to complain about on ASUS except for one single thing.. the god damn *price*, they charge more than everyone else even if the products aren't always better. So it pays off to know the products, can save pretty large sums every year when upgrading.


digitalfrost said:


> Is there any consensus as to the optimal DDR4 RAM speed for Alder Lake? For example, for Ryzen 3000/5000 3600Mhz seemed to be the sweet spot.


Huh, there is no such thing as "optimal speed", the faster the better, the lower latency the better. Nothing has changed in the past decade on Intel, every single architecture is highly memory dependant when it comes to gaming. As for Ryzen, the only reason people run 3600-3800 is because it's basically a Gear mode there too, like on Intel now. Ryzen 5000 obviously performs the best at 4000 if you can run it, 3600 is some weak ****.


newls1 said:


> While I wait for MSI to release a BIOS to fix this absolute brick wall @ 3600... What is y'alls opinioin on a DDR4 board that clocks mem well sub 300$?


They all do 4266+, starting with the MSI A Pro for $219. If they can't, just wait for BIOS update (like on Gigabyte). And just pick a CPU with amazing IMC 🤣.


----------



## ObviousCough

dbuilt said:


> Also, question… I am able to POST 4000 gear 1 with 16-16-16-32 set in bios but NOT if I change to 14-15-15-22.
> I need to do that manually in MSI dragon ball. Is there a reason for that?


I have also experienced TM5 stable Dragon Ball settings refusing to post when i put them in to the bios. I've had no luck with resolving the issue.


----------



## Skunk0001

JoeRambo said:


> Nothing will help with MSI DR wall above 3600 till they release a new BIOS like they did with PRO-A, don't even waste time, board won't train.
> Edge, Tomahawk are in same boat, need to wait for new BIOS from MSI.





newls1 said:


> While I wait for MSI to release a BIOS to fix this absolute brick wall @ 3600... What is y'alls opinioin on a DDR4 board that clocks mem well sub 300$?





zhrooms said:


> That is not true at all. See this image below that @2500k_2 shared a while back.
> The MSI Z690-A Pro has proven time and time again to run up to 4300 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks.
> This particular user ran 4189 MT/s 16-16-16-38-2T with 1.371V SA, 1.340V VDDQ and unknown DRAM voltage, on the 1.00 BIOS, this was basically right after launch, a month ago.
> Timings 6-4 RRDL/S, 388 RFC, 65K REFI, 8 RTP, 16 FAW, 8 CKE, 16 WL.
> The people who has issues on MSI boards (at least Pro) are either not on the best BIOS or their CPU IMC is just terrible, so far no evidence of anything else being the cause of the problems, except for maybe running 4 sticks might be better on some other BIOS version, that's for them to test though.


I'm not seeing any 3600 G1 wall on my Edge Wifi + 12700k with 4x8GB B-Die. Posts and boot fine at 3800 G1 with some random loose timings I entered for testing.
Its not even a 4x kit, its two different 2x kits bought almost 3 years apart (F4-3200C14D-16GTZ + F4-3600C15D-16GTZ), using beta 114 from the MSI site.

Only thing I've touched in the BIOS is disabling the useless E cores, setting the DDR voltage (1.40v), gear, speed, and a few timings.








(I have no time to actually tune it right now so I'm sticking to the 3600 15 15 15 that was stable on my old Z390 board, the above was just to test if the wall existed)


----------



## JoeRambo

Skunk0001 said:


> I'm not seeing any 3600 G1 wall on my Edge Wifi + 12700k with 4x8GB B-Die.


The wall is for DR memory, not SR memory in 4 DIMMs. 
And the wall is real, despite numerous claims. In fact post release BIOS Z690 PRO-A also had same problem with DR memory and it was solved and confirmed solved by 115U3 BIOS by members here.

And those speaking about "loosing" IMC lottery - being able to do 3600CL13 T1 and not able to post 3700 CL22 T2 is not lost lottery, but BIOS bug.


----------



## ObviousCough

I had no trouble with 4x8GB sticks doing 4100 but getting 4000 working with 2x16GB sticks was an ordeal.

I haven't gotten past 3600 with 4x16GB sticks yet.


MSI Pro Z690A
12600k


----------



## newls1

JoeRambo said:


> The wall is for DR memory, not SR memory in 4 DIMMs.
> And the wall is real, despite numerous claims. In fact post release BIOS Z690 PRO-A also had same problem with DR memory and it was solved and confirmed solved by 115U3 BIOS by members here.
> 
> And those speaking about "loosing" IMC lottery - being able to do 3600CL13 T1 and not able to post 3700 CL22 T2 is not lost lottery, but BIOS bug.


is the 115U3 bios available yet for us tomahawkers yet? please tell me its not the same 115 beta on msi's site cause this bios hits massive wall @ 3600

EDIT---- quick question, which is better to use for memory clocking, the 133MHz strap or the 100Mhz strap?


----------



## s7j3

Still trying to decide what motherboard to buy. Does anyone know when the Z690 Aorus Pro DDR4 will be in stock? I'm aware of the bios issues but thought I'd test it out on a pair of Patriot Viper Steel 4400mhz since they're on the QVL. My other choices are the Asus ROG Strix z690-a and the MSI z690 Tomahawk but neither of those are perfect in the features and compatibility; although they probably don't have bad RAM OC like Gigabyte.


----------



## Ichirou

kingofblog said:


> Following up on my comment #903: VccSA is not very important for passing TM5 under normal temperature conditions (max package temp 60 C), but it may need adjustment for stability at higher package temperatures. I was getting crashes when trying to push my core frequency up. After spending a lot of time fighting Asus' SVID bullshit (voltage settings completely change behavior when "overclocking", even if you don't raise the frequency), I reverted to stock frequency and managed to reproduce a crash. The difference from my previous test was that I intentionally restricted my fan speed to keep the CPU near Tjmax. When I compared the runs that passed and failed in x264, the difference was the package temperature, regardless of the voltage or core frequency used.
> 
> Unfortunately, there is no temperature sensor for the IMC, and raising VccSA is not guaranteed to keep it stable when the cores are running hot, because it might heat the IMC enough to be counterproductive. I recommend validating IMC stability by doing sustained tests at the highest package temperature you will encounter. I will report back on whether 1.25 or 1.3 VccSA is suitable to maintain stability at 85 C package temperature and 40 C liquid temperature. At the temperatures produced in TM5 (60 C max), 1.2 VccSA was rock solid, over >10 cumulative passes.


Great findings. Will definitely try VCCSA from the low end and go up as I usually did in the past.
So you feel that increasing VCCSA _might_ help with CPU stability on the very high end of temps?

Are your findings similar to the others for VDDQ where you tend to nee da lot? Is it more influential than VCCSA for stability/POSTing?


s7j3 said:


> Still trying to decide what motherboard to buy. Does anyone know when the Z690 Aorus Pro DDR4 will be in stock? I'm aware of the bios issues but thought I'd test it out on a pair of Patriot Viper Steel 4400mhz since they're on the QVL. My other choices are the Asus ROG Strix z690-a and the MSI z690 Tomahawk but neither of those are perfect in the features and compatibility; although they probably don't have bad RAM OC like Gigabyte.


Just avoid Gigabyte.


----------



## ObviousCough

s7j3 said:


> Still trying to decide what motherboard to buy. Does anyone know when the Z690 Aorus Pro DDR4 will be in stock? I'm aware of the bios issues but thought I'd test it out on a pair of Patriot Viper Steel 4400mhz since they're on the QVL. My other choices are the Asus ROG Strix z690-a and the MSI z690 Tomahawk but neither of those are perfect in the features and compatibility; although they probably don't have bad RAM OC like Gigabyte.


PVS 4400c19 being on the QVL made no difference for me.

Errors with custom settings and XMP.


Get an Asus or a MSI


----------



## pt0x-

There is a Shamino 0808 bios available for the Strix Z690-A Wifi D4!
Link to post on Asus forum

This solved all my G1 problems!

Where I couldn't get G1 to run higher than 3733MT on 4x8 before, now I'm running 4000MT-15-15-15-30-CR2!
Currently testing with TM5, timings are work in progress (tips are always welcome)

VDIMM @ 1.525v (might go lower, this is what was stable with G2 and these primaries) 
VCCSA @ 1.375v
VDDQTX @ 1.300v


----------



## Ichirou

pt0x- said:


> There is a Shamino 0808 bios available for the Strix Z690-A Wifi D4!
> Link to post on Asus forum
> 
> This solved all my G1 problems!
> 
> Where I couldn't get G1 to run higher than 3733MT on 4x8 before, now I'm running 4000MT-15-15-15-30-CR2!
> Currently testing with TM5, timings are work in progress (tips are always welcome)
> 
> VDIMM @ 1.525v (might go lower, this is what was stable with G2 and these primaries)
> VCCSA @ 1.375v
> VDDQTX @ 1.300v


F**king yes lol. Now to wait for more people to pitch in on its overclock potential.


----------



## s7j3

ObviousCough said:


> PVS 4400c19 being on the QVL made no difference for me.
> 
> Errors with custom settings and XMP.
> 
> 
> Get an Asus or a MSI


Thanks for the advice. This will probably save me some time rather than waiting for the Aorus Pro to be available. I just ordered an Asus Strix Z690-A and will try my luck there. Still won't be able to build anytime soon due to incompatibilities with my CPU cooler but at least I can order a replacement part from Arctic.


----------



## Ichirou

s7j3 said:


> Thanks for the advice. This will probably save me some time rather than waiting for the Aorus Pro to be available. I just ordered an Asus Strix Z690-A and will try my luck there. Still won't be able to build anytime soon due to incompatibilities with my CPU cooler but at least I can order a replacement part from Arctic.


ASUS Z690 boards support LGA 1200


----------



## s7j3

Ichirou said:


> ASUS Z690 boards support LGA 1200


My cpu cooler issue is that the Arctic Liquid Freezer II pcb cover on the coldplate/pump interferes with the CPU mounting area. I technically could install the cooler without the cover but might wait if Arctic can send me one quickly enough. 

More info here:








ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 - User Manual


Get your ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II LGA1700 user manual. Detailed explanation with coloured schematics, photos, animations and videos.




support.arctic.de


----------



## postem

Ichirou said:


> ASUS Z690 boards support LGA 1200


Mostly bad if you dont have standoffs that account for lower z height, you end with improper pressure.


----------



## chispy

Beta bios 0808 for Strix z690-A D4 ddr4 mobo - ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0808.rar Thank you Peter ( Shamino )


----------



## postem

digitalfrost said:


> Is there any consensus as to the optimal DDR4 RAM speed for Alder Lake? For example, for Ryzen 3000/5000 3600Mhz seemed to be the sweet spot. I have this Samsung B-die kit, 3200CL14. I tuned it for a long time on X370 so I have all the values and to my surprise the Alder Lake system just worked with those, effortlessly.
> 
> View attachment 2536036
> 
> 
> So I wonder if I should try to push further. Is it worth it? How does Alder Lake scale with DDR4 speeds?
> 
> e: Looking at the benchmarks here DDR4 vs. DDR5 on Intel Core i9-12900K Alder Lake Review
> 
> For gaming memory speed seems to be pretty irrelevant, especially compared to Ryzen?


You arent tied to infinite fabtric, but you should run whatever tight latencies with higher frequencies you can on DDR4 with gear1. It seem the consensus is IMC barrier is 4000/4133 with anything further troublesome.

For every intel gen i managed to get better %1 frames with lower latency. It seems that DDR5, even with higher latency, can deliver more multiple parallel access due to dual sub channels per stick. In pratical terms, im with a cheap Ballistix DR, its giving me 52ns on 3900mt, but on games that are cpu bound like transport fever i got massive fps uplift.


----------



## Cuthalu

115U3 BIOS has crazy BCLK behavior. At stock it runs at around 99.8. If you increase it in bios to 100.39 which makes it just a tad over 100, it will be unstable no matter what. Decrease it to 100.19 in bios and it's rock solid.

Also, I found a fix to the cpu vcore increases when load increases problem - adaptive offset needs to have manual base voltage, then it works like it should.

EDIT: I tightened latencies a bit -> minor instability. Dropped SA from 1.43 to 1.4 -> more instability. Dropped BCLK to 100 (=99,8), poof, solid stability again. It's crazy how big effect BCLK has on stability.


----------



## newls1

praying msi provides us another bios ASAP


----------



## 2500k_2

newls1 said:


> absolute brick wall @ 3600


1) try 3733 , 3866 . 4000. ( lower qclk multiplier - easier for the memory controller (check ram overclocking by 11 gen))
2) try rtt 80 34 40 or 80 0 40 ( wr nom park) 
3) try to adjust the voltage SA and Cpu Vddq (too much or too little also causes errors). don't forget about Dram either
4) Sometimes even simple things can help (it's even funny) - swap the sticks, squeeze them well, check if you put the processor well (whether there is a skew or strong squeezing), clamping the fixing screws can deform the signal lines or even damage them. I understand this sounds like childish mistakes, but believe me they are often made and then complain that they cannot download a certain frequency. For example, see the photo


Spoiler: Eror

























Skunk0001 said:


> I'm not seeing any 3600 G1 wall on my Edge Wifi + 12700k with 4x8GB B-Die. Posts and boot fine at 3800 G1 with some random loose timings I entered for testing.
> Its not even a 4x kit, its two different 2x kits bought almost 3 years apart (F4-3200C14D-16GTZ + F4-3600C15D-16GTZ), using beta 114 from the MSI site.
> 
> Only thing I've touched in the BIOS is disabling the useless E cores, setting the DDR voltage (1.40v), gear, speed, and a few timings.
> View attachment 2536061
> 
> (I have no time to actually tune it right now so I'm sticking to the 3600 15 15 15 that was stable on my old Z390 board, the above was just to test if the wall existed)


Try CR1  


Spoiler: 4x8 cr1


----------



## Ichirou

2500k_2 said:


> View attachment 2536125


----------



## notearlyadoptr

.


----------



## RetroWave78

Ichirou said:


> This looks like it might be even better than just installing an old copy of Aura Sync
> @RetroWave78 Try that first, and if it doesn't work for you, then I'll upload Aura Sync for you. It's a pretty hefty download; ~300 MB.
> 
> In other news, I think I'm going to head out to Canada Computers today to pick up the motherboard.
> Anyone have suggestions for top binned Samsung B-die kits that I should look out for, in case they have some lying around?


OpenRGB refuses to work with this board (Asus Strix-A D4)! Anyone else?

`Also, not sure if top GPU slot is defective or whether or not the GPU is refusing to seat completely (I've pushed nearly as hard as anyone would reasonable want to, it's seated and latched but doesn't appear in BIOS nor device manage when in windows, currently using secondary GPU in 3rd slot down). I've ruled out the PSU. The GPU is seated completely and latched but there is the possibility that the hard-line run from secondary is putting too much upward pressure although it doesn't look like it. I really hope I didn't lose my 3090 FE in the process of upgrading the chipset. I did have to disassemble the water block to deal with Mystic Fog aggregation (no longer using this garbage, back to distilled water) but I put the block back together just fine. Not sure, hoping it's just not seated correctly.

I'm tempted to try Armoury Crate but I'm worried about difficulty uninstalling later. Advice greatly appreciated.

Post script: 

I forgot to add, 12900k has an SP score of 86, shows right in BIOS, someone stated earlier that only Maximus could indicate SP value, this is obviously incorrect.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

TY


----------



## notearlyadoptr

.


----------



## newls1

2500k_2 said:


> 1) try 3733 , 3866 . 4000. ( lower qclk multiplier - easier for the memory controller (check ram overclocking by 11 gen))
> 2) try rtt 80 34 40 or 80 0 40 ( wr nom park)
> 3) try to adjust the voltage SA and Cpu Vddq (too much or too little also causes errors). don't forget about Dram either
> 4) Sometimes even simple things can help (it's even funny) - swap the sticks, squeeze them well, check if you put the processor well (whether there is a skew or strong squeezing), clamping the fixing screws can deform the signal lines or even damage them. I understand this sounds like childish mistakes, but believe me they are often made and then complain that they cannot download a certain frequency. For example, see the photo
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Eror
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536123
> 
> View attachment 2536125
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Try CR1
> 
> 
> Spoiler: 4x8 cr1
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536126


hey brother, thank you so much for the very detailed reply, I APPRECIATE THAT. Ive done nearly 99% of everything you typed EXCEPT... try CR1 and look for bad traces (brand new board and im mega careful assembling so i highly doubt this one) but will look as board is more or less on a test bench currently. As far as trying 3733+ speeds, I sure have. I have tried every single speed with just about every voltage option/combo to no avail.. I HAVE NOT HOWEVER changed any of the wr nom park settings as I have zero clue how to play with those or what they do. Never had to mess with those on z590 which took this ram to 4133 CL15...


----------



## Ichirou

RetroWave78 said:


> OpenRGB refuses to work with this board (Asus Strix-A D4)! Anyone else?
> 
> `Also, not sure if top GPU slot is defective or whether or not the GPU is refusing to seat completely (I've pushed nearly as hard as anyone would reasonable want to, it's seated and latched but doesn't appear in BIOS nor device manage when in windows, currently using secondary GPU in 3rd slot down). I've ruled out the PSU. The GPU is seated completely and latched but there is the possibility that the hard-line run from secondary is putting too much upward pressure although it doesn't look like it. I really hope I didn't lose my 3090 FE in the process of upgrading the chipset. I did have to disassemble the water block to deal with Mystic Fog aggregation (no longer using this garbage, back to distilled water) but I put the block back together just fine. Not sure, hoping it's just not seated correctly.
> 
> I'm tempted to try Armoury Crate but I'm worried about difficulty uninstalling later. Advice greatly appreciated.
> 
> Post script:
> 
> I forgot to add, 12900k has an SP score of 86, shows right in BIOS, someone stated earlier that only Maximus could indicate SP value, this is obviously incorrect.


I already uninstalled Armoury Crate; too much bloat.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

zhrooms: Thanks for all the hard work and spreadsheets to assist in this build. Going to wait for the cooler bracket and just go with the gaming X build, since it is ready to go, will let you know how it goes. Here is another usefull spreadsheet to assist in gathering info on all the current MOBO specs . . .
*







*


----------



## newls1

in the mists for waiting on MSI to release a BIOS fix for us DR memory people... how is this OC that took about 10mins to Dial in for games. Its an OC method that ive not done before. Im boosting the TVB multis on a per core / as core usage type setup. 4c @ 55x 6c @ 54x 8c @ 53x. Vcore set to "Adaptive mode" @ 1.380v. Runs damn cool, granted my room is about 18c currently tho. Decent score? I have nothing to compare it too?!


----------



## kingofblog

Ichirou said:


> Great findings. Will definitely try VCCSA from the low end and go up as I usually did in the past.
> So you feel that increasing VCCSA _might_ help with CPU stability on the very high end of temps?
> 
> Are your findings similar to the others for VDDQ where you tend to nee da lot? Is it more influential than VCCSA for stability/POSTing?


I've left Vddq at auto, which is ~1.375 V here, and I haven't had a reason to change it. There is no way to tune it from Windows, so I'd have to risk the hassle of no-POST and CMOS clear to check the sensitivity.

As for VccSA, raising it to 1.25 has been trending positive so far. I've set Tjmax to 85 C, down from 100 C, in the BIOS and comparing 1.20 vs 1.25 V, 1.25 V is passing x264 stress tests more often. The thermal environment is about the same, with overshoot to 90 C Tjmax and consistently pegged at 85 C average. Liquid temperature is 37 C with the fan curve I'm testing.



Code:


VccSA   Tliquid     Tpackage    x264
1.20    36.3        88          [email protected]
1.25    36.3        88          Pass1
1.20    36.3        88          Pass3
1.20    36.3        88          [email protected]
1.25    37.1        90          Pass3
1.25    37.1        90          Pass2

I'm fairly confident that I've isolated the weak link to VccSA at high temperature conditions. Checking my notes, I've found that both OC and stock core frequencies tend to pass at high fan speed (32 C liquid). I've also found the marginal core voltages for failing in TM5 and x264. 1.35 V passes TM5 5.0 GHz but not 5.1 GHz, with >5 rounds. 5.0 GHz @ 1.314 V is marginal on x264 at elevated temperature (near 85 C), but 1.332 V tends to pass. However, when I turn down the fans and let things get hot, the core throttles down to 4.7 GHz on the stock V/f curve, which should be rock solid up to 100 C, yet I get errors.

What does this mean? It doesn't mean that 1.25 VccSA is guaranteed stable for me, since x264 is not a worst-case IMC load, and I haven't managed to run TM5 at Tjmax. Raising VccSA 50 mV also raises SA power from 5.5 W to 6 W in TM5, which means further increases could counteract the stability benefit by heating the IMC. Since the IMC doesn't have a thermal sensor and also can't be thermal-throttled, I don't see a path to guaranteed 24/7 stability for 4000 MT/s Gear1, especially when summer arrives and ambient temperatures rise 10 C. If I lower the PL2 to control the core power and tune my fans more aggressively, I might be able to avoid stressing the IMC, but my PC is not air conditioned, so it will be futile in the end.

EDIT: I also found that if you lower Tjmax too much, you get hard crashes instead of throttling, so that's not a good idea.


----------



## ObviousCough

I could boot into windows at 4100 but it wasn't stable, going one tick past 1.42 SA caused no post. I backed it down to 4000 where it was handling my short tm5 profile with only 1-2 errors. I raised VDDQ to 1.3 and the errors went away. Now i can start to play 











2x16GB
1.42 SA
1.3 VDDQ
1.55 Vdimm



The sticks I am using for this were running 4133c14 daily on my Z490 Unify. So i should be able to get something nice out of them.













edit: I couldn't do these primaries on the Z590 Unify-X as I did on Z490 Unify using the same CPU. Doesn't seem to be a problem for the Pro Z690-A


----------



## newls1

cant understand how your PRO A board is clocking the same ram i have, and you arent having the same 3600MHz wall im having. Im loosing my patients with MSI for the first time ever. quick question, are you using the 100mhz strap or 133mhz mem strap?


----------



## bass junkie xl

i have been following this thread and a ton of other over clocking forums on deciding the z690 asus strix D4 or the msi A pro / Edge but so far im leanign on the asus strix D4 ddr4 board for memory over clocking so far . today there is a beta test bios 808 for asus strix D4 that helps the wall with ram 8g bx 4 get past 3600 up to 4133 + here is the link






Maximus Z690 and Alder Lake: Modern CPUs require Modern Overclocking Solutions - Page 4


Asus Z690, Maximus series and Alder Lake: The best tools for the best FPS. First, let me start by thanking Shamino @ ROG Asus for allowing me and the other testers to put this exciting new hardware through its paces and experiment with the new overclocking features and architecture changes...



rog.asus.com


----------



## 2500k_2

All voltages inside the processor die are temperature dependent.
For example at 60 degrees you need one vcore // sa // io /
But at 80 degrees you need a completely different vcore // sa // io /
This is physics - the higher the temperature, the greater its internal resistance of the conductors and the higher the leakage currents, which means you need to add even more and more voltage to stabilize.
For this reason, SA is not defined by Tm5 or Gsat or runmemtestpro memtests. (since the temperature during the crystal / memory controller test is low). At low crystal temperatures, it is easier to train high frequencies as less sa io is needed.

My opinion, which I do not impose on anyone, I just share my thoughts - the True Sa level that is needed for 24/7 overclocking should be checked by heating 90+. For example use LinX. But I will repeat myself. This is my opinion, I do not impose it on you. (but if you are interested in visualizing this phenomenon, I will share screenshots of the dependence of the temperature of the memory controller 11 of the intel gene on the temperature of the test)

It also tests memory well together with the heating of the crystal - FPU karhu (in the karhu settings just put a tick - FPU). 2 in 1


newls1 said:


> in the mists for waiting on MSI to release a BIOS fix for us DR memory people... how is this OC that took about 10mins to Dial in for games. Its an OC method that ive not done before. Im boosting the TVB multis on a per core / as core usage type setup. 4c @ 55x 6c @ 54x 8c @ 53x. Vcore set to "Adaptive mode" @ 1.380v. Runs damn cool, granted my room is about 18c currently tho. Decent score? I have nothing to compare it too?!
> 
> View attachment 2536135


I have a question for you. Do you overclock cores first and then memory or vice versa?


----------



## kingofblog

2500k_2 said:


> All voltages inside the processor die are temperature dependent.
> For example at 60 degrees you need one vcore // sa // io /
> But at 80 degrees you need a completely different vcore // sa // io /
> This is physics - the higher the temperature, the greater its internal resistance of the conductors and the higher the leakage currents, which means you need to add even more and more voltage to stabilize.
> For this reason, SA is not defined by Tm5 or Gsat or runmemtestpro memtests. (since the temperature during the crystal / memory controller test is low). At low crystal temperatures, it is easier to train high frequencies as less sa io is needed.
> 
> My opinion, which I do not impose on anyone, I just share my thoughts - the True Sa level that is needed for 24/7 overclocking should be checked by heating 90+. For example use LinX. But I will repeat myself. This is my opinion, I do not impose it on you. (but if you are interested in visualizing this phenomenon, I will share screenshots of the dependence of the temperature of the memory controller 11 of the intel gene on the temperature of the test)
> 
> It also tests memory well together with the heating of the crystal - FPU karhu (in the karhu settings just put a tick - FPU). 2 in 1


I absolutely agree with what you are saying. The problem is that the temperatures of the SA and IO are not directly observable and only indirectly correlate with core temperature. For example, you can check your iGPU temperature when running Linpack and you will likely find that it is equal to your coldplate temperature, even if your P-core is at 100 degrees. Running a max power test could also cause inversions in the SA temperature vs lighter loads, because of adaptive fan control lowering the coldplate temperature. The more consistent way to test SA is to control fan/pump speed and monitor the coldplate temperature that results in memory controller failure.



> This is physics - the higher the temperature, the greater its internal resistance of the conductors and the higher the leakage currents, which means you need to add even more and more voltage to stabilize.


The problem with the bleeding edge of IMC frequency is that adding more voltage can increase temperatures and result in less stability. This is especially true when you are at the "voltage wall," because your timings will be dominated by wires and not transistors. Wires do not conduct faster with higher voltages, but they do become more resistive with higher temperature.


----------



## ObviousCough

newls1 said:


> cant understand how your PRO A board is clocking the same ram i have, and you arent having the same 3600MHz wall im having. Im loosing my patients with MSI for the first time ever. quick question, are you using the 100mhz strap or 133mhz mem strap?


100 and 133 both work for me.

After a few reboots i've lost all stability. The saved OC Profile that was passing tm5 easily wouldn't even post 100% of the time.










I got my saved profile to start booting again by changing one of the fan curves in hardware monitor. That profile was throwing a BSOD every time windows loaded, i stopped this from happening by dropping VDDQ from 1.3v to 1.25v on a whim. 

This has been a horrendous overclocking experience. I should have gotten a Strix.


----------



## 2500k_2

ObviousCough said:


> 100 and 133 both work for me.
> 
> After a few reboots i've lost all stability. The saved OC Profile that was passing tm5 easily wouldn't even post 100% of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got my saved profile to start booting again by changing one of the fan curves in hardware monitor. That profile was throwing a BSOD every time windows loaded, i stopped this from happening by dropping VDDQ from 1.3v to 1.25v on a whim.
> 
> This has been a horrendous overclocking experience. I should have gotten a Strix.


Dram ?


----------



## ObviousCough

2500k_2 said:


> Dram ?


F4-3800C14D

at 1.25 VDDQ i'm back to getting 1-2 errors in TM5, but at least i'm not blue screening.


----------



## bscool

bass junkie xl said:


> i have been following this thread and a ton of other over clocking forums on deciding the z690 asus strix D4 or the msi A pro / Edge but so far im leanign on the asus strix D4 ddr4 board for memory over clocking so far . today there is a beta test bios 808 for asus strix D4 that helps the wall with ram 8g bx 4 get past 3600 up to 4133 + here is the link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Maximus Z690 and Alder Lake: Modern CPUs require Modern Overclocking Solutions - Page 4
> 
> 
> Asus Z690, Maximus series and Alder Lake: The best tools for the best FPS. First, let me start by thanking Shamino @ ROG Asus for allowing me and the other testers to put this exciting new hardware through its paces and experiment with the new overclocking features and architecture changes...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


You really just need to try each bios. I jumped right from default bios(223?) to latest beta when I got my Stirx d4 and ended going back to bios 707 which I had skipped. 707 ended up being the best for me. I haven't tried the new one(808). Also the same bios might not be good for 2x16 as 4x8. A lot of variables so in the end you really need to try it yourself unless you find someone running the exact same hardware as you which is rare.


----------



## 2500k_2

ObviousCough said:


> F4-3800C14D
> 
> at 1.25 VDDQ i'm back to getting 1-2 errors in TM5, but at least i'm not blue screening.


You probably did not understand me. What Dram voltage did you use for 4133 _ cl14 = 6.77ns


----------



## ObviousCough

2500k_2 said:


> You probably did not understand me. What Dram voltage did you use for 4133 _ cl14 = 6.77ns


1.55v
10900k was using 1.45v SA for 52 ring
I think vccio was 1.45v too, could have been 1.35v.


----------



## newls1

2500k_2 said:


> All voltages inside the processor die are temperature dependent.
> For example at 60 degrees you need one vcore // sa // io /
> But at 80 degrees you need a completely different vcore // sa // io /
> This is physics - the higher the temperature, the greater its internal resistance of the conductors and the higher the leakage currents, which means you need to add even more and more voltage to stabilize.
> For this reason, SA is not defined by Tm5 or Gsat or runmemtestpro memtests. (since the temperature during the crystal / memory controller test is low). At low crystal temperatures, it is easier to train high frequencies as less sa io is needed.
> 
> My opinion, which I do not impose on anyone, I just share my thoughts - the True Sa level that is needed for 24/7 overclocking should be checked by heating 90+. For example use LinX. But I will repeat myself. This is my opinion, I do not impose it on you. (but if you are interested in visualizing this phenomenon, I will share screenshots of the dependence of the temperature of the memory controller 11 of the intel gene on the temperature of the test)
> 
> It also tests memory well together with the heating of the crystal - FPU karhu (in the karhu settings just put a tick - FPU). 2 in 1
> 
> I have a question for you. Do you overclock cores first and then memory or vice versa?


I cant OC the memory yet as this z690 tomahawk D4 board cant clock DR dimms so i gave up on mem clocking and decided to start my first 12th gen OC.


----------



## 2500k_2

ObviousCough said:


> 1.55v
> 10900k was using 1.45v SA for 52 ring
> I think vccio was 1.45v too
> 
> View attachment 2536171


my friend, did you use 1.55v for the *z690*?


----------



## newls1

ObviousCough said:


> 100 and 133 both work for me.
> 
> After a few reboots i've lost all stability. The saved OC Profile that was passing tm5 easily wouldn't even post 100% of the time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I got my saved profile to start booting again by changing one of the fan curves in hardware monitor. That profile was throwing a BSOD every time windows loaded, i stopped this from happening by dropping VDDQ from 1.3v to 1.25v on a whim.
> 
> This has been a horrendous overclocking experience. I should have gotten a Strix.


EXACTLY WHAT IVE BEEN SAYING ON THIS FORUM AND OTHERS!!! WE NEED A BIOS FIX. im sure MSI will fix this, but how d a m n long do we have to wait. I specifically bought this MSI board cause weeks ago everyone was saying "get msi, they clock mem really good on this new platform and stay away from asus and gigabyte" Well, my oh my have the tables turned, asus' 0808 beta seemed to have fixed most mem issues.. Maybe I should have went asus too??!!


----------



## ObviousCough

2500k_2 said:


> my friend, did you use 1.55v for the *z690*?


Yes. I've tried up to 1.6v. 
Dram temps never become and issue but stability doesn't improve with more vram.


----------



## 2500k_2

ObviousCough said:


> Yes. I've tried up to 1.6v.
> Dram temps never become and issue but stability doesn't improve with more vram.


cl 14 on msi z490 and z590 = *real cl15.*
Therefore, you were able to stabilize 4133_14 at 1.55v. *(7.25ns)*
On Z690 cl14 = real cl 14 / so *6.77 ns cannot be stabilized at 1.55v*
It took me 1.63 V + low temperature of the sticks for this.


newls1 said:


> EXACTLY WHAT IVE BEEN SAYING ON THIS FORUM AND OTHERS!!! WE NEED A BIOS FIX. im sure MSI will fix this, but how d a m n long do we have to wait. I specifically bought this MSI board cause weeks ago everyone was saying "get msi, they clock mem really good on this new platform and stay away from asus and gigabyte" Well, my oh my have the tables turned, asus' 0808 beta seemed to have fixed most mem issues.. Maybe I should have went asus too??!!


I will try to give the last 2 pieces of advice. If they don't help you, then only the Asus Strix D4 will do.
A.
1) press CMOS
2) use the fully stock state of the processor
3) set primary timings - for example 16 16 16 40
4) dram - 1.5 sa 1.4 other avto.
5) and try to boot 3733, 3866, 4000,
(it is very good to install rtt odt 80 34 40 on both channels, but if you do not know where this setting is located, trust the board)
B.
1) Try loading frequency 3733, 4000 into Gear 2 and
2) after boot , manually set Gear 1 2N (this is important) And try to boot again.
Unfortunately, I have no more ideas how to help you. Why do most people find it possible to load at a higher frequency, but you do not, I don’t know.


----------



## ObviousCough

2500k_2 said:


> cl 14 on msi z490 and z590 = *real cl15.*
> Therefore, you were able to stabilize 4133_14 at 1.55v. *(7.25ns)*
> On Z690 cl14 = real cl 14 / so *6.77 ns cannot be stabilized at 1.55v*
> It took me 1.63 V + low temperature of the sticks for this.


I'll give it a shot.

Thank you


----------



## newls1

2500k_2 said:


> cl 14 on msi z490 and z590 = *real cl15.*
> Therefore, you were able to stabilize 4133_14 at 1.55v. *(7.25ns)*
> On Z690 cl14 = real cl 14 / so *6.77 ns cannot be stabilized at 1.55v*
> It took me 1.63 V + low temperature of the sticks for this.
> 
> I will try to give the last 2 pieces of advice. If they don't help you, then only the Asus Strix D4 will do.
> A.
> 1) press CMOS
> 2) use the fully stock state of the processor
> 3) set primary timings - for example 16 16 16 40
> 4) dram - 1.5 sa 1.4 other avto.
> 5) and try to boot 3733, 3866, 4000,
> (it is very good to install rtt odt 80 34 40 on both channels, but if you do not know where this setting is located, trust the board)
> B.
> 1) Try loading frequency 3733, 4000 into Gear 2 and
> 2) after downloading, manually set Gear 1 2N (this is important) And try to boot again.
> Unfortunately, I have no more ideas how to help you. Why do most people find it possible to load at a higher frequency, but you do not, I don’t know.


will try rtt odt settings, and ive tried everything else youve said. Thanks for the reply sir, much appreciated


----------



## bscool

newls1 said:


> will try rtt odt settings, and ive tried everything else youve said. Thanks for the reply sir, much appreciated


Just saw @eeeven post on another form to try 14 or 16 for cas, he said he couldnt boot 15 when he had the MSI board. Maybe you have already tried that?


----------



## newls1

i have, but thank you for looking out


----------



## eeeven

New 12900K SP 90. My old Sp76 12700K didnt mange to get more that 4000 G1 stable.

*2x8GB 4600 16-16-16-32-320 Gear 2*







*EDIT:* i forgot to set 2 Subtimings correct. Now i got the 49.8ns 








*2x16GB 4133 16-16-16-28-280 Gear 1






*


----------



## Falkentyne

kingofblog said:


> Believe it or not, some people do work *and* play games. I'd like 64 GB, but that's impossible with B-die, so I'm waiting on DDR5 for my next upgrade. For anyone that wants 32 GB though, dual-rank is definitely the way to go. Definitely not worth it to try and push 4000 MT/s at 1.5 VccSA or whatever on 4 DIMMs.


Who uses 16 GB RAM in 2021?
I've been on 32 GB for the last 3 years. You run _OUT OF MEMORY_ Just running Apex Legends and another program with just 16 GB.
Did Zhrooms wake up on the wrong side of bed? Or did he just not like the cornbread?


----------



## Ichirou

Falkentyne said:


> Who uses 16 GB RAM in 2021?
> I've been on 32 GB for the last 3 years. You run _OUT OF MEMORY_ Just running Apex Legends and another program with just 16 GB.
> Did Zhrooms wake up on the wrong side of bed? Or did he just not like the cornbread?


I can attest to 16 GB being absolutely borderline. I swapped to 32 GB many years back, and still ran near memory limits with my work once browsers got worse at memory handling (damn you, Chrome). So now I'm on 64 GB and memory running out is no longer a concern. 32 GB is probably enough for most people, though.


----------



## weyden

What do you think of my result? Remembering that my memories are Micron B-die 2x16gb Adata Xpg. z690 Aorus Elite DDR4 motherboard!


----------



## 2500k_2

*16x2 3866 15-15-15-28-1T on the Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Pro*


----------



## crpcookie

Going from 14-15-15-35 to 14-15-15-22 did nothing at all; latency was still hovering around 49~50ns. I have a feeling it's not truly doing 22 tRAS even though it's able to run it without any error. What's interesting is that undervolting the CPU via V/F dropped the latency by 3ns. I think this is good enough. I'm just gonna leave things as it is for a few years until Meteor Lake drops with DDR5-12600.

Default CPU voltage:










CPU undervolted:


----------



## neteng101

Is this a good kit? - Thinking of upgrading my RAM - 32GB G.Skill Trident Z Neo CL16.

*F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA*

DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000)
Timing 16-16-16-36
CAS Latency 16
Voltage 1.40V
$270.


----------



## Frozburn

neteng101 said:


> Is this a good kit? - Thinking of upgrading my RAM - 32GB G.Skill Trident Z Neo CL16.
> 
> *F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA*
> 
> DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000)
> Timing 16-16-16-36
> CAS Latency 16
> Voltage 1.40V
> $270.


I'm using it, haven't tried anything else yet


----------



## kingofblog

Also using F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA here. It boots up with no hassles and reduces the list of things you need to validate by one. At Gear1 and XMP timings, plus tRFC=180 ns, I get 42 ns open page latency.

See #509


----------



## elkido122

using asus 0707 bios here on z690a-d4 and 3600 xmp is a little wonky. anyone tried the 0808 bios? how is it? anyone know when official will get released?


----------



## MikeS3000

I briefly tried 0808 just to see if my 12700k could get past the 3900 gear 1 wall. No luck. I'm running Hynix DRJ 4x8 gb and can't post on any bios so far past 3900 gear 1. 0803 gave me memory errors in TM5 1usmus 20 cylces. I'm back to 0707 and retesting the same memory settings as things were previously stable on this BIOS. Any advice to post DDR 4000 gear 1?


----------



## Frozburn

kingofblog said:


> Also using F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA here. It boots up with no hassles and reduces the list of things you need to validate by one. At Gear1 and XMP timings, plus tRFC=180 ns, I get 42 ns open page latency.
> 
> See #509


Mind posting all of your timings (memtweakit or whatever) so I can try them?

What latency do you get on aida?


----------



## raad11

Anyone else try 0808? How's it been for you? Especially for anyone with 2xDR


----------



## elkido122

thought people said 0808 was garbage


----------



## raad11

2x16GB


----------



## raad11

elkido122 said:


> thought people said 0808 was garbage


0808 was just released, haven't seen much talk about it except it helping break the Gear 1 wall for 4x8GB SR


----------



## Balaned

I think my memory is peaked. The 44ns is an anomaly, typically it's between 45-46.


----------



## kingofblog

Frozburn said:


> Mind posting all of your timings (memtweakit or whatever) so I can try them?
> 
> What latency do you get on aida?


Timings are tCL=16, tRCD=16, tRP=16, tRAS=36, tRFC=180ns, NMode=2. All other timings are auto. Open page latency is 42 ns.


----------



## gerardfraser

Two different 12900K. I PC game so I run my Ram Dual Rank Gear 2 CL17 4000Mhz.So I am not trying to show anyone up,just showing Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz DDR4 settings on two 12900K Batch# for those interested G.SKILL Ripjaws 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Model F4-4000C17D-32GVKB




Here are my setting on MSI PRO z690-A DDR4 on BIOS (E7D25IMS.114)

Just Primary timings not sub timings
Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz
SA voltage needed to be greater than 1.45v
DRAM Voltage 1.55v
*12900K Batch# V1351636*



Here are my setting on MSI PRO z690-A DDR4 on BIOS (E7D25IMS.100)
Just Primary timings not sub timings
Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz
SA voltage needed to be greater than 1.45v
DRAM Voltage 1.6v
*12900K Batch# V1361515*


----------



## 2500k_2

eeeven said:


> New 12900K SP 90. My old Sp76 12700K didnt mange to get more that 4000 G1 stable.
> 
> *2x8GB 4600 16-16-16-32-320 Gear 2*
> View attachment 2536181
> 
> *EDIT:* i forgot to set 2 Subtimings correct. Now i got the 49.8ns
> View attachment 2536195
> 
> 
> *2x16GB 4133 16-16-16-28-280 Gear 1
> View attachment 2536182
> *


Great results. Can you boot higher into Gear 2 / for example 4800 17 17 or 4933 17 19?
the fact that we got out of 50 ns can give us a sense in gear 2 on ddr4.


----------



## eeeven

2500k_2 said:


> Great results. Can you boot higher into Gear 2 / for example 4800 17 17 or 4933 17 19?
> the fact that we got out of 50 ns can give us a sense in gear 2 on ddr4.


Nope, no boot even with C17,C18 or higher tRCD and tRP. I think it is the strix which can not boot higher on B-Die. Maybe the MSI could Boot 4800+? But latency will not get better past 4600 C16 in My experience of coffee and comet Lake.


----------



## 2500k_2

eeeven said:


> Nope, no boot even with C17,C18 or higher tRCD and tRP. I think it is the strix which can not boot higher on B-Die. Maybe the MSI could Boot 4800+? But latency will not get better past 4600 C16 in My experience of coffee and comet Lake.


Bad news.
but I have good ones - 2dimm B660 boards can bring some pleasant surprises.
Msi b560 a pro even better than the z590 EVGA 🤣🤣🤣


----------



## MotomEniac

I need your help, don't my latencies look kind of high for those settings?. Can't figure out what i'm missing, cant go any higher in frequency(due to very bad IMC in my 12700kf) but expecting <50ns ...Appreciate any advices here


----------



## newls1

MotomEniac said:


> I need your help, don't my latencies look kind of high for those settings?. Can't figure out what i'm missing, cant go any higher in frequency(due to very bad IMC in my 12700kf) but expecting <50ns ...Appreciate any advices here
> View attachment 2536228


i cant directly help you with your question, but i have a question to ask you... did you manually set your IOL's and RTL's or let bios auto them? Im on the tomahawk d4 board and cant pass 3600 no matter what and i refuse to use gear2.


----------



## MotomEniac

newls1 said:


> i cant directly help you with your question, but i have a question to ask you... did you manually set your IOL's and RTL's or let bios auto them? Im on the tomahawk d4 board and cant pass 3600 no matter what and i refuse to use gear2.


All items under latency section are set to Auto, only mode is set to Dynamic. I guess your problem is either BIOS version, which I believe was not updated as A-Pro does, or VDDQ\SA voltages are wrong.
In my case, I lose stability if I go from the sweet spot for SA, which is 1.24-1.26V, or set anything except Auto for TxVDDQ(on auto it is 1.25V).
P.S.: Hope it will help you


----------



## newls1

MotomEniac said:


> All items under latency section are set to Auto, only mode is set to Dynamic. I guess your problem is either BIOS version, which I believe was not updated as A-Pro does, or VDDQ\SA voltages are wrong.
> In my case, I lose stability if I go from the sweet spot for SA, which is 1.24-1.26V, or set anything except Auto for TxVDDQ(on auto it is 1.25V).
> P.S.: Hope it will help you


thanks man


----------



## zhrooms

Falkentyne said:


> Who uses 16 GB RAM in 2021?


Just 70% of Steam users, comparing 16 and above. Of which a decent amount is work PCs, likely only 10-15% of gamers are running 32GB. Because it's a complete waste.. and many/most of the gamers that got it, upgraded just because of the better overclocking ICs, not the size.


Falkentyne said:


> I've been on 32 GB for the last 3 years.


And we're so proud of you son, but we can't all be winners so here's your participation trophy 🏆.


Falkentyne said:


> You run _OUT OF MEMORY_ Just running Apex Legends and another program with just 16 GB.


Dumbest thing I've heard.


Falkentyne said:


> Did Zhrooms wake up on the wrong side of bed? Or did he just not like the cornbread?


You're pathetic. Who quotes a week old post just to try and insult someone? If you have nothing of value to contribute, don't comment.


JoeRambo said:


> The wall is for DR memory. And the wall is real, despite numerous claims. In fact post release BIOS Z690 PRO-A also had same problem with DR memory and it was solved and confirmed solved by 115U3 BIOS by members here.


No it's not, plenty of MSI Pro users ran 4133+ on the 1.00 release BIOS, I've already showed you screenshots of MSI Pro running DR up to 4266.


ObviousCough said:


> PVS 4400c19 being on the QVL made no difference for me.


QVL means next to nothing, especially now when they just test in *Gear 2*. Basically know your own memory ICs and keep an eye out in spaces like this, see what others reach with the same ICs.


Ichirou said:


> F**king yes lol. Now to wait for more people to pitch in on its overclock potential.


Plenty of people already running 4x8 at 4000+ on TUF/Strix, but great if the few people that had issues can now run it.


postem said:


> You should run whatever tight latencies with higher frequencies you can on DDR4 with Gear 1. It seems the consensus is IMC barrier is 4000/4133 with anything further troublesome.


That is correct, 2x16GB Dual Rank at 4000 works for everyone (unless bad BIOS), 4133 is doable for many, 4200 for a few and to see 4266 is very rare.
Definitely looks like SR runs a bit higher than DR, seen up to 4300 stable with 2x8GB.


newls1 said:


> Decent score? I have nothing to compare it too?!


If you want to compare your CPU, feel free to contribute to this thread.


bass junkie xl said:


> Trying to decide on the Strix or the MSI Pro / Edge, but so far leaning towards the Strix for memory overclocking.





ObviousCough said:


> This has been a horrendous overclocking experience. I should have gotten a Strix.





2500k_2 said:


> If they don't help you, then only the Strix will do.


TUF overclocks the same as Strix, practically same board, just cheaper, already mentioned it several times but I'll keep saying it.


bscool said:


> You really just need to try each bios. I jumped right from default bios(223?) to latest beta when I got my Strix and ended going back to bios 707 which I had skipped. 707 ended up being the best for me. I haven't tried the new one(808). Also the same bios might not be good for 2x16 as 4x8. A lot of variables so in the end you really need to try it yourself unless you find someone running the exact same hardware as you which is rare.


Yes, I have no reason to switch from 0707 on 2x16 Dual Rank sticks, it's basically perfect, runs up to 4300 no sweat, everything else works flawlessly, only reason to upgrade would be for a new microcode.


newls1 said:


> I specifically bought this MSI board cause weeks ago everyone was saying "get msi, they clock mem really good on this new platform and stay away from asus and gigabyte" Well, my oh my have the tables turned, asus' 0808 beta seemed to have fixed most mem issues.. Maybe I should have went asus too??!!


No one said to stay away from ASUS. Also there's *one* person saying he could now run 4000 on 0808, which he couldn't reach before, on 4x8GB Single Rank. Meanwhile we have like 5 people *already* running 4 sticks at 4000+ since weeks ago. Some people just run into walls that others don't, for some unknown reason I have yet to figure out.


eeeven said:


> New 12900K SP 90. My old Sp76 12700K didnt mange to get more that 4000 G1 stable.


Reminder, don't look at the overall SP score (P+E-core), enter the 'AI Features' menu and look at just the "P-core SP" rating.


Ichirou said:


> I can attest to 16 GB being absolutely borderline.


This is not true *at all*, like, for what? Your fifty **** tabs, while you run two Discords, Excel and Photoshop, then trying to play Star Citizen on top of that, with a memory leak.. all while you're streaming it with OBS?
You're not even close to 16GB while *gaming *(not doing **** you're not suppose to do in the background), if you want to run all of that garbage, that is *your* problem and you have no reason to push that dumb narrative to others, that 16GB is not enough.


Ichirou said:


> I swapped to 32 GB many years back


How brave of you.


Ichirou said:


> I still ran near memory limits with my work once browsers got worse at memory handling.


It's not relevant to *anyone* other than you as I explained above, if *your* *unique work load* requires X amount of memory, that is *your* problem.


Ichirou said:


> So now I'm on 64 GB and memory running out is no longer a concern.


Good for you, for likely wasting money, as you can get far with a larger pagefile.


Ichirou said:


> 32 GB is probably enough for most people, though.


🏅 Here's your award for the most incorrect comment in this thread. Even believing that there's a break-in period for motherboards is more correct.


crpcookie said:


> I'm just gonna leave things as it is for a few years until Meteor Lake drops with DDR5-12600.


Now that's wishful thinking, it's out in like 2 years and trying to run 12600 will mean it has to run in Gear 4, so latency will take a massive hit, like the IMC would have to be able to run 50% faster to stay in Gear 2, so we're going to be stuck at 6000-8000 in Gear 2 for the next few years, very likely including Meteor Lake, sure would be nice with 200GB/s bandwidth and <50ns latency though.


Balaned said:


> I think my memory is peaked. 4133 15-15-15-30-2T, 1.50V DRAM, 1.42V SA, 1.35V VDDQ on TUF with 0707. The 44ns is an anomaly, typically it's between 45-46.


💪


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Ichirou said:


> I can attest to 16 GB being absolutely borderline. I swapped to 32 GB many years back, and still ran near memory limits with my work once browsers got worse at memory handling (damn you, Chrome). So now I'm on 64 GB and memory running out is no longer a concern. 32 GB is probably enough for most people, though.


This is so true. 16GB is for cell phones and people with stripped a stripped down OS for benching. Dual rank the way to go.


----------



## Frozburn

kingofblog said:


> Timings are tCL=16, tRCD=16, tRP=16, tRAS=36, tRFC=180ns, NMode=2. All other timings are auto. Open page latency is 42 ns.


Thanks. What is Nmode and open latency? Haven't seen these before.


----------



## zhrooms

geriatricpollywog said:


> This is so true. 16GB is for people with stripped a stripped down OS for benching. Dual rank os the way to go.


You just proved you know *absolutely nothing* about computers, it astounds me that you have 4000 comments here and yet, you are _still_ this misinformed. 🤡
Strange how the users with thousands of comments seem to be the most lost. Believing that 16GB is for benching is one of the most laughable things I've ever heard.
_May god have mercy on your soul._


----------



## eeeven

hard to hit the 39.X mark... I also tried 5.1 Cache and tWR 8 - it was like 0.2ns better.


----------



## newls1

MotomEniac said:


> All items under latency section are set to Auto, only mode is set to Dynamic. I guess your problem is either BIOS version, which I believe was not updated as A-Pro does, or VDDQ\SA voltages are wrong.
> In my case, I lose stability if I go from the sweet spot for SA, which is 1.24-1.26V, or set anything except Auto for TxVDDQ(on auto it is 1.25V).
> P.S.: Hope it will help you


quick question. so DO NOT leave vddq on auto, is that what you are saying? what do you have yours at?


----------



## MotomEniac

newls1 said:


> quick question. so DO NOT leave vddq on auto, is that what you are saying? what do you have yours at?


In my case, Auto for TxVDDQ is the best solution. Also, i've checked that it remains static at 1.25V through HWInfo64, no matter what.


----------



## steve_reg

Hey guys, new to the forums, I just bought an 12700K and still deciding which mb to get, despite reading all issues with Gigabyte boards I still inclined to get an Z690 Elite D4, mainly because I had issues with both asus and msi in the past and my z390 elite is very solid, never gave a single issue. Is anyone using a GB board with micron rev E? I have 4x8gb ballistix 3600Mhz c16 and wondering if it will run XMP at least for now.



weyden said:


> What do you think of my result? Remembering that my memories are Micron B-die 2x16gb Adata Xpg. z690 Aorus Elite DDR4 motherboard!


Very nice results, best I have seem so far on a GB board by reading around, what is the max you can get on gear1?


----------



## eeeven

This is Gear 2. If your are aiming 3600 XMP 4x8 u wantto run it in Gear 1. You ether have to wait for GB releasing a working BIOS or grab a ASUS Prime/TUF/Strix or MSI A-Pro or MPG Edge.


----------



## truehighroller1

eeeven said:


> hard to hit the 39.X mark... I also tried 5.1 Cache and tWR 8 - it was like 0.2ns better.
> 
> View attachment 2536242


How do you set gear modes? I have the same mb as you and have a pretty good imc it would seem. I have 4000mhz cas 17 memory " F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR
Trident Z RGB
DDR4-4000MHz CL17-17-17-37 1.35V
32GB (4x8GB) ". If you could post any settings you've set manually as well that would be great also thank you!!


----------



## MotomEniac

I'm starting to suspect that MSI Z690-A-Pro + 1.15U3 is the main reason of my over 52ns latency. Does anybody here who are using this combo and have sub 50ns latencies? As from what I've seen in this thread so far, most of low latencies were obtained on NOT A-Pro+1.15U3. Maybe i'm stupidly wrong
PS: my latest result with tighter timings - same garbage:


----------



## Revv23

newls1 said:


> thank you for the detailed reply sir, really appreciate the time you took to type all that out, however YES... Ive done all this and done it to the exact "T". to no avail. This 1000)% has to be a bios issue, and your "EDGE" has bios version 114, tomahawk is 115.. has to be a difference there. your bios obviously isnt effected by this bios bug where as 115 is. Something is severely crippling this board with anything over 3600. Funny though, I bought an MSI board to avoid memory issues as I kept seeing gigabyte, asus, asrock having terrible mem issues, and here i am with a MSI and mem issues... F.M.L


go full auto, scroll down to Memory try it, select DDR4000 CL 17 GEAR ONE

if that doesnt work something is wrong with your rig somewhere.


----------



## raad11

Where are you guys getting the new version of Asrock Timing Configurator that works with Z690? Can anyone post a link?




MotomEniac said:


> I need your help, don't my latencies look kind of high for those settings?. Can't figure out what i'm missing, cant go any higher in frequency(due to very bad IMC in my 12700kf) but expecting <50ns ...Appreciate any advices here
> View attachment 2536228


Probably have too much stuff open or did it too soon after rebooting. That's an issue with this benchmark unless you're on a clean/empty install of Windows. It'll probably run a few times in the high 40ns range which sounds about right. Latency is a little worse than previous platforms.


zhrooms said:


> That is correct, 2x16GB Dual Rank at 4000 works for everyone (unless bad BIOS), 4133 is doable for many, 4200 for a few and to see 4266 is very rare.
> Definitely looks like SR runs a bit higher than DR, seen up to 4300 stable with 2x8GB.


With the caveat that you're considering "game stable" results (which might still throw errors in memory tests). I can probably do 4100-4133 DR game stable. But I run my memory at TM5/anta777 3-cycle passing settings. Since I tend to run my cache at "game stable", even though it might crash during hard stress tests. I've had a hard time stabilizing 4.2 ring with 5.2 all-core, so I didn't want to introduce more instability. So far, it's game stable.


----------



## MotomEniac

Revv23 said:


> go full auto, scroll down to Memory try it, select DDR4000 CL 17 GEAR ONE
> if that doesnt work something is wrong with your rig somewhere.


I've tried this also, and it doesn't work for me. I'm on MSI A-Pro.



raad11 said:


> Probably have too much stuff open or did it too soon after rebooting. That's an issue with this benchmark unless you're on a clean/empty install of Windows. It'll probably run a few times in the high 40ns range which sounds about right. Latency is a little worse than previous platforms.


I've tried relaunching mem latency section only SO MANY times.There is some deviation +-1ms(i've picked pretty good one BTW). Pretty fresh Win 11 with everything not launched\manually unloaded. So this is not the case i suppose...


----------



## raad11

Isn't Win11 worse for this kind of thing?


----------



## raad11

MotomEniac said:


> I've tried this also, and it doesn't work for me. I'm on MSI A-Pro.
> 
> 
> I've tried relaunching mem latency section only SO MANY times.There is some deviation +-1ms(i've picked pretty good one BTW). Pretty fresh Win 11 with everything not launched\manually unloaded. So this is not the case i suppose...


Is it dual rank or single rank? My dual rank sticks are doing 47-48ns average at 4000 14-15-15-28 with a few runs hitting 44-45ns. So 3800CL14 sounds about right for 50-52ns if it's two dual rank or four single rank. Overclocking also helps the numbers a little, especially ring.


----------



## steve_reg

eeeven said:


> This is Gear 2. If your are aiming 3600 XMP 4x8 u wantto run it in Gear 1. You ether have to wait for GB releasing a working BIOS or grab a ASUS Prime/TUF/Strix or MSI A-Pro or MPG Edge.


Yeah I noticed, that is why I asked him what he can get on Gear 1.

Prime Z690-P and the MSI A-PRO are available here but with a high cost (I don't feel they worth it) TUF and Strix are extremely expensive, MPG not available. GB Gaming X / Elite falls right in the middle and look decent. I will wait until more options come in or the prices drop a bit.

Do you think that even by disabling XMP and setting XMP timings/voltages manually will not work in G1? is it really that bad?


----------



## MotomEniac

raad11 said:


> Is it dual rank or single rank? My dual rank sticks are doing 47-48ns average at 4000 14-15-15-28 with a few runs hitting 44-45ns. So 3800CL14 sounds about right for 50-52ns if it's two dual rank or four single rank. Overclocking also helps the numbers a little, especially ring.


What MB do you have? Yes, you are right i have dual rank memory, but 52ns is my absolute best run, one of 10-20 relaunches. Also, I have very tight rest of timings, so i suppose to see 49-50ns, not 53.5-54 at average. Also tried to disable p-cores, and overclock ring to 4.6GHz, and the result is 51.5 at best...


----------



## Revv23

newls1 said:


> cant understand how your PRO A board is clocking the same ram i have, and you arent having the same 3600MHz wall im having. Im loosing my patients with MSI for the first time ever. quick question, are you using the 100mhz strap or 133mhz mem strap?


you are one of 2 with this issue; pro a out of the box has been the easiest of them all to get clocking. if you cant get there something is wrong with your rig.


----------



## raad11

MotomEniac said:


> What MB do you have? Yes, you are right i have dual rank memory, but 52ns is my absolute best run, one of 10-20 relaunches. Also, I have very tight rest of timings, so i suppose to see 49-50ns, not 53.5-54 at average. Also tried to disable p-cores, and overclock ring to 4.6GHz, and the result is 51.5 at best...


With e-cores disabled, ring is at 4.7 by default so oc should be like 4.9. with e-cores enabled you can oc ring to 4.2 probably. Just put a decent oc on the P-Cores (like 53-55 on 3 to 5 active cores). Aida uses p-cores for latency test.

I wouldn't be too worried, you're just off by like 1-2ns.


----------



## MotomEniac

raad11 said:


> With e-cores disabled, ring is at 4.7 by default so oc should be like 4.9. with e-cores enabled you can oc ring to 4.2 probably. Just put a decent oc on the P-Cores (like 53-55 on 3 to 5 active cores). Aida uses p-cores for latency test.
> 
> I wouldn't be too worried, you're just off by like 1-2ns.


Are you sure that ring is at 4.7 by default when e-cores are disabled? Thanks for advice, but dynamic ratios are not my piece of bread, I've always overclocked as static ratio and static voltage. 
PS: Just very frustrated that i've obtained a bad overclocker CPU, that cant open up pretty expensive ddr4 kit(f4-3800cl14)


----------



## Revv23

MotomEniac said:


> I've tried this also, and it doesn't work for me. I'm on MSI A-Pro.
> 
> 
> I've tried relaunching mem latency section only SO MANY times.There is some deviation +-1ms(i've picked pretty good one BTW). Pretty fresh Win 11 with everything not launched\manually unloaded. So this is not the case i suppose...


then something is wrong with your rig somewhere. its not the mobo unless the mobo is defective.


----------



## MotomEniac

Revv23 said:


> then something is wrong with your rig somewhere. its not the mobo unless the mobo is defective.


Yes, won't be surprised if my SP of this example be somewhere near 60-70. *This *is wrong 
From another thread...where i've descrbed my setup:
"I have an 12700kf on MSI Z690A Pro with custom water loop(40x360 rad+Eisblock XPX+D5Next). Maximum i can achieve is 5.0p/4.0e with 1.265V(LLC2) in BIOS/1.26V under load. Can boot in OS with 5.1GHz on this voltage, but instant crash in Cinebench even with 1.32V."


----------



## ObviousCough

newls1 said:


> quick question. so DO NOT leave vddq on auto, is that what you are saying? what do you have yours at?


I think it will vary depending on the quality of your IMC. Some people get away with ignoring it completely while others can't even post without it set to the perfect voltage. 

Alder lake appears to be extremely sensitive to voltage. Too much or not enough and you won't post.

I hate it


----------



## neteng101

MotomEniac said:


> "I have an 12700kf on MSI Z690A Pro with custom water loop(40x360 rad+Eisblock XPX+D5Next). Maximum i can achieve is 5.0p/4.0e with 1.265V(LLC2) in BIOS/1.26V under load. Can boot in OS with 5.1GHz on this voltage, but instant crash in Cinebench even with 1.32V."


Try a higher Vcore and much lower LLC. LLC2 is super aggressive. Took 1.36V to pass extreme tests at 5.1P for me, LLC6. Cinebench I can do with just 1.30V, Auto LLC. Its better to have more Vdroop in transitions to loaded state, the higher Vcore at idle won't hurt anything.


----------



## Revv23

I saw someone say that you dont even need 16g for gaming and that 32g is a waste, so i decided to fire up new warzone just to see. over 18gb in the menu screen.

I agree that 16GB is fine but saying gamers should not want more is a weird hill to die on.

I remember when we were moving on from micron BH-5 250mhz 2-2-2-5 2*256 and the people that sacrificed the speed and ran 200mhz 2-4-4-7 2*512mb were crucified in a similar way.

I think if you are building a 12th gen rig now and you are planning on running it for 2+ years you would be crazy to not run 32GB, even if you are just a gamer. EDIT - my pc's live life many years after they are done being my main pc, my 4790k is still my main office pc.

and yes i run lots of open tabs, and no i dont close everything im doing before i play a game, and yes im in borderless. I still have warzone up while typing this. Its running like butter. I love this rig.












I know some people are just trying to be bleeding edge until DDR5 matures, and thats cool too. tomato tomAto.


----------



## chispy

raad11 said:


> Where are you guys getting the new version of Asrock Timing Configurator that works with Z690? Can anyone post a link








Z690 Bios and Tools


ASRock: ASrock Timing Configurator for Z690 ASrock Xp Tuner Z690 Aqua OC 1.63NK11 Z690 Aqua OC 1.63NK18 (easier DDR5 OC) ... Z690 Aqua OC 4.05 Z690 Aqua OC 4.05C10 --> non K OC Z690 Aqua OC 5.05NK07 Z690 Aqua OC 5.05NK08 Z690 Aqua OC 5.05NK09 ASUS: Worktool ADL 1106 Worktool ADL 1121 TurboV Co...



community.hwbot.org


----------



## kingofblog

Frozburn said:


> Thanks. What is Nmode and open latency? Haven't seen these before.


NMode = CR/Command Rate. Name varies by BIOS.

Page open is the fastest possible latency on DRAM and only includes the effect of tCL. Per Anandtech (tCAS = tCL):














Everything You Always Wanted to Know About SDRAM (Memory): But Were Afraid to Ask







www.anandtech.com


----------



## criznit

After all of the horror stories surrounding the 3600 "wall" on the msi boards, I almost wanted to return my Edge for another board. Instead, I fired it up and was able to get above 3600 very easily! Once I have more time, I will push it to 4000 and test it out.


----------



## neteng101

Revv23 said:


> I think if you are building a 12th gen rig now and you are planning on running it for 2+ years you would be crazy to not run 32GB, even if you are just a gamer.


The last time I ran 16GB was in early 2016 - upgraded to 32GB back then, and now I'm actually at 64GB. Looking to go back to 32GB though now that I've moved some things off to a proper server build so I don't have to run VMs anymore.

16GB is enough wisdom is questionable at best - if you're sticking to 16GB, there's no room for extra stuff to be cached by the OS in RAM... even the fastest NVMe drives today can't match memory speeds. What little you might gain from tighter memory timings could very easily be lost in real world gaming performance - large online multiplayer FPS games are notoriously hard on hardware, and that's when your FPS matters the most too.


----------



## Ichirou

Some people fail to realize that professional work on a PC can easily necessitate more than 16 GB of RAM. And expecting people _not_ to multitask _at all_ in 2021 is an unreasonable expectation.


----------



## Revv23

MotomEniac said:


> Yes, won't be surprised if my SP of this example be somewhere near 60-70. *This *is wrong
> From another thread...where i've descrbed my setup:
> "I have an 12700kf on MSI Z690A Pro with custom water loop(40x360 rad+Eisblock XPX+D5Next). Maximum i can achieve is 5.0p/4.0e with 1.265V(LLC2) in BIOS/1.26V under load. Can boot in OS with 5.1GHz on this voltage, but instant crash in Cinebench even with 1.32V."


hey sorry i misread your initial comment. disregard.


----------



## Revv23

criznit said:


> After all of the horror stories surrounding the 3600 "wall" on the msi boards, I almost wanted to return my Edge for another board. Instead, I fired it up and was able to get above 3600 very easily! Once I have more time, I will push it to 4000 and test it out.


I think its like 2 ppl just repeating it every 4 hours. 

I had to switch out my asrock because it couldnt even do DDR 2800 - Booted right into MPG @ 3600 cl14 - Then booted right into 4000 CL17. Literally all on auto & on 1.0 BIOS. If they are hitting a wall its something wrong with that particular system not the bios.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

zhrooms said:


> You just proved you know *absolutely nothing* about computers, it astounds me that you have 4000 comments here and yet, you are _still_ this misinformed. 🤡
> Strange how the users with thousands of comments seem to be the most lost. Believing that 16GB is for benching is one of the most laughable things I've ever heard.
> _May god have mercy on your soul._


I liked you better when you started [Official] threads for parts you couldn’t afford and contributed nothing to them.

How’s about you get a dual rank kit before you play with the big boys?

Or create another [Official] thread for single rank.

But before you talk about anybody else’s overclocking, put your money where your mouth is 









I scored 48 072 in Fire Strike


Intel Core i9-12900K Processor, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 10}




www.3dmark.com


----------



## Cuthalu

Does this indicate a VRM problem? During OCCT mem test + 200 w GPU load I stop my CPU fan, and every time within 15 seconds OCCT mem test starts erroring heavily. Once I turn the fan on the errors disappear entirely within 30 seconds. During that fan pause CPU temp increases only by a couple of degrees from 60 c, so it doesn't feel like CPU temp could be the problem.

I have 1 rear and 1 top exhaust fans near the VRM area + CPU fan. I tried changing the top fan into intake, which destroyed my OCCT stability even without CPU fan pause.


----------



## weyden

Does anyone have any beta Bios news for Gigabyte boards? I see there from Asus, Msi, and nothing from Gigabyte. His bios is a mess of second multiple channels that analyzed the motherboards.


----------



## ObviousCough

VDDQ is super lame.

1.25 vddq and i get many errors in tm5
1.26 vddq and it won't post at all
1.3 vddq and as soon as windows gets past the loading screen it BSODs.
1.255 vddq and i can run tm5 for a little over 2 hours before the first error shows up, sticks never got hotter than 36c


guess i'll have to try again at 1.256 and see if that error still pops up just after the 2 hour mark.



edit: voltage didn't change from 1.255 when i bump it up to 1.256 then 1.257. i skipped 1.26 because it wouldn't post before and went to 1.27, it posted no problem, started dropping errors in tm5 right away.

edit2: i went back to 1.255v and it throws errors instantly. What a piece of crap


----------



## raad11

eeeven said:


> hard to hit the 39.X mark... I also tried 5.1 Cache and tWR 8 - it was like 0.2ns better.
> 
> View attachment 2536242


Where did you get Timing Configurator 4.0.13?


----------



## zhrooms

I replaced my Strix for a TUF last week, I had originally purchased the Strix for $375 pre-tax on launch, but then I ran into issues such as my 12900K retail being defective and the Gigabyte boards I ordered were also not even worth testing because of memory overclocking issues. Then I stumbled upon this TUF for $240 during the black week sale, bundled with a 12900K tray for just $450, which I obviously couldn't turn down. So I simply returned the first mess of an order, and is now rocking a TUF and a 12900K Tray, and here are the differences I wanted to share with you, after having owned both, TUF vs Strix,:

*Strix features and upgrades*

Expansion Slots​*PCIe 3.0 x16 slot* (x8 mode up from x4 on TUF)​​Storage​2x *SATA 6Gb/s ports* (6 up from 4 on TUF)​​USB​1x *USB 3.2 Gen 2 port Type-C* (up from Gen 1 on TUF)​2x *USB 2.0 ports Type-A* (missing on TUF)​1x *USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Front Panel Type-C* (up from Gen 2 on TUF)​​Audio​*Realtek ALC 4080, 32-Bit/384 kHz* (up from Realtek S1200A 24-Bit/192 kHz on TUF)​​Back Panel I/O Ports​1x *BIOS FlashBack button* (missing on TUF)​1x *Clear CMOS button *(missing TUF)​​Internal I/O Connectors​1x *4-pin Chassis Fan headers* (8 up from 7 on TUF)​1x *8-pin +12V Power connector* (8-pin up from 4-pin on TUF)​1x *CPU Over Voltage jumper* (missing on TUF)​1x *S/PDIF Out header* (missing on TUF)​1x *SPI TPM header* (missing on TUF)​1x *Thermal Sensor header* (missing on TUF)​​Special Features​1x *M.2 heatsink* (4 up from 3 on TUF)​​Accessories​2x *SATA 6Gb/s cables* (4 up from 2 on TUF)​1x *ROG key chain* (missing on TUF)​1x *ROG Strix stickers* (up from TUF GAMING stickers on TUF)​​*TUF features and upgrades*

Expansion Slots​*PCIe 3.0 x4 slot* (missing on Strix)​​Back Panel I/O Ports​1x *Optical S/PDIF out port* (missing on Strix)​​Internal I/O Connectors​1x *COM Port header* (missing on Strix)​​My thoughts on these features and upgrades that I don't care for as a gamer;
*Second PCIe x16 slot being 8x instead of 4x:* Don't care, will never use it.
*Two additional SATA ports:* Don't care, will never use them, and even if I did, 4 would be plenty.
*Faster USB ports, 20 Gbps (2.5GB/s) up from 10 Gbps (1.25GB/s):* Don't care, if I ever used them it would be for an external M.2 drive, and 1.25GB/s is already very fast.
*Better Realtek Audio*: Don't care, I'm using an external DAC through USB or S/PDIF, as everyone should.
*BIOS FlashBack button:* Don't care, you should never have to use it, the odds of your board running into an issue that warrants using flashback is extremely low.
*Clear CMOS button:* Don't care, I use a 50cm 2-pin power button connected to the Clear CMOS header directly on the board, and so far not had to use it once.
*One more 4-pin fan header:* Don't care, 8 is already so many, at the moment with 3 separate water cooling loops for CPU, GPU and MEM, I'm using 5.
*Second 8-pin EPS instead of 4-pin:* Don't care, not going to make any difference overclocking unless you're pushing it on LN2 with the Over Voltage jumper, I'm just using 1x8-pin.
*CPU Over Voltage jumper:* Don't care, as said it's for LN2.
*S/PDIF Out header:* Don't care, since the TUF has a S/PDIF port on the rear I/O already.
(For those who don't know, you can buy an external S/PDIF port and hook it up to this header)
*SPI TPM header:* Don't care, essentially no one uses this.
*Thermal Sensor header*: I do care, or I used to care until I invested in a farbwerk 360. But even with one, it needs at least 2, preferably 3.
*M.2 heatsink:* I don't care, never going to use more than 2 drives, and the TUF has heatsinks for 3, also you don't need one for games anyway.
*Additional SATA cables*: Don't care, obviously.
*ROG Key chain:* Don't care, obviously.
*ROG Strix stickers:* I do care, but it depends on which board, my previous ASUS boards has had some very nice stickers.

*Conclusion on features:* I care a little about the thermal sensor header, and the stickers 🙄. Really nothing else is of any importance to a gaming PC, I would literally trade everything I don't care about for an extra sticker 🤣. Like this is what you're paying for (and the BIOS), at the moment of writing this, the TUF costs $293.5 pre-tax in the EU ($303.1 for the Wi-Fi), and that's before VAT which is up to 25%, meanwhile the Strix is $360.0, so the Strix costs 23% more than the TUF without Wi-Fi and 19% more than the Wi-Fi version, for what? No S/PDIF for my DAC? Oh, I get a nicer sticker in return, and a thermal sensor header I currently have no use for. 😤

Okay so before I move on to the BIOS differences, let's go through the VRM in detail.. oh wait, it's the same 🤦‍♂️, all they did was remove 1 Phase (2 Stages in Parallel), it's the same controller and stages.. still ridiculously overpowered, and yes it overclocks my P-cores exactly the same, I double checked even, the relevant DIGI+ VRM BIOS settings are the same as well.

So here we go, this comparison was made with *both boards on the 0803 BIOS* released in late November (26th);


SettingsOptionsDefaultComment*AI Tweaker*OC TunerKeep Current Settings / OC Tuner I / OC Tuner IIKeep CurrentMissing on StrixPerformance Core RatioAuto / Sync All Cores / By Core Usage / AI OptimizedAuto'AI Optimized' missing on TUFCPU SVID SupportAuto / Enabled / DisabledEnabledMissing on TUF*DIGI+ VRM*VRM Initialization CheckEnabled / DisabledDisabledMissing on TUFCPU Input Voltage Load-line CalibrationAuto / Level 1 - 3AutoMissing on TUFCPU VRM Thermal ControlAuto / Enabled / DisabledAutoMissing on Strix*Boot Voltages*CPU Core/Cache Boot Voltage0.60000 to 1.70000AutoMissing on TUFCPU Input Boot Voltage1.50000 to 2.10000AutoMissing on TUFPLL Termination Boot Voltages0.80000 to 1.80000AutoMissing on TUFCPU Standby Boot Voltage0.80000 to 1.80000AutoMissing on TUFMemory Controller Boot Voltage1.00000 to 2.00000AutoMissing on TUF*Auto Voltage Caps*CPU Core Auto Voltage CapAuto / 0.60000 to 1.70000AutoMissing on TUFCPU Input Auto Voltage CapAuto / 1.50000 to 2.10000AutoMissing on TUF*Tweaker's Paradise*CPU Standby VoltageAuto / 0.8 to 1.800Auto (1.050)Missing on TUFVPPDDR VoltageAuto / 2.5 to 2.800Auto (2.500)Missing on StrixCPU Input Voltage Reset VoltageAuto / 1.5 to 2.100Auto (1.800)Missing on TUF*AI Features*Package Temperature ThresholdAuto / 30 to 115AutoMissing on TUFRegulate Frequency by above ThresholdAuto / Enabled / DisabledAutoMissing on TUFCooler Efficiency CustomizeKeep Training / Stop Training / User SpecifyKeep TrainingMissing on TUFCooler Score30 to 250-Missing on TUFRecalibrate Cooler-Missing on TUFCooler Re-evaluation AlgorithmNormal / More inclined / Very inclined / Less inclined / Least inclinedNormalMissing on TUFOptimism Scale50 to 150100Missing on TUF*AI Tweaker*Extreme Over-voltageEnabled / DisabledDisabledMissing on TUFPCH 1.8V Primary VoltageAuto / 1.8 to 2.1Auto (1.800)Missing on Strix*Onboard Devices*PCIEX16(G3) ModePCIEX16(G3) / M.2 CardPCIEX16(G3)Missing on TUF*ASM1061 Configuration*ASMedia Storage ControllerEnabled / DisabledEnabledMissing on TUFWindows Hot-plug NotificationEnabled / DisabledDisabledMissing on TUFASPM SupportEnabled / DisabledDisabledMissing on TUF*Boot Configuration*Choose your background sceneROG default / Se7enROG defaultMissing on TUFFlexkeyReset / Aura On/Off / DirectKeyResetMissing on TUFMemTest86--Missing on TUF

Starting from the top, the Strix and Maximus boards feature '*AI Overclocking*', so it replaced '*OC Tuner*', which still exists on TUF.
'*CPU SVID Support*' is enabled without the option to disable, hence missing, but should just be left enabled regardless.


> Disable this item to prevent the CPU from communicating with the external voltage regulator.


'*VRM Initialization Check*' is as useless as it sounds.


> When any error occurs during VRM initialization, the system will hang at POSTcode 76/77 if this function is enabled.


'*CPU Input Voltage Load-line Calibration*' and '*CPU Input Voltage Reset Voltage*' is not something I'm familiar with, LLC probably not nearly as useful as it could be on X299.
'*CPU VRM Thermal Control*' is just a an on/off switch for thermal protection on the VRM, that you can just disable. (Also this is on TUF, not Strix)
'*Boot Voltages*' are not something I've found beneficial for ambient overclocking.
'*Auto Voltage Caps*' is related to AI overclocking?
'*Extreme Over-voltage*' and '*CPU Standby Voltage*' is not for ambient cooling.
'*VPPDDR Voltage*' is not something I've ever had to use, can supposedly help in some circumstances with high frequency memory overclocking. (Also, this is on TUF, not Strix)
'*PCIEX16(G3) Mode*' is for the second PCIe 3.0 x16 slot I believe, which runs in x8 mode and can be used for an M.2 card, TUF is only x4 so that's why this is missing.
'*PCH 1.8V Primary Voltage*' is not something you have to think about. (Also this is on TUF, not Strix)
'*ASM1061*' is for the two additional SATA ports on the Strix.
'*Choose your background scene*' is the anime waifu background scene featuring Shirakami Fubuki. I have the power of god and anime on my side.
'*Flexkey*' is useless, it doesn't work like you think it does on Maximus boards, it hooks up to your 2-pin reset and basically doesn't work half of the time, and it's not needed anyway.
'*MemTest86*' is the built in memory test, if you would ever want to run it through the BIOS, which I don't.

So that's it, by disregarding AI overclocking and some other things, there are basically no differences left. I don't use any of the above that are missing on the TUF, so me moving to TUF from Strix was not noticeable in any way, identical everything, more or less, the only thing I miss is the background scene, but I am sure as hell not going to pay close to $70 for it. If someone has further insight into the CPU Input Voltage LLC behaviour on Z690 and CPU Input Voltage Reset Voltage, or in general just actually use any of the above, please share with us if you use any of them often enough that you would miss one.

But, for me personally, as a gamer, I'm never going to use AI Overclocking, OC Tuner, VRM Initialization Check, CPU Input LLC/Voltage Reset, Boot Voltages, Auto Voltage Caps, Package/Frequency Threshold, Extreme Over-voltage/Standby Voltage, M.2 Card, ASMedia SATA ports, Flexkey or MemTest86.

And does it perform differently? No, at least from what I've seen so far, tested it for a few days now, most recently I re-ran 5.0, 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 with the lowest voltage possible in R23, on the same processor of course, and it required the exact same voltage to be stable, with 500kHz Switching Frequency, Power Duty/Power Phase on Extreme (Current/Full Phase) and using LLC 4. It would've been odd if it didn't perform the same, since it's using the same PWM Controller, Power Stages and essentially BIOS, one could almost say.. _it's the same board_, just up to $70 cheaper, although no anime waifu 😔. As for the memory I didn't push it on the Strix either, but I can confirm that it boots the same max IMC frequency, which is expected, since the board can obviously do 5000+ in Gear 2, so it's all IMC in Gear 1, and I'm running 4133 like a breeze right now just like I did on the Strix, I would assume there might be a difference between the boards at above QVL (5333+), but that's obviously completely irrelevant. Also a last note about the two additional power stages on the Strix, pushing 5.3GHz all-core in R23 at close to 1.4V on the TUF, it's only pulling roughly 12A through each stage, which is significantly below their rated 80A maximum, so cooling is of no concern. Especially if you run something like 5.0 (which I did briefly, for science), game stable at only 1.1V, which resulted in a 70 Watt power consumption, and that's just about 4.5A per stage, it literally doesn't even heat up, same for the processor itself, almost runs at idle temps <45c in Warzone at above 200 FPS, severely processor and memory bottlenecked.

All in all, I feel very lucky I found this TUF for $239.99 pre-tax during the black week sale, and here are some pictures I took of the rig before I returned the Strix, which is a fantastic board obviously 😍, I'd prefer it over the TUF of course (except for the missing S/PDIF), but not at that price sadly, the Strix should've been 6-Phase, so 12 Stages in Parallel (70A down from 80A), also Realtek S1200A audio.. and be priced at $250 🥰 instead of what it is now, $350 😞.


----------



## Revv23

Cuthalu said:


> Does this indicate a VRM problem? During OCCT mem test + 200 w GPU load I stop my CPU fan, and every time within 15 seconds OCCT mem test starts erroring heavily. Once I turn the fan on the errors disappear entirely within 30 seconds. During that fan pause CPU temp increases only by a couple of degrees from 60 c, so it doesn't feel like CPU temp could be the problem.
> 
> I have 1 rear and 1 top exhaust fans near the VRM area + CPU fan. I tried changing the top fan into intake, which destroyed my OCCT stability even without CPU fan pause.


what are you trying to accomplish by shutting your fans off under load? why not just take the cooler off altogether LOL


----------



## truehighroller1

How do I select gear 1 on Asus ROG gaming a?


----------



## newls1

had enough of MSI, just ordered the Asus ROG Strix Z690 A D4.... Which Bios is now the "GO TO" for DR dimms? 0707 or 0808


----------



## bscool

@newls1 I would go 707 if using 2x16. I haven't tried 808 just saw a little feedback and it was not good so far. But like anything your luck may vary 

It will be interesting to see how the Asus board does for you. Wouldn't it be a [email protected]## if you got it and same thing? lol life never know what it will throw at you.


----------



## newls1

bscool said:


> @newls1 I would go 707 if using 2x16. I haven't tried 808 just saw a little feedback and it was not good so far. But like anything your luck may vary
> 
> It will be interesting to see how the Asus board does for you. Wouldn't it be a [email protected]## if you got it and same thing? lol life never know what it will throw at you.


GO WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP!!! Better be a smoother experience, this MSI board is just so dang sensitive and extremely unreliable. it'll boot 1 time, then fail 65 other times FOR NO REASON. If I drop mem speed down to 2666, everything is fine. the hell with that. my hardware is way to good to be restricted to a board this terrible led by a crappy bios. I havent used an asus board in a short while, so a learning curve is coming my way. 0707 official on asus' website or the 0707 beta i think peter posted?


----------



## bscool

@newls1 Usually they are the same bios if you check the hash on them.


----------



## weyden

Guys, what is the maximum voltage for daily memory usage allowed?

SA voltage
Dram Voltage
VDDQ voltage
Any more?


I know there are 5000mhz ddr4 memories that pull 1.6v in the XMP profile.
Theoretically these z690 should withstand more voltage than all older ddr4 motherboards.


----------



## elkido122

Guess all boards are having memory issues and xmp issues . Looks like asus might be the best bet right now though especially for 2x16gb. I always thought msi was decent but I've been proven wrong I guess. Hope asus gets there act together though and gets the bios ironed out a little more.


----------



## bscool

@weyden It is up to you for the most part. I try to stay under 1.55v for SA/VDDQ and 1.6v for dram.

Depends on mem, ICM but most will be able to get by with much lower voltage's. You can see from reading online some can run sa/dq down to 1.25 or lower and some like myself are at 1.45sa/1.5vddq and 1.55v [email protected] DR gear 1. Gear 1 and higher frequency's in general requires higher voltages.


----------



## ObviousCough

elkido122 said:


> I always thought msi was decent but I've been proven wrong I guess.


I have a lot of MSI boards, Z690 seems to be an exception not a rule.


----------



## gerardfraser

elkido122 said:


> Guess all boards are having memory issues and xmp issues . Looks like asus might be the best bet right now though especially for 2x16gb. I always thought msi was decent but I've been proven wrong I guess. Hope asus gets there act together though and gets the bios ironed out a little more.


I have tried two different 12900K on MSI Motherboard Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz both under 50ns with just primary timings changed on different BIOS.MY vote would be MSI motherboard
(2 x 16GB) Model F4-4000C17D-32GVKB

Here are my setting on MSI PRO z690-A DDR4 on BIOS (E7D25IMS.114)

Just Primary timings not sub timings
Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz
SA voltage needed to be greater than 1.45v
DRAM Voltage 1.55v
*12900K Batch# V1351636*



Here are my setting on MSI PRO z690-A DDR4 on BIOS (E7D25IMS.100)
Just Primary timings not sub timings
Dual Rank Gear 1 CL14 4000Mhz
SA voltage needed to be greater than 1.45v
DRAM Voltage 1.6v
*12900K Batch# V1361515*


----------



## postem

I almost gave up on my ballistix RAM 32GB DR
Even 1.45v 4000mt give me instant errors on memtest, its probably imc related, since 3900 pass 4 tests memtest without issues. The other issue is that i cant really lower any timings, max at 3900 i get is 16-18-17-37.
What amazes me is even on 3600 XMP profile, if i lower 38 to 36 it fails to post everytime.

Well, good enough, this kit doesnt have even temp readings, but was the cheapest i found 32gb kit cl16 32gb. 
I found a gskill 4000 16-16-16-36, but 3x the value, i dont think its gonna make much difference, but its b die, maybe i could get tigher timings, but i will stick with this memory for a year until DDR5 improves.


----------



## eeeven

newls1 said:


> GO WASH YOUR MOUTH OUT WITH SOAP!!! Better be a smoother experience, this MSI board is just so dang sensitive and extremely unreliable. it'll boot 1 time, then fail 65 other times FOR NO REASON. If I drop mem speed down to 2666, everything is fine. the hell with that. my hardware is way to good to be restricted to a board this terrible led by a crappy bios. I havent used an asus board in a short while, so a learning curve is coming my way. 0707 official on asus' website or the 0707 beta i think peter posted?


i have to agree regarding the unrelieable post behavior of the MSI MPG. I ended up buying the Strix and i am 100% happy now. MSI would be a good Mainboard if the BIOS would not be crappy. i had to learn the hard way. Next time i will buy ASUS Mainboard at first.

What also annoyed me was the odd clock numbers. In addition to that, the BCLK was heavily bugged. Stock (100.0) it showed up @ 99.75. If you raised the BCLK in the BIOS to 100.19 (the smallest increase) windows showed 100.40 which was already like 20 MHz higher CPU-Clock.


----------



## truehighroller1

Angry post grr grr ignore everyone asking for help bigger preen raghrrrrrrrrrrrrr... Back on topic Jesus. What a joke.


----------



## Cuthalu

Revv23 said:


> what are you trying to accomplish by shutting your fans off under load? why not just take the cooler off altogether LOL


I was having unexpected stability issues on CB23 multi, and I saw a couple of people talking about higher temperature affecting IMC, so I decided to try that. Seems like that wasn't the problem, but vrm seems iffy and probably runs quite a bit warmer than the temperature sensor claims. (Looks like Linpack gives more errors when mosfet is warmer, while everything else is the same. Needs more testing.)


----------



## newls1

eeeven said:


> i have to agree regarding the unrelieable post behavior of the MSI MPG. I ended up buying the Strix and i am 100% happy now. MSI would be a good Mainboard if the BIOS would not be crappy. i had to learn the hard way. Next time i will buy ASUS Mainboard at first.
> 
> What also annoyed me was the odd clock numbers. In addition to that, the BCLK was heavily bugged. Stock (100.0) it showed up @ 99.75. If you raised the BCLK in the BIOS to 100.19 (the smallest increase) windows showed 100.40 which was already like 20 MHz higher CPU-Clock.


extremely odd bclk with this board and several holes... Im sure it will be a great board in time, but right now is NOT that time


----------



## kingofblog

@zhrooms

For anyone that is disabling E-cores to get the best latency via 47x ring multiplier, I discovered that unfortunately this will crank a whopping 140 mV more into your core than needed, which will create a huge furnace. The default ring-core offset is *2*, i.e. ring runs 200 MHz lower than core, but the V/f curve programmed into the chips matches the ring to the core VID for *5* ratios higher.


Code:


SP78, P-SP 86

Ratio    Vcore    Vcache
43        --        1.217
44        --        1.252
45        --        1.296
46        --        1.35
47        --        1.394
48        1.217    --
49        1.26    --
50        1.305    --
51        1.35
52        1.396

This means that with E-cores enabled and low ring frequency, the VID is determined by P-core 49x, or 1.26 V. With E-cores disabled, now the ring will try to go all the way to 47x, and the VID is based on ring, or *1.4 V*!

How can we fix this? Ideally we would just change the offset to -5 so there is no mismatch, but I found no option for this. There are a few options, but none of them are amazing:

*Enable the E-core*: We disabled them for a reason
*Limit ring to 44x*: This ensures your voltage is set by core instead of ring, but your latency will go up
*Run core at 52x*: This requires more voltage than the stock VID. Whenever you thermal throttle, your core still drops all the way to 48x, because 49-51x are the same voltage (ring 47x)
*Undervolt the ring*: You would have to undervolt a whopping 140 mV for core to be the limiter again, which is unlikely to work*
Obviously, I don't want to run slower, so that rules out the first two. There's no way I can cool all-cores 52x, but this finding does explain why I had no problems cranking up my all-core frequency to 50x. When I was stability testing my IMC earlier in this thread, I did manage to pass tests as low as 1.33 V, but not 1.31 V, so removing all 140 mV of overvoltage won't be possible. Thus, my compromise solution will be to go 50x on the core and try to undervolt the ring as far as possible.

EDIT: *Actually, I used XTU to apply a -200 mV offset to the ring V/f curve and it passed stress tests, so this could be the way to go! Unfortunately, Asus BIOS doesn't provide the option to offset the ring separately from the core, so you need to use the extremely buggy XTU.


----------



## 2500k_2

eeeven said:


> Nope, no boot even with C17,C18 or higher tRCD and tRP. I think it is the strix which can not boot higher on B-Die. Maybe the MSI could Boot 4800+? But latency will not get better past 4600 C16 in My experience of coffee and comet Lake.


What's the maximum boot on 1 stick SR Bdie? on channels A and B? Max stable?
If you can stabilize the 4800 for example, then the higher frequency is the problem of the memory controller and not the board.


----------



## GtiJason

MotomEniac said:


> Are you sure that ring is at 4.7 by default when e-cores are disabled? Thanks for advice, but dynamic ratios are not my piece of bread, I've always overclocked as static ratio and static voltage.
> PS: Just very frustrated that i've obtained a bad overclocker CPU, that cant open up pretty expensive ddr4 kit(f4-3800cl14)


12700K(f) ring is 4.6, 4.7 is for 12900K. I have a garbage SP 70 12700Kf as well and running W11 with e cores enabled even DR 4000c14 tight latency is 46+. If you upgraded W10 to 11 latency is 2-4ns worse, and as stated by the AIDA popup after test it's not optimized for this platform. AIDA64 mem and cache test is NOT reliable and results mean very little. I stick with mem sensitive benchmarks (GB3, YCruncher, PYPrime, Super Pi 32m, Timespy Extreme cpu test, 3dM11 Physics test etc.) and LinX to make sure I'm making improvements and not regressing


----------



## jsz

zhrooms said:


> I replaced my Strix for a TUF last week, I had originally purchased the Strix for $375 pre-tax on launch, but then I ran into issues such as my 12900K retail being defective and the Gigabyte boards I ordered were also not even worth testing because of memory overclocking issues. Then I stumbled upon this TUF for $240 during the black week sale, bundled with a 12900K tray for just $450, which I obviously couldn't turn down. So I simply returned the first mess of an order, and is now rocking a TUF and a 12900K Tray, and here are the differences I wanted to share with you, after having owned both, TUF vs Strix,
> 
> And does it perform differently? No, at least from what I've seen so far, tested it for a few days now, most recently I re-ran 5.0, 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 with the lowest voltage possible in R23, on the same processor of course, and it required the exact same voltage to be stable, with 500kHz Switching Frequency, Power Duty/Power Phase on Extreme (Current/Full Phase) and using LLC 4. It would've been odd if it didn't perform the same, since it's using the same PWM Controller, Power Stages and essentially BIOS, one could almost say.. _it's the same board_, just up to $70 cheaper, although no anime waifu 😔. As for the memory I didn't push it on the Strix either, but I can confirm that it boots the same max IMC frequency, which is expected, since the board can obviously do 5000+ in Gear 2, so it's all IMC in Gear 1, and I'm running 4133 like a breeze right now just like I did on the Strix, I would assume there might be a difference between the boards at above QVL (5333+), but that's obviously completely irrelevant. Also a last note about the two additional power stages on the Strix, pushing 5.3GHz all-core in R23 at close to 1.4V on the TUF, it's only pulling roughly 12A through each stage, which is significantly below their rated 80A maximum, so cooling is of no concern. Especially if you run something like 5.0 (which I did briefly, for science), game stable at only 1.1V, which resulted in a 70 Watt power consumption, and that's just about 4.5A per stage, it literally doesn't even heat up, same for the processor itself, almost runs at idle temps <45c in Warzone at above 200 FPS, severely processor and memory bottlenecked.
> 
> All in all, I feel very lucky I found this TUF for $239.99 pre-tax during the black week sale, and here are some pictures I took of the rig before I returned the Strix, which is a fantastic board obviously 😍, I'd prefer it over the TUF of course (except for the missing S/PDIF), but not at that price sadly, the Strix should've been 6-Phase, so 12 Stages in Parallel (70A down from 80A), also Realtek S1200A audio.. and be priced at $250 🥰 instead of what it is now, $350 😞.


Yup. TUF has the least issues for me. Kept that over the MSI board I ordered. Giga order got canceled and never shipped. Didnt bother with it after reading the issues here

On x570..My ASUS xhair was.. questionable, but it seems they care more about the intel platform.


----------



## weyden

bscool said:


> @weyden It is up to you for the most part. I try to stay under 1.55v for SA/VDDQ and 1.6v for dram.
> 
> Depends on mem, ICM but most will be able to get by with much lower voltage's. You can see from reading online some can run sa/dq down to 1.25 or lower and some like myself are at 1.45sa/1.5vddq and 1.55v [email protected] DR gear 1. Gear 1 and higher frequency's in general requires higher voltages.



Ok, thanks for the explanation. I still couldn't test it in depth because gigabyte motherboards have some problem in the bios. Unfortunately the maximum I can get with this 2x16gb kit of 4133mhz cl 19 is 4600mhz cl 19. You can use 1.6v but don't go up to 4800mhz. And at 4000mhz I'm having trouble lowering the timings with this Micron B-die


----------



## Ichirou

newls1 said:


> extremely odd bclk with this board and several holes... Im sure it will be a great board in time, but right now is NOT that time


Does disabling BCLK Spread Spectrum work on Z690?


----------



## kingofblog

Ichirou said:


> Does disabling BCLK Spread Spectrum work on Z690?


No option on Asus STRIX-A, but Asus has always reserved spread spectrum as a Maximus-level feature for asinine reasons.


----------



## Ichirou

kingofblog said:


> No option on Asus STRIX-A, but Asus has always reserved spread spectrum as a Maximus-level feature for asinine reasons.


Huh. Strange. I have it on a generic Prime back on Z390. Fixed my BCLK fluctuation issues.


----------



## kingofblog

zhrooms said:


> If someone has further insight into the CPU Input Voltage LLC behaviour on Z690 and CPU Input Voltage Reset Voltage, or in general just actually use any of the above, please share with us if you use any of them often enough that you would miss one.


The CPU Input Voltage refers to the FIVR rail, which in Alder Lake only drives VccSA and Vddq. The original plan was probably to have a FIVR drive E-cores and P-cores separately, but as we all know, those are instead coming straight from the motherboard VRM in the finished product. There is no reason to adjust LLC for ADL FIVR, because the SA will never draw more than 6-7 W, making it pointless. You might need to use the "reset voltage" for some LN2 situations, because FIVRs can freeze out at subzero temperatures.


----------



## MotomEniac

GtiJason said:


> 12700K(f) ring is 4.6, 4.7 is for 12900K. I have a garbage SP 70 12700Kf as well and running W11 with e cores enabled even DR 4000c14 tight latency is 46+. If you upgraded W10 to 11 latency is 2-4ns worse, and as stated by the AIDA popup after test it's not optimized for this platform. AIDA64 mem and cache test is NOT reliable and results mean very little. I stick with mem sensitive benchmarks (GB3, YCruncher, PYPrime, Super Pi 32m, Timespy Extreme cpu test, 3dM11 Physics test etc.) and LinX to make sure I'm making improvements and not regressing


Ok, thanks for the very useful info. Can I ask you what board are you on and how did you overclock your 12700kf, cos I'm close to capitulation with my sample. Do you use fixed or dynamic core ratio approach when overclock?


----------



## kingofblog

Cuthalu said:


> Does this indicate a VRM problem? During OCCT mem test + 200 w GPU load I stop my CPU fan, and every time within 15 seconds OCCT mem test starts erroring heavily. Once I turn the fan on the errors disappear entirely within 30 seconds. During that fan pause CPU temp increases only by a couple of degrees from 60 c, so it doesn't feel like CPU temp could be the problem.
> 
> I have 1 rear and 1 top exhaust fans near the VRM area + CPU fan. I tried changing the top fan into intake, which destroyed my OCCT stability even without CPU fan pause.





Cuthalu said:


> I was having unexpected stability issues on CB23 multi, and I saw a couple of people talking about higher temperature affecting IMC, so I decided to try that. Seems like that wasn't the problem, but vrm seems iffy and probably runs quite a bit warmer than the temperature sensor claims. (Looks like Linpack gives more errors when mosfet is warmer, while everything else is the same. Needs more testing.)


How hard are you pushing your IMC? IMC is very sensitive to temperature, and it only takes a few degrees to cause memory errors if you've pushed it to the edge. For best stability, I recommend (1) top-intake for best CPU and RAM temperatures, and (2) controlling radiator fans by liquid temperature, not CPU core. If using air cooling or non-Asetek AIO, set a very aggressive fan curve (not silent!) to prevent the IHS temperature from creeping up.

CineBench errors have nothing to do with RAM. CineBench generates essentially zero load on memory.


----------



## GtiJason

MotomEniac said:


> Ok, thanks for the very useful info. Can I ask you what board are you on and how did you overclock your 12700kf, cos I'm close to capitulation with my sample. Do you use fixed or dynamic core ratio approach when overclock?


I'm not really the right guy to ask about daily OC, I always use my most recent hardware exclusively for benching and whatever platforms I'm not using in current Comps is my "Daily". Right now that's Sil Lotto 11600k and APEX XIII, DR B Die at 3866c13 G1



kingofblog said:


> How hard are you pushing your IMC? IMC is very sensitive to temperature, and it only takes a few degrees to cause memory errors if you've pushed it to the edge. For best stability, I recommend (1) top-intake for best CPU and RAM temperatures, and (2) controlling radiator fans by liquid temperature, not CPU core. If using air cooling or non-Asetek AIO, set a very aggressive fan curve (not silent!) to prevent the IHS temperature from creeping up.
> 
> CineBench errors have nothing to do with RAM. CineBench generates essentially zero load on memory.


Fully agree, for IMC temperature plays a huge role. At the limit it's probably near equal to voltages
On Z690 Strix A and MSI PRO A, Dual Rank OC goes like this for me. High ambient temps with ambient water/air temps of 28C + my Max OC is 3800-3866
Lowering this just a few degrees (apprx 24C) and therefore lowering my cpu temps I can run 4000.
For 4100 I need AC or slightly opened window/winter air ( apprx 17C ).
Here is OC running chilled 14-15C


----------



## newls1

MSI removed the BETA 115 bios from the download section for the tomahawk.... interesting


----------



## ogider

GtiJason said:


> Here is OC running chilled 14-15C


What V for this 4100 setup?
SA,vddq,1.05,ddr4


----------



## criznit

Ok, I did some quick testing today with my MSI Edge board and was able to get in with 3800 CL16 gear 1 with no issues. I am using the most current bios btw. One thing I did notice was that the board does not like 133 for the DRAM, so odd speeds wont work. I had to manually select 100 and then proceeded to tweak my settings.


----------



## JoeRambo

criznit said:


> Ok, I did some quick testing today with my MSI Edge board and was able to get in with 3800 CL16 gear 1 with no issues. I am using the most current bios btw.


Is this with DR DRAM? 2x16GB?



newls1 said:


> MSI removed the BETA 115 bios from the download section for the tomahawk.... interesting


They also removed the 114 beta from Edge, so probably not that good of release either


----------



## criznit

JoeRambo said:


> Is this with DR DRAM? 2x16GB?


It is DR 2x16GB


----------



## Man4cl

First time here, i will share my experience with z690 edge and 12900kf 


















2x16 DR 4266 CL17
1.5 vDimm
RTT 80
SA and VDDQ auto... if i put any value on manual, the board doesnt boot. And if i look on windows, the SA voltage is 1.44~ and the VDDQ 1.2v really weird.
TM5 pass but Cinebench R20 almost 95º LOL (e-cores disabled)

I think my ram is not good enough because I can't boot 4000 CL15 (maybe bc is DR), I built the ADL just yesterday so this weekend I will be wasting hours in bios and not playing games (you know the reference).

Any tip will be appreciate


----------



## kingofblog

Man4cl said:


> TM5 pass but Cinebench R20 almost 95º LOL (e-cores disabled)
> 
> Any tip will be appreciate


Make sure to run TM5 also at 95 degrees, otherwise you can pass TM5 and then later fail when you load up your CPU. Regarding R20, disabling E-cores overvolts your CPU. Scroll back up this page for more information.


----------



## newls1

this is how jacked up the Beta 115 bios is for us tomahawk people. I am physically setting GEAR1, a mem speed of 4039, yet this is what is ACTUALLY getting set shown in cpuz. Its going to GEAR2, and mem controller is wicked slow, and my mem speed is 2686Mhz. This bios is complete trash. If you go back to bclk of 99.80Mhz it will work, if you manually set 100 everything is broken..


----------



## neteng101

Frozburn said:


> I'm using it, haven't tried anything else yet
> 
> View attachment 2536210


Just got it today - can't get it to post 3800 G1 or 4000 G1 so far, 3600 G1 works. Did you need to pump more voltage? I see you're still running the 1.00 BIOS too there.


----------



## elkido122

wonder when asus will drop a new official ( not beta ) firmware for the z690-a d4..


----------



## clackersx

Best I can do currently looks to be 4000C15 G1
12900KF SP81 (91P & 63E) Batch: V139I871 Z690 Strix D4 GSKILL F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA (2X16GB bdie)
1.25V SA - 1.35V VDDQ - 1.52V RAM (will eventually go lower on the ram, maybe)
Any changes to SA make it unstable. Haven't tried lowering VDDQ BUT 1.25V is unstable.








F4-4000C15Q-32GTZR (4X8GB bdie) wouldn't even post at 4000 with 0707 0803 or 0808
Had a nightmare trying to go down to C14 or going up to 4100-4133, gave up.

0803 would not post 4133 at all, could post and boot to windows at 4100 with 1.4V SA & VDDQ, super unstable, seems like the worst bios for me so far.
0803 also would not post if I set ram voltage over 1.525V, couldn't figure that out, only tried the 2X16GB bdies though.
0808 posts 1T up to 3800, wont make it to windows though. (2X16GB bdie)
0707 & 0808 seemed about the same. Can get into windows at 4133C16 but is unstable, tried a heap of different SA & VDDQ voltages up to 1.45V.

I think the firmware/platform/uefi need a heap of improvement, I know it is still early and I get it. Who knows, maybe I have a potato IMC
I have a Z690 Force (Carbon) and some micron ddr5, cant even get it stable at its rated 5200, only got the single 12900KF though, decided to give up on the DDR5 for now.


----------



## kingofblog

clackersx said:


>


Really interesting that your i9 has a V/f point at 52x instead of 53x like many others, including myself. Do you know the production batch/FPO for your CPU?


----------



## clackersx

kingofblog said:


> Really interesting that your i9 has a V/f point at 52x instead of 53x like many others, including myself. Do you know the production batch/FPO for your CPU?


I thought that was already knowledge that the earlier ones went up to 53 but all later ones only go up to 52?
Batch V139I871 Retail boxed


----------



## kingofblog

clackersx said:


> I thought that was already knowledge that the earlier ones went up to 53 but all later ones only go up to 52?
> Batch V139I871 Retail boxed


Thanks, I must have missed that news. Can you also report your cache/ring V/f curve? Steps to do this:

0. Voltage adaptive+auto
1. Disable E-cores
2. Disable ring down-bin
3. Disable thermal velocity boost optimizations
4. LLC8+AC_LL 0.01 (don't run any workloads, just boot Windows, or even BIOS)
5. Sync all cores to 47x, 46x, etc. down to 43x
6. Write down VID or Vcore

Curious to know if the ring VID higher than core is also a bug of the earlier batches.


----------



## Frozburn

neteng101 said:


> Just got it today - can't get it to post 3800 G1 or 4000 G1 so far, 3600 G1 works. Did you need to pump more voltage? I see you're still running the 1.00 BIOS too there.


4000 14 14 14 32 CR2, gear 1, voltages: 1.2 SA and 1.2 VDDQ, DRAM at 1.58 (haven't tried lower yet) + a fan on them so they stay low temps. No issues so far, did 17 hours of testmem5 anta777 and played a bunch of heavy games like BF 2042 and Cyberjunk / SoTR 1080p low to test CPU / RAM.

SR can do 4200 CL 16 CR1 G1 with an old 3600 CL 17 kit but it's probably limiting me so I couldn't lower the CL, but it also required 1.45 SA / VDDQ. I can get a good SR kit to try but I wouldn't really use it for daily at such insane voltages anyway. I bet that it would also require even higher SA to run it at lower CL and 4200+, which is a bit too much for me.

Yes, still on the stock bios. Waiting for a newer one that isn't a beta or for someone to say that these bios upgrades have improved their DR kits at all in any way.


----------



## GtiJason

ogider said:


> What V for this 4100 setup?
> SA,vddq,1.05,ddr4


VDDQ 1.435v same as SA


----------



## playsin

12900K
MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4





PRO Z690-A DDR4115U3.zip - AnonFiles







anonfiles.com




115U3 BIOS

16G(8X2) 4133 CL 15 1T
32G(16X2) 4133 CL16 2T

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------



16G(8X2) 4133 CL 15 1T




























----------------------------------------------------------------------------------





32G(16X2) 4133 CL16 2T
































----------------------------------------------------------------




16G(8X2) 4133 CL 15 1T
BIOS SETING




































































----------------------------------------------------------------




32G(16X2) 4133 CL16 2T
BIOS SETING


----------



## neteng101

Frozburn said:


> 4000 14 14 14 32 CR2, gear 1, voltages: 1.2 SA and 1.2 VDDQ, DRAM at 1.58 (haven't tried lower yet) + a fan on them so they stay low temps.
> 
> Yes, still on the stock bios. Waiting for a newer one that isn't a beta or for someone to say that these bios upgrades have improved their DR kits at all in any way.


No luck for me - I seem to have hit that 3600 wall others have reported. Anything beyond 3600 won't POST with the G.Skill 4000-CL16 kit - verified I got Samsung B-die via Thaiphoon. Could be the IMC in the 12700k I'm using isn't good enough either. All the different beta BIOS for the Z690-A Pro is no help either (incl. the 115U3).

I have tested up to 4000 Gear 1 - but only with SR memory. Going to return the kit and go back to my original set prior to upgrading, slow 4x16GB SR that I got up to 3800-19 stable.


----------



## newls1

playsin said:


> 12900K
> MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRO Z690-A DDR4115U3.zip - AnonFiles
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> anonfiles.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 115U3 BIOS
> 
> 16G(8X2) 4133 CL 15 1T
> 32G(16X2) 4133 CL16 2T
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536659
> View attachment 2536660
> 
> 16G(8X2) 4133 CL 15 1T
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536657
> View attachment 2536658
> 
> 32G(16X2) 4133 CL16 2T
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 16G(8X2) 4133 CL 15 1T
> BIOS SETING
> 
> View attachment 2536663
> View attachment 2536664
> View attachment 2536661
> View attachment 2536662
> View attachment 2536666
> View attachment 2536665
> 
> View attachment 2536667
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 32G(16X2) 4133 CL16 2T
> BIOS SETING
> 
> 
> View attachment 2536674
> 
> View attachment 2536669
> View attachment 2536671
> View attachment 2536673
> View attachment 2536672
> View attachment 2536668
> 
> View attachment 2536675


Congratulations, That board has the bios fix "US" others are waiting for..... We've known this for several days already


----------



## LegendaryAura

I'm on Bios 114 for the MSI EDGE running 3800 CR1, Gear 1 4x8 B-die (CL14-15-15). Interestingly enough MSI removed that bios from their website. It does seem to be fairly buggy.


----------



## newls1

LegendaryAura said:


> I'm on Bios 114 for the MSI EDGE running 3800 CR1, Gear 1 4x8 B-die (CL14-15-15). Interestingly enough MSI removed that bios from their website. It does seem to be fairly buggy.


the "U3" suffix on the 114 bios seems to be the bios that fixes mem issues. Has not been released for mid range and up boards for whatever reason. I got tired of waiting and returned this POS.


----------



## shrimpmaster

New 0807 bios available on Asus website.
I tested it, can't run 1T G1 like 0803 on single rank b-die.
Max stable frequency for me is still 3900mhz gear 1 and 4600mhz gear 2 just like previous bios


----------



## elkido122

I don't see a new bios on there site... link?


----------



## Middleman

F4-3600C16-8GTZSW 8GB X 4 Dimms

3733Mhz 15-15-15-28 2T

VDDQ 1.375
VCCSA 1.375
VDIMM 1.45 (can probably lower to 1.4)

49ns, Copy 64,000 MB/sec

It posted once 3866mhz and was able to game, but crashed after an hour and
never was able to post after reboot no matter the voltage or timings.

Passmark 4300 Single thread ( Asus Default AI OC ) 5.2ghz
With tight timings, went from 4125 to 4300 in passmark.

Asus Strix Z690-A D4 / 12900k


----------



## elkido122

Which bios are you using middleman?


----------



## Frozburn

neteng101 said:


> No luck for me - I seem to have hit that 3600 wall others have reported. Anything beyond 3600 won't POST with the G.Skill 4000-CL16 kit - verified I got Samsung B-die via Thaiphoon. Could be the IMC in the 12700k I'm using isn't good enough either. All the different beta BIOS for the Z690-A Pro is no help either (incl. the 115U3).
> 
> I have tested up to 4000 Gear 1 - but only with SR memory. Going to return the kit and go back to my original set prior to upgrading, slow 4x16GB SR that I got up to 3800-19 stable.


Yeah DR is very picky. They probably won't do anything about it. I might sell mine and do 4200 or so SR CR1.


----------



## Middleman

elkido122 said:


> Which bios are you using middleman?


Hey Elkido,

I'm running with 0707 release 11/10/2021


----------



## neteng101

Frozburn said:


> Yeah DR is very picky. They probably won't do anything about it. I might sell mine and do 4200 or so SR CR1.


Real shame - at 3600CL14 which I briefly tried playing with the results didn't justify hanging on to it. Seems like SR is the answer if you want a hassle free time overclocking RAM.

Interesting new twist with beta BIOS - 115 for the Z690-A Pro DDR4 which appeared for a bit on the main MSI website has been removed too.


----------



## shrimpmaster

elkido122 said:


> I don't see a new bios on there site... link?








TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 | Motherboards | ASUS Gloabl


ASUS TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 is an Intel® Z690 (LGA 1700) ATX gaming motherboard with 16 DrMOS power stages, PCIe 5.0, four M.2 slots, WiFi 6, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type-C®, and Aura Sync RGB lighting.




www.asus.com


----------



## Frozburn

neteng101 said:


> Real shame - at 3600CL14 which I briefly tried playing with the results didn't justify hanging on to it. Seems like SR is the answer if you want a hassle free time overclocking RAM.
> 
> Interesting new twist with beta BIOS - 115 for the Z690-A Pro DDR4 which appeared for a bit on the main MSI website has been removed too.


They probably found a bug with voltages or things not saving correctly.


----------



## postem

neteng101 said:


> No luck for me - I seem to have hit that 3600 wall others have reported. Anything beyond 3600 won't POST with the G.Skill 4000-CL16 kit - verified I got Samsung B-die via Thaiphoon. Could be the IMC in the 12700k I'm using isn't good enough either. All the different beta BIOS for the Z690-A Pro is no help either (incl. the 115U3).
> 
> I have tested up to 4000 Gear 1 - but only with SR memory. Going to return the kit and go back to my original set prior to upgrading, slow 4x16GB SR that I got up to 3800-19 stable.


I wonder how much if any asus put inside according with QVL memory. The list on asus QVL DDR4 is limited, i brought this ballistix 16x2 DDR4 DR that is the QVL, 3600 OC to 3900 without issues, post at 4000 with loose times but instant memmtest fails. 3900 with original timings 16-18-17-38 rock solid. Shame latency go lower as 53ns only, but paid dirty cheap for this ram.,


----------



## eeeven

Did anyone manage to get 4600+ posted on Strix Z690-A? Got to a wall at 4600! with bclk i can do 4635 - that's it! already tried TX VDDQ up to 1.70v. SA is not helpfull in gear 2.
If i could only boot 4800-5000 on Strix with Samsung B-Die Single Rank. My Sticks already did 5000 C17 on Apex XII, so that is not the problem.


----------



## bscool

@eeeven The little I tried SR, I couldn't get b die or Hynix past 4600 I think it was. Both kits I tried have ran 5000+ with 11th gen CPUs.


@owikh84 got SR Hynix to 5000+. [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock

Maybe @owikh84 has a tip?


----------



## Exilon

Another point for the DR vs SR debate

I swapped out to 2x16GB Micron B-die 4400CL19 from my 4x8GB Samsung B-die 4133CL18 kits and got 4133 gear 1 without trying at 1.35v SA. 










The 4 stick Samsung B-die setup needed 1.37v SA for 3733 gear 1.

Now to spend a bunch of time tightening this up..


----------



## 2500k_2

eeeven said:


> Did anyone manage to get 4600+ posted on Strix Z690-A? Got to a wall at 4600! with bclk i can do 4635 - that's it! already tried TX VDDQ up to 1.70v. SA is not helpfull in gear 2.
> If i could only boot 4800-5000 on Strix with Samsung B-Die Single Rank. My Sticks already did 5000 C17 on Apex XII, so that is not the problem.
> 
> View attachment 2536800


what is your maximum for 1 stick on the asus board?


----------



## clackersx

kingofblog said:


> Thanks, I must have missed that news. Can you also report your cache/ring V/f curve? Steps to do this:
> 
> 0. Voltage adaptive+auto
> 1. Disable E-cores
> 2. Disable ring down-bin
> 3. Disable thermal velocity boost optimizations
> 4. LLC8+AC_LL 0.01 (don't run any workloads, just boot Windows, or even BIOS)
> 5. Sync all cores to 47x, 46x, etc. down to 43x
> 6. Write down VID or Vcore
> 
> Curious to know if the ring VID higher than core is also a bug of the earlier batches.


@kingofblog I am not sure it is a bug, probably just how it is intended to be, hence the warning about disabling ring down bin?
LLC8 doesn't exist for me so I used 7.


----------



## kingofblog

clackersx said:


> @kingofblog I am not sure it is a bug, probably just how it is intended to be, hence the warning about disabling ring down bin?
> LLC8 doesn't exist for me so I used 7.
> View attachment 2536839


Thanks for gathering the data, clackersx. Is your VID for 49x core with downbin enabled also 1.385 V? And if I were to guess, do you get VID of 1.275 V for 49x if you enable E-cores? It looks like your CPU has similar behavior to mine, where the ring VID for -2 bins is significantly higher than the core VID, i.e. overvoltage.


----------



## clackersx

kingofblog said:


> Thanks for gathering the data, clackersx. Is your VID for 49x core with downbin enabled also 1.385 V? And if I were to guess, do you get VID of 1.275 V for 49x if you enable E-cores? It looks like your CPU has similar behavior to mine, where the ring VID for -2 bins is significantly higher than the core VID, i.e. overvoltage.


1.288V in bios with E-cores enabled, P cores at 49X
1.385V in bios with E-cores disabled, P cores at 49X

Ringdown bin on or off did not change voltage @49X, only E-cores on or off.


----------



## Falkentyne

clackersx said:


> 1.288V in bios with E-cores enabled, P cores at 49X
> 1.385V in bios with E-cores disabled, P cores at 49X
> 
> Ringdown bin on or off did not change voltage @49X, only E-cores on or off.


Disable the E-cores then set Cache ratio to x36 manually.
Does this still show 1.385v in BIOS? or 1.288v?


----------



## clackersx

Falkentyne said:


> Disable the E-cores then set Cache ratio to x36 manually.
> Does this still show 1.385v in BIOS? or 1.288v?


1.288V
E-cores enabled and cache set to 36 also results in 1.288V

I have no clue what you guys are thinking, but I did some random stuff below
Auto adaptive voltage, LLC7, AC_LL 0.01, TVB optimization off, same as above.

E-cores disabled, [email protected]
[email protected]=1.110V
[email protected]=1.137V
[email protected]=1.172V
[email protected]=1.208V
[email protected]=1.243V
[email protected]=1.288V
[email protected]=1.341V
[email protected]=1.385V

E-cores disabled, [email protected]
[email protected]=1.332V
[email protected]=1.376V
[email protected]=1.430V


----------



## kingofblog

@clackersx Very similar behavior to what I'm seeing. At the default LLC and AC_LL, what is your voltage for 49x core + 8x cache, and is that voltage also stable for 49x core + 47x cache? TVB optimization enabled for stability testing*.

*Match the voltages without TVB, then turn TVB on.


----------



## raad11

Anyone see any improvements on Strix D4 mem oc with the newer BIOSes or is 0707 still the best? Specifically for DR


----------



## notearlyadoptr

zhrooms said:


> I replaced my Strix for a TUF last week, I had originally purchased the Strix for $375 pre-tax on launch, but then I ran into issues such as my 12900K retail being defective and the Gigabyte boards I ordered were also not even worth testing because of memory overclocking issues. Then I stumbled upon this TUF for $240 during the black week sale, bundled with a 12900K tray for just $450, which I obviously couldn't turn down. So I simply returned the first mess of an order, and is now rocking a TUF and a 12900K Tray, and here are the differences I wanted to share with you, after having owned both, TUF vs Strix,:
> 
> *Strix features and upgrades*
> 
> Expansion Slots​*PCIe 3.0 x16 slot* (x8 mode up from x4 on TUF)​​Storage​2x *SATA 6Gb/s ports* (6 up from 4 on TUF)​​USB​1x *USB 3.2 Gen 2 port Type-C* (up from Gen 1 on TUF)​2x *USB 2.0 ports Type-A* (missing on TUF)​1x *USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Front Panel Type-C* (up from Gen 2 on TUF)​​Audio​*Realtek ALC 4080, 32-Bit/384 kHz* (up from Realtek S1200A 24-Bit/192 kHz on TUF)​​Back Panel I/O Ports​1x *BIOS FlashBack button* (missing on TUF)​1x *Clear CMOS button *(missing TUF)​​Internal I/O Connectors​1x *4-pin Chassis Fan headers* (8 up from 7 on TUF)​1x *8-pin +12V Power connector* (8-pin up from 4-pin on TUF)​1x *CPU Over Voltage jumper* (missing on TUF)​1x *S/PDIF Out header* (missing on TUF)​1x *SPI TPM header* (missing on TUF)​1x *Thermal Sensor header* (missing on TUF)​​Special Features​1x *M.2 heatsink* (4 up from 3 on TUF)​​Accessories​2x *SATA 6Gb/s cables* (4 up from 2 on TUF)​1x *ROG key chain* (missing on TUF)​1x *ROG Strix stickers* (up from TUF GAMING stickers on TUF)​​*TUF features and upgrades*
> 
> Expansion Slots​*PCIe 3.0 x4 slot* (missing on Strix)​​Back Panel I/O Ports​1x *Optical S/PDIF out port* (missing on Strix)​​Internal I/O Connectors​1x *COM Port header* (missing on Strix)​​My thoughts on these features and upgrades that I don't care for as a gamer;
> *Second PCIe x16 slot being 8x instead of 4x:* Don't care, will never use it.
> *Two additional SATA ports:* Don't care, will never use them, and even if I did, 4 would be plenty.
> *Faster USB ports, 20 Gbps (2.5GB/s) up from 10 Gbps (1.25GB/s):* Don't care, if I ever used them it would be for an external M.2 drive, and 1.25GB/s is already very fast.
> *Better Realtek Audio*: Don't care, I'm using an external DAC through USB or S/PDIF, as everyone should.
> *BIOS FlashBack button:* Don't care, you should never have to use it, the odds of your board running into an issue that warrants using flashback is extremely low.
> *Clear CMOS button:* Don't care, I use a 50cm 2-pin power button connected to the Clear CMOS header directly on the board, and so far not had to use it once.
> *One more 4-pin fan header:* Don't care, 8 is already so many, at the moment with 3 separate water cooling loops for CPU, GPU and MEM, I'm using 5.
> *Second 8-pin EPS instead of 4-pin:* Don't care, not going to make any difference overclocking unless you're pushing it on LN2 with the Over Voltage jumper, I'm just using 1x8-pin.
> *CPU Over Voltage jumper:* Don't care, as said it's for LN2.
> *S/PDIF Out header:* Don't care, since the TUF has a S/PDIF port on the rear I/O already.
> (For those who don't know, you can buy an external S/PDIF port and hook it up to this header)
> *SPI TPM header:* Don't care, essentially no one uses this.
> *Thermal Sensor header*: I do care, or I used to care until I invested in a farbwerk 360. But even with one, it needs at least 2, preferably 3.
> *M.2 heatsink:* I don't care, never going to use more than 2 drives, and the TUF has heatsinks for 3, also you don't need one for games anyway.
> *Additional SATA cables*: Don't care, obviously.
> *ROG Key chain:* Don't care, obviously.
> *ROG Strix stickers:* I do care, but it depends on which board, my previous ASUS boards has had some very nice stickers.
> 
> *Conclusion on features:* I care a little about the thermal sensor header, and the stickers 🙄. Really nothing else is of any importance to a gaming PC, I would literally trade everything I don't care about for an extra sticker 🤣. Like this is what you're paying for (and the BIOS), at the moment of writing this, the TUF costs $293.5 pre-tax in the EU ($303.1 for the Wi-Fi), and that's before VAT which is up to 25%, meanwhile the Strix is $360.0, so the Strix costs 23% more than the TUF without Wi-Fi and 19% more than the Wi-Fi version, for what? No S/PDIF for my DAC? Oh, I get a nicer sticker in return, and a thermal sensor header I currently have no use for. 😤
> 
> Okay so before I move on to the BIOS differences, let's go through the VRM in detail.. oh wait, it's the same 🤦‍♂️, all they did was remove 1 Phase (2 Stages in Parallel), it's the same controller and stages.. still ridiculously overpowered, and yes it overclocks my P-cores exactly the same, I double checked even, the relevant DIGI+ VRM BIOS settings are the same as well.
> 
> So here we go, this comparison was made with *both boards on the 0803 BIOS* released in late November (26th);
> 
> 
> SettingsOptionsDefaultComment*AI Tweaker*OC TunerKeep Current Settings / OC Tuner I / OC Tuner IIKeep CurrentMissing on StrixPerformance Core RatioAuto / Sync All Cores / By Core Usage / AI OptimizedAuto'AI Optimized' missing on TUFCPU SVID SupportAuto / Enabled / DisabledEnabledMissing on TUF*DIGI+ VRM*VRM Initialization CheckEnabled / DisabledDisabledMissing on TUFCPU Input Voltage Load-line CalibrationAuto / Level 1 - 3AutoMissing on TUFCPU VRM Thermal ControlAuto / Enabled / DisabledAutoMissing on Strix*Boot Voltages*CPU Core/Cache Boot Voltage0.60000 to 1.70000AutoMissing on TUFCPU Input Boot Voltage1.50000 to 2.10000AutoMissing on TUFPLL Termination Boot Voltages0.80000 to 1.80000AutoMissing on TUFCPU Standby Boot Voltage0.80000 to 1.80000AutoMissing on TUFMemory Controller Boot Voltage1.00000 to 2.00000AutoMissing on TUF*Auto Voltage Caps*CPU Core Auto Voltage CapAuto / 0.60000 to 1.70000AutoMissing on TUFCPU Input Auto Voltage CapAuto / 1.50000 to 2.10000AutoMissing on TUF*Tweaker's Paradise*CPU Standby VoltageAuto / 0.8 to 1.800Auto (1.050)Missing on TUFVPPDDR VoltageAuto / 2.5 to 2.800Auto (2.500)Missing on StrixCPU Input Voltage Reset VoltageAuto / 1.5 to 2.100Auto (1.800)Missing on TUF*AI Features*Package Temperature ThresholdAuto / 30 to 115AutoMissing on TUFRegulate Frequency by above ThresholdAuto / Enabled / DisabledAutoMissing on TUFCooler Efficiency CustomizeKeep Training / Stop Training / User SpecifyKeep TrainingMissing on TUFCooler Score30 to 250-Missing on TUFRecalibrate Cooler-Missing on TUFCooler Re-evaluation AlgorithmNormal / More inclined / Very inclined / Less inclined / Least inclinedNormalMissing on TUFOptimism Scale50 to 150100Missing on TUF*AI Tweaker*Extreme Over-voltageEnabled / DisabledDisabledMissing on TUFPCH 1.8V Primary VoltageAuto / 1.8 to 2.1Auto (1.800)Missing on Strix*Onboard Devices*PCIEX16(G3) ModePCIEX16(G3) / M.2 CardPCIEX16(G3)Missing on TUF*ASM1061 Configuration*ASMedia Storage ControllerEnabled / DisabledEnabledMissing on TUFWindows Hot-plug NotificationEnabled / DisabledDisabledMissing on TUFASPM SupportEnabled / DisabledDisabledMissing on TUF*Boot Configuration*Choose your background sceneROG default / Se7enROG defaultMissing on TUFFlexkeyReset / Aura On/Off / DirectKeyResetMissing on TUFMemTest86--Missing on TUF
> 
> Starting from the top, the Strix and Maximus boards feature '*AI Overclocking*', so it replaced '*OC Tuner*', which still exists on TUF.
> '*CPU SVID Support*' is enabled without the option to disable, hence missing, but should just be left enabled regardless.
> 
> '*VRM Initialization Check*' is as useless as it sounds.
> 
> '*CPU Input Voltage Load-line Calibration*' and '*CPU Input Voltage Reset Voltage*' is not something I'm familiar with, LLC probably not nearly as useful as it could be on X299.
> '*CPU VRM Thermal Control*' is just a an on/off switch for thermal protection on the VRM, that you can just disable. (Also this is on TUF, not Strix)
> '*Boot Voltages*' are not something I've found beneficial for ambient overclocking.
> '*Auto Voltage Caps*' is related to AI overclocking?
> '*Extreme Over-voltage*' and '*CPU Standby Voltage*' is not for ambient cooling.
> '*VPPDDR Voltage*' is not something I've ever had to use, can supposedly help in some circumstances with high frequency memory overclocking. (Also, this is on TUF, not Strix)
> '*PCIEX16(G3) Mode*' is for the second PCIe 3.0 x16 slot I believe, which runs in x8 mode and can be used for an M.2 card, TUF is only x4 so that's why this is missing.
> '*PCH 1.8V Primary Voltage*' is not something you have to think about. (Also this is on TUF, not Strix)
> '*ASM1061*' is for the two additional SATA ports on the Strix.
> '*Choose your background scene*' is the anime waifu background scene featuring Shirakami Fubuki. I have the power of god and anime on my side.
> '*Flexkey*' is useless, it doesn't work like you think it does on Maximus boards, it hooks up to your 2-pin reset and basically doesn't work half of the time, and it's not needed anyway.
> '*MemTest86*' is the built in memory test, if you would ever want to run it through the BIOS, which I don't.
> 
> So that's it, by disregarding AI overclocking and some other things, there are basically no differences left. I don't use any of the above that are missing on the TUF, so me moving to TUF from Strix was not noticeable in any way, identical everything, more or less, the only thing I miss is the background scene, but I am sure as hell not going to pay close to $70 for it. If someone has further insight into the CPU Input Voltage LLC behaviour on Z690 and CPU Input Voltage Reset Voltage, or in general just actually use any of the above, please share with us if you use any of them often enough that you would miss one.
> 
> But, for me personally, as a gamer, I'm never going to use AI Overclocking, OC Tuner, VRM Initialization Check, CPU Input LLC/Voltage Reset, Boot Voltages, Auto Voltage Caps, Package/Frequency Threshold, Extreme Over-voltage/Standby Voltage, M.2 Card, ASMedia SATA ports, Flexkey or MemTest86.
> 
> And does it perform differently? No, at least from what I've seen so far, tested it for a few days now, most recently I re-ran 5.0, 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 with the lowest voltage possible in R23, on the same processor of course, and it required the exact same voltage to be stable, with 500kHz Switching Frequency, Power Duty/Power Phase on Extreme (Current/Full Phase) and using LLC 4. It would've been odd if it didn't perform the same, since it's using the same PWM Controller, Power Stages and essentially BIOS, one could almost say.. _it's the same board_, just up to $70 cheaper, although no anime waifu 😔. As for the memory I didn't push it on the Strix either, but I can confirm that it boots the same max IMC frequency, which is expected, since the board can obviously do 5000+ in Gear 2, so it's all IMC in Gear 1, and I'm running 4133 like a breeze right now just like I did on the Strix, I would assume there might be a difference between the boards at above QVL (5333+), but that's obviously completely irrelevant. Also a last note about the two additional power stages on the Strix, pushing 5.3GHz all-core in R23 at close to 1.4V on the TUF, it's only pulling roughly 12A through each stage, which is significantly below their rated 80A maximum, so cooling is of no concern. Especially if you run something like 5.0 (which I did briefly, for science), game stable at only 1.1V, which resulted in a 70 Watt power consumption, and that's just about 4.5A per stage, it literally doesn't even heat up, same for the processor itself, almost runs at idle temps <45c in Warzone at above 200 FPS, severely processor and memory bottlenecked.
> 
> All in all, I feel very lucky I found this TUF for $239.99 pre-tax during the black week sale, and here are some pictures I took of the rig before I returned the Strix, which is a fantastic board obviously 😍, I'd prefer it over the TUF of course (except for the missing S/PDIF), but not at that price sadly, the Strix should've been 6-Phase, so 12 Stages in Parallel (70A down from 80A), also Realtek S1200A audio.. and be priced at $250 🥰 instead of what it is now, $350 😞.
> 
> View attachment 2536285
> 
> View attachment 2536286
> 
> View attachment 2536293


Can't wait to get my Arctic Freezer 420mm LGA 1700 mount so I can verify my G-Gaming X Bios is immature and incompatible with my G.Skill TridentZ 2x8GB Single Rank B-die 16-16-16-36 Ram, send back the Gigabyte for incompatibility, order and get my TUF on and get back to gaming and memory / CPU overclocking on the new system. Tell it like it is *zhrooms *and thanks for all the research done for the enthusiast community, your hard work is much needed and appreciated bro.


----------



## Cam1

So you need discord which is 200Mb additional 
Do i have to change my 2x8Gb 5years old ram for a 500+ Euros 2x16 ?
Srsly, can't get this to work at more than 3600MHz Gear 1, no matter what 😢

Corsair recommend this for intel 300-500 series.

Btw i play many games full maxed with no issues ( with Friends on Discord ) on my beautiful 3440x1440 screenplay. ( Chiv 2, BF2042, Apex Legends... ) no Ray tracing :|


----------



## PolRoger

FYI for Gigabyte owners:

It looks like Gigabyte issued some BIOS updates for their Z690 DDR4 motherboards yesterday? My Giga Z690i has a new F5B BIOS 12/10/21 listed (the previous BIOS was F5A which has been taken down). I checked the other Gigabyte DDR4 motherboards, and they are showing new BIOS with 12/10/21 dates as well. No updates to the DDR5 boards.

Update info for F5B BIOS:

Checksum : 5152
Improve DDR XMP 3200~3600MHz compatibility
Add Legacy Game Compatibility Mode option


----------



## Exilon

neteng101 said:


> there's a cached component in Windows memory management. It just uses extra memory in your system to store recently access stuff from disk.


I upgraded to 32GB to run Tarkov because after a while it would leak 2-3GB of memory and between Chrome and Tarkov, the standby memory gets flushed and frametimes would die. It's a shoddily coded Unity game that tries to stream assets from disk too much and freezes the game to garbage collect but what can you do if you want to play it?

Even when Tarkov or another game isn't leaking memory, it doesn't look good with just Chrome, Steam, and Discord running.










The problem really is current day webapps that eat memory like nothing.









That's memory leaking from a YouTube tab  and the GPU acceleration process. It doesn't go away until I restart the browser process!

Personally I would never go back to 16GB after the luxury of having to never worry about memory usage. Back in 2013 on a 4C/8T CPU I would've closed stuff just to conserve CPU cycles but with a high-end hybrid architecture offering gobs of threads to spare, having to mind background applications would suck.


----------



## Cam1

I'm not sure what to choose between
i have a good seller ( Similar prices ) 2x16 or 4x8 ?

G.Skill Ripjaws V F4-4000C14D-32GVK 
G.Skill 32 Go DDR4-4000 Quad-Kit : F4-4000C15Q-32GTZR

The 4x8 are listed in the QVL for my motherboard.
Could you help me decide ?


----------



## newls1

Exilon said:


> Another point for the DR vs SR debate
> 
> I swapped out to 2x16GB Micron B-die 4400CL19 from my 4x8GB Samsung B-die 4133CL18 kits and got 4133 gear 1 without trying at 1.35v SA.
> 
> View attachment 2536804
> 
> 
> The 4 stick Samsung B-die setup needed 1.37v SA for 3733 gear 1.
> 
> Now to spend a bunch of time tightening this up..


what board are you using, and what bios?


----------



## Exilon

newls1 said:


> what board are you using, and what bios?


ASUS Strix D4 0707

Currently running 4000 16-18-18-40 1.5v VDIMM, 1.4v VDDQ. I'd have to bump up all the timings to hit 4133 and it didn't seem to change performance much, and I can do much lower VCCSA with 4000.

DIMM temperatures never exceed 38C so I'm guessing 1.5v should be fine for Micron 16Gbit B-die?


----------



## Ichirou

Exilon said:


> ASUS Strix D4 0707
> 
> Currently running 4000 16-18-18-40 1.5v VDIMM, 1.4v VDDQ. I'd have to bump up all the timings to hit 4133 and it didn't seem to change performance much, and I can do much lower VCCSA with 4000.
> 
> DIMM temperatures never exceed 38C so I'm guessing 1.5v should be fine for Micron 16Gbit B-die?


Micron B-die is safe up to 1.60-1.65V; might need a fan though
(Ref: Me; I've daily'd 1.63V for a year now and I actively work on my PC for most of the day)


----------



## newls1

Exilon said:


> ASUS Strix D4 0707
> 
> Currently running 4000 16-18-18-40 1.5v VDIMM, 1.4v VDDQ. I'd have to bump up all the timings to hit 4133 and it didn't seem to change performance much, and I can do much lower VCCSA with 4000.
> 
> DIMM temperatures never exceed 38C so I'm guessing 1.5v should be fine for Micron 16Gbit B-die?


awesome man, thanks.. I have this board delivered today and waiting for me. Im hoping my 2x16gb b-die sticks like this board more then my MSI Tomahawk did... Just hoping for 4000 speed again like I had on z490/590 with these sticks... that MSI experience was BRUTAL. 3600 was pulling teeth


----------



## Man4cl

The kit that I currently have, is the following F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB and the maximum that boot is 4000CL16, today a friend lent me this Kit 4000C16D-32GTRSA that on paper seems to be better, and only boot 3600CL15.

I know it is ambiguous what I will point out, but it seems to me that a higher frequency kit has a better chance to boot over 4000 with z690, I will get me some 4400CL17 kit to check this.

All Dual ranks kits.


----------



## eeeven

Cam1 said:


> I'm not sure what to choose between
> i have a good seller ( Similar prices ) 2x16 or 4x8 ?
> 
> G.Skill Ripjaws V F4-4000C14D-32GVK
> G.Skill 32 Go DDR4-4000 Quad-Kit : F4-4000C15Q-32GTZR
> 
> The 4x8 are listed in the QVL for my motherboard.
> Could you help me decide ?


100% go with the F4-4000C14D-32GVK if you want to reach 4000+ on Z690.


----------



## bscool

Cam1 said:


> I'm not sure what to choose between
> i have a good seller ( Similar prices ) 2x16 or 4x8 ?
> 
> G.Skill Ripjaws V F4-4000C14D-32GVK
> G.Skill 32 Go DDR4-4000 Quad-Kit : F4-4000C15Q-32GTZR
> 
> The 4x8 are listed in the QVL for my motherboard.
> Could you help me decide ?


I would go with 2x16 because it will be easier to run than 4x8 since MB is daisy chain and they do better with 2 sticks. 4 sticks does better on t topology MB.


----------



## bscool

Man4cl said:


> The kit that I currently have, is the following F4-4266C17D-32GTZRB and the maximum that boot is 4000CL16, today a friend lent me this Kit 4000C16D-32GTRSA that on paper seems to be better, and only boot 3600CL15.
> 
> I know it is ambiguous what I will point out, but it seems to me that a higher frequency kit has a better chance to boot over 4000 with z690, I will get me some 4400CL17 kit to check this.
> 
> All Dual ranks kits.


It is helpful if you at least list the MB/bios you are using.

Edit i looked at past posts looks like you have MSI z690 Edge ddr4.


----------



## eeeven

here is some more Testing on Alder Lake DDR 4 - this time BFV 720p (custom scene)


----------



## newls1

anyone try the new 0807 asus strix z690 bios yet?


----------



## weyden

PolRoger said:


> FYI for Gigabyte owners:
> 
> It looks like Gigabyte issued some BIOS updates for their Z690 DDR4 motherboards yesterday? My Giga Z690i has a new F5B BIOS 12/10/21 listed (the previous BIOS was F5A which has been taken down). I checked the other Gigabyte DDR4 motherboards, and they are showing new BIOS with 12/10/21 dates as well. No updates to the DDR5 boards.
> 
> Update info for F5B BIOS:
> 
> Checksum : 5152
> Improve DDR XMP 3200~3600MHz compatibility
> Add Legacy Game Compatibility Mode option



Here also appeared. The one I had downloaded is gone. I'll download and test it later to see if anything has improved. Here on my Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4. I'm having trouble lowering the timings at 4000mhz. The most I got so far is 17-21-21-43. These are Micron B die memories. But many get better timings than me. I have a 16gb x2 kit


----------



## Man4cl

bscool said:


> It is helpful if you at least list the MB/bios you are using.
> 
> Edit i looked at past posts looks like you have MSI z690 Edge ddr4.


Sorry yes, z690 edge, 1.14 bios, my bad. 1.5 vdim vddq auto and vcssa auto (any value on manual won't boot xD)


----------



## clackersx

kingofblog said:


> @clackersx Very similar behavior to what I'm seeing. At the default LLC and AC_LL, what is your voltage for 49x core + 8x cache, and is that voltage also stable for 49x core + 47x cache? TVB optimization enabled for stability testing*.
> 
> *Match the voltages without TVB, then turn TVB on.


[email protected] [email protected] 1.376V in bios at auto everything TVB optimization off

What do you want me to do exactly boss? Static vcore so it matches 1.376V in bios or something else?
To get 1.376V in bios with a static voltage, I need to set 1.40V

What stress test?
With the fixed 1.40Vcore (1.376V shown in bios), [email protected], [email protected], E-cores disabled
passed 500% or 10 minutes of karhu with FPU enabled
passed cinebench R23 single and multi
passed 15 minutes of realbench
hwinfo open for all tests, reported vcore min=1.296V max=1.385V average 1.333V. temps peaked 82C cores and package.

I ran prime95 for literally 1 minute on every test type, temps got to 90C pretty quick as expected.

I have not touched CPU overclocking since the time you just sync all cores and smash a static voltage.
I have not looked into overclocking the CPU properly yet, it is on the to do list, watched all the skatterbench videos on rocket and alder just haven't really studied/focused on it.

off topic, judging the TIM spread pattern, my CPU IHS seems to be pretty concave (lower in center), I have only used the one bock though, Corsair XC7. If I was aiming to try clock it hard it would need a lapping for sure.


----------



## kingofblog

@clackersx Thanks for testing. It looks like your cache also has a lot of headroom for undervolting @ 47x. 



> my CPU IHS seems to be pretty concave (lower in center),


Could it be this? Cooling issues with Intel’s Alder Lake - Problems with the LGA-1700 socket and a possible workaround | Page 4 | igor'sLAB


----------



## 2500k_2

Engineering versions
DDR4 MAG Z690 TOMAHAWK WIFI *115U1*
DDR4 MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFI* A14U1*
DDR4 MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI* 114U1*
PRO Z690-P DDR4 *A13U1* 





Z690 инженерные версии - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## newls1

2500k_2 said:


> Engineering versions
> DDR4 MAG Z690 TOMAHAWK WIFI *115U1*
> DDR4 MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFI* A14U1*
> DDR4 MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI* 114U1*
> PRO Z690-P DDR4 *A13U1*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z690 инженерные версии - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


i'll happily give these a try if my asus rog strix lets me down later today. some how doubt it tho


----------



## BattlePhenom

zhrooms said:


> 16GB is overkill for essentially all games, but first a brief recap on what these absolute clowns has been shouting recently, it started off with me being the voice of reason of course;


I staunchly disagree. Maybe you can make that argument for 32GB, but not 16GB. That ship has sailed long ago. You have right to your opinion, but you are very wrong on this one and pagefile and a fast Nvme is not a substitute for RAM in a modern video game. I've had a number of games surpass 16GB. I've seen games use 22GB. I almost feel like your comment is an out of date April fool's joke it's so preposterous.


----------



## Arni90

Considering how much RAM Cities Skylines, or Flight Simulator 2020 will eat up, the claims of 16GB being overkill ring hollow. Another potential nail in the DDR4 vs DDR5 discussion is how much bandwidth PCIe 5.0 provides. 64GB/s is very similar to DDR-4000.


----------



## Smaz

newls1 said:


> anyone try the new 0807 asus strix z690 bios yet?


this work in 0707 but in the 0807 have errors

SA 1.41 DRAM 1.54375 DQ 1.35


----------



## dbuilt

2500k_2 said:


> Engineering versions
> DDR4 MAG Z690 TOMAHAWK WIFI *115U1*
> DDR4 MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFI* A14U1*
> DDR4 MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI* 114U1*
> PRO Z690-P DDR4 *A13U1*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Z690 инженерные версии - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


thank you for posting this.
I have DDR4 Edge WIFI. On v100 I can post maximum: 4133, on v114 I can post 4000, on v114u1 I can post 3600.
AIDA also reports 0 latency on new bios version.
Seems to be new entry in BIOS called “EVENTUAL DRAM VOLTAGE”.
It seems regardless of voltage and timings there is now an even more “real” wall of 3600 for MSI on this specific bios update. However, to some credit.. I have not previously been able to post with CL14 and with the new version I am able to post 14-14-14-22 1T 3600.


----------



## Man4cl

dbuilt said:


> thank you for posting this.
> I have DDR4 Edge WIFI. On v100 I can post maximum: 4133, on v114 I can post 4000, on v114u1 I can post 3600.
> AIDA also reports 0 latency on new bios version.
> Seems to be new entry in BIOS called “EVENTUAL DRAM VOLTAGE”.
> It seems regardless of voltage and timings there is now an even more “real” wall of 3600 for MSI on this specific bios update. However, to some credit.. I have not previously been able to post with CL14 and with the new version I am able to post 14-14-14-22 1T 3600.


Same here, on V114 i'm just able to post 4000cl16, maybe i will try the v100 from the msi website bios.

Thanks!


----------



## JoeRambo

dbuilt said:


> It seems regardless of voltage and timings there is now an even more “real” wall of 3600 for MSI on this specific bios update.


Same here. Not even 3700 with manually set ODT is possible now with 114U1 on my Edge


----------



## p4spooky

Does MSI Pro Z690-A (non WiFi and WiFi versions) share the same bios? Just got my 12700K/690-A Pro WiFi DDR4. Would like to the flash the A13U1 bios, before I do wanted to check if this will work with my WiFi version?


----------



## Skunk0001

p4spooky said:


> Does MSI Pro Z690-A (non WiFi and WiFi versions) share the same bios? Just got my 12700K/690-A Pro WiFi DDR4. Would like to the flash the A13U1 bios, before I do wanted to check if this will work with my WiFi version?


The BIOS files on MSI's website are identical for the wifi and non-wifi, so the beta should also be the same






PRO Z690-A DDR4


PRO series motherboards, tuned for better performance by Core Boost, Memory Boost, Extended Heatsink Design, M.2 Shield Frozr, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, Lightning Gen5, Front Type-C, 2.5G LAN




www.msi.com









PRO Z690-A WIFI DDR4


PRO series motherboards, tuned for better performance by Core Boost, Memory Boost, Extended Heatsink Design, M.2 Shield Frozr, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, Lightning Gen5, Front Type-C, 2.5G LAN, Wi-Fi 6




www.msi.com


----------



## p4spooky

Skunk0001 said:


> The BIOS files on MSI's website are identical for the wifi and non-wifi, so the beta should also be the same
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRO Z690-A DDR4
> 
> 
> PRO series motherboards, tuned for better performance by Core Boost, Memory Boost, Extended Heatsink Design, M.2 Shield Frozr, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, Lightning Gen5, Front Type-C, 2.5G LAN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRO Z690-A WIFI DDR4
> 
> 
> PRO series motherboards, tuned for better performance by Core Boost, Memory Boost, Extended Heatsink Design, M.2 Shield Frozr, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, Lightning Gen5, Front Type-C, 2.5G LAN, Wi-Fi 6
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com


Thanks, will flash after my test bench build is complete shortly. Upgrading from 2600K to 12700K - exciting.


----------



## iceboy

MSI Edge 4800 SRx2 Gear2 SA=1.2V DRAM=1.5V default XMP timings


----------



## Mr69

Hello would like some help, msi pro z690-A,i7-12700kf, i have this g.skill kit









When i enable XMP it will only boot at 4000 gear 2 (latency 81 ns) and not gear 1











If i ever try to only set on Bios "Gear 1" with same setup it will not post, same with 3800, but 3600 does work










What i can try to reach a good 4000mhz 16CL gear1? i tried DRAM = 1.45-1.5 didnt seems to work, SA = 1.35 also.
Stock bios is the issue?and i need one of these betas? what about this ram kit?

@anubis1127 i saw you have same board and ram as me if im not wrong (my cpu is kf), any tips? mine dont go on gear 1 xmp


----------



## ES IST ZEIT

Smaz said:


> this work in 0707 but in the 0807 have errors
> 
> SA 1.41 DRAM 1.54375 DQ 1.35
> View attachment 2537097


I had the same problem !
I reduced the SA voltage from 1.38 to 1.32 V.
after that no more errors.
possibly the same problem with you


----------



## iceboy

MSI Edge 4800 SRx2 Gear2 SA=1.2V DRAM=1.5V slightly optimized timings

Edit: need Q=1.45V and 1:1 to be stable


----------



## notearlyadoptr

I love Gigabyte, they updated the BIOS for the Gaming X a day before the Arctic cooler LGA 1700 mounting bracket arrived and it directly addressed the "Broken XMP" issue. Issues addressed in new BIOS update included. . .

Checksum : A809
Improve DDR XMP 3200~3600MHz compatibility
Add Legacy Game Compatibility Mode option
Finally got it to boot with ram in slot 2 and 4, and after a little fiddling around got everything working. Booted in XMP Profile 1 at 3600 16-16-16-36 gear 1. If it (BIOS Update) arrived a day later I would've returned it. So far running good. There is so much new tech now it blows away my 11 year old IVY system. Amazed!!! NOW: let's get down to some OC'ing on the ram and CPU!!! Thanks *zhrooms *and the rest of you guys for your research, information and encouragement in getting this system up and running.* LEEEEEET'S GHOOOO!!! *And a special thanks goes out to Gigabyte for listening to our needs...LOL! Shhh, but they are listening. . .










I can't get any of Gigabyte's software to run . . .Gigabyte is a great *HARDWARE* company, but their *SOFTWARE* is complete ****e.


----------



## truehighroller1

Hello,

Eveyone first post here.

Is this good? If not, what should I change settings wise memory timings wise?










I feel like I can make some changes and get better performance here memory setting wise but, don't know what to do from here.


----------



## iceboy

MSI Edge 4266 *SRx4* Gear2 SA=1.2V DRAM=1.5V CL16
*







*


----------



## Middleman

Switched to dual rank dimms that were sitting in my x299 box
16GB x 2 F4-3600C16-16TZN [G.Skill Samsung B]

4000mhz 15-15-15-32 2T G1
VDIMM 1.481
VCCSA 1.44
VDDQ 1.41

Latency 46.3 ns
Read 66,237 MB/sec

Asus Strix z690-A D4 Bios 0707

My single rank that run @ 4000mhz 16-16-16-36 T1 8GB X4 on X299 Asus Rampage Apex VI had
more trouble on this LGA1700 motherboard - could only do CL17-17-17-37 8GB X2 on Z690.

The dual rank runs optimal for some reason. but, trouble pushing it over 4000mhz. not sure what's safe voltages
compared to what i have set for 24/7.


----------



## Middleman

truehighroller1 said:


> Hello,
> 
> Eveyone first post here.
> 
> Is this good? If not, what should I change settings wise memory timings wise?
> 
> View attachment 2537169
> 
> 
> I feel like I can make some changes and get better performance here memory setting wise but, don't know what to do from here.


Yeah not bad, impressive you got 3900mhz with 4dimms, is it stable?
Please provide voltages, and memory type / brand


----------



## EarlZ

Does anyone know if the MSI Z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 can run kits with XMP at 4000Mhz gear1? I have an exsiting g.skill 4000Mhz cl18 (4 sticks of 8GB) and I was hoping to move that over and not spend more on memory.

EDIT: GSKILL TRIDENT Z RGB F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB 16GB


----------



## acoustic

EarlZ said:


> Does anyone know if the MSI Z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 can run kits with XMP at 4000Mhz gear1? I have an exsiting g.skill 4000Mhz cl18 (4 sticks of 8GB) and I was hoping to move that over and not spend more on memory.


It's more IMC based than anything.


----------



## EarlZ

acoustic said:


> It's more IMC based than anything.


My current 9700K runs it w/o issues but I need to use 1.370 vDIMM and I was hoping the vast majority if not all of the 12900K can do so too!

EDIT: What is the max save voltage for VCCSA and VDDQ for 24/7 usage.


----------



## flashkillpro

notearlyadoptr said:


> I love Gigabyte, they updated the BIOS for the Gaming X a day before the Arctic cooler LGA 1700 mounting bracket arrived and it directly addressed the "Broken XMP" issue. Issues addressed in new BIOS update included. . .
> 
> Checksum : A809
> Improve DDR XMP 3200~3600MHz compatibility
> Add Legacy Game Compatibility Mode option
> Finally got it to boot with ram in slot 2 and 4, and after a little fiddling around got everything working. Booted in XMP Profile 1 at 3600 16-16-16-36 gear 1. If it (BIOS Update) arrived a day later I would've returned it. So far running good. There is so much new tech now it blows away my 11 year old IVY system. Amazed!!! NOW: let's get down to some OC'ing on the ram and CPU!!! Thanks *zhrooms *and the rest of you guys for your research, information and encouragement in getting this system up and running.* LEEEEEET'S GHOOOO!!! *And a special thanks goes out to Gigabyte for listening to our needs...LOL! Shhh, but they are listening. . .
> 
> View attachment 2537170
> 
> 
> I can't get any of Gigabyte's software to run . . .Gigabyte is a great *HARDWARE* company, but their *SOFTWARE* is complete ****e.


I also updated to the newest bios with the same description. My previously stable 3600mhz dual rank cl16 doesn't even post now, and the 3600mhz cl16-16 XMP profile doesn't either. Right now best I can do is 3400mhz cl16 but I might keep tweaking it a bit. For me it got actually worse vs release bios.


----------



## iceboy

truehighroller1 said:


> Hello,
> 
> Eveyone first post here.
> 
> Is this good? If not, what should I change settings wise memory timings wise?
> 
> View attachment 2537169
> 
> 
> I feel like I can make some changes and get better performance here memory setting wise but, don't know what to do from here.


Try lower tWR, it makes my game feel better while showing no difference in benchmark.
Is tRFC too low? If I use a tRFC like this I can feel games stutter (not microstutter).
I heard on previous gens 133 base clock and even CL could be more stable. Not sure if this is true on ADL.


----------



## bscool

EarlZ said:


> Does anyone know if the MSI Z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 can run kits with XMP at 4000Mhz gear1? I have an exsiting g.skill 4000Mhz cl18 (4 sticks of 8GB) and I was hoping to move that over and not spend more on memory.
> 
> EDIT: GSKILL TRIDENT Z RGB F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB 16GB


Pretty unlikely any ddr4 z690 board will run [email protected] XMP. I would bet you will need to manully set timings and voltages and get ready to dive in and spend time tweaking. If you want XMP click and go, go with 2x16 3200-3600mhz or 4x8 3200mhz. MB are daisy chain and will have easier time running 2 sticks vs 4.


----------



## newls1

for the love of jesus, i finally got a board that will clock my ram like z490/590 did! Im currently @ 46.9ns... Can someone please assist me with what settings I should further improve upon?! Much appreciated.


----------



## bscool

@newls1 If only someone would post his cmo file and txt file. you could look at that and it has all the setting you could compare. You just want me to come over there and do it for you in person  lol


----------



## newls1

bscool said:


> @newls1 If only someone would post his cmo file and txt file. you could look at that and it has all the setting you could compare. You just want me to come over there and do it for you in person  lol


well hell yeah I do! Atlanta GA area.... come on, coffee's on me


----------



## EarlZ

bscool said:


> Pretty unlikely any ddr4 z690 board will run [email protected] XMP. I would bet you will need to manully set timings and voltages and get ready to dive in and spend time tweaking. If you want XMP click and go, go with 2x16 3200-3600mhz or 4x8 3200mhz. MB are daisy chain and will have easier time running 2 sticks vs 4.


To be fair my Z390 doesnt run it at XMP too! I need to apply 1.370v vDIMM, 1.200v VCCIO and 1.200v VCCSA and no other tweak timings has loose timing of 18-22-22-42. 

I was looking at maybe getting a Kingston Fury 3600Mhz CL16-22-22 if my 4000Mhz wont boot on something like 1.4v DIMM and 1.25c VCCSA on Z690 or it should with tthose volts?


----------



## GtiJason

Windows 10 latency using same Aida64 is way better. Not that it really matters but just something I noticed when comparing 11 to 10 (21H1v2)
Also got a 12900k and the painfully slow mem training when using 12700Kf on Strix A D4 is gone. 4000c14 booted without even trying where the i7 took days of tweaking
To be fair the 12900k SP is way higher as well, here is what happens with simple AI OC, a "+175% OC"


----------



## truehighroller1

Middleman said:


> Yeah not bad, impressive you got 3900mhz with 4dimms, is it stable?
> Please provide voltages, and memory type / brand


Yeah it was stable but the rtls weren't perfect. I updated to the newest 0807 bios and can no longer get to it.. Best I can do now is 3600Mhz gear 1, 14-14-14-28-1. I might go back to 0803 but not tonight. I was running 1.45v memory sa 1.34v vddq 1.35.

Kit is F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR I bought couple years ago now.




bscool said:


> Pretty unlikely any ddr4 z690 board will run [email protected] XMP. I would bet you will need to manully set timings and voltages and get ready to dive in and spend time tweaking. If you want XMP click and go, go with 2x16 3200-3600mhz or 4x8 3200mhz. MB are daisy chain and will have easier time running 2 sticks vs 4.


I can boot xmp 4000 with all four sticks fine just not gear 1.


----------



## ObviousCough

I finally got around to testing plain old boring XMP with this bios and it passed easily. So I ordered 4 sticks of F4-4000-C14D-16GTRG to see if they're stable at XMP or maybe i really do have a weak IMC.










The 4 patriot viper sticks i had was able to post at 4100 in gear 1. So my expectations are high.


----------



## robertr1

notearlyadoptr said:


> I love Gigabyte, they updated the BIOS for the Gaming X a day before the Arctic cooler LGA 1700 mounting bracket arrived and it directly addressed the "Broken XMP" issue. Issues addressed in new BIOS update included. . .
> 
> Checksum : A809
> Improve DDR XMP 3200~3600MHz compatibility
> Add Legacy Game Compatibility Mode option
> Finally got it to boot with ram in slot 2 and 4, and after a little fiddling around got everything working. Booted in XMP Profile 1 at 3600 16-16-16-36 gear 1. If it (BIOS Update) arrived a day later I would've returned it. So far running good. There is so much new tech now it blows away my 11 year old IVY system. Amazed!!! NOW: let's get down to some OC'ing on the ram and CPU!!! Thanks *zhrooms *and the rest of you guys for your research, information and encouragement in getting this system up and running.* LEEEEEET'S GHOOOO!!! *And a special thanks goes out to Gigabyte for listening to our needs...LOL! Shhh, but they are listening. . .
> 
> View attachment 2537170
> 
> 
> I can't get any of Gigabyte's software to run . . .Gigabyte is a great *HARDWARE* company, but their *SOFTWARE* is complete ****e.


Your screenshot is showing gear2 here, not gear1. Look at your mem controller frequency vs dram frequency.


----------



## bscool

@robertr1 You just crushed all gigaybte z690 ddr4 MB owners dreams


----------



## notearlyadoptr

robertr1 said:


> Your screenshot is showing gear2 here, not gear1. Look at your mem controller frequency vs dram frequency.


Thanks for the heads up. I was tempted to switch it to gear 1 in the bios but still trying to get to stock stable which at this rate might not happen. Also cannot enter the bios on boot up. It's just a black screen until it gets to the windows login screen, the gigabyte logo and post info are completely bypassed. Disabled fast-boot in bios, tried everything. Clearing the CMOS and removing the battery doesn't help. Finally figured out have to remove one stick of ram, then it will show gigabyte logo and the bios can be entered. Put in a support ticket with gigabyte, waiting to hear back but the more I get to know this board the more I hate it.


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

After days of tweaking, best I can do that I'm comfortable with on 4x8 SR B die is 4000 14-15-15-35 G1 CR2. I was disappointed at first, but guess that's actually pretty good from what I've seen here. Running an MSI Edge on 114 BIOS, on 100 BIOS the same profile worked as well. Can boot up 4266 CL 15 at insane (for me) voltages, and 4100/4133 won't stabilize without more voltage than I'm comfortable with dailying, and since I can run my current profile with 1.25/1.35/1.48 SA/DDRQ/VDIMM that's where I'm leaving it. Can't complain too much I suppose. Seeing multiple users hit a brick wall at 3600 on this board for G1 is perplexing to me, since I've not had any issues whatsoever.


----------



## newls1

anyone using win10 with their alder lake cpu here? im having a serious weird far cry 6 issue, and was thinking formatting again and loading back win10 to see if issue is fixed. Im just worried ill loose performance by going back to win10, or is this not true? Does alder lake really need win11?


----------



## Frozburn

newls1 said:


> anyone using win10 with their alder lake cpu here? im having a serious weird far cry 6 issue, and was thinking formatting again and loading back win10 to see if issue is fixed. Im just worried ill loose performance by going back to win10, or is this not true? Does alder lake really need win11?


I gained fps on win 10 in sotr and bf2042. Not much tho, like 5 fps, worse in other games so I stick to win 11

here is a farcry bench


----------



## kingofblog

I got my Asetek LGA1700 bracket and it lowered my core temperature 10-ish degrees like others mentioned. Surprisingly, I also saw a reduction in idle temperature, which means that my IMC temperature might have also gone down a few degrees. I need to see if this gives me the headroom to push VccSA further and run 4133 MT/s.


----------



## Glottis

newls1 said:


> Does alder lake really need win11?


I would say yes. Noticing a lot of problems with Win10 and 12700K affinity. Some games lag and stutter really bad because affinity is messed up in Win10 in certain games. For example Shadow of the Tomb Raider and AC: Origins always launches with E cores deselected (in Processor Affinity), I have to manually enable all cores after starting these games to fix this CPU stutter. I'm sure there could be many more games and apps with this problem in Win10, but this is just from my own personal testing. I'll be fresh installing Win11 when I get around to it.


----------



## truehighroller1

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> After days of tweaking, best I can do that I'm comfortable with on 4x8 SR B die is 4000 14-15-15-35 G1 CR2. I was disappointed at first, but guess that's actually pretty good from what I've seen here. Running an MSI Edge on 114 BIOS, on 100 BIOS the same profile worked as well. Can boot up 4266 CL 15 at insane (for me) voltages, and 4100/4133 won't stabilize without more voltage than I'm comfortable with dailying, and since I can run my current profile with 1.25/1.35/1.48 SA/DDRQ/VDIMM that's where I'm leaving it. Can't complain too much I suppose. Seeing multiple users hit a brick wall at 3600 on this board for G1 is perplexing to me, since I've not had any issues whatsoever.


What are your other settings memory timing wise? Secondaries etc? Probably bios related on my part because I could run gear 1 3900 fine but the last dim rtl was off by two on bios 0803 now on 0807 it won't go past 3600 but the rtls are spot on.


----------



## grey.clock

So far not great luck with "nicer" ram on my z690 D4 TUF/12700k...... Back to the store it goes since it wont run full speed or at the low timings of my other kit.... I will stick with my cheapie b die binned 4000mhz/cl15 kit and just worry about some of the sub timings. Tridant Z Royal Elite 4266 32gb is pictured below. NOT XMP stable for either profile 1 or 2 in g1/t1.


----------



## SpirosKGR

Hello, while i'm waiting for the mobo's arrival ( Msi Pro z690 - A DDR4 ) i m a little confused as a newbie to the Ram - oc hobby to what ram sticks 32GB to choose. What would you go for?

a. G.Skill Flare X 32GB DDR4 (2x16GB) 3200MHz ( Samsung B Die )
[ F4-3200C14D-32GFX ]

b. Crucial Ballistix Black 32GB DDR4 (2x16GB) ( Micron Die )
[ BL2K16G36C16U4B ]
* But i dont know if these are DR or SR
CHECK: Crucial support say that the extension M16FE1 is the Dual Rank version and the M8FB1 is single rank. 





Crucial 32gb (2x16gb) cl16 3600 BL2K16G36C16U4B - Single Rank


I’m aware the BL2K16G36C16U4B 32gb 3600 cl16 kit has been mentioned in a number of threads now in relation to whether it is single or dual rank. Rather than post in all the threads it’s been mentioned in I’ll post here for ease of reference. I’ve just had an e-mail back from Crucial who have...




forums.overclockers.co.uk





*Cpu: i7 12700K


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

truehighroller1 said:


> What are your other settings memory timing wise? Secondaries etc? Probably bios related on my part because I could run gear 1 3900 fine but the last dim rtl was off by two on bios 0803 now on 0807 it won't go past 3600 but the rtls are spot on.


Here's a screen shot:









DIMMS in use are some cheap(ish) OLOY Blade 4000 CL16 2x8 kits.


----------



## Jscs1992

Has anyone tried the new bios (0807) for ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming Wifi DDR4 ?


----------



## truehighroller1

Jscs1992 said:


> Has anyone tried the new bios (0807) for ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming Wifi DDR4 ?


Yeah for my single b die it sucks.


----------



## ObviousCough

ObviousCough said:


> I finally got around to testing plain old boring XMP with this bios and it passed easily. So I ordered 4 sticks of F4-4000-C14D-16GTRG to see if they're stable at XMP or maybe i really do have a weak IMC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The 4 patriot viper sticks i had was able to post at 4100 in gear 1. So my expectations are high.



Boots no problem at CR1 but errors instantly in TM5. The short test i use for big changes was throwing many errors while the much longer new Anta777 test only tossed 1 in the first few seconds.



















edit: Changing VDDQ from Auto (1.25) to 1.26 decreased the number of errors in tm5 significantly. only 1 in 30 seconds on my short test vs the 8+ i was getting before. Now i get to keep playing with it in .005 intervals until errors stop or posting stops.


edit2: at 1.265 VDDQ it takes over 30 seconds for the first error to show up, but then they start rolling in


----------



## truehighroller1

ObviousCough said:


> Boots no problem at CR1 but errors instantly in TM5. The short test i use for big changes was throwing many errors while the much longer new Anta777 test only tossed 1 in the first few seconds.
> 
> View attachment 2537322
> 
> View attachment 2537323
> 
> 
> 
> edit: Changing VDDQ from Auto (1.25) to 1.26 decreased the number of errors in tm5 significantly. only 1 in 30 seconds on my short test vs the 8+ i was getting before. Now i get to keep playing with it in .005 intervals until errors stop or posting stops.
> 
> 
> edit2: at 1.265 VDDQ it takes over 30 seconds for the first error to show up, but then they start rolling in
> 
> View attachment 2537326



Read this write up and adjust your settings appropriately.

It may be as simple as You made need to up your tRAS some.










MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com





My settings were off on a couple of my timings. I'm going to fix them tonight.


----------



## ObviousCough

truehighroller1 said:


> Read this write up and adjust your settings appropriately.
> 
> It may be as simple as You made need to up your tRAS some.


I'm just trying to run XMP at 1T.

With VDDQ at 1.29v is now takes over four and a half minutes for an error to appear. I should be pretty close.


----------



## truehighroller1

ObviousCough said:


> I'm just trying to run XMP at 1T.
> 
> With VDDQ at 1.29v is now takes over four and a half minutes for an error to appear. I should be pretty close.


Well, your tRAS might be to tight bub.


----------



## ObviousCough

1.295v and 1.30v started throwing TM5 errors instantly again. 1.305v wouldn't post, said memory overclock failed when it finally did.

1.31v took over eight and a half minutes to get the first error, so i let it finish and only 1 more popped up.


----------



## MikeS3000

Jscs1992 said:


> Has anyone tried the new bios (0807) for ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming Wifi DDR4 ?


Need more testing but 0807 and 0808 both seemed to fail memory tests on the previous stable settings on 0707.


----------



## truehighroller1

MikeS3000 said:


> Need more testing but 0807 and 0808 both seemed to fail memory tests on the previous stable settings on 0707.


What modules do you have it of curiosity? DB SB?


----------



## bscool

MikeS3000 said:


> Need more testing but 0807 and 0808 both seemed to fail memory tests on the previous stable settings on 0707.


Last night I compared 707 to 808. 808 gives a little bit better performance # using CPUz bench, Geekbench5 and r23 to test.

But for mem oc stability 808 fails mem test setting that worked on 707. There might be a way to get 808 stable but I dont know what it takes. Maybe a increase or decrease in a voltage or changing a memory algorythym. I dont care enought to spend the time to figure it out. I got to 96 or 97%(memtestpro) before error on 808 so it would probably be game and daily stable.

2x16 b die 4133c15-15-15. Old screenshot of timings and voltages used that also passed 100% on 803 and 707.


----------



## criznit

How feasible is 4800? I just watched this video from HC and was shocked at how well ddr4 4800 managed against ddr5 6000.

DDR4 vs DDR5 - Gaming Benchmarks with Alder Lake


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

criznit said:


> How feasible is 4800? I just watched this video from HC and was shocked at how well ddr4 4800 managed against ddr5 6000.
> 
> DDR4 vs DDR5 - Gaming Benchmarks with Alder Lake


For 4400+ 32GB setups you would be looking at either Hynix DJR kits or Micron Rev. B kits in gear 2. I know it's been said that you don't need 32GB for strictly gaming, and while that can be said, you would be giving up dual rank advantages if going for a 2x8 B die kit. Honestly though if you're going to run gear 2 may as well just wait for DDR5 to become available. I think for flat out gaming performance, dual rank B die 4000 - 4133 is simply going to offer some of the best you can get, DDR5 or not. The problem is there isn't a single "tech reviewer" out there who actually knows how to clock memory properly, much less trouble shoot XMP compatibility issues. As stated earlier in this thread, B die 4000 - 4133 should be possible with most IMCs that aren't potatoes and will get you excellent performance.

Also, turn off the E cores and crank the ring up if you're running Windows 10, if you're running 11 it's still probably best to run the E cores due to the thread scheduler.


----------



## criznit

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> For 4400+ 32GB setups you would be looking at either Hynix DJR kits or Micron Rev. B kits in gear 2. I know it's been said that you don't need 32GB for strictly gaming, and while that can be said, you would be giving up dual rank advantages if going for a 2x8 B die kit. Honestly though if you're going to run gear 2 may as well just wait for DDR5 to become available. I think for flat out gaming performance, dual rank B die 4000 - 4133 is simply going to offer some of the best you can get, DDR5 or not. The problem is there isn't a single "tech reviewer" out there who actually knows how to clock memory properly, much less trouble shoot XMP compatibility issues. As stated earlier in this thread, B die 4000 - 4133 should be possible with most IMCs that aren't potatoes and will get you excellent performance.
> 
> Also, turn off the E cores and crank the ring up if you're running Windows 10, if you're running 11 it's still probably best to run the E cores due to the thread scheduler.


Thanks for the response! I was wondering because I was able to snag some DDR5 6000 from newegg today and didn't know if it would make more sense to just clock my memory higher or swap out configurations.


----------



## truehighroller1

This is it for me. I found my sweet spot. I had to tweak slowly working my way up after reverting back to BIOS version 0803 to get it and do research via this guide but, my RTLs are perfect, everything is set correctly 100%.


----------



## Exilon

Jscs1992 said:


> Has anyone tried the new bios (0807) for ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming Wifi DDR4 ?


Swapped to it for 2xSR 16Gbit Micron B-die. Works fine 
Currently running at 4000 15-18-18-34-2T 1.2v SA


----------



## Revv23

zhrooms said:


> Congratulations, you started the *one* game that that consumes a lot of RAM, I have also noticed it hogs a ton of RAM in the menu, it makes no sense. Also, *it does not use nearly as much as you claim*, you just have way too many things running, and if you wanted to spend up to an extra $150 to be able to run whatever it is that you're running, while playing, then that's your choice, no one is going to stop you, just don't go telling random people to upgrade when they don't need to, like you literally just did. 32GB is an actual *waste* *of money* for every of gamer that don't run, as previously mentioned, _demanding software_, instead you could get a 12700K and 16GB over a 12600K and 32GB as an example, hell of a lot more gaming performance, faster by at least 6%, up to 25% depending on how well the game utilized those two extra cores.


Bro - I don't need a 12900k either. I can run warzone on a 4790k with a 2900xt. 

Don't tell me I'm running to much **** - I'm using my pc spec'd the way I want it the way I want to use it. I told you I had a lot running, I don't stop and reboot my pc every time I pull a game up. 

I don't know why we have to have this debate every time memory capacities increase. It's not a fight. It just is what it is. If you want 16GB good for you. I want 32GB. Mostly dual rank sticks are running great for people in this thread so I don't know why you are upset that people are trying to have size and speed, regardless of how use full or useless it is.


----------



## Bakka

Ok. Have replaced my gigabyte with the tuf z690 plus wifi d4. Can someone tell me the correct BIOS names for vccsa and vddq?

Thanks


----------



## MikeS3000

truehighroller1 said:


> What modules do you have it of curiosity? DB SB?


4x8gb Hynix DJR at DDR 3800 speed Gear 1. Should be single rank.


----------



## Agent-A01

Not bad. Only needs 1.2SA.

I'll revisit 4133 on later bios when they are out.












Bakka said:


> Ok. Have replaced my gigabyte with the tuf z690 plus wifi d4. Can someone tell me the correct BIOS names for vccsa and vddq?
> 
> Thanks


SA and VDDQ


----------



## EarlZ

Is Alder Lakes DDR4 memory controller weaker than on Coffe Lake? I ask this because with my 9700K the 4000Mhz kit (8GBx4) works with XMP and the only adjustment I make is the DIMM to 1.370 to make it run. My 12900K and MSI Edge WIFI DDR4 is still on its way but its starting to sound that this is a hit or miss with Alder Lake or did I just get extremely lucky on my 9700K? Gigabyte does pump the VCCIO and SA to very high values with XMP thats why I lower them to 1.20 each.


----------



## bscool

EarlZ said:


> Is Alder Lakes DDR4 memory controller weaker than on Coffe Lake? I ask this because with my 9700K the 4000Mhz kit (8GBx4) works with XMP and the only adjustment I make is the DIMM to 1.370 to make it run. My 12900K and MSI Edge WIFI DDR4 is still on its way but its starting to sound that this is a hit or miss with Alder Lake or did I just get extremely lucky on my 9700K? Gigabyte does pump the VCCIO and SA to very high values with XMP thats why I lower them to 1.20 each.


It is not apples to apples comparison since a lot has changed between the two. More than I know about or how to describe but in simple terms no it is not "weaker".

Even though you might compare say ADL at 3600 vs 4000 CML. ADL will have higher latency(worse) but higher bandwidth(better) and higher performance(better) in pretty much everything. When I say higher latency for ADL many will assume oh no it is slower/worse, but there is more to it than just latency.

Have no worries your ADL setup will slaughter your Coffee Lake(call it coffin lake because it is dead  But in actual use you might not "feel" a difference but in benches or software that can measure the difference will be large.

I like to "play" with new hardware and ADL has been the most fun and impressive by FAR in years. It is awseome.

Edit this post was sponsored and paid for by Intel  lol kidding

Edit 2 Your experience my vary as I have seen many people have issues with MSI Edge. So you might hate ADL. I admit I got lucky and got a very good IMC and good CPU in general as far as I can tell. A lot of it is lotto luck, pray to the OC gods  for a good bin. But with that MB I wouldnt expect much going by the feedback I have seen.

Edit 3 lol I might have the MSI boards mixed up(Edge and Tomahak?), maybe it was the Tomahawk that people had issues with. Cant keep up. I know for sure MSI and Gigabyte I see a lot of complaints. MSI z690 A ddr4 is good though.


----------



## Agent-A01

GtiJason said:


> Windows 10 latency using same Aida64 is way better. Not that it really matters but just something I noticed when comparing 11 to 10 (21H1v2)
> Also got a 12900k and the painfully slow mem training when using 12700Kf on Strix A D4 is gone. 4000c14 booted without even trying where the i7 took days of tweaking
> To be fair the 12900k SP is way higher as well, here is what happens with simple AI OC, a "+175% OC"


Since we are running similar timings, have you tried lower SA voltage? 1.4+ seems unnecessary but maybe that's part of the IMC lottery.
I'm using 1.2SA. I just set it first try and it's stable. Lower may be possible


----------



## Mr69

Huh what i can try msi pro z690-A,i7-12700kf, B-die DR 4000 16-19-19-39 1.4v XMP wont post on gear 1 (only on gear 2).
I tried looser timing but nothing, will changing VDDQ, SA or vram make difference for make it to windows? had them on auto
Seems also that "memory try it" function doesnt even work.
Will a different bios from stock make difference (no official yet?) does w11 or 10 matter ? or just bad IMC luck ( what test i can try to be sure of this).

Since it doesnt work im trying to optimize a 3600mhz profile. I get a stable test at 15-18-18-37 - 700 Trfc - Sa 1.25 - vddq auto - 1.4 Vram, everything else auto

But if i try those lower timing i get these errors









What could i improve ? peace


----------



## truehighroller1

Middleman said:


> Yeah not bad, impressive you got 3900mhz with 4dimms, is it stable?
> Please provide voltages, and memory type / brand


I went back to 0803 and nailed down all the memory settings bro!!!!! I have it on lock down 100% I had to knit pick through all the settings one by one like in this guide here. After each setting I saved my profile / progress, to not lose anything if I messed up, one by one until all the way through and the rtls finally locked in and man what a difference let me tell you!!


----------



## notearlyadoptr

notearlyadoptr said:


> I love Gigabyte, they updated the BIOS for the Gaming X a day before the Arctic cooler LGA 1700 mounting bracket arrived and it directly addressed the "Broken XMP" issue. Issues addressed in new BIOS update included. . .
> 
> Checksum : A809
> Improve DDR XMP 3200~3600MHz compatibility
> Add Legacy Game Compatibility Mode option
> Finally got it to boot with ram in slot 2 and 4, and after a little fiddling around got everything working. Booted in XMP Profile 1 at 3600 16-16-16-36 gear 1. If it (BIOS Update) arrived a day later I would've returned it. So far running good. There is so much new tech now it blows away my 11 year old IVY system. Amazed!!! NOW: let's get down to some OC'ing on the ram and CPU!!! Thanks *zhrooms *and the rest of you guys for your research, information and encouragement in getting this system up and running.* LEEEEEET'S GHOOOO!!! *And a special thanks goes out to Gigabyte for listening to our needs...LOL! Shhh, but they are listening. . .
> 
> View attachment 2537170
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gigabyte Z690 Gaming X Update: No matter what method is employed, the* gigabyte* logo screen no longer appears. No way to enter bios. *All* methods have been tried, fast boot disabled in BIOS. Probably a memory problem. If anyone out there has experienced a similar issue, let me know. Oh & just found out a USB port on the rear IO is M-MALF. Hate to do it . . . going to have to do a tear down and make the return. . .


----------



## newls1

EarlZ said:


> Is Alder Lakes DDR4 memory controller weaker than on Coffe Lake? I ask this because with my 9700K the 4000Mhz kit (8GBx4) works with XMP and the only adjustment I make is the DIMM to 1.370 to make it run. My 12900K and MSI Edge WIFI DDR4 is still on its way but its starting to sound that this is a hit or miss with Alder Lake or did I just get extremely lucky on my 9700K? Gigabyte does pump the VCCIO and SA to very high values with XMP thats why I lower them to 1.20 each.


as of right now its BOARD DEPENDENT. I was told since i was having dram clocking issues that my memory controller was weak and get a different chip type BS, and thats just what it was BS. Switched boards and now my mem will clock to the moon (not literally LOL) but my goal of 4000+MT/s with my 32gb and low 40ns speeds was met with CL15 timings. Alder Lake is so new motherboards companies have to catchup on bios updates....


----------



## notearlyadoptr

.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

notearlyadoptr said:


> View attachment 2537411


12700k


----------



## notearlyadoptr

.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

notearlyadoptr said:


> 12700k





notearlyadoptr said:


> 1270
> [QUOTE="notearlyadoptr, post: 28910964, member: 654


----------



## notearlyadoptr

.


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> Is Alder Lakes DDR4 memory controller weaker than on Coffe Lake? I ask this because with my 9700K the 4000Mhz kit (8GBx4) works with XMP and the only adjustment I make is the DIMM to 1.370 to make it run. My 12900K and MSI Edge WIFI DDR4 is still on its way but its starting to sound that this is a hit or miss with Alder Lake or did I just get extremely lucky on my 9700K? Gigabyte does pump the VCCIO and SA to very high values with XMP thats why I lower them to 1.20 each.


You can't compare Coffee Lake/Comet Lake with Alder Lake. Skylake cores are buried and completely dead. While the main voltages are still used for DDR4 compatibility, there are differences in how they are implemented (even some of the minimum DR/DD timings you can use are higher, otherwise you will end up with write/copy half than read bandwidth, etc, or no POST). You've already seen the wild west of BIOS bugs with support so far.

It is more accurate to compare Alder Lake with Rocket Lake, as the gearing system was basically backported for a single IMC (the drawbacks of the 14nm port caused RKL to suffer a latency access penalty).

Even with Gear 1 and 1T, you aren't going to be hitting the same latency you hit with RKL and Gear 1+1T, and no where what you would hit with CML. But the IPC increase from CML to ADL just blows CML out of the water, so ADL won't lose to CML in any CPU limited situation anyway.

And with regards to DDR5, ADL has just insane scaling, but you need to be able to hit 6800 1T on DDR5 (Gear 2 only), which people should be starting to do next year, when good kits aren't $1500 on ebay for a scalp.


----------



## bscool

Decided to test 807 since I had tried 808 and couldn't pass memtestpro.

807 has similar performance to 707(when using AI OC) and passed [email protected]% using same setting as other previous tests

Edit added Universal2 memtest and CPUz screen and link. CPU OC is AI OC









Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5200 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR


[606r3z] Validated Dump by WIN11SATA (2021-12-14 08:05:42) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB




valid.x86.fr


----------



## ObviousCough

Memory training on MSI Pro Z690A must be somewhat broken somewhere. I went too far and couldn't post then previously stable timings were throwing errors when i went back. 

Very annoying not being able to go back to stable settings after a failed attempt.


----------



## solon

ObviousCough said:


> Memory training on MSI Pro Z690A must be somewhat broken somewhere. I went too far and couldn't post then previously stable timings were throwing errors when i went back.
> 
> Very annoying not being able to go back to stable settings after a failed attempt.


try 1.15u3 bios (i had the same issue with v1.00) and RTLs manual.


----------



## shrimpmaster

newls1 said:


> as of right now its BOARD DEPENDENT. I was told since i was having dram clocking issues that my memory controller was weak and get a different chip type BS, and thats just what it was BS. Switched boards and now my mem will clock to the moon (not literally LOL) but my goal of 4000+MT/s with my 32gb and low 40ns speeds was met with CL15 timings. Alder Lake is so new motherboards companies have to catchup on bios updates....


I have 12700k + z690 tuf and the max I can get fully stable (pass memtest5 and linpack xtreme) is 3900mhz with single rank b-die. If I set it to Gear 2 it works fine up to 4600mhz, even passes testmem5.
Pretty sure it's the IMC...


----------



## criznit

ObviousCough said:


> Memory training on MSI Pro Z690A must be somewhat broken somewhere. I went too far and couldn't post then previously stable timings were throwing errors when i went back.
> 
> Very annoying not being able to go back to stable settings after a failed attempt.


114 is great for memory overclocking. I've went as far as 4200 G1 and the board didn't post, but I was able to recover pretty quickly.


----------



## ObviousCough

solon said:


> try 1.15u3 bios (i had the same issue with v1.00) and RTLs manual.


That's the one I am using 


criznit said:


> 114 is great for memory overclocking. I've went as far as 4200 G1 and the board didn't post, but I was able to recover pretty quickly.


I'll give it a shot. Was that with DR dimms or SR?


----------



## criznit

ObviousCough said:


> That's the one I am using
> 
> I'll give it a shot. Was that with DR dimms or SR?


DR


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Decided to test 807 since I had tried 808 and couldn't pass memtestpro.
> 
> 807 has similar performance to 707(when using AI OC) and passed [email protected]% using same setting as other previous tests
> 
> Edit added Universal2 memtest and CPUz screen and link. CPU OC is AI OC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5200 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
> 
> 
> [606r3z] Validated Dump by WIN11SATA (2021-12-14 08:05:42) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> valid.x86.fr



I find it interesting that your memory wants 1.55v and your vddq Jack's itself up to match that voltage.. I also noticed that your vssa turned itself up to 1.45v. interesting indeed. I was able to lock in gear 1 3900 with my memory yesterday and have a way better feel for setting memory settings manually on this platform now. That info I noticed above can probably be helpful pushing things further for me too.




ObviousCough said:


> Memory training on MSI Pro Z690A must be somewhat broken somewhere. I went too far and couldn't post then previously stable timings were throwing errors when i went back.
> 
> 
> 
> Very annoying not being able to go back to stable settings after a failed attempt.


You can probably just go back down to a lower setting let it boot then slowly boot into higher settings until your back where you were as that's what I had to do yesterday after going back to a more stable bios.


----------



## Bakka

Still cant get past 3200 in memtest86. Ran at 3200 last night with no issues. However loaded up aida64 extreme and even at 3200 it throws a hardware issue detected error with just the memory test within a few seconds. Any thoughts on what may be going wrong?


----------



## truehighroller1

Bakka said:


> Still cant get past 3200 in memtest86. Ran at 3200 last night with no issues. However loaded up aida64 extreme and even at 3200 it throws a hardware issue detected error with just the memory test within a few seconds. Any thoughts on what may be going wrong?


Probably your memory timings are off.


----------



## Skunk0001

Seems some new MSI beta BIOS files appeared in here today:






Beta/MP - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## bass junkie xl

mornin guys , my 12900k and Asus Strix z690 ddr4 showed up at my door . 

I'm currently on the rig in my sig . 8gb x 4 sticks of team group extreme 4133 cl-18-18-18-38 @ 4133 cl-16-16-16-36 1.5v stable on a cheap z390 Gigabyte peo wifi on my 9900ks that has a insane imc . 

my team group kit is on the Strix d4 qvl list . 

what should I try first xmp reboot ? 
leave all auto. if it fails try 1.45v / 1.40 vcssa 1.45 vddq ? . 

I have saved all my current z390 bios and ram profiles and the windows m.2 is staying with my z390 incase so it would.be plug and play to go back to


----------



## Forsaken1

Skunk0001 said:


> Seems some new MSI beta BIOS files appeared in here today:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beta/MP - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


1.15u3 is pretty good for pro a ddr4.Any non rar download links?


----------



## JoeRambo

Skunk0001 said:


> Seems some new MSI beta BIOS files appeared in here today:


Sadly our Edge is stuck on 114 since October.


----------



## bscool

@truehighroller1 I set those voltages and tested them manually as other voltages errored. If only it was that easy to leave on auto.

That is how you can spend weeks and month tweaking memory is trying every setting manually.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> @truehighroller1 I set those votlages and tested them manually as other voltages errored. If only it was that easy to leave on auto.
> 
> That is how you can spend weeks and month tweaking memory is trying every setting manually.


Yeah I'm going to be lowering my twr timing tonight when I get home via the timings tWRPE / tWRPDEN because I overlooked it last night after getting my rtls in line finally and being so ecstatic about it 😂 that I started gaming with my brothers. That should bring my latency down more.

I'm probably going to send Asus support an email to get them to add this info to their bios updates from here on out so I can just flash their bios updates without any issues in the future.


----------



## bscool

@truehighroller1 Get Asus to add what info?


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> @truehighroller1 Get Asus to add what info?


Hopefully my memory module profile info. Whatever they do in the bios to add the memory info so it auto loads correct settings when you boot the first time.


----------



## ObviousCough

Skunk0001 said:


> Seems some new MSI beta BIOS files appeared in here today:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beta/MP - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


----------



## Middleman

Noticed stability issues with 4000mhz 15-15-15-35 G1 T2, Games starting to crash. I think you need a proper waterblock to support VCCSA @ 4000mhz gear1. I'm just using an AIO 280.

At first i thought it was my memory overheating @ 45C , i put a 140 fan on it, and it peaks at 37c.
VCCSA 1.38 seemed best, but still crash , went all the way to 1.4X. not sure man, loosened timing too.

Im settling for 3866mhz 15-15-15-35 G1 T2
VDIMM 1.421
VCCSA 1.344
VDDQ 1.35
47.x ns


----------



## Mr69

Skunk0001 said:


> Seems some new MSI beta BIOS files appeared in here today:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beta/MP - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Anyone tested that 116 msi pro-a? any improve on the 3600 wall and memory training?


----------



## Peaches182

bscool said:


> Decided to test 807 since I had tried 808 and couldn't pass memtestpro.
> 
> 807 has similar performance to 707(when using AI OC) and passed [email protected]% using same setting as other previous tests
> 
> Edit added Universal2 memtest and CPUz screen and link. CPU OC is AI OC
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5200 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
> 
> 
> [606r3z] Validated Dump by WIN11SATA (2021-12-14 08:05:42) - MB: Asus ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 - RAM: 32768 MB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> valid.x86.fr



Hi, I am very interested in know the voltage applied in the bios for your ram and for VCSSA and VDDQ.


----------



## ObviousCough

Mr69 said:


> Anyone tested that 116 msi pro-a? any improve on the 3600 wall and memory training?


My 3800CL14 kit stopped posting in XMP and the Memory Try it Profile for 4000C17 also didn't post. Both were possible with 1.15u3.


I plopped in my DJR 5333CL22 kit and tried to make this post. First BSOD was Memory_managment second one was related to the Kernel. 



I flashed to 1.14 to finish.


Z690 is on its way to surpassing Z490 in under 6 months lol


----------



## criznit

Middleman said:


> Noticed stability issues with 4000mhz 15-15-15-35 G1 T2, Games starting to crash. I think you need a proper waterblock to support VCCSA @ 4000mhz gear1. I'm just using an AIO 280.
> 
> At first i thought it was my memory overheating @ 45C , i put a 140 fan on it, and it peaks at 37c.
> VCCSA 1.38 seemed best, but still crash , went all the way to 1.4X. not sure man, loosened timing too.
> 
> Im settling for 3866mhz 15-15-15-35 G1 T2
> VDIMM 1.421
> VCCSA 1.344
> VDDQ 1.35
> 47.x ns


If that's the case, I'm thinking 4000 isn't really possible for day to day activities?


----------



## Bakka

truehighroller1 said:


> Probably your memory timings are off.


The memory is rated at 4000 15,16,16,36. This is what I have set. Shouldnt I be able to use those timings even at 3200?


----------



## ObviousCough

F6 -> Enable XMP -> F10 -> TM5 -> This post










Edit: Muh performance


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

Any thoughts on running 1N vs 2N command rate? I have to drop down to 3733 13-13-13-30 to run 1N stable. I imagine running 4000 at 2N should be better?


----------



## solon

Is msi save profile to usb broken ?


----------



## Exilon

Middleman said:


> Noticed stability issues with 4000mhz 15-15-15-35 G1 T2, Games starting to crash. I think you need a proper waterblock to support VCCSA @ 4000mhz gear1. I'm just using an AIO 280.
> 
> At first i thought it was my memory overheating @ 45C , i put a 140 fan on it, and it peaks at 37c.
> VCCSA 1.38 seemed best, but still crash , went all the way to 1.4X. not sure man, loosened timing too.
> 
> Im settling for 3866mhz 15-15-15-35 G1 T2
> VDIMM 1.421
> VCCSA 1.344
> VDDQ 1.35
> 47.x ns


Depends entirely on your RAM setup. 

2xSR Micron B-die 4000 with 1.20V SA
4xSR Samsung B-die 3733 with 1.35V SA

I could push 4133 with the 2xSR setup but the gains are miniscule for another 150-200mV SA


----------



## ObviousCough

1.14 couldn't boot 3800c14 xmp, 4000c17 memory try it profile loaded but caused irq not less or equal bsod.

back to 1.15u3 and i can boot 3800c14 xmp easily.


----------



## Gardiff

@Middleman @Exilon 

If anyone needs a reference on 4x8gb running @4000 15-15-15-30 2t Gear 1 (patriot viper 4400cl19 samsung B-die)

Been running bios 0002 (never ended up testing 707 since this worked)


----------



## bscool

Peaches182 said:


> Hi, I am very interested in know the voltage applied in the bios for your ram and for VCSSA and VDDQ.


sa 1.45v
dq 1.5v


----------



## bscool

@Garlicky [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock

Strix A d4 4000c15 4x8


----------



## eeeven

For those who hoped for a ROG Max D4 Board like Apex D4 - you guys will be disappointed to hear, that ASUS confirmed not to launch anything like that. ROG Max will focus on D5.

Source: german ROG Podcast latest episode with der8auer and ASUS engineers


----------



## EarlZ

bscool said:


> sa 1.45v
> dq 1.5v


Are these safe SA and QD voltages for 24/7 usage with an AIO?


----------



## bscool

EarlZ said:


> Are these safe SA and QD voltages for 24/7 usage with an AIO?


Ill let you know in a year or two  Up to you to decide. It is to me.


----------



## truehighroller1

Bakka said:


> The memory is rated at 4000 15,16,16,36. This is what I have set. Shouldnt I be able to use those timings even at 3200?



Your timings, secondaries etc. matter though. Rtls.


----------



## MikeS3000

Gardiff said:


> @Middleman @Exilon
> 
> If anyone needs a reference on 4x8gb running @4000 15-15-15-30 2t Gear 1 (patriot viper 4400cl19 samsung B-die)
> 
> Been running bios 0002 (never ended up testing 707 since this worked)


How in the world are you stable with VCCSA at only 1.2v? My 4x8gb Hynix DJR won't post past DDR 3900 Gear 1 and that's at 1.35v VSSA and beyond. Granted I only have a 12700k so maybe the IMC is just way inferior.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

notearlyadoptr said:


> Gigabyte Gaming X Update: Regained BIOS access. It was an NVIDIA firmware update for 700 - 1000 series graphics cards, I'm running a GTX 1080. I applied the update and BAM!!! Now getting Gigabyte logo screen and able to get access to the BIOS. Keeping the Gaming X DDR4 board now. Here is the NVIDIA firmware update link. . . NVIDIA Graphics Firmware Update Tool for DisplayPort 1.3 and 1.4 Displays


----------



## truehighroller1

MikeS3000 said:


> How in the world are you stable with VCCSA at only 1.2v? My 4x8gb Hynix DJR won't post past DDR 3900 Gear 1 and that's at 1.35v VSSA and beyond. Granted I only have a 12700k so maybe the IMC is just way inferior.



I think it's his bios he's in letting him get that far tbh. Everything looks okay but his first rtl is off a little. Not that it's not stable mind you, I don't know could be stable but it's off and some things seem tight setting wise. I'm about to go home and tweak my settings one more little time then I'll save my progress and try pushing it up a little.


----------



## Gardiff

truehighroller1 said:


> I think it's his bios he's in letting him get that far tbh. Everything looks okay but his first rtl is off a little. Not that it's not stable mind you, I don't know could be stable but it's off and some things seem tight setting wise. I'm about to go home and tweak my settings one more little time then I'll save my progress and try pushing it up a little.



Haven't touched my RTL's. Thought people were having issues trying to adjust manually so i just left them.


@MikeS3000 
there is some behavior with the VCCSA and VDDQ TX, had to keep them somewhat close. just maxing out vccsa didn't work, and my board/cpu wanted VDDQ TX > VCCSA (but not too much)


----------



## Middleman

Ok, i take it back, gave it another go earlier today.
found a stable setting, but latency isn't as good.

4000mhz Samsung b-die dual rank
16-16-16-37 2T G1

vddq 1.375
vccsa 1.411 [posts 1.408]
vdimm 1.4812 [posts 1.492v]

Still I think i would need better cooling to crank it up


----------



## bscool

@Gardiff If that 4x8 can pass memtest I would be amazed. Not knocking it just there is a difference from passing various memory test to just running and it "works". 

It can be misleading if people see that and think it has been memtested. Like people see @safedisk posts and think they should be able to run it if he does. Well he works for Asus and probably has some of the best binned CPUs, ICM and ram etc available I would guess. To think the average consumer can run what the top stuff you see posted online is unrealistic. I partly post this because I have fallen into it myself in the past. But it really does come down to a big part of it being luck, lotto. Without good parts/top bins you cant run top clocks and tight timings etc.

@Gardiff This isnt aimed at you more of a rant or thinking a loud


----------



## grey.clock

Interesting ram profile for people to look at, wonder how much of it is real....
Purchased as:
Cl 15 16 16 36
NOT xmp stable at G1 T1 so far. 

Previously I had GSKILL RIPJAW DDR4 4000 1.4v cl18 @ g1 t1 stable so more tweaking may be needed.


----------



## safedisk

Gardiff said:


> @Middleman @Exilon
> 
> If anyone needs a reference on 4x8gb running @4000 15-15-15-30 2t Gear 1 (patriot viper 4400cl19 samsung B-die)
> 
> Been running bios 0002 (never ended up testing 707 since this worked)
> 
> View attachment 2537516
> 
> View attachment 2537517
> View attachment 2537529


wow awesome


----------



## grey.clock

I am giving up the dream (whatever that is)
Here is a quick rundown for my experiences this generation. Each x16 or whatever is a differnt kit or brand, not just a different timing. XMP2 profiles mostly @ G1 T1 when possible
.

After running through 2x 12600k
1x 12700k
z690 ASUS TUF motherboard
2x16gb cl 14 @ 3600 1.45
2x 16gb cl 15 4000 1.5
2x 16gb cl 18 4000 1.45
2x 16gb cl 16 42XX 1.5

Which one I will keep? The CL14 3600.
Why? Because I can run it at the cl14 settings but 3800mhz stable.

IMC does seem to degrade after time or there is something else going on with voltages on auto settings for z690. Averages seem OK.... but those max peak postings and benchmarks will be regulated by other factors.


----------



## EarlZ

bscool said:


> Ill let you know in a year or two  Up to you to decide. It is to me.


I'm looking for information and not some tongue and cheek reply but thank you.


----------



## Exilon

Exilon said:


> Depends entirely on your RAM setup.
> 
> 2xSR Micron B-die 4000 with 1.20V SA
> 4xSR Samsung B-die 3733 with 1.35V SA
> 
> I could push 4133 with the 2xSR setup but the gains are miniscule for another 150-200mV SA
> View attachment 2537515


I swapped to 100:100 at 1.20V SA, 1.55V DRAM

















-2 tRAS, -2 tRTP at 100:100 gives me consistently 2% higher Civ6 benchmarks. Total gaming perf increase over 3733CL15 B-die 4xSR is 3-5%. The high tRFC needed for 16gbit micron rev.b is brutal. Anything less than 630 is unstable after warm up even with a 120mm fan pointing at the sticks.


----------



## Falkentyne

EarlZ said:


> I'm looking for information and not some tongue and cheek reply but thank you.


This CPU has been out for just over a month. No one knows what's safe or not. It's not skylake cores anymore. It's a completely brand new arch.
You're going to have to use some common sense, or experiment on your own. Probably best to stick with the limits you used on Rocket Lake, since that also isn't skylake cores. Good luck.


----------



## MikeS3000

I'm new to Intel memory overclocking. I have 4x8gb Hynix DJR DDR 3800 sticks stable at 1.42v mem, 1.35v SA and 1.35v VDDQ with TM5 Anta777 extreme 3 cycles. My 12700k can comfortably boot Gear 1 DDR 3900 and that's it. I tried some quick settings at DDR 3900 by only relaxing tRFC a bit. I got like 300 memory errors in 30 minutes. Does anyone have advice at some settings to try to get 3900 stable? How do I rule out memory settings vs. insufficient voltage to system agent as the culprit? The screenshot shows my stable DDR 3800 settings.


----------



## bscool

EarlZ said:


> I'm looking for information and not some tongue and cheek reply but thank you.


That is a legit answer. It is up to you to decide. How can I decide what is safe for you? Some people dont want to run over 1,25v some 1.35.

On Rocket Lake I was running 1.45io and 1.5v sa. Most wouldnt run that but I did and still do. You have to decide.


----------



## Bakka

I ran aida64 last night for 10 hrs without issue with my RAM at factory default bios (2133(66?)) no problems. The second I closed aida, blue screen. page fault in non paged location. Thoughts? replace the ram? Thanks


----------



## bscool

4266c16-16-16

Strix A d4 808 
sa 1.4
vdda 1.5
dram 1.55
mem kit gskill ripjaw 4000c14-15-15 2x16


----------



## solon

my 24/7 sweet spot


----------



## dbuilt

@zhrooms

I drank the cool-aid. You have turned me into a monster. All - I'm a serious FPS player, latency matters to me. Decided to jump on board with 2x8 SR b-die to maximize potential.
For those curious, *F4-4000C14D-16GTZR G.Skill Product Site Newegg Product Link

I9-12900k @ STOCK
2x8 SR 4000 14-15-15-35 Gear 1 (XMP)
MSI MPG z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 (v114)*

I have not played all too much yet.
_NOTE: This is just to show and prove that it is not an issue with *YOUR BOARD*_

BIOS OPTIMIZED DEFAULTS (AUTO EVERYTHING) + XMP *ENABLED*








*XMP TRAINED TIMINGS*

























Low effort at tightening some timings
1.59 *VDIMM* @ *4133*









Updates to follow..


----------



## bscool

@dbuilt I think the "issue" people had with z690 Tomahawk and Edge was with DR b die not SR.

I dont think I have seen any DR b die 4133 to 4266(with tight sub and passing mem test) on MSI. Maybe the MSI z690 A that seems like the best MSI board for DR from what I have seen.

Maybe it is just me but your post comes off like you are here to prove people wrong about MSI mb? I probably missed something 😁

"_NOTE: This is just to show and prove that it is not an issue with *YOUR BOARD"*_

Edit for clarity I have owned both MSI and Asus the last few gens so no favorite. I think it is good to talk about issues with a product if there is one and if people cant run say DR b die at the same clock they can with say Strix using same components that is good to have the info out there.

On z490 MSI Unify was better than z490 Hero for 2x16 mem OC. z390 Hero was the better for 4x8, MSI I think was better for 2x8 on 4 dim boards. Always goes back and forth. z590 Apex was better than z590 Unify X in gear 1, UNify X did better with DR b die. etc


----------



## dbuilt

bscool said:


> @dbuilt I think "issue" people had with z690 Tomahawk and Edge was DR b die not SR.
> 
> I dont think I have seen any DR b die 4133 to 4266(with tight sub and passing mem test) on MSI. Maybe the MSI z690 A that seems like the best MSI board for DR from what I have seen.
> 
> Maybe it is just me but your post comes off like you are here to prove people wrong about MSI mb? I probably missed something 😁
> 
> "_NOTE: This is just to show and prove that it is not an issue with *YOUR BOARD"*_


1/3 of this thread is complaining about "x" board and how they can't POST over xxxx.
My intention was to calm the herd as it seems that folks are up in arms about how their board cannot do this/that. I think some may not have good RAM or are simply not following recipes posted in here correctly. I am just your average noob with an internet connection.. the only *REAL ISSUE *I had thus far was with Gigabyte's Z690. So it is mind boggling that other's results != my results. We, collectively, know from the information in this thread that ASUS TUF has proven to be most successful.. specifically folks with MSI boards have been complaining or voicing concerns with wall @ *3600*.

Before I send out my RAM (2x16 *DR* *3466 *16-18-18-36 b die) today or tomorrow, I'll swap them in and post my *DR* *4133 *results w/ memtest.
I was able to get some pretty decent timings with *4133 *but did not push hard.

There are certainly inconsistencies currently with board firmware, *v100*/*v114 *does not allow me the same ceiling. *DR *b-die *4000*/*4133 *ceilings respectively.
I can assume that with what comes next there will be further optimizations, however, even on stock *XMP *w/ *AUTO *voltages I am able to POST *4000* _regardless _of *firmware.*


----------



## rissler84

bscool said:


> 4266c16-16-16
> 
> Strix A d4 808
> sa 1.4
> vdda 1.5
> dram 1.55
> mem kit gskill ripjaw 4000c14-15-15 2x16


Where you able to hit +4000 on other bios as well? I have tried 0003, 0707 and 0807.
I am able to boot but it is so unstable, it just gives errors right away.
I have almost tried all combinations of sa and vdda.
I have a 4000mhz 16 16 16 36 dual rank kit from GSkill, most I can do is 3900 mhz, which is completely stable at just 1,2 sa.

I have the same board as you Strix A d4 .


----------



## ObviousCough

Falkentyne said:


> Probably best to stick with the limits you used on Rocket Lake, since that also isn't skylake cores. Good luck.


This is bad advice imo.

While it's true Rocket Lake was no Skylake, it was still ultra mature 14nm. 

Who knows what 10nm can handle? (no one)


----------



## bscool

rissler84 said:


> Where you able to hit +4000 on other bios as well? I have tried 0003, 0707 and 0807.
> I am able to boot but it is so unstable, it just gives errors right away.
> I have almost tried all combinations of sa and vdda.
> I have a 4000mhz 16 16 16 36 dual rank kit from GSkill, most I can do is 3900 mhz, which is completely stable at just 1,2 sa.
> 
> I have the same board as you Strix A d4 .


I was stable with 707, 803, 807 @4133c15 could boot and bench 4266 with those also with DR b die. I think I have a pretty good IMC. Good mem sticks also. I have a dozen or so dr b die and this is one of the better ones.

I think the trick is finding the right combo of sa and dq. To much or too little of either will not boot or error in mem test. Take a lot of testing. Cant really just copy others setting and voltages but they can be used as a guide. Like I couldnt use @safedisk cmo it would error even rasing main timings to 15-16-16 or 16-16-16.

But I think getting that point of 4266 is right on the edge for most with DR so it is going to come down to details like temps and minor voltages adjustments being too high or too low. But from my testing you will need in that 1.35 to 1.4v plus on SA to get 4000+ memtest stable. Probably IMC dependant though.

Also mem temps if I go much over 44c errors come much easier. I am just air cooling mem with airflow from AIO fans no direct fans.


----------



## warbucks

bscool said:


> 4266c16-16-16
> 
> Strix A d4 808
> sa 1.4
> vdda 1.5
> dram 1.55
> mem kit gskill ripjaw 4000c14-15-15 2x16


Would you do me a favour and save your bios settings and attach the txt file to this post. What SP is your cpu? I've got the same ram kit as you and I'd like to try your settings.


----------



## bscool

@warbucks here is txt

Edit that is now with AI oc. When I tested mem I just had CPU oc at defaults. Still all the same mem timings and voltages.

Edit 2 SP 95


----------



## warbucks

bscool said:


> @warbucks here is txt
> 
> Edit that is now with AI oc. When I tested mem I just had CPU oc at defaults. Still all the same mem timings and voltages.
> 
> Edit 2 SP 95


Thanks so much. What SP is your cpu again? Mine is 84.


----------



## bscool

@warbucks SP 95


----------



## Middleman

Has anyone posted Gear2 DDR4-4800 results? Wondering what the lowest possible latency is with the Royal Elites @ 4800mhz/MT


----------



## Hiikeri

Middleman said:


> Has anyone posted Gear2 DDR4-4800 results? Wondering what the lowest possible latency is with the Royal Elites @ 4800mhz/MT


Forget Gear2 if you want to low latencies. IMC at half speed cant handle G1 latencies even at ddr4 5400+ Mhz... even near.

Go with Gear1 4000-4266 at lowest stable clocks, example cl 141414 - cl 161616...


----------



## bscool

Middleman said:


> Has anyone posted Gear2 DDR4-4800 results? Wondering what the lowest possible latency is with the Royal Elites @ 4800mhz/MT


Highest i have seen for SR b die is 4600 i think and Hynix 5033. Latency was in the 49ns range for b die and 53-55? I think for Hynix. @eeeven and @owikh84 were the users I remember posting benchs if you want to search for them.

Edit [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


Yeah DR is very picky. They probably won't do anything about it. I might sell mine and do 4200 or so SR CR1. Real shame - at 3600CL14 which I briefly tried playing with the results didn't justify hanging on to it. Seems like SR is the answer if you want a hassle free time overclocking RAM...




www.overclock.net


----------



## MotomEniac

Mr69 said:


> Huh what i can try msi pro z690-A,i7-12700kf, B-die DR 4000 16-19-19-39 1.4v XMP wont post on gear 1 (only on gear 2).


Same problem with A-Pro+12700KF, maximum for me was 3800 14/14/14/28, i've tried many combinations of SA\VDDQ\VDIMM\timings and nothing let me pass 3800. Then I decided to change my board to TUF, and now I can run stable 4000 14\15\15\32. Someone said earlier in the thread that it's not only IMC dependant but board is viable too and I confirm this with clear experiment.


solon said:


> Is msi save profile to usb broken ?


Try different usb stick, don't know the reason exactly, but it was a problem for me until I insert different USB stick(smaller one)


----------



## solon

i'll try
edit
Bios 1.16 worse than 1.15U3 (same settings not stable).


----------



## ssgwright

anyone have a link to the MSI pro 116 bios?


----------



## p4spooky

ssgwright said:


> anyone have a link to the MSI pro 116 bios?


Take a look at this post#1264


----------



## ogider

solon said:


> Bios 1.16 worse than 1.15U3 (same settings not stable).


same conclusion


----------



## ssgwright

ogider said:


> same conclusion


oh ok, should I even bother with this bios? I'm currently on the original 1.0 (I believe)


----------



## ObviousCough

My two kits of F4-4000C14D-16GTRG arrived today. I can do XMP with one of them installed no problem, but 4 sticks is extremely unstable. I've tried the launch bios, 1.15u3, and i just flashed 1.13. i still have 1.14 and 1.15 and 1.16 to try but i doubt they'll be the magic bullet for this bullshit. All i want to do is run XMP with 32GB of ram.


If this board was my first experience with MSI, I would never buy their products again. But I have 2 Unify-X boards, so i know they're not a totally inept.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

.


----------



## Sarzinski

ObviousCough said:


> My two kits of F4-4000C14D-16GTRG arrived today. I can do XMP with one of them installed no problem, but 4 sticks is extremely unstable. I've tried the launch bios, 1.15u3, and i just flashed 1.13. i still have 1.14 and 1.15 and 1.16 to try but i doubt they'll be the magic bullet for this bullshit. All i want to do is run XMP with 32GB of ram.
> 
> 
> If this board was my first experience with MSI, I would never buy their products again. But I have 2 Unify-X boards, so i know they're not a totally inept.


This is somewhat expected and could happen with Asus as well.

Since Z490 all 4 DIMM boards have been Daisy Chain, which means that there are 2 preferred DIMM slots. 2x 16 GB is a far better option for reaching good results. If possible you should return those 8 GB DIMMs and get a 2x 16 GB b-die kit. T


----------



## notearlyadoptr

Gigabyte Gaming X Update: Everything running fine, even got all the software working, Back into BIOS after GPU 10xx series firmware update. Glad everyone talked me into keeping it. It has jumped off the paper and is now superior (bang for buck) in actual use. Love everything about this board, again. Now commencing to D/L launchers and games, programs and apps, & CPU/DDR4 tuning.


----------



## EarlZ

ObviousCough said:


> This is bad advice imo.
> 
> While it's true Rocket Lake was no Skylake, it was still ultra mature 14nm.
> 
> Who knows what 10nm can handle? (no one)


This is the better answer instead of saying figure it out or being passive-aggressive by saying use common sense. I honestly don't understand the need for that kind of reply. If it is not yet known at this time then by all means just say that its too early to tell.


----------



## RetroWave78

I finally got it all together, this upgrade was an adventure, in the process of removing the original EKWB special edition back-plate the middle fastener held fast and had to be removed with a tap and die, which I just so happened to have on hand, and then after leak testing I was treated to the primary PCI-E slot refusing to read the GPU. Upon closer inspection the GPU, although latched in the slot, was not making adequate contact. Giving the GPU a few gentle taps and the acrylic terminal cracked due to hardline in and out and I had to pull the GPU and realized that this board, Asus Strix-A D4 will not accommodate the active back-plate for this block. Putting the original back-plate back on and the primary slot still refuses to read anything. It either arrived damaged or I damaged it trying in the process of trying to seat it with the active back-plate. Inspecting the slot, there are no bent pins. Real heart stopper here as I was genuinely worried I had a dead GPU as I'm using Thermal Grizzly Conductonaut on the die and considered the possibility that some of it may have gotten elsewhere on the PCB. I have applied 4 coats of conformal coating on the PCB immediately surrounding the die. Taking part the GPU, no liquid metal anywhere but the die thank god. GPU works in bottom slot but only runs at x4 speed which allowed for some interesting data. My timespy score only dropped 5% but Port Royal dropped 13% running at x4 speed. I forgot to add that while attempting to leak test with EK's Leak Tester I suspected (very quickly fortunately) that the Leak Tester might not be holding pressure after a few near fool-proof runs (ZMT into pump and rad, all fittings tight as can be) and sure enough, using a 1/4 plug in the part of the tester you connect to your loop and the Leak Tester itself refused to hold pressure. So from that point forward, and we are talking 5 additional draining and filling of the loop whilst troubleshooting either a dead GPU or PCI-E slot I was and still am flying blind. Good thing I tighten fittings as tight as humanly possible.

In regards to transplanting the OS, I literally cannot believe that everything works fine, I have no BSOD's, no issues whatsoever in Windows and I've been using it for a week now so definitely do not need to reinstall windows if upgrading the chipset. I'm coming from 8700k and have included my before and after Timespy CPU runs below. Literally blown completely away here. Running both processors at 5.1 GHz and my CPU score went from 9k to nearly 15.5k, an improvement of 70%. Given that physical core count has increased by 33% we are still looking at an IPC / single core speed improvement of nearly 40%.


On to Memory. This was a fun project from start to finish (still not done, tomorrow I have to swap the motherboard with it's replacement, which arrived this afternoon), for the first time I flashed a BIOS to a board simply breadboarding the mobo, no CPU, no RAM, via BIOS flashback function. So it had 0707 right off the bat. Thanks to zhrooms advise here to simply set SA to 1.42 and that 4133 MHz @ 133 ratio should be no problem Gear 1, he was spot on. I'm at 4133 MHz with 2 sticks of a 4 stick matched set (that is on the QVL 4x8) and I am completely, absolutely blown away with the performance, particularly the latency. Shown in the snapshot below you can see the former Aida64 run on the top and the new run on the bottom. Latency is 26 ns, half of what it formerly was.

I did try to get 4 sticks to work and even dropping freq down to 3600 MHz with the same SA and voltage and it refuses to POST. I'm just going to content myself with 2x8 for now. Love the latency of these sticks and I'm not doing anything productivity wise.

As for the CPU, this 12900k has an SP rating of 86 and does 5.1 GHz all P-Core at an indicated 1.32v in BIOS which dips down to 1.261v in software, possibly indicative of inadequate LLC. But it is stable at 1.261v. In the Hwinfo64 snapshot below, the cores are in the high 50's and low 60's but that was only 3DMark. In Prime95 the temps did get up to 80C on one core, with the rest in the low to mid 70's, this is with EKWB Supremacy 2.0, Thermal Grizzley Kryonaut, and roughly 1200w rad surface area (EK CE 420, 420x45 + EK XE 360, 360x60, push-pull) with really low ambient at the moment, 63-65F, and the case completely open. Ambient is so good right now that I'm mining Ethereum on Nicehash and Memory T-Junction doesn't exceed 60C with the case open and a small fan pointed at the back-plate. Memory T-Junction approaches 109C with factory cooler while mining Ethereum for comparison. This is at 70% PT.

My undervolt curves if anyone is interested:

Hot MSI AB profile: 1965 MHz @ .931v @ 114% PT (dialed in here during Timespy Part 2 where it will never dip under 1965 MHz @ 400w)
Balanced profile: 1875 MHz @ .825v @ 100% PT (5% less performance than hot profile but consumes 50w less on average)

Really looking forward to returning to games that were previously giving me CPU bottleneck issues: Red Dead Redemption 2 (80% GPU utilization in Strawberry), Watch Dogs Legion (80% GPU utilization while driving around), Assetto Corsa Competizione (80% GPU utilization at the start of full grid races in Pimax 8KX, even with mirrors turned down).

Everything went smooth, had I taken the time to check clearance on the active back-plate it would have saved a lot of undo headache but I learned a lot in the process. Just happy my GPU didn't die during the upgrade, there was a time that I did consider the possibility that liquid metal got on the PCB during the disassembly (I had to disassemble to clean the block due to Mystic Crap fallout, pics also included, avoid this crap like the plague, I have only used distilled water up until now and I am returning to that approach) and visiting ebay to see how much replacement 3090's are going for was a real eye opener ($3k to $4k! What on earth!).

Fingers crossed everything is smooth sailing tomorrow, I intend to get up early in the morning and pace myself, pulling the motherboard entails having to take quite a few things apart. Good news is that I'm really getting this down.

Pics shown, CPU and memory before and after benches, how everything looked when I had it all together initially with the active back-plate (I am getting a replacement terminal from EK and if crypto continues it's southward trajectory I will pull the 2080 Ti out and mount the 3090 vertically as this case, View 71, comes with a bracket for this), the clearance issue area with this motherboard and the result of Mystic Fog on the GPU block. I soaked both rads with Mayhems Blitz part 1 for 9 hours and then flushed 4 separate times with distilled water and cleaned both GPU blocks, replaced the distro plate, and the CPU block during the upgrade. Love the performance jump, also love being back with Asus coming from Gigabyte, much easier overclocking, much more intuitive, better software and utilities (all of the RGB is coordinated now, previously RGB Fusion refused to sync G-Skill memory). Board looks great, I will have some updated benches when I get the 3090 in x16 slot with ReBar on and dial in the CPU to 5.2 GHz all P-Core. Oh and E-Cores disabled obviously.

Special thanks to zhrooms and Bscool. Love this community.

Memory I'm using: F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)

Trident Z Royal
DDR4-4000MHz CL15-16-16-36 1.50V
32GB (4x8GB)


----------



## RetroWave78

Uggh, photo uploading is positively broken here, it refuses to upload the full images, I can't open the benchmark desktop snapshot in a new window as a full image, it's only using the thumbnail and I've done this 2x now, deleting all the images and selecting full images to be used.


----------



## grey.clock

My new daily settings from some random tweaking. Will do some more later but happy to have good stable settings to fall back on.


----------



## jayfkay

which of the boards are best so far for dual rank? gigabyte still yielding poor results?


----------



## bscool

jayfkay said:


> which of the boards are best so far for dual rank? gigabyte still yielding poor results?


From what I have seen Asus TUF and Strix clock highest(with tightest timings) with 2x16 b die, 4x8 still much lower clocks on all boards.

MSI is close and Gigabyte last I saw I think was 3600 or maybe 3800. Not sure. I know Strix will do 4133c15 fairly easy on DR b die if your IMC can do it.

Edit adding link to @eeeven posts who had both Strix and Edge to compare mem OC [Sammelthread] - OC Prozessoren Intel 12th Gen. Sockel 1700 (Alder Lake-S)









[Sammelthread] - OC Prozessoren Intel Sockel 1700 (Alder Lake-S & Raptor Lake-S)


Testen. Ich hatte jetzt erst zwei CPUs aber der Unterschied war trotz SP97 Pc vs SP100 Pc bei nur 5GHz schon relativ groß. Magst mal schauen was sie für CB23 Multicore 5000MHz braucht?




www.hardwareluxx.de


----------



## jayfkay

asus prime not so good?


----------



## bscool

jayfkay said:


> asus prime not so good?


I am not sure. Havent really paid attention or seen many post results.


----------



## Sarzinski

jayfkay said:


> asus prime not so good?


The physical memory topology looks to be the same, but it doesn't get all the beta BIOS versions and it may or may not be more restricted in terms of BIOS settings.

Theoretically it should be capable of achieving the same results when it gets the same BIOS version, but it hasn't really been tested.


----------



## GtiJason

RetroWave78 said:


> Uggh, photo uploading is positively broken here, it refuses to upload the full images, I can't open the benchmark desktop snapshot in a new window as a full image, it's only using the thumbnail and I've done this 2x now, deleting all the images and selecting full images to be used.


Sure you can, just Right click / Open in new tab and then delete the first part of the size-down url
This is what you are left with, OG size pic


https://www.overclock.net/attachments/20180513_191245-jpg.2537778/


EDIT: Just looked at the mega sized desktop pic, AIDA64 is hella buggy there are several ways to make it show pretty much anything
Aida thinks you are running 265 bclk, weather you are or are not doesn't matter to Aida. It's probably do to the old version you are running and it having no idea what your hardware is. Version 6.50.5800 has been OK but Windows 7, 8, 10 and 11 show fairly different results with 10 being about 5ns faster. It judges many scores by what it thinks it see's and even leaves out fairly important things (depending on version) like mem timings your real latency is most likely double what it's saying


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 As @GtiJason said Adia64 bug. Need to run as close as you can to 100 bclk to get comparable results to others latency.


----------



## GtiJason

bscool said:


> @RetroWave78 As @GtiJason said Adia64 bug. Need to run as close as you can to 100 bclk to get comparable results to others latency.


He's running super old version, it probably thinks he has 2 cpu's and it just halving the latency
Oh bscool, did you get to download that XP .GHO I created. I can see why most people could care less but it actually supports most things and is the only way to bench 3dMark2001 SE if your into that kind of thing. Anyways restoring .gho file easier than True Image or Reflect etc.
This site won't let me upload .zip or .exe so I "renamed file to txt. Just rename Ghost32.txt to .zip and unzip it. Restore_Ghost OS.txt is actually a text file
Here is a terribly recorded TY vid actually showing how easy it is


----------



## bscool

@GtiJason No I havent even gotten around to playing with manual CPU oc. Just been messing with memory OC.


----------



## ObviousCough

i really wish they would address the horrendous blck variance, missing so many _megahurtz.








_

Just a little XMP+blck testing before work. I wonder if i can push to 4200 like this.


----------



## JoeRambo

jayfkay said:


> which of the boards are best so far for dual rank? gigabyte still yielding poor results?


I would not recommend any MSI D4 motherboards due to problems with DR memory and bad BIOS releases. Asus TUF/ Strix is much safer choice with BIOSes that actually work and a few cases of MSI users switching to them and suddenly their "bad IMC CPUs" having no problems with 4000 memory speeds on Asus.

I had real great experience with MSI Z490 Unify, but my MSI Z690 Edge is badly supported piece of crap for Dual Rank memory overclocking.


----------



## 2500k_2

i have seen for SR b die is 4800 ,but not stable









1 stick was stable


----------



## bscool

ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0812.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com





Source [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread

Testing right now 4133c15 DR setting and so far seems better than previous bios. Lower 1.35sa/dq is stable so far. Previously needed 1.4 to 1.45sa and 1.5vddq to pass [email protected]% only about edit80% into test so still early. But looks like the best bios so far for DR b die for me on Strix d4.


----------



## truehighroller1

I was running 4x 8gb last night at 4133 gear 1 but it wasn't stable. Turned it back down to 4000 gear 1.









I scored 22 636 in Time Spy


Intel Core i9-12900K Processor, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 11}




www.3dmark.com


----------



## criznit

Welp, I decided to return my msi board and go the asus + ddr5 6000 route. While fun, I had a few issues with the MSI board that I couldn't overlook. The memory overclocking was fine, but the inconsistency with the ethernet speed, the coil whine and the bios not wanting to save certain changes put me off. The last MSI board I had was with my 5820k and that board was amazing, but it had time to mature. I'm willing to bet that the MSI boards will be amazing once the small kinks are fixed as well.


----------



## bscool

Best bios for me on z690 Strix d4 2x16 with the little testing I have done. Much lower sa and vddq needed for my settings.

Previous bios version I needed sa 1.4 to 1.45 and vddq 1.5v

NO CPU oc @ defaults

Strix A d4 812

4133c15-15-15-35

sa 1.35
vddq 1.35
dram 1.55
mem kit gskill ripjaw 4000c14-15-15 2x16


----------



## Likaroski92

Hello guys,

I just got my 12600k and I am looking for best budget dd4 motherboard.

From what I saw in threads, Gigabyte board had good features but bad BIOS out of the box and MSI A pro was a good bet.

Is that still a good choice? Did Gigabyte fixed their BIOS?

Also I have 2x8 Gskill 3200MHZ CL14 bdie, wanted to buy 2 more of those, is that a good idea, or should I go for 2 dimms at higher frequency?


----------



## Sarzinski

Okay, what do you do when TM5 runs 30 cycles without issues, OCCT and GSAT run 1h each without issues, but Karhu throws 1 singular error at 21000% after like 8 hours?

DIMM Temps were below 40° the entire time.Is there any way to even narrow down what might be the issue in such a case? Usually I would stop Karhu at 10000%, but I was at work so it just ran and ran and ran.

This will be so annoying to test...


----------



## LionAlonso

Sarzinski said:


> Okay, what do you do when TM5 runs 30 cycles without issues, OCCT and GSAT run 1h each without issues, but Karhu throws 1 singular error at 21000% after like 8 hours?
> 
> DIMM Temps were below 40° the entire time.Is there any way to even narrow down what might be the issue in such a case? Usually I would stop Karhu at 10000%, but I was at work so it just ran and ran and ran.
> 
> This will be so annoying to test...


Probably u wont have problems never.
maybe even at stock a single error like that would be present


----------



## Hiikeri

ObviousCough said:


> My two kits of F4-4000C14D-16GTRG arrived today. I can do XMP with one of them installed no problem, but 4 sticks is extremely unstable. I've tried the launch bios, 1.15u3, and i just flashed 1.13. i still have 1.14 and 1.15 and 1.16 to try but i doubt they'll be the magic bullet for this bullshit. All i want to do is run XMP with 32GB of ram.
> 
> 
> If this board was my first experience with MSI, I would never buy their products again. But I have 2 Unify-X boards, so i know they're not a totally inept.


Theres nothing wrong on MB. Its just you who doesnt understand how Dimms and IMC works and what are theirs validated spesifications. All Z690 Mobos are Intel validated and thats enough from manufacturers what theirs component must pass.

ADL valid DDR4 ram speed is 3200Mhz, anything over it is overclocking and doesnt have to work. 0% motherboard doesnt have to work even 3333Mhz.

Sell your rams and buy only 3200Mhz and dont whine.


----------



## ObviousCough

Hiikeri said:


> Theres nothing wrong on MB. Its just you who doesnt understand how Dimms and IMC works and what are theirs validated spesifications. All Z690 Mobos are Intel validated and thats enough from manufacturers what theirs component must pass.
> 
> ADL valid DDR4 ram speed is 3200Mhz, anything over it is overclocking and doesnt have to work. 0% motherboard doesnt have to work even 3333Mhz.
> 
> Sell your rams and buy only 3200Mhz and dont whine.


Your opinions are wrong.


----------



## Middleman

I updated to the new 812 Asus Strix Z690-A Bios.
Buddy said he got better voltage on his 4133 setup.

What i noticed, Memory Third Tier

Doesn't accept value of 7 anymore for
tRDRD_dr
tRDRD_dd

tRTL - Setting value of 69 prevents post
Setting to auto or manual value of 73 doesnt fix it, had to load profile. Remember to save your profiles!


Trying lower VCCSA i just clocked it down from 1.411 to 1.375.
Still cant boot @ 4100 or 4133 , i dont think these dimms can handle it.
BLCK can post 4044, but throws all sorts of errors. Windows 11 boots into error stop code @ 4100.

Tried 1.44/1.44 VDDQ/VCCSA 1.55 dimm.


----------



## neteng101

Sarzinski said:


> Okay, what do you do when TM5 runs 30 cycles without issues, OCCT and GSAT run 1h each without issues, but Karhu throws 1 singular error at 21000% after like 8 hours?


30 cycles of TM5 basic? Totally irrelevant. 30 cycles of TM5 Anta Absolut/Extreme? I'd pull my hair out - or throw the Karhu results away.


----------



## ObviousCough

4133 is no go, but i can do flat 14's!











I've tried 6 different kits of B die and none of them will let me go lower than 240 on the tRFC...Maybe when I get my TUF.


----------



## Bakka

Did some additional testing and am able to run any one of the dimms under XMP (4000) without issue; POSTs and runs aida mem stress for a few hours. When I throw even more than one in A2/B2, aida will throw a hardware error. Can anyone provide guidance on what BIOS settings to try and tweak to provide better stability? Thanks


----------



## Minut

This might be helpful to some. Lot's of testing on Gigabyte Z690 Elite DDR4 on F5a bios.

VCCSA: 1.03V (yes contrary to many others here, my VCCSA can go pretty low)
DRAM: 1.36V
VDDQ: 1.25V
VCCIN: 1.7V


----------



## bscool

@Minut Is that DR or SR? Also memtest or stress test stable or just screenshot to show 3600 with low sa?

From what I have seen in testing on Srtix d4 vccsa can be lower in the 3600 to 3866 range but the higher the frequency the higher sa you need as has always been a trend. If you can run 4000+ see what kind of SA you need to be stable. I bet it is 1.3+. Also DR needs more SA than SR from what I have seen.

Edit you also have loose subtimings. The tighter I make subtimig the more votlage it needs.


----------



## Minut

DR, memtest stable and tm5 extreme stable.

On X570 i was running 3800 c15 but on z690 cant go past 3600 no matter how much voltage i pump in


----------



## MotomEniac

Bakka said:


> Did some additional testing and am able to run any one of the dimms under XMP (4000) without issue; POSTs and runs aida mem stress for a few hours. When I throw even more than one in A2/B2, aida will throw a hardware error. Can anyone provide guidance on what BIOS settings to try and tweak to provide better stability? Thanks


Yes, it is expectable, when you load both memory controller channels it requires more of everything to be stable. So from my long path to achieve DR 4000 stable, I would suggest you to do next:

Fix VDIMM voltage to something in range of 1.5-1.6V depending on quality of your ram(I suppose you have B-Dies, otherwise can't recommend on VDIMM, but anyway something reasonably high for stability)
Set SA voltage to 1.25V, from my experience it has some sweetspot for every board and target frequency. You will try to raise it gradually in the next steps
Fix VDDQ voltage to 1.35V, this one also has some dependency from target frequency but more evident - more frequency more VDDQ, but 1.35V is good starting point.
Launch stress test, if errors will appear first try to raise VDDQ in small steps of 20mV(1.35->1.37). You can raise it until it will equal your VDIMM voltage. Maybe you will notice some sweetspot here also, where stability increasing the most.
If you will not get stability with VDDQ try to raise SA voltage in 10mv steps and to achieve stability with it. My recommendation is to stay below 1.45V.
PS: My parameters on DR 4000MT/s 14/15/15/32 are VDIMM 1.6V, VDDQ 1.54V, SA 1.38V. Good luck!


----------



## newls1

JoeRambo said:


> I would not recommend any MSI D4 motherboards due to problems with DR memory and bad BIOS releases. Asus TUF/ Strix is much safer choice with BIOSes that actually work and a few cases of MSI users switching to them and suddenly their "bad IMC CPUs" having no problems with 4000 memory speeds on Asus.
> 
> I had real great experience with MSI Z490 Unify, but my MSI Z690 Edge is badly supported piece of crap for Dual Rank memory overclocking.


This.... that zshrooms guy (spelled screenname wrong) telling me/us "Get a chip with a better IMC" blah, blah BS... guy is so full of BS, people who listen to advice from some of these folks i feel sorry for. Upon first boot up on my asus board, my DR B-die (32GB's cause 32gb is really the only way to go today) <---- thats for the zshrooms guy ... had no issue @ 4000+ speeds with CL15 @ 1.490vdimm. THe POS MSI board couldnt even do XMP with out tons of tweaking. Moral of this story is: kids please dont listen to the folks that give out info stating your chip is bad/bad imc/bad silicone, etc... they dont know ****.


----------



## pitter

2500k_2 said:


> i have seen for SR b die is 4800 ,but not stable
> View attachment 2537831
> 
> 
> 1 stick was stable
> View attachment 2537832


edit : sorry wrong reply


----------



## pitter

bscool said:


> Best bios for me on z690 Strix d4 2x16 with the little testing I have done. Much lower sa and vddq needed for my settings.
> 
> Previous bios version I needed sa 1.4 to 1.45 and vddq 1.5v
> 
> NO CPU oc @ defaults
> 
> Strix A d4 812
> 
> 4133c15-15-15-35
> 
> sa 1.35
> vddq 1.35
> dram 1.55
> mem kit gskill ripjaw 4000c14-15-15 2x16


i tried your settings and got 47ns , got same motherboard but 4000 15 15 15 35 kit , what could be different ? i have your settings exactly but with 1.5 vdimm


----------



## pitter

pitter said:


> i tried your settings and get 47ns, what could be different ? got same motherboard but i have the 4000 15-15-15-35 kit


sorry wrong reply


----------



## jayfkay

MotomEniac said:


> Yes, it is expectable, when you load both memory controller channels it requires more of everything to be stable. So from my long path to achieve DR 4000 stable, I would suggest you to do next:
> 
> Fix VDIMM voltage to something in range of 1.5-1.6V depending on quality of your ram(I suppose you have B-Dies, otherwise can't recommend on VDIMM, but anyway something reasonably high for stability)
> Set SA voltage to 1.25V, from my experience it has some sweetspot for every board and target frequency. You will try to raise it gradually in the next steps
> Fix VDDQ voltage to 1.35V, this one also has some dependency from target frequency but more evident - more frequency more VDDQ, but 1.35V is good starting point.
> Launch stress test, if errors will appear first try to raise VDDQ in small steps of 20mV(1.35->1.37). You can raise it until it will equal your VDIMM voltage. Maybe you will notice some sweetspot here also, where stability increasing the most.
> If you will not get stability with VDDQ try to raise SA voltage in 10mv steps and to achieve stability with it. My recommendation is to stay below 1.45V.
> PS: My parameters on DR 4000MT/s 14/15/15/32 are VDIMM 1.6V, VDDQ 1.54V, SA 1.38V. Good luck!


thanks for this. however I must say... thats some hefty voltage on a 300$ board just to get those timings.


----------



## zhrooms

Finally finished my first memory overclock, still a few things to tweak, but sadly it appears that my IMC limit is just above 4100 (with tight timings) so 4133 is not possible, which throws a lot of errors in TM5 no matter what I do, and requires a high SA (1.45) and VDDQ (1.52) voltage. 
So, below is what I ended up at with the frequency set to 4100 (100:100);








I have confirmed that it is game stable in Battlefield 2042, Call of Duty: Warzone and World of Warcraft, all severely bottlenecked by the processor/memory. 
But that's expected considering it passed TM5 (it can be game stable even when it throws a bunch of errors), but to satisfy everyone, I made sure it was error free.
A few words about the timings;

*CL:* Obviously can't do 13, to move down from 15 to 14 I had to increase the DRAM voltage from 1.512 all the way up to 1.632, to not produce any errors, later when adjusting other timings I ran into a single error a few times and decided to just bump it from 1.632 to 1.648, to ensure stability once and for all, and I have the cooling for it as you can see, temperature stabilized at about 29-30°C after just a few minutes, last time I checked while gaming it never exceeded 30°C, basically it stays at about 6°C above the water temperature
*RCD:* A few errors at 15, so kept it 16
*RP:* A few errors at 14, so kept it 15
*RAS:* Sometimes it passes 32 with no errors, but not always, so I left it at 34, but can definitely run it 30-32 and be completely game stable
*CR:* 1 refused to boot as expected

*WR:* Didn't attempt lower than 8
*WRPDEN:* This is set to 22 from 'Auto 38', to get WR down to 8

*RFC:* Many errors at 270, no errors at 275, but set 280 just to be on the safe side
*RRDL/RRDS/FAW:* 4/4/16 running fine
*RTP:* Didn't attempt lower than 6
*WL:* Didn't attempt lower than 10

*REFI:* No hint of any issues running 65535
*CKE:* Disabled by changing PPD from Auto to 0 in the memory section of the BIOS, then set to 69 with no penalty of any kind, since it's for "power saving"

*RDRD:* A lot of errors with SG at 6, so had to stay at 7
*WRRD:* SG controls WTR_L which can run at both 8 and 10 but they throw a single error every time, 12 is the lowest that is always error free
DG controls WTR_S, which runs 4 no problem, no attempt under that, so it is gaming stable 8/4 but not TM5 stable
*RDWR:* Refuses to run below 14, doesn't even boot at 13, I've been told it might be because WL is too low (10)
*WRWR:* Same as RDRD, errors at 6, so kept it at 7

*RTL:* Auto

System Agent Voltage:
*1.300:* TM5 crashed
*1.320:* 170 Errors
*1.340:* 14 Errors
*1.350:* 9 Errors
*1.360:* Passed (1.364V)

VDDQ Voltage:
*1.350:* No Boot
*1.360:* No Boot
*1.370:* Errors
*1.380:* Passed (1.380V)

DRAM Voltage:
*1.630:* Errors (1.632V)
*1.650:* Passed (1.652V)

Shame that it can't do 4133, as that boosts Read and Write by a lot, going 4100 to 4133 is in theory +0.80%, and the bandwidth gained when I ran it was about 0.83%, on Read (570MB/s), so I get ~69,400 MB/s at 4133 compared to ~68,800 at 4100. That also tells us that to pass 70,000 Read, you have to run maybe close to +4150, it'd also push latency down to 42-42.2, but at least I'm under 42.5 and there is definitely more to tweak. Like a lot of things can be lowered that will cause errors but it will remain game stable, so I think I can reach 42.2 for gaming.

What I need to experiment with for the next overclock, is to figure out how to lower SG on RDRD and WRWR, and lower RDWR, also check at which frequency it starts throwing errors, I've already attempted 4120 and that wasn't error free, so it's somewhere between 4100 and 4120, I'm guessing about 4110, so probably not worth messing with it in that case. Then I need to test the new BIOSes as I'm still on 0707.

For anyone wondering, the kit is the G.Skill 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die one from 2020, came with these XMPs: 3600 14-15-15 1.45V / 4000 17-18-18 1.40V / 4266 17-18-18 1.50V, which were all sold as Ripjaws, Trident Z and Royal. I got the cheapest Ripjaws one at 4000 (1.40V), as there shouldn't be any difference between them, and as demonstrated it has no issues running 4133 CL14 below 1.65V. As for the board, it is the cheapest TUF (no Wi-Fi module) running the now quite old 0707 BIOS, but it clearly has no issues with a tight overclock like this. 
Overall I'm definitely pleased with this first overclock, fairly sure I have the lowest latency right now but that's of course only because I run a very high DRAM voltage (1.632-1.648) thanks to the water block, I intend to do a test where I simply shut off the water pump, so temperatures increase up to 50°C, then we'll see when/if it starts producing errors, in both TM5 and while Gaming.


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler






zhrooms said:


> Finally finished my first memory overclock, still a few things to tweak, but sadly it appears that my IMC limit is just above 4100 (with tight timings) so 4133 is not possible, which throws a lot of errors in TM5 no matter what I do, and requires a high SA (1.45) and VDDQ (1.52) voltage.
> So, below is what I ended up at with the frequency set to 4100 (100:100);
> View attachment 2537922
> 
> I have confirmed that it is game stable in Battlefield 2042, Call of Duty: Warzone and World of Warcraft, all severely bottlenecked by the processor/memory.
> But that's expected considering it passed TM5 (it can be game stable even when it throws a bunch of errors), but to satisfy everyone, I made sure it was error free.
> A few words about the timings;
> 
> *CL:* Obviously can't do 13, to move down from 15 to 14 I had to increase the DRAM voltage from 1.512 all the way up to 1.632, to not produce any errors, later when adjusting other timings I ran into a single error a few times and decided to just bump it from 1.632 to 1.648, to ensure stability once and for all, and I have the cooling for it as you can see, temperature stabilized at about 29-30°C after just a few minutes, last time I checked while gaming it never exceeded 30°C, basically it stays at about 6°C above the water temperature
> *RCD:* A few errors at 15, so kept it 16
> *RP:* A few errors at 14, so kept it 15
> *RAS:* Sometimes it passes 32 with no errors, but not always, so I left it at 34, but can definitely run it 30-32 and be completely game stable
> *CR:* 1 refused to boot as expected
> 
> *WR:* Didn't attempt lower than 8
> *WRPDEN:* This is set to 22 from 'Auto 38', to get WR down to 8
> 
> *RFC:* Many errors at 270, no errors at 275, but set 280 just to be on the safe side
> *RRDL/RRDS/FAW:* 4/4/16 running fine
> *RTP:* Didn't attempt lower than 6
> *WL:* Didn't attempt lower than 10
> 
> *REFI:* No hint of any issues running 65535
> *CKE:* Disabled by changing PPD from Auto to 0 in the memory section of the BIOS, then set to 69 with no penalty of any kind, since it's for "power saving"
> 
> *RDRD:* A lot of errors with SG at 6, so had to stay at 7
> *WRRD:* SG controls WTR_L which can run at both 8 and 10 but they throw a single error every time, 12 is the lowest that is always error free
> DG controls WTR_S, which runs 4 no problem, no attempt under that, so it is gaming stable 8/4 but not TM5 stable
> *RDWR:* Refuses to run below 14, doesn't even boot at 13, I've been told it might be because WL is too low (10)
> *WRWR:* Same as RDRD, errors at 6, so kept it at 7
> 
> *RTL:* Auto
> 
> System Agent Voltage:
> *1.300:* TM5 crashed
> *1.320:* 170 Errors
> *1.340:* 14 Errors
> *1.350:* 9 Errors
> *1.360:* Passed (1.364V)
> 
> VDDQ Voltage:
> *1.350:* No Boot
> *1.360:* No Boot
> *1.370:* Errors
> *1.380:* Passed (1.380V)
> 
> DRAM Voltage:
> *1.630:* Errors (1.632V)
> *1.650:* Passed (1.652V)
> 
> Shame that it can't do 4133, as that boosts Read and Write by a lot, going 4100 to 4133 is in theory +0.80%, and the bandwidth gained when I ran it was about 0.83%, on Read (570MB/s), so I get ~69,400 MB/s at 4133 compared to ~68,800 at 4100. That also tells us that to pass 70,000 Read, you have to run maybe close to +4150, it'd also push latency down to 42-42.2, but at least I'm under 42.5 and there is definitely more to tweak. Like a lot of things can be lowered that will cause errors but it will remain game stable, so I think I can reach 42.2 for gaming.
> 
> What I need to experiment with for the next overclock, is to figure out how to lower SG on RDRD and WRWR, and lower RDWR, also check at which frequency it starts throwing errors, I've already attempted 4120 and that wasn't error free, so it's somewhere between 4100 and 4120, I'm guessing about 4110, so probably not worth messing with it in that case. Then I need to test the new BIOSes as I'm still on 0707.
> 
> For anyone wondering, the kit is the G.Skill 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die one from 2020, came with these XMPs: 3600 14-15-15 1.45V / 4000 17-18-18 1.40V / 4266 17-18-18 1.50V, which were all sold as Ripjaws, Trident Z and Royal. I got the cheapest Ripjaws one at 4000 (1.40V), as there shouldn't be any difference between them, and as demonstrated it has no issues running 4133 CL14 below 1.65V. As for the board, it is the cheapest TUF (no Wi-Fi module) running the now quite old 0707 BIOS, but it clearly has no issues with a tight overclock like this.
> Overall I'm definitely pleased with this first overclock, fairly sure I have the lowest latency right now but that's of course only because I run a very high DRAM voltage (1.632-1.648) thanks to the water block, I intend to do a test where I simply shut off the water pump, so temperatures increase up to 50°C, then we'll see when/if it starts producing errors, in both TM5 and while Gaming.








That's some good memory overclocking right there. Good job tuning things the right way man!


----------



## bscool

pitter said:


> i tried your settings and got 47ns , got same motherboard but 4000 15 15 15 35 kit , what could be different ? i have your settings exactly but with 1.5 vdimm


Probably your OS and programs, software you having running in the background? I dont run anything extra on boot like keyboard/mouse software, rgb lighting controls, steam or anything like that. Also it varies, seems like I get the lowest latency the first run and after that I have to run it a few times or it goes back up to say 43, then 45 and down to 42 etc.=


----------



## weyden

Guys, does anyone out there have Micron B die memories and can they get which timings at 4000mhz? My Gigabyte mobo does not load 4000mhz cl 18-19-19-39 1.35v profile. Even if I put 1.5v it doesn't load. Increasing SA to 1.4v and VDDQ to 1.5v doesn't help either. This new Bios from Gigabyte hasn't changed anything for me. I keep stuck at 4600mhz. If I put 4666mhz it goes back to 4533. I would like to know the timings of someone with that kind of memory and at what speed they use it.


----------



## ObviousCough

newls1 said:


> THe POS MSI board couldnt even do XMP with out tons of tweaking.


It's best to keep in mind that these boards are actually budget trash. The price went up but the quality did not. They're still the same ~$135 boards they've always been. The physical board itself is likely the issue, not the bios, ram, or cpu.



My flat 14s started throwing errors in TM5 extreme after 3 reboots. idk why! I just won a newegg shuffle for ddr5 and an i7 so i ordered an Apex...I'm not done with this thread though.


----------



## truehighroller1

weyden said:


> Guys, does anyone out there have Micron B die memories and can they get which timings at 4000mhz? My Gigabyte mobo does not load 4000mhz cl 18-19-19-39 1.35v profile. Even if I put 1.5v it doesn't load. Increasing SA to 1.4v and VDDQ to 1.5v doesn't help either. This new Bios from Gigabyte hasn't changed anything for me. I keep stuck at 4600mhz. If I put 4666mhz it goes back to 4533. I would like to know the timings of someone with that kind of memory and at what speed they use it.



Yes I hold world record now LOL.










Obviously a glitch but funny timing for your question.


----------



## bscool

ObviousCough said:


> It's best to keep in mind that these boards are actually budget trash. The price went up but the quality did not. They're still the same ~$135 boards they've always been. The physical board itself is likely the issue, not the bios, ram, or cpu.
> 
> 
> 
> My flat 14s started throwing errors in TM5 extreme after 3 reboots. idk why! I just won a newegg shuffle for ddr5 and an i7 so i ordered an Apex...I'm not done with this thread though.


I wish you luck but when I see @shamino1978 post about issues with ddr5 I doubt your problems are over 









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


there is still some weirdness with s16b when you go to the limit. some boots it's completely stable for an hour tm5, then you go into bios, force memory training again and it errors after a few minutes im tm5. I also checked all timings with "intel mem timings" in tool.exe, all identical, even...




www.overclock.net


----------



## weyden

truehighroller1 said:


> Yes I hold world record now LOL.
> 
> View attachment 2538063
> 
> 
> Obviously a glitch but funny timing for your question.
> 
> View attachment 2538064


What is the voltage you use on the ram? SA and VDDQ? Here I turn on this profile and the blue screen on windows input. My motherboard is a gigabyte Aorus elite dd4! =/


----------



## ObviousCough

bscool said:


> I wish you luck but when I see @shamino1978 post about issues with ddr5 I doubt your problems are over
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> there is still some weirdness with s16b when you go to the limit. some boots it's completely stable for an hour tm5, then you go into bios, force memory training again and it errors after a few minutes im tm5. I also checked all timings with "intel mem timings" in tool.exe, all identical, even...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


At the very least i've got another memory controller to test my DDR4 boards with in the i7 :| I'm about ready to give the Gigabyte Z690i another shot.


----------



## ObviousCough

1.42 SA
1.35 VDDQ
1.55 Vimm


----------



## Bakka

MotomEniac said:


> Yes, it is expectable, when you load both memory controller channels it requires more of everything to be stable. So from my long path to achieve DR 4000 stable, I would suggest you to do next:
> 
> Fix VDIMM voltage to something in range of 1.5-1.6V depending on quality of your ram(I suppose you have B-Dies, otherwise can't recommend on VDIMM, but anyway something reasonably high for stability)
> Set SA voltage to 1.25V, from my experience it has some sweetspot for every board and target frequency. You will try to raise it gradually in the next steps
> Fix VDDQ voltage to 1.35V, this one also has some dependency from target frequency but more evident - more frequency more VDDQ, but 1.35V is good starting point.
> Launch stress test, if errors will appear first try to raise VDDQ in small steps of 20mV(1.35->1.37). You can raise it until it will equal your VDIMM voltage. Maybe you will notice some sweetspot here also, where stability increasing the most.
> If you will not get stability with VDDQ try to raise SA voltage in 10mv steps and to achieve stability with it. My recommendation is to stay below 1.45V.
> PS: My parameters on DR 4000MT/s 14/15/15/32 are VDIMM 1.6V, VDDQ 1.54V, SA 1.38V. Good luck!


I was able to hit 3600 stable at 1.5vdimm, 1.25SA, and 1.39vddq. Trying 3733 @ same but 1.43 vddq currently (not sure stable yet). I tried jumping directly to 4000, but couldnt even find settings that would post. The ram is rated for [email protected] When I cant even get it to post, what knobs do i turn and at what deltas? Thanks!


----------



## Vidas

Why are so many users here running command rate 2? Is running 1t a lost cause? I haven't spent too much time on it but at c14 I can't get my 2x16 bdie past 3333 in command rate 1, would save me a lot of time if it's a waste to keep trying to get 1t to work. Using a strix d4, 12700k, 2x16 3200c14 1.35v kit.


----------



## Cam1

Vidas said:


> Why are so many users here running command rate 2? Is running 1t a lost cause? I haven't spent too much time on it but at c14 I can't get my 2x16 bdie past 3333 in command rate 1, would save me a lot of time if it's a waste to keep trying to get 1t to work. Using a strix d4, 12700k, 2x16 3200c14 1.35v kit.


I think we can't use command rate 1 passing 3600MHz using Gear 1


----------



## jayfkay

do you guys expect MSI to fix their DR wall?


----------



## truehighroller1

weyden said:


> What is the voltage you use on the ram? SA and VDDQ? Here I turn on this profile and the blue screen on windows input. My motherboard is a gigabyte Aorus elite dd4! =/


I'll let you in on my secret to getting to the higher clocks.

Set a lower clock say 3600 which seems to work as a good starting point for me. I can't boot straight into 4133 or 4100 or 4000 for that matter from a fresh BIOS flash and or a clean BIOS not touched yet settings wise either. Set your primary settings be it 16-16-16-36 or whatever. Set the ratio to 1-1 100-133 leave your 1t o 2t settings to auto. Set your memory voltage. Save and reboot. Let everything train and boot back into the BIOS and then turn it up to 3700 save and reboot and let it boot up and train. Go back into the BIOS and set it to 3800 and let it boot up train etc. Go back into BIOS and repeat, keep going up till you can't anymore. I did have to boost my vssca eventually a little. I set mine to 1.35 vssca and 1.3 vddq I believe. From the get go, I had it set to 1.25 / 1.25. Voltage on my ram there was 1.49375 I velieve. I'm sitting back down at 1.45v now at 4000mhz 17-17-17-37-2t Gear 1, 4 x 8GB. My memory is rated for 1.35v at this speed. I'm tightening secondary settings etc. Playing around I will probably leave that voltage.

I can force my way into higher clocks every time doing this. Took me a minute to catch onto it TBH. 

Once you've done this you can save your settings and boot into it every time from that point on without having to repeat this unless you flash a new BIOS or screw up bad enough settings wise memory wise to have to clear cmos I suppose.


----------



## weyden

truehighroller1 said:


> I'll let you in on my secret to getting to the higher clocks.
> 
> Set a lower clock say 3600 which seems to work as a good starting point for me. I can't boot straight into 4133 or 4100 or 4000 for that matter from a fresh BIOS flash and or a clean BIOS not touched yet settings wise either. Set your primary settings be it 16-16-16-36 or whatever. Set the ratio to 1-1 100-133 leave your 1t o 2t settings to auto. Set your memory voltage. Save and reboot. Let everything train and boot back into the BIOS and then turn it up to 3700 save and reboot and let it boot up and train. Go back into the BIOS and set it to 3800 and let it boot up train etc. Go back into BIOS and repeat, keep going up till you can't anymore. I did have to boost my vssca eventually a little. I set mine to 1.35 vssca and 1.3 vddq I believe. From the get go, I had it set to 1.25 / 1.25. Voltage on my ram there was 1.49375 I velieve. I'm sitting back down at 1.45v now at 4000mhz 17-17-17-37-2t Gear 1, 4 x 8GB. My memory is rated for 1.35v at this speed. I'm tightening secondary settings etc. Playing around I will probably leave that voltage.
> 
> I can force my way into higher clocks every time doing this. Took me a minute to catch onto it TBH.
> 
> Once you've done this you can save your settings and boot into it every time from that point on without having to repeat this unless you flash a new BIOS or screw up bad enough settings wise memory wise to have to clear cmos I suppose.


The big problem is that I'm not able to boot at 3600mhz. The minimum that the motherboard accepts is 4000mhz. And it goes up to 4600mhz easily without moving too much. But if I try to lowering the timimngs at 4000mhz, I get a lot of blue screens. I think Gigabyte's bios must be worse than I imagined. Even with updates, it's not improving anything for me. I will try to follow your tips!


----------



## bscool

Vidas said:


> Why are so many users here running command rate 2? Is running 1t a lost cause? I haven't spent too much time on it but at c14 I can't get my 2x16 bdie past 3333 in command rate 1, would save me a lot of time if it's a waste to keep trying to get 1t to work. Using a strix d4, 12700k, 2x16 3200c14 1.35v kit.


I have only tried 1t a bit and it cant clock as high so I have just stuck to 2t. SR will be easier to run at 1t. So up to you to go for lower clocks and 1t or higher frequency and 2t. It was the same on rocket lake for gear 1.


----------



## ssgwright

no issues here on my MSI pro getting 4000 on CR 1


----------



## bscool

ssgwright said:


> View attachment 2538137
> 
> 
> no issues here on my MSI pro getting 4000 on CR 1


Is that DR? My 2t is a little better than your 1t. What is the point of loose timing to run 1t? What do you gain?


----------



## ssgwright

it's weird, i can run 1t but can't get anything lower than 17 18 18 36 even at 2


----------



## bscool

ssgwright said:


> it's weird, i can run 1t but can't get anything lower than 17 18 18 36 even at 2


What memory?


----------



## ssgwright

crucial 
Module Part Number: BLM16G40C18U4BL.M8FB


----------



## ssgwright

ssgwright said:


> crucial
> Module Part Number: BLM16G40C18U4BL.M8FB











Crucial Ballistix MAX RGB 4000 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 32GB (16GBx2) CL18 BLM2K16G40C18U4BL (Black) at Amazon.com


Buy Crucial Ballistix MAX RGB 4000 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 32GB (16GBx2) CL18 BLM2K16G40C18U4BL (Black): Memory - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases



www.amazon.com


----------



## truehighroller1

ssgwright said:


> Crucial Ballistix MAX RGB 4000 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 32GB (16GBx2) CL18 BLM2K16G40C18U4BL (Black) at Amazon.com
> 
> 
> Buy Crucial Ballistix MAX RGB 4000 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 32GB (16GBx2) CL18 BLM2K16G40C18U4BL (Black): Memory - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com


I bought some crucial yesterday because it was rated for 4400 mhz cas19 2 x 16gb kit. Taking it back tonight because my current gskill 4 x 8gb is better. I was disappointed.


----------



## bscool

@ssgwright That is why crucial, you cant tighten timings as much as samsung b die. Plus I have all my timings fairly tight.


----------



## bscool

Strix z690 A d4 bios

Testing 4x16 3600c14

I didnt do a long memory test as if no one is interested I am not going to spend the time. CMO should work for 4x8 also. You could bump up speed for 4x8 I would think to 3866+. Havent tested but I do have a 4x8 I could test but wont as if 4x16 can do this I know 4x8 can do more easy.

Also before bios 812(tested 003, 707, 803, 808) I would get cashes at idle/low load if using AI oc. To fix need to set static v core voltage. No isssue like that with 812.

If someone want to test cmo file let me know and I will make one and post

Edit I am using 2 pair of mismatched ram kits of 4000c14 and 3600c14 so this is not ideal and still works.

Made this post on Asus support forum as people were posting about issues running 4 sticks. ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 crashes Windows 11 in XMP 1 or 2 mode - Page 2


----------



## ObviousCough

One more time to prove it wasn't a fluke 










Too bad this isn't currently possible for me with 4*8 or 2*16


----------



## samuelspark

I think some bad CPU OC was throwing off my stability earlier. The timings are pretty loose but I definitely think I can get them lower. Going for long term stability at this point.

VCCSA 1.29
DRAM 1.4
VDDQ TX 1.355

4x8 Patriot Viper 4400 MHz


----------



## newls1

Finally found the settings in bios that were holding my latency back.. freaking turn around timings got jacked.. Now hows this looking for 4030MT/s


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler






newls1 said:


> Finally found the settings in bios that were holding my latency back.. freaking turn around timings got jacked.. Now hows this looking for 4030MT/s
> 
> View attachment 2538181






Which ones would those be exactly? I figured out that if I lower my vssca and vddq to much my rtls misalign a smudge enough to boot into 73-75-75-75 bump them up a little as in .2v and they align perfectly again. Just cold booted from it being off all last night and perfectly aligned still. I'm sitting at 1.328vssa and 1.301 tx vddq and 1.43v ram.


----------



## MotomEniac

Bakka said:


> I was able to hit 3600 stable at 1.5vdimm, 1.25SA, and 1.39vddq. Trying 3733 @ same but 1.43 vddq currently (not sure stable yet). I tried jumping directly to 4000, but couldnt even find settings that would post. The ram is rated for [email protected] When I cant even get it to post, what knobs do i turn and at what deltas? Thanks!


What memory and board do you use?


Vidas said:


> Why are so many users here running command rate 2? Is running 1t a lost cause? I haven't spent too much time on it but at c14 I can't get my 2x16 bdie past 3333 in command rate 1, would save me a lot of time if it's a waste to keep trying to get 1t to work. Using a strix d4, 12700k, 2x16 3200c14 1.35v kit.


Yes, it is not too stable on most of the boards. Only saw one successful Dual Rank CR1 overclock on Gigabyte Aourus Pro yet, on ActuallyHardcoreOveclocking youtube channel. It was 3866 CR1 with pretty decent timings.


newls1 said:


> Finally found the settings in bios that were holding my latency back.. freaking turn around timings got jacked.. Now hows this looking for 4030MT/s


Can you specify which timings you are talking about? Did you obtain such a low latency on Win 11 and what is your E-Cores state? I'm asking because i'm struggling with pretty high latency with my system. I'm on DR 4000 14/15/15/32 (Win 11, E Cores ON) and my latency is 51-52 ns.


----------



## newls1

truehighroller1 said:


> Which ones would those be exactly? I figured out that if I lower my vssca and vddq to much my rtls misalign a smudge enough to boot into 73-75-75-75 bump them up a little as in .2v and they align perfectly again. Just cold booted from it being off all last night and perfectly aligned still. I'm sitting at 1.328vssa and 1.301 tx vddq and 1.43v ram.
> View attachment 2538185


you have the same issue i had. Change the following:
tWRWR_dr "7"
tWRWR_dd "7"
tWRRD_dr "7"
tWRRD_dd "7"

This should help you like it did for me. Let me know! Also, how do I know where my RTL's should land at... whats considered good? here is a pic of my RTL's below. Looks like im @ 25/25 if im understanding what im seeing?


----------



## bscool

@newls1 No need to worry about rtls on Strix with latest bios round trip latency enabled by default from my testing.

Use memtweakit it to view them in Windows. If round trip wasnt on they will be much farther apart. pic 1 on and pic 2 off.

When RTL if enabled they will either be the same or within 2. When disabled they spread much more like 8 points in the screenshot.

But if you want to be safe you could enable round trip latency so they are tightened on older bios versions.


----------



## Frozburn

jayfkay said:


> do you guys expect MSI to fix their DR wall?


What are you stuck at? My DR works stable Anta 777 extreme 10 hours at 4000 CL 14 14 14 32, 1.2 SA / 1.2 VDDQ, gear 1, CR2. On SR I can boot 4200 CR1, haven't tested much on it because it's some old 2x8GB kit and the voltage requirement (SA for example) is like 1.48 or so. Mobo is Z690-A Pro, default bios.


----------



## RetroWave78

I got the new motherboard in, extremely satisfied with the end result, the performance is brain-warping, 48% increase in single core speed vs 8700k:









Result







www.3dmark.com





Some pics and a post build video with ample information in the video description to back-up where I take the video at the very end:

Alder Lake Upgrade + Fake Pandemic Update






Thanks for looking, feedback welcome!































































































GtiJason said:


> Sure you can, just Right click / Open in new tab and then delete the first part of the size-down url
> This is what you are left with, OG size pic
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/attachments/20180513_191245-jpg.2537778/
> 
> 
> EDIT: Just looked at the mega sized desktop pic, AIDA64 is hella buggy there are several ways to make it show pretty much anything
> Aida thinks you are running 265 bclk, weather you are or are not doesn't matter to Aida. It's probably do to the old version you are running and it having no idea what your hardware is. Version 6.50.5800 has been OK but Windows 7, 8, 10 and 11 show fairly different results with 10 being about 5ns faster. It judges many scores by what it thinks it see's and even leaves out fairly important things (depending on version) like mem timings your real latency is most likely double what it's saying


Yep, I was using an outdated version of Aida64, after updating latency is now 52 ns, nothing to write home about.



bscool said:


> @RetroWave78 As @GtiJason said Adia64 bug. Need to run as close as you can to 100 bclk to get comparable results to others latency.


I was using an older version of Aida64! After updating latency is now 52 ns, nothing to write home about.


----------



## newls1

bscool said:


> @newls1 No need to worry about rtls on Strix with latest bios round trip latency enabled by default from my testing.
> 
> Use memtweakit it to view them in Windows. If round trip wasnt on they will be much farther apart. pic 1 on and pic 2 off.
> 
> When RTL if enabled they will either be the same or within 2. When disabled they spread much more like 8 points in the screenshot.
> 
> But if you want to be safe you could enable round trip latency so they are tightened on older bios versions.


ok, thanks man. Im using the bios you linked a few days ago (beta 0812) and my RTL's are 25/25 so im prob good then. appreciate ya


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> @newls1 No need to worry about rtls on Strix with latest bios round trip latency enabled by default from my testing.
> 
> Use memtweakit it to view them in Windows. If round trip wasnt on they will be much farther apart. pic 1 on and pic 2 off.
> 
> When RTL if enabled they will either be the same or within 2. When disabled they spread much more like 8 points in the screenshot.
> 
> But if you want to be safe you could enable round trip latency so they are tightened on older bios versions.





newls1 said:


> you have the same issue i had. Change the following:
> tWRWR_dr "7"
> tWRWR_dd "7"
> tWRRD_dr "7"
> tWRRD_dd "7"
> 
> This should help you like it did for me. Let me know! Also, how do I know where my RTL's should land at... whats considered good? here is a pic of my RTL's below. Looks like im @ 25/25 if im understanding what im seeing?
> 
> View attachment 2538197



Yours look good because you have 71-71-73-73. Mine I can through off without the right voltage so while centering is, enabled by default to little voltage will throw them off still. Mine are all in line perfectly 75-75-75-75.


----------



## newls1

RetroWave78 said:


> I got the new motherboard in, extremely satisfied with the end result, the performance is brain-warping, 48% increase in single core speed vs 8700k:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Result
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.3dmark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some pics and a post build video with ample information in the video description to back-up where I take the video at the very end:
> 
> Alder Lake Upgrade + Fake Pandemic Update
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for looking, feedback welcome!
> 
> View attachment 2538217
> 
> View attachment 2538215
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538218
> View attachment 2538212
> View attachment 2538213
> View attachment 2538214
> View attachment 2538215
> View attachment 2538217
> View attachment 2538218
> 
> View attachment 2538214
> 
> View attachment 2538213
> 
> View attachment 2538212
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, I was using an outdated version of Aida64, after updating latency is now 52 ns, nothing to write home about.
> 
> 
> 
> I was using an older version of Aida64! After updating latency is now 52 ns, nothing to write home about.


i see about $4,857 worth of fittings used in this loop.


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 Your cpu score seems low on Timespy. It should be more like 20,000+.

Edit I see you disabled e cores in the video.


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> @RetroWave78 Your cpu score seems low on Timespy. It should be more like 20,000+.


That's only P-Cores as I explain in the post build vid!


----------



## Bakka

MotomEniac said:


> What memory and board do you use?


Tuf z690-plus wifi d4
gskill F4-4000C15Q-32GVK (quad kit) ([email protected] 15-16-16-36)
I've tried two different kits (same model) and have the same results with both.

I've been able to run quad stable at 3733 1.5vdimm, 1.28SA, 1.45vddq and dual stable at 4000, 1.5, 1.25, 1.35. But just cant manage to get the quad to post once I try bumping the speed to 3867.


----------



## bscool

Bakka said:


> Tuf z690-plus wifi d4
> gskill F4-4000C15Q-32GVK (quad kit) ([email protected] 15-16-16-36)
> I've tried two different kits (same model) and have the same results with both.
> 
> I've been able to run quad stable at 3733 1.5vdimm, 1.28SA, 1.45vddq and dual stable at 4000, 1.5, 1.25, 1.35. But just cant manage to get the quad to post once I try bumping the speed to 3867.


It could be your IMC limit. If you test with just 2 sticks and can only get say 4000 stable then you are going to be down a few bins with 4 sticks. So another way to check is find your max 2 stick stable clocks. If you can run say 4266 with 2x8 then it could be another issue.

I have a very good IMC and can run 4x16 @3866c15. Didnt mem test it just booted and played around for a bit. I can boot and bench 4266c16 with 2x16. 430015c with 2x8.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

RetroWave78 said:


> I got the new motherboard in, extremely satisfied with the end result, the performance is brain-warping, 48% increase in single core speed vs 8700k:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Result
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.3dmark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Some pics and a post build video with ample information in the video description to back-up where I take the video at the very end:
> 
> Alder Lake Upgrade + Fake Pandemic Update
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for looking, feedback welcome!
> 
> View attachment 2538217
> 
> View attachment 2538215
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538218
> View attachment 2538212
> View attachment 2538213
> View attachment 2538214
> View attachment 2538215
> View attachment 2538217
> View attachment 2538218
> 
> View attachment 2538214
> 
> View attachment 2538213
> 
> View attachment 2538212
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yep, I was using an outdated version of Aida64, after updating latency is now 52 ns, nothing to write home about.
> 
> 
> 
> I was using an older version of Aida64! After updating latency is now 52 ns, nothing to write home about.


Score looks nice but GT1 and GT2 are down by 1 fps.


----------



## ObviousCough

btw, i'm maxing out 16GB of ram at 4k in Forza Horizon 5.










Good thing i'm using a GAMMIX S70 nvme :|


----------



## Revv23

jayfkay said:


> do you guys expect MSI to fix their DR wall?


 i think the wall is user error - plenty of proof in this thread of such. 

The only brand I know of that still has a wall is ASROCK


----------



## bscool

Revv23 said:


> i think the wall is user error - plenty of proof in this thread of such.
> 
> The only brand I know of that still has a wall is ASROCK


Plenty of proof DR @4000+ with tight timings is not happening on MSI. If so post links. To memtest stable 4000 to 4133+ tight timing DR.


----------



## ObviousCough

The only "user error" involved is not taking the hours/days to find a magic combination of vddq/vdimm/sa to even post and or pass a stress test.


----------



## PolRoger

My low bin i5-12600k IMC seems to have trouble stabilizing @4000 Gear 1 and the best that I've managed to get a pass for 20 cycles of TM5 is @3900 Gear 1. I decided to look at higher speed Gear 2 memory OC but my B-die kits can only manage ~4400 (not fully stable) or lower memory speeds with stability. I recently picked up a new Crucial Ballistix 2x8GB 1R kit that can run higher memory speeds with relaxed primary timings compared to Samsung B-die. The latency penalty in Gear 2 is still present but the faster memory speed is providing better bandwidth results. Low Gear 2 memory controller frequency means that VCCSA can be left on auto (~.910v) DRAM voltage is set to 1.45v.

i5-12600K P49/E39 4800C18:


----------



## EarlZ

I'm looking at getting a Kingston Fury Renegade 3600Mhx cl16 32gb kit (KF436C16RB1AK2/32) if my existing 4000amhz kit does not play well. Should I expect greater succress with 3600Mhz ? 

Is the said kit dual or single rank?


----------



## bscool

EarlZ said:


> I'm looking at getting a Kingston Fury Renegade 3600Mhx cl16 32gb kit (KF436C16RB1AK2/32) if my existing 4000amhz kit does not play well. Should I expect greater succress with 3600Mhz ?
> 
> Is the said kit dual or single rank?


I would think you have a higher chance of it working if you just want to set XMP. I have no idea if it is SR or DR, looks like DR from spec sheet.

I would think your current kit should work at 3600 if you manually set it to that.. If it is not working at 3600 with 2x8 something is wrong. Also it would help to list your MB. I looked back thru your old posts but most people wont do that.









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


thank you for posting this. I have DDR4 Edge WIFI. On v100 I can post maximum: 4133, on v114 I can post 4000, on v114u1 I can post 3600. AIDA also reports 0 latency on new bios version. Seems to be new entry in BIOS called “EVENTUAL DRAM VOLTAGE”. It seems regardless of voltage and timings there...




www.overclock.net


----------



## EarlZ

bscool said:


> I would think you have a higher chance of it working if you just want to set XMP. I have no idea if it is SR or DR, looks like DR from spec sheet.
> 
> I would think your current kit should work at 3600 if you manually set it to that.. If it is not working at 3600 with 2x8 something is wrong. Also it would help to list your MB. I looked back thru your old posts but most people wont do that.
> "
> Does anyone know if the MSI Z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 can run kits with XMP at 4000Mhz gear1? I have an exsiting g.skill 4000Mhz cl18 (4 sticks of 8GB) and I was hoping to move that over and not spend more on memory.
> 
> EDIT: GSKILL TRIDENT Z RGB F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB 16GB"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> 
> thank you for posting this. I have DDR4 Edge WIFI. On v100 I can post maximum: 4133, on v114 I can post 4000, on v114u1 I can post 3600. AIDA also reports 0 latency on new bios version. Seems to be new entry in BIOS called “EVENTUAL DRAM VOLTAGE”. It seems regardless of voltage and timings there...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net



Thanks for loooking back my previous posts. The MB im getting is indeed the MSI Z690 Edge Wifi ddr4. Due to the recent weather conditions in where I live, there is a huge delay with the parts arriving.

If 4000Mhz XMP doesnt play nice with 4x8gb ill still load up XMP and just manually change to 3600Mhz right?

If I wanted to go with two of those kingston kits can I still.expect xmp at 3600Mhz (4x16gb sticks) or my best bet is a 3200Mhz kit for 4x16gb?


----------



## zhrooms

Re-posting because moderators cleaned up some _rude_ posts. 💀

Context: A couple of users were stating *16GB* is either *not enough* or *barely enough* for *gaming*, which is demonstrably false.
So I opened up 9 popular multiplayer games, put all of the settings to the highest possible to maximize the the RAM usage and simultaneously disabled the pagefile, so all of the data was physically stored in the memory sticks, this is then the *absolute worst case scenario* for these games, as many of them will use *significantly less* when being optimized for framerate instead of visual fidelity.

About the pagefile, it helps reduce OS/Software memory usage by a lot, cuts the physical memory usage *in half* on the desktop, and lets the game put a portion of standby data in the pagefile, this is where there is some confusion, as some users seem to believe that you will encounter stuttering or run into other performance issues, when the game needs to pull standby data from a disk, *this is not true at all*, games cache a lot of data that it will never use, there is absolutely *zero evidence* that a game having to pull a file from a 7000MB/s (and lowest latency ever) page file, has any performance impact what so ever. If you're curious about your memory usage I recommend you download RAMMap, basically a more advanced version of the Resource Monitor, where you can also manually clear Standby files and more.

As for why I own 32GB.. I have mentioned this multiple times in this thread already, purchased my 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die sticks that I am now running at 4100 14-16-15-34 @ 42.4ns, back in December of 2020, just after they were released, at the low price of just $220 pre-tax ($110 per stick), for the sole purpose of overclocking them on the 11th Gen processors that were releasing a couple of months later, at up to 4600 MT/s just like on 10th Gen, but that clearly didn't work out as we all know now, the Rocket Lake IMC was atrocious, so I really wasted my money there, because I still can't get over 4100, which my previous 2x8GB Single Rank B-die sticks I got in 2015 still do just fine, the reason I wanted 4600 is because I'm a gamer and enthusiast, I really need that performance for all of the processor/memory bottlenecked games I play, and as a bonus it's fun to overclock new hardware, what makes these new sticks unique from the older B-die is that they can do up to a few hundred MT/s faster, for an even better MT/s to CL ratio, during my decision to get these new sticks back in 2020 it bothered me *a lot* that they were 32GB, when all I needed/wanted was the increased overclocking capability, so I had to really convince myself that this was worth the $140 it cost me to upgrade, it was certainly not an easy choice is what I'm saying.

Mainly because.. 32GB has always been a meme for* gamers*, take for example the new Battlefield game, latest game on the market too, with 128 players in a tight area compared to Warzone which has them all spread out, this game consumes *half *of a 16GB kit.. Now in hindsight, G.Skill released their new 2x8GB kits (4000 14-15-15) not long after Rocket Lake, I believe about 2 months, which at the time was $100 less than the 32GB kits. That would definitely have been a better upgrade, as they are easier on the IMC to overclock, run cooler and cost less. I have no problem admitting I was wrong there, my mistake was simply purchasing this 2x16GB kit *a few months before* Rocket Lake released, had I waited I would never have bought them obviously, and likely upgraded to the 2x8GB 4000 14-15-15 kit now for the Alder Lake release and enjoyed an even tighter overclock than I do now, would have lost up to 1% performance from going back to single rank but the higher frequency/lower timings should provide more than a percent increase in performance, as well as them being cheaper and run cooler as said.

But in conclusion, as seen below, 32GB really is a joke, it always has been, I can't recall a single game that ever got close to 16GB except for Warzone, the *average gamer* will never use the 32GB capacity, and let me be very clear, *if* you play let's say 'Cities Skylines' with 500 assets/mods (this is a real number), then you don't need to be offended, I'm clearly *not* talking about you, if you need 64GB to play that one game or for work on the side of gaming, then *you* clearly need it, but the *average gamer* who do *not* play Cities Skyline with 500 mods or run multiple pieces of software in the background at all times, is more than fine on 16GB, most would even get by with 12GB if that was still a choice (3x4GB), with no performance penalty of any kind, and even in the event of them playing a game that requires more than 16GB physical memory, the performance impact of not having enough physical memory is negligible, not talking standby now but actual physical memory that it wants to use, personally when I take screenshots in games at 8K resolution, like Star Citizen where memory usage could go up to 24GB+ because of memory leaks, then simply increasing the pagefile up to 24GB extra memory, so physical 16 + 24 = 40, that completely eliminated any instability/crashing, no need to purchase another two sticks of RAM to avoid those crashes, and there should only be a measurable slowdown if you *far exceed the physical needs*, for example in the graph below, Warzone gets close, and does fill the rest up with standby over time, but never runs out of physical memory, let me be very clear that there is absolutely no measurable performance penalty from it filling up the rest of the memory as standby. For example if I clear the standby data after joining a match, and not move the character, it will barely use any standby, it'll remain at about 2GB for the whole match, only when you move around the map and it will start loading in new data and put the previous on standby, or vice versa. For example, given enough time in the game, like 3 hours, exploring every inch of the map, all of the menus, guns, operators, store items, it literally filled up my entire 32GB of RAM as standby, no empty/zeroed RAM left.. that does not mean that 32GB isn't enough, it just means that the game is trash and likes to basically put every single thing on standby, so physical memory usage is the only thing you need to worry about, which Warzone uses about just over 10GB of, the developers are clearly optimizing not just this game but all games to run on 16GB as that is what most people have, like you can bet your ass on the Warzone developers knowing *exactly* how much RAM their game is pulling, thinking some mainstream game would randomly use like 24GB physical memory is absurd, hundreds of thousands of Warzone players would encounter issues and complain, that is not a thing and will not be a thing for a long time, we're years away from any game being developed to take advantage of up to 32GB physical RAM.

Q: What memory do I buy?
A: That depends on what you're going to do with the PC.

Q: Do I need 16GB, 32GB or 64GB?
A: That depends on what you're going to do with the PC.

Q: Do I need a kit with 3200 MT/s or 4000 MT/s?
A: That depends on what you're going to do with the PC.

Q: How many sticks do I need?
A: That depends on what you're going to do with the PC.

Q: Is 14-14-14 better than 16-18-18?
A: That depends on what you're going to do with the PC.

Q: Is this memory good for Call of Duty: Warzone?
A: That depends on the rest of your PC parts.

Q: Is this memory good for Adobe Photoshop?
A: That depends on the rest of your PC parts.

Q: Is this memory good for Vegas Pro?
A: That depends on the rest of your PC parts.

Saying "16GB is barely enough for gaming" and "most people should be fine on 32GB" is literal crazy talk, it makes no sense. It's obvious that 16GB is far more than what most PCs need, as I pointed out earlier in the thread, only about 10 to 15% of Steam users run 32GB, very likely far less, it just happens to be that many work PCs are occasionally used for gaming. In general, the starting point for everyone should be dual channel, as in 2x4GB, you would get very far on that, 8GB physical memory and 8-24GB pagefile for up to 32GB total system RAM, like a hybrid solution. And most PCs would be fine with 2400 MT/s, with how fast the processors are today, you'd hit far above 144 FPS on a 144 Hz Monitor. 4000 MT/s is also clearly useless for most games, again, especially with how fast the processors are today, I benchmarked a bunch of popular games such as Apex Legends, CS:GO, Overwatch and Rainbow Six Siege earlier this year, and they all run above 240 FPS on a 9900K and XMP 3600 14-15-15 memory, it didn't dip below 240 at any point in those games, it's really impressive how well these games are optimized, so if you're on a 240 Hz G-Sync monitor then that's more than you need, so even thinking about a 50% faster processor like the 12600K-12900K and 4133 MT/s at CL14, you're not going to use it in those games, no difference at all, except your wallet is now significantly lighter. And that's with a 240 Hz monitor, now think of everyone who runs just 144 Hz monitors? The majority that is, they already hit 144 Hz locked without dipping below on several year old hardware and 3000 MT/s CL16 memory, the sweet spot for price/performance is still the 8700K 6C/12T and a 2x8GB B-die kit at 4133 MT/s CL16, it'd demolish practically every single game on the market at 144 FPS, given a powerful enough GPU. 

So, I have absolutely no idea how anyone could come to the conclusion that 16GB isn't enough, everyone should really be on the same page that 16GB is far more than enough for gamers, and that 32GB can be a good idea if you do work on the side, and even 64GB a good choice if you do some more advanced work or have very specific game requirements such as running a ridiculous amount of mods in a game, but that's your choice. Like, you aren't the "gamer" I/we are talking about, you are the *exception* at that point, and none of this applies to you, you made a choice that has different requirements from the *norm*, and you have to pay the price (higher physical memory capacity). Then you have to understand that you are the exception and you should absolutely not push* your requirements* on the average gamer which has very different requirements. I myself have zero need for 32GB and it was a complete waste, if I could go back I'd replace my 2x16GB sticks with the latest 2x8GB sticks, not a doubt in my mind, it would literally be faster, at a lower cost.

*Software running*
MSI Afterburner (Overclocking)
RivaTuner Statistics Server (OSD) _I would not run this normally_
HWiNFO (OSD) _I would not run this normally_
Discord (Voice)
Battle.net / Epic Games Store / Origin / Steam / Ubisoft Connect (Game Launchers)

Physical memory usage at desktop is *3.0GB*, with the pagefile disabled (physical is half that with the pagefile enabled).

*Apex Legends - 6.996 GB / 42% of 16GB - 4GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality

*Battlefield 2042 - 9.719 GB / 60% of 16GB - 6.7GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality, Ray Tracing, DLSS Quality, HDR

*Battlefield V - 9.153 GB / 56% of 16GB - 6.2GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality, Ray Tracing, HDR

*Call of Duty: Warzone - 13.645 GB / 84% of 16GB - 10.6GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality, Ray Tracing, DLSS Quality, HDR

*DayZ - 7.428 GB / 46% of 16GB - 4.4GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality

*Fortnite - 9.188 GB / 56% of 16GB - 6.2GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality, Ray Tracing, DLSS Quality

*Overwatch - 6.663 GB / 40% of 16GB - 3.7GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality

*Rainbow Six Siege - 6.176 GB / 38% of 16GB - 3.2GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality, DLSS Quality

*World of Warcraft - 8.160 GB / 50% of 16GB - 5.2GB not including OS/Software*
4K, Highest Quality, Ray Tracing









​


----------



## bscool

EarlZ said:


> Thanks for loooking back my previous posts. The MB im getting is indeed the MSI Z690 Edge Wifi ddr4. Due to the recent weather conditions in where I live, there is a huge delay with the parts arriving.
> 
> If 4000Mhz XMP doesnt play nice with 4x8gb ill still load up XMP and just manually change to 3600Mhz right?
> 
> If I wanted to go with two of those kingston kits can I still.expect xmp at 3600Mhz (4x16gb sticks) or my best bet is a 3200Mhz kit for 4x16gb?


I forgot about you running 4 sticks. I would try and get your current sticks working at 3600. Set XMP and then go to where you can manually set mem clock and set to 3600 and save and reboot. It should work and then slowly lower timings to like 17-20-20 then 16-20-20, 16-19-19 etc.

The isssue is 4 sticks. It is just harder to run on z690 as MB is daisy chain and favors 2 sticks. I can run 4133 with 2x16 but 4x16 I have tough timing running 3866. I havent tried 4x8 but I wouldnt expect much more, maybe 4000 and I have a top IMC and on Strix. Msi is just not up to the level of Asus this round when it comes to 2x16 or 4x8 from what i have seen.

I wouldnt bet on even if you went with [email protected] it working on MSI. it might but you wont know until you try it. MSI QVL list shows 4000 4x16 for you board but I dont believe that at all. Maybe gear 2 but even that i dont know.

My Strix will barely run 2x16 @ 4266 gear 2. I cant imagine 4x16 in gear 2. But I am using b die and the QVL show Hynix 4x16.

Edit looking at Gskill ram config for your MB they show 3200 4x16 so that should work(gskill list nothing past 3200 for 4x16). I would trust Gskill over what MSI says.

Edit 2 gskill also show 3600 4x8 for your MB.


----------



## EarlZ

bscool said:


> I forgot about you running 4 sticks. I would try and get your current sticks working at 3600. Set XMP and then go to where you can manually set mem clock and set to 3600 and save and reboot. It should work and then slowly lower timings to like 17-20-20 then 16-20-20, 16-19-19 etc.
> 
> The isssue is 4 sticks. It is just harder to run on z690 as MB is daisy chain and favors 2 sticks. I can run 4133 with 2x16 but 4x16 I have tough timing running 3866. I havent tried 4x8 but I wouldnt expect much more, maybe 4000 and I have a top IMC and on Strix. Msi is just not up to the level of Asus this round when it comes to 2x16 or 4x8 from what i have seen.
> 
> I wouldnt bet on even if you went with [email protected] it working on MSI. it might but you wont know until you try it. MSI QVL list shows 4000 4x16 for you board but I dont believe that at all. Maybe gear 2 but even that i dont know.
> 
> My Strix will barely run 2x16 @ 4266 gear 2. I cant imagine 4x16 in gear 2. But I am using b die and the QVL show Hynix 4x16.
> 
> Edit looking at Gskill ram config for your MB they show 3200 4x16 so that should work(gskill list nothing past 3200 for 4x16). I would trust Gskill over what MSI says.
> 
> Edit 2 gskill also show 3600 4x8 for your MB.


Thank you for the very helpful response and I greatly apprrciate the effort! I'm starting to think that I made the bad decision to try MSI over Asus. .


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

EarlZ said:


> Thank you for the very helpful response and I greatly apprrciate the effort! I'm starting to think that I made the bad decision to try MSI over Asus. .


I'm running 4000 14-15-15-35 @ 1.25/1.35/1.48 SA/DDRQ/VDIMM with 4x8 B die on a Z690 Edge. I've already posted results and it's TM5 stable for 8 cycles, so it wouldn't hurt to give it a try. Not sure why others seem to have such problems, my kits are cheap 4000 CL16 Oloy Blades and the board worked with XMP default settings G1 zero problems.


----------



## bscool

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> I'm running 4000 14-15-15-35 @ 1.2/1.35/1.48 SA/DDRQ/VDIMM with 4x8 B die on a Z690 Edge. I've already posted results and it's TM5 stable for 8 cycles, so it wouldn't hurt to give it a try. Not sure why others seem to have such problems, my kits are cheap 4000 CL16 Oloy Blades and the board worked with XMP default settings G1 zero problems.


I looked back thru your post you no screenshot of timing and memtest past. So not saying you dont have the setting you say running but unless there is proof it doesnt help. I could say I am running 4400c16 gear with 1,25sa etc and it helps no one.

Your post I assume you are refering to

txt about your 4x8









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


for the love of jesus, i finally got a board that will clock my ram like z490/590 did! Im currently @ 46.9ns... Can someone please assist me with what settings I should further improve upon?! Much appreciated.




www.overclock.net





2x8









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


for the love of jesus, i finally got a board that will clock my ram like z490/590 did! Im currently @ 46.9ns... Can someone please assist me with what settings I should further improve upon?! Much appreciated.




www.overclock.net





If all any of us did was come on here and type what we run it would lose something. Just typing what we can run without showing proof. Screen shots can be faked but if someone is going to those lengths they have issues beyond the scope of this. To me threads like this are to create a database ofuser experience/reference source of info and screenshot help with validation.


----------



## bscool

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> Just hold on for 3 hours then I guess mate. Providing disinformation benefits me nothing, not sure why anyone would want to "fake screenshots" to share OC statistics and experiences but whatever.


People do fake screen shots/benchmarks. Weird i know. Just like why do cheat at video games? Makes no sense but people do.

Didnt you hear about Gigaybte recently posting fake/inaccurate screenshot benchmarks?

And yeah i get it, not everyone want to hit print screen at the end of their memtest to share it with other. I never really did in the past, I just ran the tests for my own use. With this new platform I did post screenshot results so there was more data out there rather only hearsay. But I understand not wanting to.

I think MSI will eventually release a bios that lets them run closer Asus on 690 ddr4 with dual rank. On z590 it took a few months before Unify X could run DR past 3733 gear 1. I had both z590 Apex and Unify X and Asus was running 3866+ way before MSI. MSi was better in gear 2 on z590 for me.

Havent watch the video yet........


----------



## JoeRambo

bscool said:


> I think MSI will eventually release a bios that lets them run closer Asus on 690 ddr4 with dual rank. On z590 it took a few months before Unify X could run DR past 3733 gear 1. I had both z590 Apex and Unify X and Asus was running 3866+ way before MSI. MSi was better in gear 2 on z590 for me.


It's 100% BIOS thing. It turns out my EDGE needs ODT 60/48/80 AND WRPRE 34 + RDPRE 8 + WRPDEN 34 manually set. Thanks to Buildzoid video i am now able to boot 3866 and 3800.
Working on OC and stability now, but looks kinda ridiculous that You need to know these magic values to be able to boot DR DRAM.

Kinda fun to set any of "PRE" settings to Auto and no more training4u.


----------



## dbuilt

bscool said:


> I would think you have a higher chance of it working if you just want to set XMP. I have no idea if it is SR or DR, looks like DR from spec sheet.
> 
> I would think your current kit should work at 3600 if you manually set it to that.. If it is not working at 3600 with 2x8 something is wrong. Also it would help to list your MB. I looked back thru your old posts but most people wont do that.
> "
> Does anyone know if the MSI Z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 can run kits with XMP at 4000Mhz gear1? I have an exsiting g.skill 4000Mhz cl18 (4 sticks of 8GB) and I was hoping to move that over and not spend more on memory.
> 
> EDIT: GSKILL TRIDENT Z RGB F4-4000C18D-16GTZRB 16GB"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> 
> thank you for posting this. I have DDR4 Edge WIFI. On v100 I can post maximum: 4133, on v114 I can post 4000, on v114u1 I can post 3600. AIDA also reports 0 latency on new bios version. Seems to be new entry in BIOS called “EVENTUAL DRAM VOLTAGE”. It seems regardless of voltage and timings there...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


MSI EDGE DDR4 2x8 SR boots 4000 1T gear 1 XMP Auto everything.

GSKILL TRIDENT Z F4-4000c14


----------



## ssgwright

got the shuffle for a asus z690 maximus hero and some ddr5 6000. Just a heads up I'll be selling my msi z690 pro and some ballistix 4000 here soon $300 shipped for both.


----------



## newls1

Ive already asked this question in another section on this forum, and i hate to sound repetitive, but is it possible to lock RTL's on an asus Z690 board? Anyone know this?


----------



## truehighroller1

newls1 said:


> Ive already asked this question in another section on this forum, and i hate to sound repetitive, but is it possible to lock RTL's on an asus Z690 board? Anyone know this?


Nope


----------



## newls1

thats what i figured... thanks


----------



## weyden

someone with a gigabyte motherboard, got improvements in the bios in its latest version? I saw that they are releasing several!


----------



## PolRoger

weyden said:


> someone with a gigabyte motherboard, got improvements in the bios in its latest version? I saw that they are releasing several!


ADL/Z690 is a new platform so I think there is plenty of room for improvements to tune the BIOS from Gigabyte. 

Two new BIOS released recently from them for my Giga Z690i: F5C and F5D.

I've been testing a new kit of Micron E-die with my low bin i5-12600K:

P49/E39 3733C16 Gear1:









P50/E40 4400C17 Gear 2:









P51/E41 4800C19 Gear 2:









Previous screenshot of P49/E39 3900C16 Gear 1 (Samsung B-die):


----------



## Bladed

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> I'm running 4000 14-15-15-35 @ 1.2/1.35/1.48 SA/DDRQ/VDIMM with 4x8 B die on a Z690 Edge. I've already posted results and it's TM5 stable for 8 cycles, so it wouldn't hurt to give it a try. Not sure why others seem to have such problems, my kits are cheap 4000 CL16 Oloy Blades and the board worked with XMP default settings G1 zero problems.


Idk how you do it lol. I have some cheap Oloy Blades 4x16Gb 3600 14-14-14-34 @1.45v, XMP doesn't even get close to working on an Asus Strix Z690-A. I've been manually tuning it for about 10 days now and the closest settings I could get to work are 1.329v SA, 1.205v VDDQ, 1.45625v DRAM. Anything more than 1.21 VDDQ seems to make it really unstable. I'm just trying to run them at stock 3600 CL14.

They run fine with just 2 sticks though.


----------



## neteng101

Is there any consensus on how to tweak/use VCCSA and VDDQ? I see everyone having these at all sorts of different voltages - some high, some low. Working in reverse right now that I have settled on an overclock, just trying to lower voltages.


----------



## weyden

PolRoger said:


> ADL/Z690 is a new platform so I think there is plenty of room for improvements to tune the BIOS from Gigabyte.
> 
> Two new BIOS released recently from them for my Giga Z690i: F5C and F5D.
> 
> I've been testing a new kit of Micron E-die with my low bin i5-12600K:
> 
> P49/E39 3733C16 Gear1:
> View attachment 2538462
> 
> 
> P50/E50 4400C17 Gear 2:
> View attachment 2538463
> 
> 
> P51/E41 4800C19 Gear 2:
> View attachment 2538464
> 
> 
> Previous screenshot of P49/E39 3900C16 Gear 1 (Samsung B-die):
> View attachment 2538465


Thanks for sharing your SS! 
Could you take some pictures of your configuration in the bios of the memories to reach 4800mhz? Here I am going up to 4600mhz. If I put 4700mhz, it starts with 4533mhz. And if I put 4800mhz, it doesn't boot!


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

For anyone wanting some more definitive proof that MSI boards are in fact capable of 4x8 DDR4 4000+, here is your screenshot.









I can boot 4133, even 4266 if I really pump up the voltages, but I can't seem to get 4133 fully stable without jumping up to at least straight 16s on my primaries, and that's still with more juice than I would like to run daily. I can provide screenshots if anyone needs to see those.

Peace


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

Bladed said:


> Idk how you do it lol. I have some cheap Oloy Blades 4x16Gb 3600 14-14-14-34 @1.45v, XMP doesn't even get close to working on an Asus Strix Z690-A. I've been manually tuning it for about 10 days now and the closest settings I could get to work are 1.329v SA, 1.205v VDDQ, 1.45625v DRAM. Anything more than 1.21 VDDQ seems to make it really unstable. I'm just trying to run them at stock 3600 CL14.
> 
> They run fine with just 2 sticks though.


I guess my IMC may be better than average - are you running a 12700k or a 12900k? A lot of the people I have read about running into issues have been running the i7. 4x16 is also a pretty tough ask, even at 3600. What can you get 2 DIMMs up to?


----------



## bscool

@Dead_Bot_42 Have you tried just 2 dim to see how high you can go. It looks like you have a very good IMC.

Do you set ODTs? Or just leave them on auto?


----------



## zhrooms

zhrooms said:


> Finally finished my first memory overclock, still a few things to tweak, but sadly it appears that my IMC limit is just above 4100 (with tight timings) so 4133 is not possible, which throws a lot of errors in TM5 no matter what I do, and requires a high SA (1.45) and VDDQ (1.52) voltage.
> So, below is what I ended up at with the frequency set to 4100 (100:100);
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I have confirmed that it is game stable in Battlefield 2042, Call of Duty: Warzone and World of Warcraft, all severely bottlenecked by the processor/memory.
> But that's expected considering it passed TM5 (it can be game stable even when it throws a bunch of errors), but to satisfy everyone, I made sure it was error free.
> A few words about the timings;
> 
> *CL:* Obviously can't do 13, to move down from 15 to 14 I had to increase the DRAM voltage from 1.512 all the way up to 1.632, to not produce any errors, later when adjusting other timings I ran into a single error a few times and decided to just bump it from 1.632 to 1.648, to ensure stability once and for all, and I have the cooling for it as you can see, temperature stabilized at about 29-30°C after just a few minutes, last time I checked while gaming it never exceeded 30°C, basically it stays at about 6°C above the water temperature
> *RCD:* A few errors at 15, so kept it 16
> *RP:* A few errors at 14, so kept it 15
> *RAS:* Sometimes it passes 32 with no errors, but not always, so I left it at 34, but can definitely run it 30-32 and be completely game stable
> *CR:* 1 refused to boot as expected
> 
> *WR:* Didn't attempt lower than 8
> *WRPDEN:* This is set to 22 from 'Auto 38', to get WR down to 8
> 
> *RFC:* Many errors at 270, no errors at 275, but set 280 just to be on the safe side
> *RRDL/RRDS/FAW:* 4/4/16 running fine
> *RTP:* Didn't attempt lower than 6
> *WL:* Didn't attempt lower than 10
> 
> *REFI:* No hint of any issues running 65535
> *CKE:* Disabled by changing PPD from Auto to 0 in the memory section of the BIOS, then set to 69 with no penalty of any kind, since it's for "power saving"
> 
> *RDRD:* A lot of errors with SG at 6, so had to stay at 7
> *WRRD:* SG controls WTR_L which can run at both 8 and 10 but they throw a single error every time, 12 is the lowest that is always error free
> DG controls WTR_S, which runs 4 no problem, no attempt under that, so it is gaming stable 8/4 but not TM5 stable
> *RDWR:* Refuses to run below 14, doesn't even boot at 13, I've been told it might be because WL is too low (10)
> *WRWR:* Same as RDRD, errors at 6, so kept it at 7
> 
> *RTL:* Auto
> 
> System Agent Voltage:
> *1.300:* TM5 crashed
> *1.320:* 170 Errors
> *1.340:* 14 Errors
> *1.350:* 9 Errors
> *1.360:* Passed (1.364V)
> 
> VDDQ Voltage:
> *1.350:* No Boot
> *1.360:* No Boot
> *1.370:* Errors
> *1.380:* Passed (1.380V)
> 
> DRAM Voltage:
> *1.630:* Errors (1.632V)
> *1.650:* Passed (1.652V)
> 
> Shame that it can't do 4133, as that boosts Read and Write by a lot, going 4100 to 4133 is in theory +0.80%, and the bandwidth gained when I ran it was about 0.83%, on Read (570MB/s), so I get ~69,400 MB/s at 4133 compared to ~68,800 at 4100. That also tells us that to pass 70,000 Read, you have to run maybe close to +4150, it'd also push latency down to 42-42.2, but at least I'm under 42.5 and there is definitely more to tweak. Like a lot of things can be lowered that will cause errors but it will remain game stable, so I think I can reach 42.2 for gaming.
> 
> What I need to experiment with for the next overclock, is to figure out how to lower SG on RDRD and WRWR, and lower RDWR, also check at which frequency it starts throwing errors, I've already attempted 4120 and that wasn't error free, so it's somewhere between 4100 and 4120, I'm guessing about 4110, so probably not worth messing with it in that case. Then I need to test the new BIOSes as I'm still on 0707.
> 
> For anyone wondering, the kit is the G.Skill 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die one from 2020, came with these XMPs: 3600 14-15-15 1.45V / 4000 17-18-18 1.40V / 4266 17-18-18 1.50V, which were all sold as Ripjaws, Trident Z and Royal. I got the cheapest Ripjaws one at 4000 (1.40V), as there shouldn't be any difference between them, and as demonstrated it has no issues running 4133 CL14 below 1.65V. As for the board, it is the cheapest TUF (no Wi-Fi module) running the now quite old 0707 BIOS, but it clearly has no issues with a tight overclock like this.
> Overall I'm definitely pleased with this first overclock, fairly sure I have the lowest latency right now but that's of course only because I run a very high DRAM voltage (1.632-1.648) thanks to the water block, I intend to do a test where I simply shut off the water pump, so temperatures increase up to 50°C, then we'll see when/if it starts producing errors, in both TM5 and while Gaming.


My second overclock below, didn't bother with voltages, which I think are rather low already (SA and VDDQ), but will be lowering them later, as I'm going to see what I can do with CL12 and CL11 first, so stay tuned for that!









*Frequency:* 3866, a lot of errors at 3900 (down from 4100)
*CL: *13, 12 didn't boot (down from 14)
*RCD:* A few errors at 14, so kept it 15 (down from 16)
*RP:* A few errors at 14, so kept it 15
*RAS: *No issues at 28 (down from 34)
*CR:* 1 refused to boot

*WR:* Didn't attempt lower than 8
*WRPDEN:* This is set to 22 from 'Auto 38', to get WR down to 8

*RFC:* Didn't boot at 260, no issues at 270 (down from 280)
*RRDL/RRDS/FAW:* 4/4/16 no issues
*RTP:* Didn't attempt lower than 6
*WL:* Didn't attempt lower than 10

*REFI:* No issues at 65535
*CKE:* Disabled by changing PPD from Auto to 0 in the memory section of the BIOS, then set to 69 with no penalty of any kind, since it's for "power saving"

*RDRD:* A few errors with SG at 6, so had to stay at 7
*WRRD:* SG controls WTR_L, which runs at 6 with no errors, 5 didn't boot at all (down from 12)
DG controls WTR_S, which runs 4, no attempt under that (I know it can do lower, but since I didn't go lower at 4100 I left this at 4)
*RDWR:* Now runs at 12, 11 didn't boot (down from 14)
*WRWR:* Same as RDRD, errors at 6, so kept it at 7

*RTL:* Auto

System Agent Voltage: Not attempted lower yet, will do it later
VDDQ Voltage: Not attempted lower yet, will do it later
DRAM Voltage: Not attempted lower yet, will do it later

*Green* are the ones that changed from the previous 4100 overclock, so: Frequency, CL, RCD, RAS, RFC, WRRD and RDWR, the rest unchanged, including RTL which was still on Auto (and did change from 69/71 to 65/67).
*Summary*
Compared to the first overclock, that ran at *4100 MT/s*, this is running at *3866 MT/s*, that is *233 MT/s* or *5.7%* lower.
The *read bandwidth* decreased from *68,807 MB/s* to *65,208 MB/s*, that is *-3,599 MB/s* or *5.2%* lower.
The *write bandwidth* decreased from *64,471 MB/s* to *61,057 MB/s*, that is *-3,414 MB/s* or *5.3%* lower.
The *latency* increased from *42.4 ns* to *43.0 ns*, that is *+0.6 ns* or *1.4%* higher.
(It took 4.75% longer to complete TM5 because of the lower bandwidth)

Now what does this mean? In a game that is not limited by bandwidth (most games), the performance should be more or less identical, and in a game where bandwidth plays a larger role (few games), it should be measurably slower, but barely. As for actual numbers, I will definitely benchmark a few games once I've found out what I can run at CL12 and CL11 too, then compare and benchmark them all against each other (14, 13, 12, 11).​


----------



## Bladed

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> I guess my IMC may be better than average - are you running a 12700k or a 12900k? A lot of the people I have read about running into issues have been running the i7. 4x16 is also a pretty tough ask, even at 3600. What can you get 2 DIMMs up to?


I ended up getting it very stable on an older bios version for my motherboard (0605 for Asus Strix-A D4). I tried 5 other bios versions but skipped past this one. Stock XMP1 settings worked without any tweaking, ran AIDA64 for an hour and 1 min to make sure. 

Before, even if something passed memtest64 twice (4 passes each time), AIDA64 would still crash within the first 10-30seconds. Most stable run I had before was about 2 min 34 seconds but I couldn't reach that again even with the same settings.

This old bios is a champ lol. I'm running a 12700k, now officially at 4x16Gb 3600 CL 14-14-14-34 1.45v. AIDA64 shows mem latency is 55.5ns, I was hoping forunder 50ns but I'll take it. Can't believeI spent so much time on this for such a simple fix.

Thanks for checking in with me though.


----------



## Skunk0001

JoeRambo said:


> Sadly our Edge is stuck on 114 since October.


New official 7D31v11 out today for the Edge though, noting yet for the Pro





MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4


MPG series motherboards offer colorful customization with MSI Mystic Light RGB and Ambient Link, tuned for better performance by direct 16 phases VRM power, Memory Boost, Lightning Gen5 solution, Premium Thermal Solution, Wi-Fi 6, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2




www.msi.com





Not had a chance to try it yet, but I was TM5 Absolut stable with 4x8 3866 CL16 B-Die (F4-3200C14D-16GTZ) with the launch BIOS, so if I can get that back I'll be happy.

@dbuilt
@JoeRambo
@Dead_Bot_42
@EarlZ
@Man4cl
@criznit


----------



## shrimpmaster

Any tips to get 4000mhz g1 stable on z690 tuf? I have 2x8gb gskill b-die. It's stable up to 4600mhz 1t g2, g1 max is 3900mhz.
Running 3900mhz 15-15-15 1t 1.47v vdimm 1.2v SA right now, TM5 and linpack xtreme stable.
Board also post up to 4100mhz g1, but can't even load windows.

4000mhz anything under 1.3v sa errors very fast. 1.35-1.4v SA takes minutes to error. Also tried messing with VDDQ with no luck.
Testing with tm5.

Only thing I didn't try was setting ODTs, but I can't even see what ODT board is setting.


----------



## 2500k_2

Skunk0001 said:


> noting yet for the Pro


Data 12. 17 - *v115U6*





DDR4 PRO Z690-A115U6.rar - AnonFiles







anonfiles.com




Data 12 .14 - v116


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

bscool said:


> @Dead_Bot_42 Have you tried just 2 dim to see how high you can go. It looks like you have a very good IMC.
> 
> Do you set ODTs? Or just leave them on auto?


I haven't tweaked ODTs yet since I'm pretty happy with what I've been getting for performance, luckily MSI BIOS tells you what it auto sets and mine is running 80/34/0. I suppose I may be able to tighten down 4133 if I spend some time on it.

I haven't tried any 2 DIMM configurations because everything in my build is under water and it would be a minor headache to do so. I have a 2x16 GTRZA 4000 CL16 Trident Z RGB kit I might try if I feel like dealing with the nuisance, I'll make sure to post any findings here if I do.


----------



## neteng101

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> For anyone wanting some more definitive proof that MSI boards are in fact capable of 4x8 DDR4 4000+, here is your screenshot.


4xX SR is easy on MSI - I can boot my super budget 3000-16 memory at 4000 just can't get it very stable since my RAM doesn't like memory voltage beyond 1.4V. That's 4x16GB SR, done this on 2 different 12700k's as well.

I'm convinced MSI's issues > 3600 with DR sticks is all BIOS and memory training.


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

neteng101 said:


> 4xX SR is easy on MSI - I can boot my super budget 3000-16 memory at 4000 just can't get it very stable since my RAM doesn't like memory voltage beyond 1.4V. That's 4x16GB SR, done this on 2 different 12700k's as well.
> 
> I'm convinced MSI's issues > 3600 with DR sticks is all BIOS and memory training.


That very well may be the case, which is counterintuitive due to memory topology. 2x16 _should _be easier than 4x8 because they're all daisy chain layouts, but it does seem a fair number of people are really struggling with 2x16 B die kits.

Hopefully MSI gets it sorted with BIOS revisions.


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

sorry, I'm a beginner with oc, I set the automatic oc to 12900, I set ram on xmp and only changed ratio to 100: 133 and gear 1: 1 and hi manually set the fq to 4000mhz, those below they are my screens, i did 2 hours under occt and 2 hours with ryzen dram calculator ram bench, no errors, the system in games is stable.
ram is gskill Royal 4000 CL14-15-15-35 1.55V 2x8

what could i do to improve a little?


----------



## bscool

@IIISLIDEIII I posted my txt and cmo here ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread it is for DR but the timings will work on SR also.

I see you are on bios 807, for me bios 812 is the best but that is up to you to test. Either is fine but I can use lower sa/vddq on 812. I just leave them on auto with bios 812 and previous bios I had to set them manually or it wouldnt boot or be stable in Windows.

Also Ai oc works better on 812 if you use it. Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5200 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR

On previous bios Windows would crash on idle/low loads using Ai oc.


----------



## FinnFIN

When did MSI remove that official 115 Bios for the DDR4 Pro Z690-A and any ideas why?


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

bscool said:


> @IIISLIDEIII I posted my txt and cmo here ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread it is for DR but the timings will work on SR also.
> 
> I see you are on bios 807, for me bios 812 is the best but that is up to you to test. Either is fine but I can use lower sa/vddq on 812. I just leave them on auto with bios 812 and previous bios I had to set them manually or it wouldnt boot or be stable in Windows.
> 
> Also Ai oc works better on 812 if you use it. Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5200 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
> 
> On previous bios Windows would crash on idle/low loads using Ai oc.


thank you, you are very kind, where can i find the bios 812?
Once the bios is installed I try to copy the values directly from your txt file.
How do you use the .cmo file?


----------



## bscool

IIISLIDEIII said:


> thank you, you are very kind, where can i find the bios 812?
> Once the bios is installed I try to copy the values directly from your txt file.
> How do you use the .cmo file?











ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


is there a newer "beta" bios out for this board newer then the 0807 on the site?




www.overclock.net





CMO file you save to usb and you load it in the bios. Probably dont use it if you are not familar with bios. I have a lot of stuff disabled. I should make 1 that is more basic with everything at defaults but mem timings for people to try.

But then I think it helps people to learn by them doing it themself. But it can be nice to have a cmo to test if you are new to get an idea of what you need. Hmm


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

bscool said:


> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> is there a newer "beta" bios out for this board newer then the 0807 on the site?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CMO file you save to usb and you load it in the bios. Probably dont use it if you are not familar with bios. I have a lot of stuff disabled. I should make 1 that is more basic with everything at defaults but mem timings for people to try.
> 
> But then I think it helps people to learn by them doing it themself. But it can be nice to have a cmo to test if you are new to get an idea of what you need. Hmm


thanks again, so if i upload your cmo file, can i avoid entering the values manually from your txt file?


----------



## ogider

2500k_2 said:


> Data 12. 17 - *v115U6*


im able to do this on DR 2x16 B-die










but I don't think I will be able to set this to stable 
Just screenshot for now with this new bios.


----------



## bscool

IIISLIDEIII said:


> thanks again, so if i upload your cmo file, can i avoid entering the values manually from your txt file?


I made a cmo and txt file for bios 812 4000c15-15-15 file with everything on defaults except memory settings(armoury crate disbled also). Timings are tiny bit looser so better chance of working for more people. It should work for samsung single or dual rank b die.

But anyway where you go to save a bios profile in bios, under "Tool" tab. Load the cmo there.









4000c15 bios 812 b die.zip


Compressed (zipped) Folder



1drv.ms





Let me know if it works or not.

Edit tested with 2x8 b die and bios 812 is not good. Has boot issues. Good for DR b die though.


----------



## JoeRambo

Skunk0001 said:


> New official 7D31v11 out today for the Edge though, noting yet for the Pro


Thanks a lot for heads up. Using 114U1 and tips from Buildzoid's video I was able to finally break from DR 3600 and moved up to 3866. Kinda afraid to test this "new" BIOS 

The wall is in training, in my case You need to manually punch 3(6) ODT values and 3 more PRE values.


----------



## ObviousCough

JoeRambo said:


> The wall is in training, in my case You need to manually punch 3(6) ODT values and 3 more PRE values.


guess i'll give 64GB a shot again.

edit: 4x16 still walled at 3600. no matter what i try it won't boot at 3700.

Now testing 4x8 which does post at 4000

edit2: 4x8 still unstable, i tried cranking up the voltages and that didn't help.


----------



## PolRoger

weyden said:


> Guys, does anyone out there have Micron B die memories and can they get which timings at 4000mhz? My Gigabyte mobo does not load 4000mhz cl 18-19-19-39 1.35v profile. Even if I put 1.5v it doesn't load. Increasing SA to 1.4v and VDDQ to 1.5v doesn't help either. This new Bios from Gigabyte hasn't changed anything for me. I keep stuck at 4600mhz. If I put 4666mhz it goes back to 4533. I would like to know the timings of someone with that kind of memory and at what speed they use it.





weyden said:


> The big problem is that I'm not able to boot at 3600mhz. The minimum that the motherboard accepts is 4000mhz. And it goes up to 4600mhz easily without moving too much. But if I try to lowering the timimngs at 4000mhz, I get a lot of blue screens. I think Gigabyte's bios must be worse than I imagined. Even with updates, it's not improving anything for me. I will try to follow your tips!





weyden said:


> Thanks for sharing your SS!
> Could you take some pictures of your configuration in the bios of the memories to reach 4800mhz? Here I am going up to 4600mhz. If I put 4700mhz, it starts with 4533mhz. And if I put 4800mhz, it doesn't boot!


What is the exact make and model/part# for the memory kit that you are running now?

With my Gigabyte Z690i Ultra motherboard there are several memory settings that do not function or rather they post at a lower memory setting.

Starting with 4000m/t speed (all the lower speeds @3900m/t or less are working that I've tested).

4000- yes
4100- boots @4000
4133- boots @4000
4200- yes
4266- yes
4300- boots @4200
4400- yes
4500- boots @4400
4533- yes
4600- yes
4666- boots @4533
4700- boots @4600
4800- yes
4900- boots @4800
4933- boots @4800
5000- No post... CMOS CLR
5066- No post... CMOS CLR
5100- No post... CMOS CLR
5200- yes

Your particular kit and or motherboard combo may or may not be able to run @4800(+) speeds.?

With my early production 3733C17 kit (Samsung B-die) the highest speed that I could get into Windows was @4400 and it wasn't stable, while 4533 could post to BIOS but would BSOD when loading windows and 4600 would not post at all. I also have a lower bin Ballistix 3600C16 memory kit (E-die) that seems to top out @4000C17.and ~ 4200/4266C18.

As far as BIOS settings I'm not doing too much tweaking just initial testing with setting the Primaries and DRAM voltage and using BIOS auto settings.


----------



## riximFPS

shrimpmaster said:


> Any tips to get 4000mhz g1 stable on z690 tuf? I have 2x8gb gskill b-die. It's stable up to 4600mhz 1t g2, g1 max is 3900mhz.
> Running 3900mhz 15-15-15 1t 1.47v vdimm 1.2v SA right now, TM5 and linpack xtreme stable.
> Board also post up to 4100mhz g1, but can't even load windows.
> 
> 4000mhz anything under 1.3v sa errors very fast. 1.35-1.4v SA takes minutes to error. Also tried messing with VDDQ with no luck.
> Testing with tm5.
> 
> Only thing I didn't try was setting ODTs, but I can't even see what ODT board is setting.


I couldn't go higher than 3900 MHz g1 with the Tuf either. Due to other issues with this board, I switched to Strix-A and am now at 4100 MHz g1 with the same Patriot Viper 4400 RAM with four sticks. It's not the best result here, but I didn't spend a lot of time optimizing it.


----------



## weyden

PolRoger said:


> What is the exact make and model/part# for the memory kit that you are running now?
> 
> With my Gigabyte Z690i Ultra motherboard there are several memory settings that do not function or rather they post at a lower memory setting.
> 
> Starting with 4000m/t speed (all the lower speeds @3900m/t or less are working that I've tested).
> 
> 4000- yes
> 4100- boots @4000
> 4133- boots @4000
> 4200- yes
> 4266- yes
> 4300- boots @4200
> 4400- yes
> 4500- boots @4400
> 4533- yes
> 4600- yes
> 4666- boots @4533
> 4700- boots @4600
> 4800- yes
> 4900- boots @4800
> 4933- boots @4800
> 5000- No post... CMOS CLR
> 5066- No post... CMOS CLR
> 5100- No post... CMOS CLR
> 5200- yes
> 
> Your particular kit and or motherboard combo may or may not be able to run @4800(+) speeds.?
> 
> With my early production 3733C17 kit (Samsung B-die) the highest speed that I could get into Windows was @4400 and it wasn't stable, while 4533 could post to BIOS but would BSOD when loading windows and 4600 would not post at all. I also have a lower bin Ballistix 3600C16 memory kit (E-die) that seems to top out @4000C17.and ~ 4200/4266C18.
> 
> As far as BIOS settings I'm not doing too much tweaking just initial testing with setting the Primaries and DRAM voltage and using BIOS auto settings.


I am using an Aorus elite ddr4 along with the memories specified below.

If I turn on the xmp 2 to load 4000mhz cl 18. Right when entering the windows of the blue screen. It doesn't matter how much voltage you put, from 1.35v to 1.62v that I tested. VCCSA makes no difference and VDDQ doesn't seem to make a difference either.

I've already put 20-28-28-50 with 1.62v from the ram and not from the boot at 4800mhz. I thought you set something up outside of the primal times.

I'll test it again at 4000mhz to see the minimum timings I can get. But it's never enough to beat my performance at 4600mhz in games!


memory information:

ManufacturerMicron TechnologyPart NumberD9XPF (MT40A2G8VA-062E:B)PackageStandard Monolithic 78-ball FBGADie Density / Count16 Gb B-die (Z22A / 17 nm) / 1 dieComposition2048Mb x8 (128Mb x8 x 16 banks)Input Clock Frequency1333 MHz (0,750 ns)Minimum Timing Delays19-19-19-43-61Read Latencies Supported20T, 19T, 18T, 17T, 16T, 15T, 14T...Supply Voltage1,20 VXMP Certified2070 MHz / 19-23-23-45-68 / 1,40 VXMP Extreme2000 MHz / 18-19-19-39-58 / 1,35 V


----------



## PolRoger

weyden said:


> I am using an Aorus elite ddr4 along with the memories specified below.
> 
> If I turn on the xmp 2 to load 4000mhz cl 18. Right when entering the windows of the blue screen. It doesn't matter how much voltage you put, from 1.35v to 1.62v that I tested. VCCSA makes no difference and VDDQ doesn't seem to make a difference either.
> 
> I've already put 20-28-28-50 with 1.62v from the ram and not from the boot at 4800mhz. I thought you set something up outside of the primal times.
> 
> I'll test it again at 4000mhz to see the minimum timings I can get. But it's never enough to beat my performance at 4600mhz in games!
> 
> memory information:


I found some info on Micron "IC" for that kit but I couldn't find the actual kit?? Is it a Crucial Ballistix kit? or some other kind of Micron kit?

I'm looking for something like this:

Crucial Ballistix MAX 32GB Kit (2 x 16GB) DDR4-4400 Desktop Gaming Memory (Black)
BLM2K16G44C19U4B 
Crucial Ballistix MAX 32GB Kit (2 x 16GB) DDR4-4400 Desktop Gaming Memory (Black) | BLM2K16G44C19U4B | Crucial.com


You could also take a screen shot of CPUz SPD tab like this:


----------



## Relent

bscool said:


> I made a cmo and txt file for bios 812 4000c15-15-15 file with everything on defaults except memory settings(armoury crate disbled also). Timings are tiny bit looser so better chance of working for more people. It should work for samsung single or dual rank b die.
> 
> But anyway where you go to save a bios profile in bios, under "Tool" tab. Load the cmo there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4000c15 bios 812 b die.zip
> 
> 
> Compressed (zipped) Folder
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know if it works or not.


can this be loaded in BIOS?


----------



## bscool

Relent said:


> can this be loaded in BIOS?


Put the cmo on a usb and then you can.


----------



## weyden

PolRoger said:


> I found some info on Micron "IC" for that kit but I couldn't find the actual kit?? Is it a Crucial Ballistix kit? or some other kind of Micron kit?
> 
> I'm looking for something like this:
> 
> Crucial Ballistix MAX 32GB Kit (2 x 16GB) DDR4-4400 Desktop Gaming Memory (Black)
> BLM2K16G44C19U4B
> Crucial Ballistix MAX 32GB Kit (2 x 16GB) DDR4-4400 Desktop Gaming Memory (Black) | BLM2K16G44C19U4B | Crucial.com
> 
> 
> You could also take a screen shot of CPUz SPD tab like this:
> View attachment 2538622











memoria


Image memoria hosted in ImgBB




ibb.co





My kit is an XPG D50 4133mhz cl 19

I'm thinking it's some option in the memory part that mine isn't changing when I put 4800mhz. Because I researched this memory it would go up to 5000mhz with 1.6v

That's why I asked you to take the photo of your bios with all the timings and options that are in the auto for me to copy!


----------



## PolRoger

weyden said:


> memoria
> 
> 
> Image memoria hosted in ImgBB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ibb.co
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My kit is an XPG D50 4133mhz cl 19
> 
> I'm thinking it's some option in the memory part that mine isn't changing when I put 4800mhz. Because I researched this memory it would go up to 5000mhz with 1.6v
> 
> That's why I asked you to take the photo of your bios with all the timings and options that are in the auto for me to copy!


I find it odd that you can't run that kit at 3200m/t up to 4000m/t memory settings?

Have you tried 3200 16-18-18-38 with Dram at 1.35v and everything else in BIOS on Auto??
What about 3333/3466/3600??

For 4800m/t... My kit is a 2x8GB 1R single-sided while yours is 2x16 2R double-sided. I don't have any 2x16GB kits so I don't know how 32GB would run on this motherboard. It has only two DIMM slots so I can't even test at 4x8GB 1R.

*EDIT*: I was looking again at your CPUZ SPD tab and it is showing that your kit is actually 16GB 1R which means that it has higher density chips under the heat spreader. It is also showing a default JEDEC of 2666C19 @1.2v. I don't have any experience with that type of higher density memory IC so I don't know if they will run @Cas 16/17? It does have an XMP at C18 so it should boot/run with that at lower memory speeds.

If you can't get 3200 18-19-19-39 with DRAM @1.35v and everything else in BIOS left on Auto to work?? Then I'm thinking that the BIOS probably needs additional tuning for your memory kit. You should also test @JEDEC 2666 19-19-19-43 @1.2v. I would also keep checking on and testing any new BIOS release from Gigabyte.

Here is a PDF link for your ADATA memory series: https://webapi3.adata.com/storage/downloadfile/datasheet_xpg_spectrix_d50_ddr4_rgb_dram_20210517.pdf
You could also and test with some the settings from the lower speed kits in the series like 3200 16-20-20 or 3600 18-20-20.


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

bscool said:


> I made a cmo and txt file for bios 812 4000c15-15-15 file with everything on defaults except memory settings(armoury crate disbled also). Timings are tiny bit looser so better chance of working for more people. It should work for samsung single or dual rank b die.
> 
> But anyway where you go to save a bios profile in bios, under "Tool" tab. Load the cmo there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4000c15 bios 812 b die.zip
> 
> 
> Compressed (zipped) Folder
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Let me know if it works or not.


unfortunately it does not start, it stops at boot, I tried both by loading the sets from the cmo file and by entering the values manually but there is something that my ram does not like.

Maybe I should start to tighten the times by going to vary one value at a time and test?


----------



## notearlyadoptr

zhrooms said:


> Finally finished my first memory overclock, still a few things to tweak, but sadly it appears that my IMC limit is just above 4100 (with tight timings) so 4133 is not possible, which throws a lot of errors in TM5 no matter what I do, and requires a high SA (1.45) and VDDQ (1.52) voltage.
> So, below is what I ended up at with the frequency set to 4100 (100:100);
> View attachment 2537922
> 
> I have confirmed that it is game stable in Battlefield 2042, Call of Duty: Warzone and World of Warcraft, all severely bottlenecked by the processor/memory.
> But that's expected considering it passed TM5 (it can be game stable even when it throws a bunch of errors), but to satisfy everyone, I made sure it was error free.
> A few words about the timings;
> 
> *CL:* Obviously can't do 13, to move down from 15 to 14 I had to increase the DRAM voltage from 1.512 all the way up to 1.632, to not produce any errors, later when adjusting other timings I ran into a single error a few times and decided to just bump it from 1.632 to 1.648, to ensure stability once and for all, and I have the cooling for it as you can see, temperature stabilized at about 29-30°C after just a few minutes, last time I checked while gaming it never exceeded 30°C, basically it stays at about 6°C above the water temperature
> *RCD:* A few errors at 15, so kept it 16
> *RP:* A few errors at 14, so kept it 15
> *RAS:* Sometimes it passes 32 with no errors, but not always, so I left it at 34, but can definitely run it 30-32 and be completely game stable
> *CR:* 1 refused to boot as expected
> 
> *WR:* Didn't attempt lower than 8
> *WRPDEN:* This is set to 22 from 'Auto 38', to get WR down to 8
> 
> *RFC:* Many errors at 270, no errors at 275, but set 280 just to be on the safe side
> *RRDL/RRDS/FAW:* 4/4/16 running fine
> *RTP:* Didn't attempt lower than 6
> *WL:* Didn't attempt lower than 10
> 
> *REFI:* No hint of any issues running 65535
> *CKE:* Disabled by changing PPD from Auto to 0 in the memory section of the BIOS, then set to 69 with no penalty of any kind, since it's for "power saving"
> 
> *RDRD:* A lot of errors with SG at 6, so had to stay at 7
> *WRRD:* SG controls WTR_L which can run at both 8 and 10 but they throw a single error every time, 12 is the lowest that is always error free
> DG controls WTR_S, which runs 4 no problem, no attempt under that, so it is gaming stable 8/4 but not TM5 stable
> *RDWR:* Refuses to run below 14, doesn't even boot at 13, I've been told it might be because WL is too low (10)
> *WRWR:* Same as RDRD, errors at 6, so kept it at 7
> 
> *RTL:* Auto
> 
> System Agent Voltage:
> *1.300:* TM5 crashed
> *1.320:* 170 Errors
> *1.340:* 14 Errors
> *1.350:* 9 Errors
> *1.360:* Passed (1.364V)
> 
> VDDQ Voltage:
> *1.350:* No Boot
> *1.360:* No Boot
> *1.370:* Errors
> *1.380:* Passed (1.380V)
> 
> DRAM Voltage:
> *1.630:* Errors (1.632V)
> *1.650:* Passed (1.652V)
> 
> Shame that it can't do 4133, as that boosts Read and Write by a lot, going 4100 to 4133 is in theory +0.80%, and the bandwidth gained when I ran it was about 0.83%, on Read (570MB/s), so I get ~69,400 MB/s at 4133 compared to ~68,800 at 4100. That also tells us that to pass 70,000 Read, you have to run maybe close to +4150, it'd also push latency down to 42-42.2, but at least I'm under 42.5 and there is definitely more to tweak. Like a lot of things can be lowered that will cause errors but it will remain game stable, so I think I can reach 42.2 for gaming.
> 
> What I need to experiment with for the next overclock, is to figure out how to lower SG on RDRD and WRWR, and lower RDWR, also check at which frequency it starts throwing errors, I've already attempted 4120 and that wasn't error free, so it's somewhere between 4100 and 4120, I'm guessing about 4110, so probably not worth messing with it in that case. Then I need to test the new BIOSes as I'm still on 0707.
> 
> For anyone wondering, the kit is the G.Skill 2x16GB Dual Rank B-die one from 2020, came with these XMPs: 3600 14-15-15 1.45V / 4000 17-18-18 1.40V / 4266 17-18-18 1.50V, which were all sold as Ripjaws, Trident Z and Royal. I got the cheapest Ripjaws one at 4000 (1.40V), as there shouldn't be any difference between them, and as demonstrated it has no issues running 4133 CL14 below 1.65V. As for the board, it is the cheapest TUF (no Wi-Fi module) running the now quite old 0707 BIOS, but it clearly has no issues with a tight overclock like this.
> Overall I'm definitely pleased with this first overclock, fairly sure I have the lowest latency right now but that's of course only because I run a very high DRAM voltage (1.632-1.648) thanks to the water block, I intend to do a test where I simply shut off the water pump, so temperatures increase up to 50°C, then we'll see when/if it starts producing errors, in both TM5 and while Gaming.


Congrats!!! Excellent OC on da' memory!!! I know you put in the hours since I have been eagerly waiting your results. As we all know the TUF and the Gaming X, are capable of 5333 OC ram speeds, and it sounds like you have found the outer limits of your IMC. Let's face it: It don't get any better than Sammy B-DIE's. (B-Die Finder) Let's hope the silicon gets better and the chips mature on this socket . . .But again, you have done us all a big favor by setting the base.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

notearlyadoptr said:


> Congrats!!! Excellent OC on da' memory!!! I know you put in the hours since I have been eagerly waiting your results. As we all know the TUF and the Gaming X, are capable of 5333 OC ram speeds, and it sounds like you have found the outer limits of your IMC. Let's face it: It don't get any better than Sammy B-DIE's. (B-Die Finder) Let's hope the silicon gets better and the chips mature on this socket . . .But again, you have done us all a big favor by setting the base.


Gigabyte Gaming X Update: Not ready for any MEM or CPU OC'ing yet. This G-Gaming X is still burning in . . .shrooms laugh if you want, but: I had to reload once already, wasting 2 days of loading programs and games / launchers, and productivity software. And after another day, it quit the windows stop code memory management BSOD on boot up. It took some time to be compatible with all the other hardware as well, I believe. I'm going out on a limb here , but I'm guessing Gigabyte can be a bit finicky. Still a bit too early to start tweaking things yet.🤪 Now I admit, running 24 / 7 for 6 months, or waiting 6 months to officially call it a "Burn In", is a bit of a stretch. However, Z690 is a whole bunch of brand new technology all rolled out at once. I hate to admit it, but once I pull the RAM OC trigger after the chipset break in, I wont even get close to 4000 tight timings from what I have seen. I was lucky to boot on 3600 XMP 1, the day the BIOS update came out allowing 3600 ram to even boot under XMP settings. Let's just say we should see a much better RAM tweak-ability once these chips sets burn in and we see more BIOS updates. It's only going to get better from here on out. Nothing like the smell of fresh silicon / chips gassing off for the first time on a brand new system, just make sure to get a breath of fresh air once in a while.


----------



## notearlyadoptr

zhrooms: can you share the overclock CPU overclocking thread for the AL / Z690 platform again please? TY in advance.


----------



## bscool

IIISLIDEIII said:


> unfortunately it does not start, it stops at boot, I tried both by loading the sets from the cmo file and by entering the values manually but there is something that my ram does not like.
> 
> Maybe I should start to tighten the times by going to vary one value at a time and test?


Edit 2 after all that rambling I put in 2x8 kit of gskill 4000c15-16-16 2x8 with the 4000c15 cmo I posted and no boot. c16-16-16- boots so there is something the board doesnt like. Ill check it out and post an update. Strange 2x8 is harder to boot than 2x16 dr b die. Trying another reboot with 4000c16 with the 2x8 failed. Looks like it need some other timings adjusted also.


What ram kit do you have? It could be needing more sa or vddq. I left them on auto, which sets them @1.35v for me. You could try setting sa from 1.4 to 1.45v and vddq from 1.45 to 1.5v to see if it boots.

The other thing you could try is setting the main 3 timings from 15-15-15- to 16-16-16. If that doesnt boot it might be your IMC. You have a 2x8 kit of b die that should run 4000c16 easy.

I am using the gskil 4000c14-15-15 2x16 kit and they are my best kits out of a dozen or so I have had in the last year. I did try 2x8 b die a little and even with my best kit of 2x8 which is a gskill 4000c15-16-16 kit it was harder to get stabe than this 4000c14 DR kit. Ill try messing with 2x8 and see what I can find.

Also before loading a saved profile turn off PSU and hold clear CMOS for 30 secs. It wont probably wont fix anything but I have had it help before because sometimes setting will "stick" and clear cmos can help. But even before you could only run 3900 so it seems like it is something else(mem, IMC?).

Edit saw someone post on another board when first loaing up a new cmo to clear cmos as I said above and the first time rebooting the boot will fail.

"When you do cmos clear, loading the Profile and get a Safeboot .. just go to Bios and F10+Enter again"

source ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4


----------



## Larkonian

IIISLIDEIII said:


> unfortunately it does not start, it stops at boot, I tried both by loading the sets from the cmo file and by entering the values manually but there is something that my ram does not like.
> 
> Maybe I should start to tighten the times by going to vary one value at a time and test?


You should try 15-16-16-35 instead of 15-15-15-35. There are lots of B-Die that can't do tRCD 15 at 4000 speeds.

Also set DRAM Write Latency (tCWL) to 15, again it is only the best B-Die bins that can handle that.


----------



## Frozburn

Larkonian said:


> You should try 15-16-16-35 instead of 15-15-15-35. There are lots of B-Die that can't do tRCD 15 at 4000 speeds.
> 
> Also set DRAM Write Latency (tCWL) to 15, again it is only the best B-Die bins that can handle that.


Any idea why it works like that? My DR B-Die works at 4000 and 4133 14 14 14 32 but 15 never boots with any voltage.


----------



## bscool

Anyone else on z690 Strix d4 running SR b die on bios 512? Just started testing and even 4000c16-16-16 doesn't boot half the time. DR I can run 4133c15 to 4266c16. gear 1.

Edit Definitely something strange going on with bios 812 and SR b die. Timings that are stable will fail on next boot and blue screens. Havent tried sa or vddq yet(on auto 1.35v). But DR is so easy this doesnt make sense why SR would be harder to run.


----------



## Crow77

bscool said:


> Anyone else on z690 Strix d4 running SR b die on bios 512? Just started testing and even 4000c16-16-16 doesn't boot half the time. DR I can run 4133c15 to 4266c16. gear 1.
> 
> Edit Definitely something strange going on with bios 812 and SR b die. Timings that are stable will fail on next boot and blue screens. Havent tried sa or vddq yet(on auto 1.35v). But DR is so easy this doesnt make sense why SR would be harder to run.


Yeah, my SR B die won't even run at 3200mhz without failing on reboot. Same with 0807, 0707 works great so staying on that.


----------



## ogider

2500k_2 said:


> Data 12. 17 - *v115U6*


New bios 121





Beta/MP - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## bscool

Yeah it is buggy. It can boot and run 4266c15 1t but repeatable boot is not there even at lower clocks


----------



## Frozburn

ogider said:


> New bios 121
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beta/MP - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Do they say anywhere what has been improved? A forum post maybe? Thanks for the link.


----------



## Larkonian

Frozburn said:


> Any idea why it works like that? My DR B-Die works at 4000 and 4133 14 14 14 32 but 15 never boots with any voltage.


No idea really, it is just something I have observed.



bscool said:


> Anyone else on z690 Strix d4 running SR b die on bios 512? Just started testing and even 4000c16-16-16 doesn't boot half the time. DR I can run 4133c15 to 4266c16. gear 1.
> 
> Edit Definitely something strange going on with bios 812 and SR b die. Timings that are stable will fail on next boot and blue screens. Havent tried sa or vddq yet(on auto 1.35v). But DR is so easy this doesnt make sense why SR would be harder to run.


707, 003 and 812 all works exactly the same for me with 2x8GB B-Die. I have the random bluescreen but that was true of all the different BIOS versions. There can be some slight instability that just hits hard sometimes while other times I can go days without an issue. Do note that I like to run a BIOS for several weeks before switching to another one.

For me it is being at the limit of my IMC, it causes the occasional problem. Try to run Linpack Extreme for an hour or more, and check the residuals. Heating up the IMC might reveal some instability.


----------



## ogider

Frozburn said:


> Do they say anywhere what has been improved? A forum post maybe?


No. I haven't read about it. I've had link for a long time, and I check in on what's new from time to time.


----------



## bscool

@Larkonian It is doubt it is my IMC. I have had no issues with booting for weeks running 2x16 b die at 4133c15 on any of the bios. 

When I put in 2x8 it has the issue with booting. Looks to me like a bios/compatiility issue with 2x8. I can pass memtest and tm5 and y crucher with my 2x16. I am not messing with 2x8. Ill stick to 2x16.


----------



## ObviousCough

my i7 will be here today. idk if it'll get here in time for me to do any testing. But by tomorrow night i'll know if my board is weak or my cpu is.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> @Larkonian It is doubt it is my IMC. I have had no issues with booting for weeks running 2x16 b die at 4133c15 on any of the bios.
> 
> When I put in 2x8 it has the issue with booting. Looks to me like a bios/compatiility issue with 2x8. I can pass memtest and tm5 and y crucher with my 2x16. I am not messing with 2x8. Ill stick to 2x16.



Here's your file you requested with my settings for my sr 2x8gb samsung b die memory settings. The highest I can run 100% stable is 15-16-16-32 2t @4000MHz. Delete the .txt


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> Edit 2 after all that rambling I put in 2x8 kit of gskill 4000c15-16-16 2x8 with the 4000c15 cmo I posted and no boot. c16-16-16- boots so there is something the board doesnt like. Ill check it out and post an update. Strange 2x8 is harder to boot than 2x16 dr b die. Trying another reboot with 4000c16 with the 2x8 failed. Looks like it need some other timings adjusted also.
> 
> 
> What ram kit do you have? It could be needing more sa or vddq. I left them on auto, which sets them @1.35v for me. You could try setting sa from 1.4 to 1.45v and vddq from 1.45 to 1.5v to see if it boots.
> 
> The other thing you could try is setting the main 3 timings from 15-15-15- to 16-16-16. If that doesnt boot it might be your IMC. You have a 2x8 kit of b die that should run 4000c16 easy.
> 
> I am using the gskil 4000c14-15-15 2x16 kit and they are my best kits out of a dozen or so I have had in the last year. I did try 2x8 b die a little and even with my best kit of 2x8 which is a gskill 4000c15-16-16 kit it was harder to get stabe than this 4000c14 DR kit. Ill try messing with 2x8 and see what I can find.
> 
> Also before loading a saved profile turn off PSU and hold clear CMOS for 30 secs. It wont probably wont fix anything but I have had it help before because sometimes setting will "stick" and clear cmos can help. But even before you could only run 3900 so it seems like it is something else(mem, IMC?).
> 
> Edit saw someone post on another board when first loaing up a new cmo to clear cmos as I said above and the first time rebooting the boot will fail.
> 
> "When you do cmos clear, loading the Profile and get a Safeboot .. just go to Bios and F10+Enter again"
> 
> source ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4


I now start to think it's not my IMC. I can post my 2x8gb gskill b-die up to 4100mhz (fails to load windows). But it's stable only up to 3900mhz no matter the voltages i try. For 3900mhz it passes tm5 and linpack xtreme with only 1.2v SA.
4000mhz is almost stable.

Strange thing is on gear 2, it works stable up to 4600mhz, soo not memory either.

Running 3900mhz 15-15-15-36 1t on 12700k + z690 tuf.


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

bscool said:


> Edit 2 after all that rambling I put in 2x8 kit of gskill 4000c15-16-16 2x8 with the 4000c15 cmo I posted and no boot. c16-16-16- boots so there is something the board doesnt like. Ill check it out and post an update. Strange 2x8 is harder to boot than 2x16 dr b die. Trying another reboot with 4000c16 with the 2x8 failed. Looks like it need some other timings adjusted also.
> 
> 
> What ram kit do you have? It could be needing more sa or vddq. I left them on auto, which sets them @1.35v for me. You could try setting sa from 1.4 to 1.45v and vddq from 1.45 to 1.5v to see if it boots.
> 
> The other thing you could try is setting the main 3 timings from 15-15-15- to 16-16-16. If that doesnt boot it might be your IMC. You have a 2x8 kit of b die that should run 4000c16 easy.
> 
> I am using the gskil 4000c14-15-15 2x16 kit and they are my best kits out of a dozen or so I have had in the last year. I did try 2x8 b die a little and even with my best kit of 2x8 which is a gskill 4000c15-16-16 kit it was harder to get stabe than this 4000c14 DR kit. Ill try messing with 2x8 and see what I can find.
> 
> Also before loading a saved profile turn off PSU and hold clear CMOS for 30 secs. It wont probably wont fix anything but I have had it help before because sometimes setting will "stick" and clear cmos can help. But even before you could only run 3900 so it seems like it is something else(mem, IMC?).
> 
> Edit saw someone post on another board when first loaing up a new cmo to clear cmos as I said above and the first time rebooting the boot will fail.
> 
> "When you do cmos clear, loading the Profile and get a Safeboot .. just go to Bios and F10+Enter again"
> 
> source ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4





Larkonian said:


> You should try 15-16-16-35 instead of 15-15-15-35. There are lots of B-Die that can't do tRCD 15 at 4000 speeds.
> 
> Also set DRAM Write Latency (tCWL) to 15, again it is only the best B-Die bins that can handle that.


my kit is this:








F4-4000C14D-16GTRS - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 CL14-15-15-35 1.55V 16GB (2x8GB) Trident Z Royal is the latest addition to the Trident Z flagship family and features a crown jewel design. Meticulously crafted to display just the right amount of light refraction, the patented crystalline light bar scatters the RGB...




www.gskill.com





I currently have the following voltages:
System Agent Voltage: 1.42v
VDDQ Voltage: 1.5v
DRAM Voltage: 1.55
100.133
gear1
4000mhz with xmp profile (14-15-15-35 at 1.55v) everything works, (no errors after 2 hours of extreme on testmem5), but if I try to enter those values you gave me it does not start.

the memory (with xmp) is stable even if I lower the voltages of the system agent and vddq, now I put them on:
-sa 1.34
-vddq 1.35
-dram 1.55


shar net


----------



## truehighroller1

shrimpmaster said:


> I now start to think it's not my IMC. I can post my 2x8gb gskill b-die up to 4100mhz (fails to load windows). But it's stable only up to 3900mhz no matter the voltages i try. For 3900mhz it passes tm5 and linpack xtreme with only 1.2v SA.
> 4000mhz is almost stable.
> 
> Strange thing is on gear 2, it works stable up to 4600mhz, soo not memory either.
> 
> Running 3900mhz 15-15-15-36 1t on 12700k + z690 tuf.



Here's my max stable right now with my memory kit but I can boot to windows at 4133 as well just not stable.










I have the following memory kit.

G.SKILL TridentZ RGB Series 32GB (4 x 8GB) DDR4 4000 F4-4000C17Q-32GTZR


----------



## neteng101

ogider said:


> New bios 121


Gave this a go - I've been tuning my OC reducing voltages on 115 (Vcore 1.32 Auto LLQ VCCSA 1.25 VDDQ 1.35 DRAM 1.40). 121 still doesn't train my memory correctly for just 3600 G1 (lower/higher works). Can't say I see any real difference 115 > 121, maybe margin of error improvements...

*115 Pre Update*


















*121 Post Update*


----------



## ssgwright

Here's my new DDR 5 with a slight 200mhz bump... need to see if I can work on that latency


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

bscool said:


> @Larkonian It is doubt it is my IMC. I have had no issues with booting for weeks running 2x16 b die at 4133c15 on any of the bios.
> 
> When I put in 2x8 it has the issue with booting. Looks to me like a bios/compatiility issue with 2x8. I can pass memtest and tm5 and y crucher with my 2x16. I am not messing with 2x8. Ill stick to 2x16.


let's say that I would be curious if the ram kit is "unlucky" because I still have time to make a return of this and I can have another one sent.
It seems strange to me that the ram comes with an xmp profile already at the limit, there should be some margin or am I wrong?
Another strange thing is that with the timing of xmp the ram is stable in gear1 at 4000 even with sa and vddq voltage at 1.35, I don't need to get close to 1.4, so in theory I should be able to tighten the times a bit.

Should the e-cores be deactivated or does it have nothing to do with it?


----------



## bscool

IIISLIDEIII said:


> my kit is this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-4000C14D-16GTRS - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 CL14-15-15-35 1.55V 16GB (2x8GB) Trident Z Royal is the latest addition to the Trident Z flagship family and features a crown jewel design. Meticulously crafted to display just the right amount of light refraction, the patented crystalline light bar scatters the RGB...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I currently have the following voltages:
> System Agent Voltage: 1.42v
> VDDQ Voltage: 1.5v
> DRAM Voltage: 1.55
> 100.133
> gear1
> 4000mhz with xmp profile (14-15-15-35 at 1.55v) everything works, (no errors after 2 hours of extreme on testmem5), but if I try to enter those values you gave me it does not start.
> 
> the memory (with xmp) is stable even if I lower the voltages of the system agent and vddq, now I put them on:
> -sa 1.34
> -vddq 1.35
> -dram 1.55
> 
> 
> shar net


I dont know what to tell you. I messed with bios 815 a little and it is a mess for me using 2x8. I dont feel like spending hour trying to figure it you. Maybe try the timings in the txt in another bios version or in the bios you found stable @3900. They will still give you a good boost in bandwidth and decrease latency.

The memory kit you have is top notch. Message me if you want more help. It will take a lot trial and error and I dont want clutter up this thread. ill send you a pm and you can reply if you want.


----------



## truehighroller1

LOOK WHAT I FOUND IN THE OCTOOL!


----------



## bscool

IIISLIDEIII said:


> let's say that I would be curious if the ram kit is "unlucky" because I still have time to make a return of this and I can have another one sent.
> It seems strange to me that the ram comes with an xmp profile already at the limit, there should be some margin or am I wrong?
> Another strange thing is that with the timing of xmp the ram is stable in gear1 at 4000 even with sa and vddq voltage at 1.35, I don't need to get close to 1.4, so in theory I should be able to tighten the times a bit.
> 
> Should the e-cores be deactivated or does it have nothing to do with it?


Just from what I can see I think you should go with 2x16. But that is twice the price. Just testing 2x8 it looks strange on z690 Strix 812. But I dont want to stir you wrong. That is my 2 cents.

Maybe an older bios is better?.

There shouldnt be any reason 2x8 b die doesnt work well? unless it z690 is somehow optimized for 16gb DR dims being most will use that for ddr4 and ddr5 on z690. I really do not know.


----------



## bscool

Maybe 2x8 needs odts set manually?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> LOOK WHAT I FOUND IN THE OCTOOL!
> 
> View attachment 2538732


That is a good find. Interesting.


----------



## PolRoger

ssgwright said:


> Here's my new DDR 5 with a slight 200mhz bump... need to see if I can work on that latency
> 
> View attachment 2538730


Which brand/model kit of DDR5 6000 did you get in the NewEgg shuffle? I'm also kind of curious as to how the Egg was pricing kits of DDR5 now?


----------



## ssgwright

G.SKILL Trident Z5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6000 (PC5 48000) Desktop Memory Model F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5K - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR5 6000 (PC5 48000) Desktop Memory Model F5-6000U4040E16GX2-TZ5K with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com


----------



## Freshair

Hello from Germany, i am new here.
Very interessting Thread, with lots of info. My Board is MSI z690 edge ddr4. I have been trying to get my two sticks of 8GB b-dies stable at different settings for 4 days now.
I can boot into Win10 with several combinations up two 4000+ in gear 1 and up to 4800 in gear 2. No problems in normal use of Win, but always errors in tests and gaming.
I always played with timings/subs and voltages to become my favorite setting 3866 14-14-14-32 1T stable, but always error on tests. Today i testet lowering sa and vddq Voltage,
and i cant believe it, this thing was stable at 1.25 vddq and 1.256 sa . So i think these voltages have much effect on overclocking, but since yet i didnt see on what it depends.
So now the first thing for me is, how low can i get with voltage and then trying higher frequenz. I always used voltages above 1.3 and on auto the board set sa to 1.45..jesus.
High sa produces lot more heat on my ram, that can also be a reason for instability. There for these setting are very fast and i realy didnt need more.


----------



## grey.clock

Bladed said:


> Idk how you do it lol. I have some cheap Oloy Blades 4x16Gb 3600 14-14-14-34 @1.45v, XMP doesn't even get close to working on an Asus Strix Z690-A. I've been manually tuning it for about 10 days now and the closest settings I could get to work are 1.329v SA, 1.205v VDDQ, 1.45625v DRAM. Anything more than 1.21 VDDQ seems to make it really unstable. I'm just trying to run them at stock 3600 CL14.
> 
> They run fine with just 2 sticks though.


how do you like the oloy blade cl14 3600's with two sticks? I am running the same kit myself. I am really new to tweaking memory..... been overclocking since the amd xp days but alder lake is the first time I have gotten into tweaking the timings since the rest of my system is... maxxed out without options for new hardware due to shortages. I am using a 12700k, ASUS TUF and have it at around 55ns


----------



## Revv23

bscool said:


> Plenty of proof DR @4000+ with tight timings is not happening on MSI. If so post links. To memtest stable 4000 to 4133+ tight timing DR.


ive posted a few myself over 4000; i havent had time to optimize timings yet. All I was implying was that I had no wall, i literally got over 4000mhz with auto settings on 1.00 bios. 

I also don't see many with memtest stable tight timings over 4000mhz - but i know it's possible. I think we have an issue of people seeing some really aggressive overclocks running an aida64 latency test and then wondering why they cant run 24/7 at those speeds with a weaker IMC.

I also think there is a much bigger IMC difference than we first thought between chips, buildzoid cant run 4000+ stable on any of the 3 brands he has tried so far.


----------



## bscool

Revv23 said:


> ive posted a few myself over 4000; i havent had time to optimize timings yet. All I was implying was that I had no wall, i literally got over 4000mhz with auto settings on 1.00 bios.
> 
> I also don't see many with memtest stable tight timings over 4000mhz - but i know it's possible. I think we have an issue of people seeing some really aggressive overclocks running an aida64 latency test and then wondering why they cant run 24/7 at those speeds with a weaker IMC.
> 
> I also think there is a much bigger IMC difference than we first thought between chips, buildzoid cant run 4000+ stable on any of the 3 brands he has tried so far.


After having issues running 2x8 b die on the Strix bios 812 today I don't know about anything right now


----------



## Revv23

bscool said:


> After having issues running 2x8 b die on the Strix today I dont know about anything right now


Yeah thats a new one too LOL. I should get my 2*8 out but im having too much fun playing halo right now to tweak LOL. 

I'd like to give my asrock board another shot too now that they have a new bios but again having too much fun gaming. my same kit that auto'd over 4000 couldnt even get to 3000 on asrock. It XMP'd 3600 14-14-14 on the EDGE 1st boot.


----------



## zhrooms

bscool said:


> Just from what I can see I think you should go with 2x16. But that is twice the price. Just testing 2x8 it looks strange on z690 Strix 812. But I dont want to stir you wrong. That is my 2 cents. Maybe an older bios is better?. There shouldnt be any reason 2x8 b die doesnt work well? unless it z690 is somehow optimized for 16gb DR dims being most will use that for ddr4 and ddr5 on z690. I really do not know.


2x8GB Single Rank ran like a dream for me (and many others in this thread), I ran 4133 16-16-16 1.45V without an issue on the Strix with 0707, before I returned it, the exact kit was the 2x8GB Trident Z RGB 3600 16-16-16 1.35V from 2017. From my personal experience, using both 2x8GB Single Rank and 2x16GB Dual Rank, on TUF/Strix with 0707 on both, there is no difference between the boards or the sticks in terms of compatibility, the boards also overclock the same, which isn't a surprise as they're the same board more or less, and very similar sticks (both hits a wall at 4133 15-15-15 unless you push voltage), the only issue I've had on either board/kit is my IMC, but I think I've proven that the board itself (TUF) is already overkill from my 42.4ns overclock, by that I mean that it should run just the same on the cheaper ASUS Z690-P D4, really wish I could test a MSI Z690-A Pro, after having heard so many people have issues with it, but at the same time there are just as many that show screenshots of it being great, so it's still unclear to me if it's user error or something else, now that I know my exact IMC and RAM limit, would be very apparent if a new board I tried was better or worse, sadly I don't feel like putting any more time or effort into testing more boards, after the whole fiasco of purchasing a defective 12900K and having to return two Gigabyte boards because of trash BIOSes on launch, and I have everything working perfectly right now so would be nice to keep that going.


----------



## HvacGuru

bscool said:


> After having issues running 2x8 b die on the Strix today I dont know about anything right now


On my Strix mb DR is better at XMP and overclocking. I have tested 3 sets of SR 3600-4100 mhz and they all suck on every bios. They will pass memtest, but Windows acts stupid.


----------



## bscool

HvacGuru said:


> On my Strix mb DR is better at XMP and overclocking. I have tested 3 sets of SR 3600-4100 mhz and they all suck on every bios. They will pass memtest, but Windows acts stupid.


Yeah I am seeing that too. Flashback to 707 to test doesnt seem any better on 2x8 than bios 812. I dont care about 2x8 was trying to help another user out with 2x8 issues on the Strix d4.


----------



## weyden

PolRoger said:


> I find it odd that you can't run that kit at 3200m/t up to 4000m/t memory settings?
> 
> Have you tried 3200 16-18-18-38 with Dram at 1.35v and everything else in BIOS on Auto??
> What about 3333/3466/3600??
> 
> For 4800m/t... My kit is a 2x8GB 1R single-sided while yours is 2x16 2R double-sided. I don't have any 2x16GB kits so I don't know how 32GB would run on this motherboard. It has only two DIMM slots so I can't even test at 4x8GB 1R.
> 
> *EDIT*: I was looking again at your CPUZ SPD tab and it is showing that your kit is actually 16GB 1R which means that it has higher density chips under the heat spreader. It is also showing a default JEDEC of 2666C19 @1.2v. I don't have any experience with that type of higher density memory IC so I don't know if they will run @Cas 16/17? It does have an XMP at C18 so it should boot/run with that at lower memory speeds.
> 
> If you can't get 3200 18-19-19-39 with DRAM @1.35v and everything else in BIOS left on Auto to work?? Then I'm thinking that the BIOS probably needs additional tuning for your memory kit. You should also test @JEDEC 2666 19-19-19-43 @1.2v. I would also keep checking on and testing any new BIOS release from Gigabyte.
> 
> Here is a PDF link for your ADATA memory series: https://webapi3.adata.com/storage/downloadfile/datasheet_xpg_spectrix_d50_ddr4_rgb_dram_20210517.pdf
> You could also and test with some the settings from the lower speed kits in the series like 3200 16-20-20 or 3600 18-20-20.


The problem with testing at 3200 and 3600mhz with these timings is that there won't be any gain!

Even using gear 2 at 4600mhz with cl 19-23-23-45. The gain prevails over any speed from 4000mhz gear 1 with cl 17-21-21-43. It was the smallest timing I could get at 4000mhz.

As I told you, the memory has an xmp profile of 4000mhz cl 18-19-19-39 with 1.35v. This profile loads, but when you get to the windows home screen, give the blue screen. And I haven't figured out why until now. I think it's some option in Gigabyte's bios that isn't changing to support. As I told you. I've already put 1.62v in memory, 1.45v SA, VDDQ 1.5v and nothing does correctly load the 4000mhz profile cl 18-19-19-39!

A good thing is that I managed to improve the secondary values a lot with 4600mhz!


----------



## shrimpmaster

HvacGuru said:


> On my Strix mb DR is better at XMP and overclocking. I have tested 3 sets of SR 3600-4100 mhz and they all suck on every bios. They will pass memtest, but Windows acts stupid.





bscool said:


> Yeah I am seeing that too. Flashback to 707 to test doesnt seem any better on 2x8. I dont care about 2x8 was trying to help another user out with 2x8 issues on the Strix d4.


Anyone tried setting manual ODTs with single rank b-die? Maybe that's the issue. I have no clue how to set them, can't see the values the board sets and Asus OCtool doesn't even work for me.


----------



## bscool

shrimpmaster said:


> Anyone tried setting manual ODTs with single rank b-die? Maybe that's the issue. I have no clue how to set them, can't see the values the board sets and Asus OCtool doesn't even work for me.


2x8 sr b die I tried manual odts on 812 and didnt matter Also tried setting memory algorithms to train odts and that didnt help on 812. Seems like 707 is working better. But another bug it doesnt boot 4000c15 needs 4000c16 ,4133c16 or 4133c15. Every bios has some quirk it looks like. Need to test more. MB z690 Strix d4, listening because I b&tch when people dont 

707 is booting better than 812 on SR b die so far............


----------



## ObviousCough

I know i'm in Gear1 and stable... why is my latency so lame?


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> 2x8 sr b die I tried manual odts on 812 and didnt matter Also tried setting memory algorithms to train odts and that didnt help on 812. Seems like 707 is working better. But another bug it doesnt boot 4000c15 needs 4000c16 ,4133c16 or 4133c15. Every bios has some quirk it looks like. Need to test more. MB z690 Strix d4, listening because I b&tch when people dont
> 
> 707 is booting better than 812 on SR b die so far............


No problem booting and testing 4000 14-14-14, 15-15-15 or 16-16-16. But latest bios for tuf is 808, no 812 yet.

But there's a strange quirk with bios after 0002 with the 1t single rank tweak. If I set 2t or auto command rate(2t) sometimes board gets stuck training, usually after a reboot, first time trains just fine.
If I set 1t this never happens and works perfect. 
0707, 0807 don't have this tweak soo this doesn't happen. But can't run 1t stable on those bios.


----------



## bscool

@ObviousCough Maybe timings and cache? I was just testing 4000c15 2x8 and screened yours next to mine

Edit CPU as default no OC


----------



## bscool

shrimpmaster said:


> No problem booting and testing 4000 14-14-14, 15-15-15 or 16-16-16. But latest bios for tuf is 808, no 812 yet.


707 is working much better on SR b die than 812. MB z690 Strix d4


----------



## bscool

@ObviousCough Also Windows stuff running in back ground has big effect like rgb, keyboard/mouse, steam etc any type of extra software.


----------



## ObviousCough

it's a really clean install of windows. I am fully dialed now!


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> 707 is working much better on SR b die than 812. MB z690 Strix d4


I might try it for the heck of it. I think it's the only one I didn't try. Are you able to get to your settings from earlier that you posted then?


----------



## bscool

@ObviousCough I think this being enabled can cause it to be high also


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I might try it for the heck of it. I think it's the only one I didn't try. Are you able to get to your settings from earlier that you posted then?


Do it. Here is new if you want it cmo for 707 sr 4000c15 bios 707 sr .CMO

I noticed I had [email protected] I usually set it higher. But it doesnt make a lot of difference either way.


----------



## ObviousCough

I have windows security disabled entirely


----------



## bscool

ObviousCough said:


> I have windows security disabled entirely


I wonder why your latency is so high.10ns higher than mine at similar timings?


----------



## ObviousCough

IDK!!!! i disabled ecores, pumped p cores to 5.2 and cache to 4.9


----------



## bscool

@truehighroller1 Note about 707 I and other had issues with crashes in Windows at idle/low loads if using Ai OC with auto voltages. Needed to set static v core(1.35 llc6 is what I set) to fix. Just a heads up if you have that issue and dont run static v core. Might be other ways to fix it but I dont know.


----------



## bscool

@ObviousCough Hmmm you should be 43-45ns I would think. Do you have round trip latency enabled in bios? Not sure if it matter on MSI. On Asus it wasnt enabled by default on older bioses.


----------



## Revv23

I don't think aida is that great of a benchmark TBH. At least not for what we are using it for. It can help us compare relative to ourselves but comparing against each other I think can be misleading.


----------



## bscool

Revv23 said:


> I don't think aida is that great of a benchmark TBH. At least not for what we are using it for. It can help us compare relative to ourselves but comparing against each other I think can be misleading.


True but it is easy  What do you use?


----------



## ObviousCough

I enabled Enhanced Interleave, Disabled Power Down mode, PPD manually set to 0










Only thing left to do now is install a fresh version of windows. Maybe I broke this one.


----------



## Revv23

bscool said:


> True but it is easy  What do you use?


I dont have the answer - just saying LOL  Bandwidth scores are clearly leaching off cache and we see things like windows settings cause huge differences. Like I said I think its useful to compare your rig to your rig as you are tweaking settings to find out what makes a difference and what doesn't - beyond that - I think we should probably looking at more wholistic benchmarks.. Or not who am I to decide haha.


----------



## bscool

@Revv23 I was just curious. I know some like intel latency checker or super pi or tm5 and time how long a run takes. I really just oc for fun.


----------



## bscool

@ObviousCough I dont know, just other even on MSI with timings like yours are much lower latency.


----------



## Middleman

HvacGuru said:


> On my Strix mb DR is better at XMP and overclocking. I have tested 3 sets of SR 3600-4100 mhz and they all suck on every bios. They will pass memtest, but Windows acts stupid.


Yeah im having intermittent issues, i thought it was my OC. So i down clocked on dual rank 4000mhz to 3866, but then noticed the same issue. Basically computer would randomly reboot, no blue screen, just hard shutdown, then reboot. or best case, the program shutdown. Memtest passes.

Looked into the debug, and its related to videocard, dxgmms2.sys.

Plus im on Windows 11, so its tough nailing it down.


----------



## Bladed

grey.clock said:


> how do you like the oloy blade cl14 3600's with two sticks? I am running the same kit myself. I am really new to tweaking memory..... been overclocking since the amd xp days but alder lake is the first time I have gotten into tweaking the timings since the rest of my system is... maxxed out without options for new hardware due to shortages. I am using a 12700k, ASUS TUF and have it at around 55ns


I didn't do much testing with 2 sticks. I tried each set individually just to see if xmp would pass Memtest. No issues at all with XMP with just two sticks, I'm debating returning 1 set and just run 2 sticks since I'm starting to get weird issues in windows with 4 sticks.

4 sticks pass Memtest and Aida64, but a day later I get random browser window crashes, steam crashes, and BSODs. Going to try TM5 soon.


55ns is pretty good, are you going to try to get it faster? My original goal was under 50ns with 2 sticks.


----------



## bscool

zhrooms said:


> 2x8GB Single Rank ran like a dream for me (and many others in this thread), I ran 4133 16-16-16 1.45V without an issue on the Strix with 0707


Thanks, your post got me to go back to 707 from 812 to see if that would let me get 2x8 sr b die working and that was it. 812 is buggy with sr b die.


----------



## HvacGuru

Middleman said:


> Yeah im having intermittent issues, i thought it was my OC. So i down clocked on dual rank 4000mhz to 3866, but then noticed the same issue. Basically computer would randomly reboot, no blue screen, just hard shutdown, then reboot. or best case, the program shutdown. Memtest passes.
> 
> Looked into the debug, and its related to videocard, dxgmms2.sys.
> 
> Plus im on Windows 11, so its tough nailing it down.


On Windows 11 myself. My internet would drop out and the dxgmms2.sys. I have 2 12900k rigs and my DR ram rig has never had these issues. I just ordered another set of DR ram and giving up on the SR. I think the MSI boards do a lot better from what I have seen on the forums.


----------



## PolRoger

weyden said:


> The problem with testing at 3200 and 3600mhz with these timings is that there won't be any gain!
> 
> Even using gear 2 at 4600mhz with cl 19-23-23-45. The gain prevails over any speed from 4000mhz gear 1 with cl 17-21-21-43. It was the smallest timing I could get at 4000mhz.
> 
> As I told you, the memory has an xmp profile of 4000mhz cl 18-19-19-39 with 1.35v. This profile loads, but when you get to the windows home screen, give the blue screen. And I haven't figured out why until now. I think it's some option in Gigabyte's bios that isn't changing to support. As I told you. I've already put 1.62v in memory, 1.45v SA, VDDQ 1.5v and nothing does correctly load the 4000mhz profile cl 18-19-19-39!
> 
> A good thing is that I managed to improve the secondary values a lot with 4600mhz!


This thread is mostly about users running/tuning kits of Samsung B-die @4000(+) Gear 1. Your Micron kit will perform best at high memory speeds of 4600(+) Gear 2. I wasn't suggesting that you run at lower memory speeds with your kit in Gear 1. I was just trying to find out if your combo also behaves at lower speeds like it does when you try to run your 4000C18 XMP which causes BSOD in Windows??

You could try and post about your combo over at OCF in this ADL thread. There is a forum user there (Woomack) who is very experienced and knowledgeable about memory overclocking and he might be able to help you get your kit to run at 4800?? Alder Lake CPUs: Overclocking and general ADL memory/motherboard discussion


----------



## Revv23

bscool said:


> @Revv23 I was just curious. I know some like intel latency checker or super pi or tm5 and time how long a run takes. I really just oc for fun.


Super pi would probably be better but obviously takes longer. I think aida is a good tool for getting dialed in like i said, Im just not sure if we should be using it as an absolute performance comparison between each other. Maybe time spy? I dunno.


----------



## Man4cl

New board, new cpu, old single rank b-die 3600c17 (ripjaws) 1.5vdim, 1.2vcsa 1.5vddq

Any 32gb *DR *kit recomendation? I have on sight F4-4266C16D-32GTES but i'm not sure...


----------



## Professor DumbDumb

Man4cl said:


> View attachment 2538818
> 
> 
> New board, new cpu, old single rank b-die 3600c17 (ripjaws) 1.5vdim, 1.2vcsa 1.5vddq
> 
> Any 32gb *DR *kit recomendation? I have on sight F4-4266C16D-32GTES but i'm not sure...


That kit is sort of the best of the available kits (in stock) unless you want to try the best bin - which may or not actually be the best bin (4000c14) - at about 50% greater cost. There is a 4400c16 xmp kit - but I'm not sure where Gskill puts the best bins. I suspect based on price the 4000c14 - but ymmv. I had the best results with sr 4000c14 compared to sr 4400c16 in both 4x8 and 2x8 configs.


----------



## acoustic

Isn't the 4000C14 kit @ 1.55v?

I went with 4000C16 kit at 1.4v. I was running 4000 15-15-15-30 at 1.48v with no issues. I don't know where the limit is yet


----------



## GtiJason

Revv23 said:


> Super pi would probably be better but obviously takes longer. I think aida is a good tool for getting dialed in like i said, Im just not sure if we should be using it as an absolute performance comparison between each other. Maybe time spy? I dunno.


Yeah, I'm a Pi Guy myself ! W7 1.6vdimm 1.35vSA + VDDQ


----------



## neteng101

bscool said:


> True but it is easy  What do you use?


I've started using Shadow Of The Tomb Raider 1080p lowest with all things off... its a very good indicator of memory performance improvements. Going from OC CPU + XMP memory profile to tuned memory got me from 228fps to 278fps (all that improvement is just pure memory overclocking). Its also very consistent run to run with results. Might be harder to compare with others but as long as no one has low end GPUs, at these settings it should tell us a lot. I prefer it to Aida for sure to compare my own improvements... plus its actually a better test of stability than running Aida memory benchmark too. Aida is still a useful indicator and comparison point though.


----------



## weyden

PolRoger said:


> This thread is mostly about users running/tuning kits of Samsung B-die @4000(+) Gear 1. Your Micron kit will perform best at high memory speeds of 4600(+) Gear 2. I wasn't suggesting that you run at lower memory speeds with your kit in Gear 1. I was just trying to find out if your combo also behaves at lower speeds like it does when you try to run your 4000C18 XMP which causes BSOD in Windows??
> 
> You could try and post about your combo over at OCF in this ADL thread. There is a forum user there (Woomack) who is very experienced and knowledgeable about memory overclocking and he might be able to help you get your kit to run at 4800?? Alder Lake CPUs: Overclocking and general ADL memory/motherboard discussion


I wanted to join this thread using 4000mhz gear 1. But my bios doesn't help. Other people with the same kit can use 19-19-19-39 at 4400mhz. Here this timing is impossible to obtain!

I'll wait for new bios from Gigabyte and maybe come back here with some print showing that I got a better timing at 4000mhz, the same 4800mhz with decent timings!

Thank you for your help!


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

Currently running Corsair 4000C16 at 3600 16-16-16-36 Gear 1 CR1 at 1.4 DRAM and 1.25 SA on a D4 Strix with no OC and BIOS 0807 stable. When I try 4000 16-16-16-36 Gear 1 CR1, I get BSODs. What I'm currently running is below. Anything I can change to improve things on the 3600 or get 4000 or above?


----------



## FinnFIN

These MSI BIOS version numbers are a bit puzzling for me. For Z690-A Pro there is now a 1.1 on their site which is dated December 13th.. But I'm already using 1.15 dated November 30th, also downloaded from their site (it is now removed from there). Both have the same changes listed though..


----------



## Skunk0001

FinnFIN said:


> These MSI BIOS version numbers are a bit puzzling for me. For Z690-A Pro there is now a 1.1 on their site which is dated December 13th.. But I'm already using 1.15 dated November 30th, also downloaded from their site (it is now removed from there). Both have the same changes listed though..


The first two digits are the version, the last number should always be 0 for a full release, if its not 0, then it indicates its a beta version.


----------



## FinnFIN

Skunk0001 said:


> The first two digits are the version, the last number should always be 0 for a full release, if its not 0, then it indicates its a beta version.


Oh, that makes a bit more sense, thanks!


----------



## neteng101

Skunk0001 said:


> The first two digits are the version, the last number should always be 0 for a full release, if its not 0, then it indicates its a beta version.


So 110 is really the final of the 11x beta releases we had. And the latest beta is now 121.


----------



## ObviousCough

What build of windows are y'all using?


----------



## FreedomMonkey

Greetings, Gurus!

Can you fine folks sanity-check my memory overclock, and let me know if I've missed any settings to tweak? I had bad luck with this kit on my old 10700KF on a cheap ASUS board, but it seems happier on my new setup. I'm relatively new to memory overclocking, but I'm pretty happy so far with this setup.

Screenshots of my settings and some benchmarks are attached. To summarize:

12900K running 5.2 on all P-Cores, 4.2 on E-Cores with a slight voltage underclock to keep temps down
4x8 TEAMGROUP-UDR-3600 kit (single rank b-die) running at 4000 with what I think are typical b-die settings: 14-15-15-28 Gear1, 2T, with tightened sub-timings
MSI Pro Z690-A WIFI DDR4, v1.0 BIOS















































Runs Linpack 5X without issues, MemTest 5X without errors, no crashes of any kind in any games or productivity. The throughput in Linpack is a bit lower than I expected, but latency looks good IMO as do the other results in AIDA.

Thanks in advance for any tips.


----------



## Frozburn

Managed to bring down the voltage from 1.2 SA to 1.131 for the 4000 CL 14 14 14 32 DR G1 CR2, no clue if it can go lower yet. Just testing things while away from the PC. DRAM however won't budge, I set it to 1.58 in bios for stability, lower never boots.


----------



## grey.clock

Bladed said:


> I didn't do much testing with 2 sticks. I tried each set individually just to see if xmp would pass Memtest. No issues at all with XMP with just two sticks, I'm debating returning 1 set and just run 2 sticks since I'm starting to get weird issues in windows with 4 sticks.
> 
> 4 sticks pass Memtest and Aida64, but a day later I get random browser window crashes, steam crashes, and BSODs. Going to try TM5 soon.
> 
> 
> 55ns is pretty good, are you going to try to get it faster? My original goal was under 50ns with 2 sticks.



Yea I am aiming for a bit lower. At 54 right now..... lmk your timings if you keep the sticks. I had a much higher binned kit, tridant Z royal elites that would not run at XMP so I just returned them deciding they were not worth the $100 premium over these.


----------



## pitter

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Currently running Corsair 4000C16 at 3600 16-16-16-36 Gear 1 CR1 at 1.4 DRAM and 1.25 SA on a D4 Strix with no OC and BIOS 0807 stable. When I try 4000 16-16-16-36 Gear 1 CR1, I get BSODs. What I'm currently running is below. Anything I can change to improve things on the 3600 or get 4000 or above?
> View attachment 2538884
> View attachment 2538885
> View attachment 2538886


Running same ram probably , you have the 4000 16-16-16-36 kit 1.4v XMP kit ? If so , go gear 1 cr2 , 4000-16-16-16-36 , 1.45 DimVolt ,1.35 SA + VDDQ ( 1.35 is the default on auto) & TREFI 40000 TRFC 350 , let me know if improved


----------



## pitter

bscool said:


> Probably your OS and programs, software you having running in the background? I dont run anything extra on boot like keyboard/mouse software, rgb lighting controls, steam or anything like that. Also it varies, seems like I get the lowest latency the first run and after that I have to run it a few times or it goes back up to say 43, then 45 and down to 42 etc.=


i closed everything program related , well i still have my mouse and keyboard on...lowest i can get is around 47-50ns even ecores disabled and cache 47


----------



## bscool

pitter said:


> i closed everything program related , well i still have my mouse and keyboard on...lowest i can get is around 47-50ns even ecores disabled and cache 47


There is something adding latency. Are you on Win11? I get a little lower on Win10. But still not sure why there would be a 4-5ns difference. Even Win11 with those timings I think I am 43ish.


----------



## bscool

Edit. can be deleted.


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

FreedomMonkey said:


> Greetings, Gurus!
> 
> Can you fine folks sanity-check my memory overclock, and let me know if I've missed any settings to tweak? I had bad luck with this kit on my old 10700KF on a cheap ASUS board, but it seems happier on my new setup. I'm relatively new to memory overclocking, but I'm pretty happy so far with this setup.
> 
> Screenshots of my settings and some benchmarks are attached. To summarize:
> 
> 12900K running 5.2 on all P-Cores, 4.2 on E-Cores with a slight voltage underclock to keep temps down
> 4x8 TEAMGROUP-UDR-3600 kit (single rank b-die) running at 4000 with what I think are typical b-die settings: 14-15-15-28 Gear1, 2T, with tightened sub-timings
> MSI Pro Z690-A WIFI DDR4, v1.0 BIOS
> 
> View attachment 2538957
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538958
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538959
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538961
> 
> 
> View attachment 2538960
> 
> 
> 
> Runs Linpack 5X without issues, MemTest 5X without errors, no crashes of any kind in any games or productivity. The throughput in Linpack is a bit lower than I expected, but latency looks good IMO as do the other results in AIDA.
> 
> Thanks in advance for any tips.


I've found that setting RTLs to Dynamic and then enabling Slow Learning (I think that's what it's called?) For memory training can help you dial on RTLs. Once you get what you want you can turn memory training off entirely.

This is only for MSI boards, Asus boards seem to do better training RTLs from the get go if the BIOS you're running has RTL training enabled by default.


----------



## FreedomMonkey

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> I've found that setting RTLs to Dynamic and then enabling Slow Learning (I think that's what it's called?) For memory training can help you dial on RTLs. Once you get what you want you can turn memory training off entirely.
> 
> This is only for MSI boards, Asus boards seem to do better training RTLs from the get go if the BIOS you're running has RTL training enabled by default.


Thanks for the tips, much appreciated.

I don't remember seeing "Slow Learning" but I'll take a look. I did try to manually set the RTLs, but it was like the board discarded them and just set them automatically. Probably user error, or maybe the 1.0 BIOS isn't 100% bug-free.


----------



## Dead_Bot_42

Slow Learning option is in the menu before you go into timings and such. As far as I can tell the board will just completely ignore anything you try to set, Init values or otherwise.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

pitter said:


> Running same ram probably , you have the 4000 16-16-16-36 kit 1.4v XMP kit ? If so , go gear 1 cr2 , 4000-16-16-16-36 , 1.45 DimVolt ,1.35 SA + VDDQ ( 1.35 is the default on auto) & TREFI 40000 TRFC 350 , let me know if improved


Yes, that's right. What board are you using? Is 1.35 SA ok to use long-term? I'm not sure if my board could be an issue as I've read some posts saying that my board (Strix D4) struggles with 4000 and blue screens.


----------



## bscool

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Yes, that's right. What board are you using? Is 1.35 SA ok to use long-term? I'm not sure if my board could be an issue as I've read some posts saying that my board (Strix D4) struggles with 4000 and blue screens.


If you have z690 strix d4 707 works good for me with 2x8 b die. bios 812 I had issues with 2x8 a2 pcb b die. Which newer b die will most likely be. Guy on hwbot said bios 812 works fine with a0/a1 2x8 b die. But most wont have those. Most of the newer b die is A2 layout.

So if you have 2x8 b die try 707. Bios 812 is excellent for dr b die.

Note thiaphoon burner is not accurate on pcb layout. I saw yours and it says a0. I doubt it is but you can tell by looking at it how far the modules are apart. If you have a gap between banks then A2. If all evenly spaced a0/a1.





__





A1 or A2 PCB - easy recognition


Hi guys, I discovered we can easily know which PCB a memory has, just by looking at the module. No need to look under the heat sink. My finding is this: A1 has a resistor capacitor above the slot cut and other resistors near it. A2 has only one resistor capacitor, a bit on the left from the slot ...



community.hwbot.org


----------



## FreedomMonkey

Dead_Bot_42 said:


> Slow Learning option is in the menu before you go into timings and such. As far as I can tell the board will just completely ignore anything you try to set, Init values or otherwise.


Yep, I found it, thanks! Using your suggestions, I was able to lower my RTLs from 73/79 to 69/71. This seems to have improved latency in AIDA by ~1.5ns on average, and slightly boosted Linpack throughput. Still rock stable in benchmarks. Games TBD but I don't anticipate any issues. Thanks again!


----------



## truehighroller1

FreedomMonkey said:


> Yep, I found it, thanks! Using your suggestions, I was able to lower my RTLs from 73/79 to 69/71. This seems to have improved latency in AIDA by ~1.5ns on average, and slightly boosted Linpack throughput. Still rock stable in benchmarks. Games TBD but I don't anticipate any issues. Thanks again!
> 
> View attachment 2539070
> 
> 
> View attachment 2539069



What revision of bdie is your memory?


----------



## FreedomMonkey

truehighroller1 said:


> What revision of bdie is your memory?


I don't know how to check that. It's a TEAMGROUP-UD4-3600 kit from week 34 of 2020, with a SN of 010415A1 like this.


----------



## HvacGuru

Need a little advise here please. I noticed that on all the screen shots that been posted that the RTL's matched. Any idea why mine isn't? Can I adjust them manually? This is SR b die. My DR hasn't came in yet and this is driving me crazy.


----------



## truehighroller1

FreedomMonkey said:


> I don't know how to check that. It's a TEAMGROUP-UD4-3600 kit from week 34 of 2020, with a SN of 010415A1 like this.


I'm willing to bet it's a2 then. I have a funny feeling mines an older model. Like a1 or even a0.

Thank you!


----------



## truehighroller1

HvacGuru said:


> Need a little advise here please. I noticed that on all the screen shots that been posted that the RTL's matched. Any idea why mine isn't? Can I adjust them manually? This is SR b die. My DR hasn't came in yet and this is driving me crazy.
> View attachment 2539090


Your 67 number is what you look at. They're lined up perfect. 67-67 and no you can't touch them manually.


----------



## HvacGuru

truehighroller1 said:


> Your 67 number is what you look at. They're lined up perfect. 67-67 and no you can't touch them manually.


Thanks. Most of the pics I seen were 67/67 71/71 25/25 not 25/67. I thought maybe I was missing something.


----------



## truehighroller1

HvacGuru said:


> Thanks. Most of the pics I seen were 67/67 71/71 25/25 not 25/67. I thought maybe I was missing something.
> 
> View attachment 2539095


It's just because you're only running two sticks. Yours are fine. That quoted picture with 73-73-79-79 those are off and he has four sticks not two thus more numbers to look at. Anything more then 2 difference is considered off. That guy should be say worst case, 73-73-75-75 better still would be 73-73-74-74 or 73-73-73-73. 

Mine are 71-71-71-71.


----------



## HvacGuru

truehighroller1 said:


> It's just because you're only running two sticks. Yours are fine. That quoted picture with 73-73-79-79 those are off and he has four sticks not two thus more numbers to look at. Anything more then 2 difference is considered off. That guy should be say worst case, 73-73-75-75 better still would be 73-73-74-74 or 73-73-73-73.
> 
> Mine are 71-71-71-71.


Thank you again. That makes perfect sense! They are memtest stable, but act stupid in windows above 3600 mhz. Screen flickers and internet drops out. Tested in bios 707, 807. I can run them t1 and gear1 @ 3600 and there fine. Crazy!


----------



## bscool

HvacGuru said:


> Thanks. Most of the pics I seen were 67/67 71/71 25/25 not 25/67. I thought maybe I was missing something.
> 
> View attachment 2539095


Dual rank vs single rank. Too see all rtls with dr you need to use memtweakit


----------



## truehighroller1

FreedomMonkey said:


> I don't know how to check that. It's a TEAMGROUP-UD4-3600 kit from week 34 of 2020, with a SN of 010415A1 like this.


Yep, I have A1.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Yep, I have A1.
> 
> View attachment 2539123


You probably do but thaiphoon is incorrect many times on pcb layout. To really know you need to look at the sticks. Also gets layers wrong many times. Will show 8 layer when it is 10 layer.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> You probably do but thaiphoon is incorrect many times on pcb layout. To really know you need to look at the sticks. Also gets layers wrong many times. Will show 8 layer when it is 10 layer.


I know but, this is an older kit. I bought it in 2018 so a1 would make sense. I paid $650 from new egg at the time when new egg wasn't doing external sources too. I think it's right this time as it is sometimes.

I think I'm at my imc limit. I'm pushing things slowly at this point to find breaking points and what works best if you will results wise, write copy read best if you will. I'm sitting at 47 latency right now.


----------



## EarlZ

Just looking for some input regarding MSI Z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 vs Asus TUF Gaming Z690-Plus WIFI D4. Since my order for the MSI was cancelled this means I can get the Asus instead. At this point in time is the Asus board ( especially its bios) a better pick? Its even cheaper by $35. My main concern is that I am using 4x8GB 4000Mhz CL18 sticks and besides the silicon lottery on the IMC for the 12900K. I would like to make sure that the board/bios wont hold me back in running those sticks under XMP with just a voltage adjustments.

EDIT: I'm also looking at the Asus Z690-A ROG Strix Gaming WIFI D4 if its a better mobo+bios vs the TUF and Edge.


----------



## MotomEniac

ObviousCough said:


> IDK!!!! i disabled ecores, pumped p cores to 5.2 and cache to 4.9


Latencies depend on processor model also i5>i7>i9 each step is ~2ms diff. So I9 has much better mem latency than I5


----------



## GtiJason

truehighroller1 said:


> I know but, this is an older kit. I bought it in 2018 so a1 would make sense. I paid $650 from new egg at the time when new egg wasn't doing external sources too. I think it's right this time as it is sometimes.
> 
> I think I'm at my imc limit. I'm pushing things slowly at this point to find breaking points and what works best if you will results wise, write copy read best if you will. I'm sitting at 47 latency right now.


Very rare to have A0 on RGB and/or on G.Skill Ultra low latency kits (4000/4133/4266c17) . A1 wasn't really used on enthusiast ram. A2 is commonly known as the rgb pcb and is probably what you have. I had 4000c17 and still have 4133c17 kits (no 4266c17 since they only came 4x8gb) and they have always been A2. You are right about these coming out in early spring of 2018 and that was around the time G.Skill started using A2 pcb for most of there high end kits although I know they were already using them in 2017. The kit's that could be A0 or A2 were the TridentZ "color" kits rated at 4400, 4500 and 4600c19 kits. My last A0 kit is TZ Black on black 4600c19-23-23-43 1.50v from week 42 of 2018 but they still used A0 pcb at least until 2020 if not still do.


----------



## pitter

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Yes, that's right. What board are you using? Is 1.35 SA ok to use long-term? I'm not sure if my board could be an issue as I've read some posts saying that my board (Strix D4) struggles with 4000 and blue screens.


im on asus d4 a-gaming , 1.35 is the default that motherboard uses anyway...u need cr2 to boot


----------



## pitter

FreedomMonkey said:


> Yep, I found it, thanks! Using your suggestions, I was able to lower my RTLs from 73/79 to 69/71. This seems to have improved latency in AIDA by ~1.5ns on average, and slightly boosted Linpack throughput. Still rock stable in benchmarks. Games TBD but I don't anticipate any issues. Thanks again!
> 
> View attachment 2539070
> 
> 
> View attachment 2539069


what voltage you running on dim ram ? Also cache try min 43?


----------



## pitter

ObviousCough said:


> I enabled Enhanced Interleave, Disabled Power Down mode, PPD manually set to 0
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Only thing left to do now is install a fresh version of windows. Maybe I broke this one.


how do you disable Enhanced Interleave, Disabled Power Down mode on an ASUS mobo ? i never found these options


----------



## truehighroller1

GtiJason said:


> Very rare to have A0 on RGB and/or on G.Skill Ultra low latency kits (4000/4133/4266c17) . A1 wasn't really used on enthusiast ram. A2 is commonly known as the rgb pcb and is probably what you have. I had 4000c17 and still have 4133c17 kits (no 4266c17 since they only came 4x8gb) and they have always been A2. You are right about these coming out in early spring of 2018 and that was around the time G.Skill started using A2 pcb for most of there high end kits although I know they were already using them in 2017. The kit's that could be A0 or A2 were the TridentZ "color" kits rated at 4400, 4500 and 4600c19 kits. My last A0 kit is TZ Black on black 4600c19-23-23-43 1.50v from week 42 of 2018 but they still used A0 pcb at least until 2020 if not still do.
> 
> View attachment 2539172



I took a picture of one of them.










I see it doesn't have the cap right above the slot so yeah I have A2.


----------



## bscool

pitter said:


> how do you disable Enhanced Interleave, Disabled Power Down mode on an ASUS mobo ? i never found these options


Asus already enables round trip latency on Srtix with later bioses. But if you want just enable it to be sure. You can tell by looking at your rtls if it is enabled. My latency using Aida64 is in the 42-43 range not using any special settings or tweak just the basics as been for years. clocks from 4000c14, 4133c15. SR and DR b die on strix d4 with 12900kf.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

pitter said:


> im on asus d4 a-gaming , 1.35 is the default that motherboard uses anyway...u need cr2 to boot


Yes, I changed all the timings to Auto and CR2 was automatically selected. I’m going to give XMP a go with the new 0901 BIOS and see what happens. Would really like to use 4000 C16 as in theory it should work fine with DRAM 1.4V and SA 1.25V.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

EarlZ said:


> Just looking for some input regarding MSI Z690 Edge WIFI DDR4 vs Asus TUF Gaming Z690-Plus WIFI D4. Since my order for the MSI was cancelled this means I can get the Asus instead. At this point in time is the Asus board ( especially its bios) a better pick? Its even cheaper by $35. My main concern is that I am using 4x8GB 4000Mhz CL18 sticks and besides the silicon lottery on the IMC for the 12900K. I would like to make sure that the board/bios wont hold me back in running those sticks under XMP with just a voltage adjustments.
> 
> EDIT: I'm also looking at the Asus Z690-A ROG Strix Gaming WIFI D4 if its a better mobo+bios vs the TUF and Edge.


The Edge looks like a great board and I think is more comparable with the Strix rather than the TUF. I’ve read that the BIOS on the MSI is solid whereas you may have read that the ASUS BIOSes so far have had a couple of issues. I think as others have said, it’s just because the Z690 boards are new and the BIOSes need to mature. I have the Strix and am sticking with it.


----------



## bscool

@MacTavishPapa6 So far 901 is good for me on SR b die. I added some info to the other thread where you asked about it.

edit adding link for others [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread

cmo and bios download link z690 strix d4 901


----------



## Middleman

HvacGuru said:


> On Windows 11 myself. My internet would drop out and the dxgmms2.sys. I have 2 12900k rigs and my DR ram rig has never had these issues. I just ordered another set of DR ram and giving up on the SR. I think the MSI boards do a lot better from what I have seen on the forums.


I did a clean install, and unplugged two fans from the PC.

I think I was experiencing two issues

1) OS corrupt files due to memory testing
2) Random short causing shutdown/reboot


----------



## EarlZ

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> The Edge looks like a great board and I think is more comparable with the Strix rather than the TUF. I’ve read that the BIOS on the MSI is solid whereas you may have read that the ASUS BIOSes so far have had a couple of issues. I think as others have said, it’s just because the Z690 boards are new and the BIOSes need to mature. I have the Strix and am sticking with it.


Thank you for your input! I can still get the MSI board from a different retailer if it turns out to be better however our return policies here are not that great so the decision I need to make must be final. So far I am leaning towards the Strix instead. All I'm really after is to be able to run XMP on my current kits and just tweak a few voltages and I'll be very happy! In terms of looks I prefer the Edge a lot more than the Strix and this is just because the Strix is white and looks kinda out of place/mismatched but at the end of the day the TG tint on my Corsair 5000D is so dark that it barely matters!


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

EarlZ said:


> Thank you for your input! I can still get the MSI board from a different retailer if it turns out to be better however our return policies here are not that great so the decision I need to make must be final. So far I am leaning towards the Strix instead. All I'm really after is to be able to run XMP on my current kits and just tweak a few voltages and I'll be very happy! In terms of looks I prefer the Edge a lot more than the Strix and this is just because the Strix is white and looks kinda out of place/mismatched but at the end of the day the TG tint on my Corsair 5000D is so dark that it barely matters!


No problem! I think either of them will be a great choice!


----------



## RetroWave78

QUOTE="bscool, post: 28914610, member: 571521"]
@IIISLIDEIII I posted my txt and cmo here ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread it is for DR but the timings will work on SR also.

I see you are on bios 807, for me bios 812 is the best but that is up to you to test. Either is fine but I can use lower sa/vddq on 812. I just leave them on auto with bios 812 and previous bios I had to set them manually or it wouldnt boot or be stable in Windows.

Also Ai oc works better on 812 if you use it. Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5200 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR

On previous bios Windows would crash on idle/low loads using Ai oc.
[/QUOTE]

Where can we get 0812? I'm in the same boat as Slide, I think we might even have the same memoryv(2x8 C15 4000 MHz G-Skill B Die, on the QVL as 4x8)


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> @IIISLIDEIII I posted my txt and cmo here ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread it is for DR but the timings will work on SR also.
> 
> I see you are on bios 807, for me bios 812 is the best but that is up to you to test. Either is fine but I can use lower sa/vddq on 812. I just leave them on auto with bios 812 and previous bios I had to set them manually or it wouldnt boot or be stable in Windows.
> 
> Also Ai oc works better on 812 if you use it. Intel Core i9 12900KF @ 5200 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
> 
> On previous bios Windows would crash on idle/low loads using Ai oc.


Where can we get 0812? I'm in the same boat as Slide, I think we might even have the same memoryv(2x8 C15 4000 MHz G-Skill B Die, on the QVL as 4x8)


----------



## Middleman

RetroWave78 said:


> Where can we get 0812? I'm in the same boat as Slide, I think we might even have the same memoryv(2x8 C15 4000 MHz G-Skill B Die, on the QVL as 4x8)


It looks like 0812 got pulled from the site, and only has 0807 - thats the one im using now for Asus Strix D4


----------



## Tradition

Here is my micron e-die timings it wont go to 4000 because my imc is **** im waiting for a bios to try 
im n a z690m-plus d4 but cant get bios 07xx


----------



## dracktw

FreedomMonkey said:


> Yep, I found it, thanks! Using your suggestions, I was able to lower my RTLs from 73/79 to 69/71. This seems to have improved latency in AIDA by ~1.5ns on average, and slightly boosted Linpack throughput. Still rock stable in benchmarks. Games TBD but I don't anticipate any issues. Thanks again!
> 
> View attachment 2539070
> 
> 
> View attachment 2539069


would you add a picture the RTL from your bios ? i seem to having issues


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

@RetroWave78 @Middleman Guys, there’s a new BIOS, 0901:






ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG United Kingdom


ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, OptiMem III, PCIe 5.0, 16+1 power stages, WiFi 6, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync



rog.asus.com


----------



## PolRoger

Tradition said:


> Here is my micron e-die timings it wont go to 4000 because my imc is **** im waiting for a bios to try
> im n a z690m-plus d4 but cant get bios 07xx
> 
> View attachment 2539228


I see that you are running with an i7-12700K. Most users here are running Samsung B-die kits. What is the exact brand/model/part# for your Micron E die sticks?

Have you tried to run your Micron based sticks at higher memory speeds with Gear 2 @ 4600/4800m/t with something like 18-21-21 or 19-21-21? 

Gear 2 does have a latency penalty, but the faster memory speeds will give you greater memory bandwidth results.


----------



## truehighroller1

Serious question here without the need for technical wording etc. What controls your copy speed? We have read write & copy, what controls the copy part? Are there timings to lower / control that part? Total noob question I'm sure but, bear with me please.


----------



## Cpfan1

Do VCCSA/VCCIO have a "sweetspot"?


----------



## vgishmasters

hello i have some weird latency with crucial ballistix e-die memory on msi z690-a pro ddr4 + i7-12700k. Memory XMP 16-18-18-38 at 3600mhz, latency with this timings was 45 нс, on my previous i7-11700k, but with 12700 i get only 60-61 ns.


----------



## PolRoger

vgishmasters said:


> hello i have some weird latency with crucial ballistix e-die memory on msi z690-a pro ddr4 + i7-12700k. Memory XMP 16-18-18-38 at 3600mhz, latency with this timings was 45 нс, on my previous i7-11700k, but with 12700 i get only 60-61 ns.


Here is my i5-12600K with Micron E-die @3733C16 with ~58ns latency.


----------



## RetroWave78

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> @RetroWave78 @Middleman Guys, there’s a new BIOS, 0901:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 | Gaming Motherboards｜ROG - Republic of Gamers｜ROG United Kingdom
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI Intel LGA 1700 ATX motherboard, OptiMem III, PCIe 5.0, 16+1 power stages, WiFi 6, Intel® 2.5 Gb Ethernet, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 USB Type-C®, SATA and Aura Sync
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com


Anyone try this yet? This may be a stupid question but can you save your BIOS settings and apply them to a different BIOS with this board? This was not possible with my previous mobo, Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7. If you flashed to a different BIOS you had to redo all of your settings. I mean it's not that hard but yeah.


----------



## vgishmasters

PolRoger said:


> Here is my i5-12600K with Micron E-die @3733C16 with ~58ns latency.
> 
> View attachment 2539265


it look like the Alder IMC, doesn't like e-die, or something else


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

RetroWave78 said:


> Anyone try this yet? This may be a stupid question but can you save your BIOS settings and apply them to a different BIOS with this board? This was not possible with my previous mobo, Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7. If you flashed to a different BIOS you had to redo all of your settings. I mean it's not that hard but yeah.


Yes, I’m running it and so is @bscool

With it, I’m now running XMP II 4000 C16 stable whereas on 0807, I could barely get to the desktop and was getting BSoDs. I think you can save profiles to a USB drive and then load them back in any version of the BIOS but I always just load optimal defaults and set everything up again just so I know everything is clear.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

Cpfan1 said:


> Do VCCSA/VCCIO have a "sweetspot"?


I always like to run 1.25 on SA as it always seems to work pretty well for me. I think 1.35 is the Auto/default for what is IO on Z690.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

truehighroller1 said:


> Serious question here without the need for technical wording etc. What controls your copy speed? We have read write & copy, what controls the copy part? Are there timings to lower / control that part? Total noob question I'm sure but, bear with me please.


Well according to MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper:

RAM timings are split into 3 categories: primary, secondary and tertiary. These are indicated by 'P', 'S', and 'T' respectively.
Primary and secondary timings affect latency and bandwidth.
Tertiary timings affect bandwidth.
The exception to this is tREFI/tREF which affects latency and bandwidth, though it isn't modifiable on AMD., though it isn't modifiable on AMD.


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 

@Middleman 

bios 812









ROG-STRIX-Z690-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0812.rar


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## bscool

RetroWave78 said:


> Anyone try this yet? This may be a stupid question but can you save your BIOS settings and apply them to a different BIOS with this board? This was not possible with my previous mobo, Gigabyte Z370 Gaming 7. If you flashed to a different BIOS you had to redo all of your settings. I mean it's not that hard but yeah.


Best practice is not to use cmo file from other bios version. But I have done it and it has worked. But I also have done it and had weird issues like wifi disappearing and only comes back after clear cmso and reloading setting. So just try it and see and if having weird issues then best to turn off psu and had clear cmos for 30 secounds and start fresh entering everything manually.


----------



## Cam1

@*MacTavishPapa6*
i see you have a 12700k with asus strix... And you need the very last bios to be able to run 4000MHz ram ?
What is the max ram frequency Bios post using Gear 1 ?

I hope they make a better Tuf bios like they did for the Strix.


----------



## Tradition

PolRoger said:


> I see that you are running with an i7-12700K. Most users here are running Samsung B-die kits. What is the exact brand/model/part# for your Micron E die sticks?
> 
> Have you tried to run your Micron based sticks at higher memory speeds with Gear 2 @ 4600/4800m/t with something like 18-21-21 or 19-21-21?
> 
> Gear 2 does have a latency penalty, but the faster memory speeds will give you greater memory bandwidth results.



my kits are crucial ballistix 3600 cl16 
i did try and it runs at 4800 cl18 no problem but when i test games like rise of the tomb raider i have a 30fps loss because of gear


----------



## Tradition

vgishmasters said:


> hello i have some weird latency with crucial ballistix e-die memory on msi z690-a pro ddr4 + i7-12700k. Memory XMP 16-18-18-38 at 3600mhz, latency with this timings was 45 нс, on my previous i7-11700k, but with 12700 i get only 60-61 ns.


that sounds about right the new 12 gen has a higher latency 
im using 3900cl15 and i get 52ns


----------



## PolRoger

Tradition said:


> my kits are crucial ballistix 3600 cl16
> i did try and it runs at 4800 cl18 no problem but when i test games like rise of the tomb raider i have a 30fps loss because of gear


Ok... got it. 

If you wouldn't mind, could you please post up an AIDA64 memory benchmark of your i7-12700K combo running @4800C18 Gear 2? I'd like to compare the results to my i5-12600K. 

My "low-bin" i5 sample's IMC also seems to top out at ~3900 G1. I can post/load windows @4000 G1 but I have stability issues and get errors in TM5. Maybe future motherboard BIOS releases will help? Or maybe not?? It could just be a somewhat weak IMC...

i5-12600k @4000C17 G1:


----------



## Tradition

PolRoger said:


> Ok... got it.
> 
> If you wouldn't mind, could you please post up an AIDA64 memory benchmark of your i7-12700K combo running @4800C18 Gear 2? I'd like to compare the results to my i5-12600K.
> 
> My "low-bin" i5 sample's IMC also seems to top out at ~3900 G1. I can post/load windows @4000 G1 but I have stability issues and get errors in TM5. Maybe future motherboard BIOS releases will help? Or maybe not?? It could just be a somewhat weak IMC...
> 
> i5-12600k @4000C17 G1:
> View attachment 2539302



This is what im getting RN
i can do it later 4800 but latency its arround 60ns and 72gbps 
i didnt save the screen shot


----------



## truehighroller1

I ordered these memory sticks last night. 
Ripjaws V
DDR4-4600MHz CL19-26-26-46 1.50V
32GB (2x16GB) 
F4-4600C19D-32GVK

I'm trying to figure out if they're b die or not, does anyone know?


----------



## PolRoger

Someone else may chime in here but I didn't think that B-die kits were ever released @4600m/t speed?? I'm thinking that kit could be either Hynix or Micron IC?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I ordered these memory sticks last night.
> Ripjaws V
> DDR4-4600MHz CL19-26-26-46 1.50V
> 32GB (2x16GB)
> F4-4600C19D-32GVK
> 
> I'm trying to figure out if they're b die or not, does anyone know?


Hynix most likely. def not b die. Cheaper good b die 2x16 is 3200c14. 4000c16-16-16, 3600c14-15-15. Where you ordering from I can look if you want?


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Hynix most likely. def not b die. Cheaper good b die 2x16 is 3200c14. 4000c16-16-16, 3600c14-15-15. Where you ordering from I can look if you want?


Newegg

G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4600 (PC4 36800) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model F4-4600C19D-32GVK - Newegg.com


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Newegg
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4600 (PC4 36800) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model F4-4600C19D-32GVK - Newegg.com


Defintely not b die. Do you care rgb or not I have a bunch I will link?


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Defintely not b die. Do you care rgb or not I have a bunch I will link?



No it doesn't matter just really want a low latency 32gb 16gb x2 kit bdie. I'm about to cancel that order.


----------



## bscool

@truehighroller1 I have had many of these kits(or same bin different model like neo or rgb etc) over the last year or so and they are all very close. Lotto really. Your best best should be the higher bins(most expensive usually) but it isnt always true in testing them. I left out 4000c14 because I dont think it is worth the price unless money is no object and I think it is out of stock.

Listed by price from low to high best i could.



Spoiler: b die list












G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-8GVRB - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-8GVRB with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GVK - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













OLOy Blade RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model ND4U1636144BRADE - Newegg.com


Buy OLOy Blade RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model ND4U1636144BRADE with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C17D-32GVKB - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C17D-32GVKB with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C16D-32GVK - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C16D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C16D-32GVK - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C16D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4400 (PC4 35200) Desktop Memory Model F4-4400C17D-32GVK - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4400 (PC4 35200) Desktop Memory Model F4-4400C17D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com


----------



## truehighroller1

Spoiler






bscool said:


> @truehighroller1 I have had many of these kits(or same bin different model like neo or rgb etc) over the last year or so and they are all very close. Lotto really. Your best best should be the higher bins(most expensive usually) but it isnt always true in testing them. I left out 4000c14 because I dont think it is worth the price unless money is no object and I think it is out of stock.
> 
> Listed by price from low to high best i could.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-8GVRB - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 8GB (2 x 4GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model F4-3200C16D-8GVRB with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GVK - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> OLOy Blade RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model ND4U1636144BRADE - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy OLOy Blade RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model ND4U1636144BRADE with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C17D-32GVKB - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C17D-32GVKB with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C16D-32GVK - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C16D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C16D-32GVK - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Desktop Memory Model F4-4266C16D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4400 (PC4 35200) Desktop Memory Model F4-4400C17D-32GVK - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4400 (PC4 35200) Desktop Memory Model F4-4400C17D-32GVK with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com






Looks like this one is the best one from looking at the timings.

G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4400 (PC4 35200) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model F4-4400C17D-32GVK - Newegg.com 

You agree?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Looks like this one is the best one from looking at the timings.
> 
> G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4400 (PC4 35200) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model F4-4400C17D-32GVK - Newegg.com
> 
> You agree?


tcl is slightly better on 4266c16 kit and I "think" might be better if you want gear 1 say [email protected] or [email protected] But either "should" do those timings if you IMC can.

trcd/trp better on 4400c17 but again down to lotto if manually oc and tighter timings.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> tcl is slightly better on 4266c16 kit and I "think" might be better if you want gear 1 say [email protected] or [email protected] But either "should" do those timings if you IMC can.


I ordered those screw it lol. Thank you sir! I think the IMC can handle it the memory sticks I have are just pushing the envelope to far being 4 x 8gb I believe.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I ordered those screw it lol. Thank you sir! I think the IMC can handle it the memory sticks I have are just pushing the envelope to far being 4 x 8gb I believe.


They are priced the same I would bet either could run the others timings.


----------



## ObviousCough

I installed Windows 11 and my latency is better now


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

Cam1 said:


> @*MacTavishPapa6*
> i see you have a 12700k with asus strix... And you need the very last bios to be able to run 4000MHz ram ?
> What is the max ram frequency Bios post using Gear 1 ?
> 
> I hope they make a better Tuf bios like they did for the Strix.


Yes, 0901. I’ve only tried 4000 C16 as I think I’m in a happy place running it at 1.4 DRAM and the performance it gives.

I’m sure they will


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I ordered those screw it lol. Thank you sir! I think the IMC can handle it the memory sticks I have are just pushing the envelope to far being 4 x 8gb I believe.


hey after i thought about it I was thinking of SR i have for the voltages i said. I have that same kit you ordered DR 4400c17 gskill and it cant do [email protected] or 4133c15-15-15#1.55v at least mine cant. Will need more like 1.6v unless your kit is better. The 4000c14-15-15 dr kits I have does [email protected]

I am going to edit the other post above so other dont see it and get bad info.

It will take a top bin to do 4000c14-15-15 sr or dr @1.55v with tight subtimings and pass various memtests. Benchmarks vs memtest stable very different.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> hey after i thought about it I was thinking of SR i have for the voltages i said. I have that same kit you ordered DR 4400c17 gskill and it cant do [email protected] or 4133c15-15-15#1.55v at least mine cant. Will need more like 1.6v unless your kit is better. The 4000c14-15-15 dr kits I have does [email protected]
> 
> I am going to edit the other post above so other dont see it and get bad info.
> 
> It will take a top bin to do 4000c14-15-15 sr or dr @1.55v with tight subtimings and pass various memtests. Benchmarks vs memtest stable very different.





raad11 said:


> Is it dual rank or single rank? My dual rank sticks are doing 47-48ns average at 4000 14-15-15-28 with a few runs hitting 44-45ns. So 3800CL14 sounds about right for 50-52ns if it's two dual rank or four single rank. Overclocking also helps the numbers a little, especially ring.


The guy I quoted above has my kit I ordered. His seems to do pretty good. We shall see what I can squeeze out of it.


----------



## HvacGuru

This is my DR rig on Windows 10.


----------



## ObviousCough




----------



## RetroWave78

Hey have you guys heard what is happening to Z690 Hero's?

ASUS ROG Maximus Z690 HERO Motherboards Might Have A Serious Defect, Several Reports of Boards Burning Up (wccftech.com)


----------



## s7j3

Anyone know when a good indication to increase VDDQ IVR Transmitter voltage? Been trying to run some OCCT Large AVX2 8hr tests and none of them pass. Tried increasing my V/F Offset voltage for the AVX frequency and also VCCSA; none of them help. I'm confused as to what VDDQ IVR Transmitter voltages does and where it would help an OC.


----------



## Agent-A01

I get this random application crashes(games)
0xc0000005

Seems like it may be ram related. Anyone have experience with that?


----------



## Tradition

ObviousCough said:


> View attachment 2539375



not bad
im doing 311 on my 12700k + 6900xt 
micron memory cl15


----------



## grey.clock

truehighroller1 said:


> I get it it's all good trust me. Just seemed trolly to me., that's all and not on your part. I felt like he was trying to be a douchebag by telling me I'm a douchebag. I was just being nice asking him a genuine question. Maybe there's a language barrier I don't know.


made me laugh, happy holidays and don't let people get a rise out of you, intentional or not. Life is too short to let little things like that take importance!


----------



## Jayden1397

So after reading through the last 30 pages am I right to conclude that the strix is the best board for dual rank?


----------



## MikeS3000

For those of you Hynix DJR users out there, here is my stable 4x8gb setup. It's not B-die, but it's cheaper and runs pretty fast. DRAM voltage = 1.45v, VCCSA = 1.328v, VDDQ = 1.35v. I have a hard wall on my IMC on my 12700k at Gear 1 3900 mhz. I screwed around with bclk and could post just a touch over 3900 but I don't think it's worth the hassle as the computer will probably be flaky over 3900. Anything that I can improve on here? I've tightened primaries as far as they will go without error. Can I safely max out tREFi or will I run into issue at higher temperatures? How about tRFC? I used some online calculators inputting about 261 to 262ns tRFC and the # is outputted for DDR 3900 was around 510.


----------



## HvacGuru

I am gay with my results


----------



## Gsen999

GtiJason said:


> Yeah, I'm a Pi Guy myself ! W7 1.6vdimm 1.35vSA + VDDQ
> 
> View attachment 2538856


Is this the ripjaws kit? Also are you on custom loop? Could you show cpu and ram temps?


----------



## neteng101

ObviousCough said:


> SOTR Results


Try turning off your TAA - surprised you aren't getting more FPS. Lowest settings, 1080P, everything off.

Are your E-cores disabled? What's your CPU OC settings?


----------



## Gsen999

At this moment of time is there any advantages of strix a over the tuf? Or is tuf already an overkill to run in gear 1 since ram will be IMC limited anyway?


----------



## Bobbylee

truehighroller1 said:


> I get it it's all good trust me. Just seemed trolly to me., that's all and not on your part. I felt like he was trying to be a douchebag by telling me I'm a douchebag. I was just being nice asking him a genuine question. Maybe there's a language barrier I don't know.



Haha oops was tired, I don’t remember linking it that way or writing gay. Enjoy a Christmas chuckle on me lads


----------



## bscool

Bobbylee said:


> Haha oops was tired, I don’t remember linking it that way or writing gay. Enjoy a Christmas chuckle on me lads


Too much Eggnog ehhh


----------



## Jayden1397

Gsen999 said:


> At this moment of time is there any advantages of strix a over the tuf? Or is tuf already an overkill to run in gear 1 since ram will be IMC limited anyway?


I'm in the same boat, I'm about to pull the trigger on a strix but if the tuf performs identical then I may as well buy the tuf


----------



## ObviousCough

neteng101 said:


> Try turning off your TAA - surprised you aren't getting more FPS. Lowest settings, 1080P, everything off.
> 
> Are your E-cores disabled? What's your CPU OC settings?


e cores disabled, 5.2 all P core and 49 on the ring.


I will disable TAA.


----------



## Agent-A01

Jayden1397 said:


> I'm in the same boat, I'm about to pull the trigger on a strix but if the tuf performs identical then I may as well buy the tuf


Tuf is fine for 4133 and below. Past that Strix-A will be better.

Strix-A does get better support if that matters to you.


----------



## Cam1

Can't do 4000MHz stable with my Tuf and 12700K, Still waiting for a bios that can allow that.
Having amazing results and stability with my setup btw.
Maybe i could try 3900 with tighter timings but i'm fine with this.

Auto overclock with Thermal Velocity Boost +2

Core isolation is enabled but Aida64 still give me Latency result on this install ?


----------



## bscool

Did a short test on z690 Strix d4 bios 901 with 4x8 sr b die A2 pcb.

Going to 4 dims kills clocks as would make since since Daisy Chain topology does better with 2 sticks. 

Clocks on 2x8 or 2x16 b die 4133c15 to 4266.

4x8(4x16 to 3600) drops to 3733c14 for my IMC.


----------



## m4ck

I was doing some last minute Christmas shopping at BestBuy yesterday stumbled across a 12900k. Checked the Batch saw that it was made in Vietnam decided to pull the trigger. I was really unimpressed with my old one pretty sure it had a bad IC would not boot past 3800 with this kit.

Old CPU Batch# V136J542 China
New CPU Batch# X141k203 Vietnam

Running 4x8 3600 F4-3600c16D-16GVK

MSI z690-A pro

Think this is pretty good for 4x8 sticks I can boot 1t and run semi stable. I'm relatively new to Ram Oc so I'm sure someone more experienced could get it stable. Haven't touched the sub timing at all. I'm sure there's more to be gained I'm not even sure where to start with adjusting the Subtimings.


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> Did a short test on z690 Strix d4 bios 901 with 4x8 sr b die A2 pcb.
> 
> Going to 4 dims kills clocks as would make since since Daisy CHain does better with 2 sticks. Clocks on 2x8 or 2x16 b die 4133c15 to 4266.
> 
> 4x8(4x16 to 3600) drops to 3733c14 for my IMC.


I have the same experience on 0707, my PC won't even boot with 4x8 @ 3733 MHz, even with 1.39 SA. I've just contented myself with 2x8 @ 4000 MHz for now. 

The memory I'm using, curiously 4x8 is on the QVL and I bought a matched set and it will not boot with them at XMP, even with about as much SA as I'd like to use. 

Question, how much SA is safe for 24/7 use? I noticed you mention that you were able to reduce SA between 0707 and 0812, is 0901 any better than 0812? 

F4-4000C15Q-32GTRS-G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd. (gskill.com)


----------



## bscool

@RetroWave78 901 seems similar to 812 with need less sa/dq but it is much better booting sr b die than 812.

Also running DR b die on 901 now and so far as good as 812. So as of now for DR I think 901 is the bios I will stay on.

For me 901 is the best for dr and sr b die A2 pcb.

I dont know how much sa is safe for 24/7 use. I use 1.35 and I would use 1.45 without issue but no idea what is safe.


----------



## grey.clock

Gsen999 said:


> At this moment of time is there any advantages of strix a over the tuf? Or is tuf already an overkill to run in gear 1 since ram will be IMC limited anyway?


Perhaps if you have a i9 and are binning CPU's before you settle on one. The i9's IMC is also stronger than the i7 from what I have been following here....


----------



## m4ck

I keep getting a #2 error into Tm5 antaextreme about a hour in. Trying to get 1t stable can I up the voltage to 1.55 safely my temps are all sub 35c.


----------



## Gsen999

m4ck said:


> I keep getting a #2 error into Tm5 antaextreme about a hour in. Trying to get 1t stable can I up the voltage to 1.55 safely my temps are all sub 35c.


Try to raise VDDQ voltage by 20mv. What are your VDIMM SA and vddq voltages.


----------



## m4ck

Gsen999 said:


> Try to raise VDDQ voltage by 20mv. What are your VDIMM SA and vddq voltages.


Current
Dram 1.5
VDDQ 1.35
SA 1.2

Bump VDDQ to 1.37?


----------



## bass junkie xl

hey guys i have asus strix z-690 D4 bios = 901 with 32 gb ( 8 gb x 4 sticks ) @ 4000 mhz Gear 1 , cl-16-17-17-35 -2T-300 trfc @ 1.26 vcssa / 1.25vddq / 1.50 v Dram 
stable in tm5 anta extreme 6 cycles . adia 64 scores are 

read - 63.2 k 
write - 60.3 k 
copy- 66.7 k 
Latency - 46.8 ns 

how do i use a rtl / iol offset in my asus strix z690 D4 ? i used a rtl/iol offset on my asus xi code z-390 21 is default i had it to 18


----------



## Gsen999

m4ck said:


> Current
> Dram 1.5
> VDDQ 1.35
> SA 1.2
> 
> Bump VDDQ to 1.37?


There is a variety of reasons why you may have gotten an error on 4. Usually error 4 on testmem5 is due to tRFC make sure it's always even so 16,32,64 etc.. Furthermore as you're trying to go from 2t to 1t youre tightening the timings what's your ram sticks, mobo cpu please? Bumping dram voltages should help stability when tightening the timings but you've got to be careful of the temps especially if you have a poor flow in the case or dont have some sort of active cooling over the ram sticks. I would check the tRFC for now keeping the voltages the same. You shouldn't need to go higher but that's also dependant on the frequency you're trying to run. You may need to go higher than 1.25 VCCSA when running above 3600mhz to help stability.


----------



## Sarzinski

.


----------



## truehighroller1

bass junkie xl said:


> hey guys i have asus strix z-690 D4 bios = 901 with 32 gb ( 8 gb x 4 sticks ) @ 4000 mhz Gear 1 , cl-16-17-17-35 -2T-300 trfc @ 1.26 vcssa / 1.25vddq / 1.50 v Dram
> stable in tm5 anta extreme 6 cycles . adia 64 scores are
> 
> read - 63.2 k
> write - 60.3 k
> copy- 66.7 k
> Latency - 46.8 ns
> 
> how do i use a rtl / iol offset in my asus strix z690 D4 ? i used a rtl/iol offset on my asus xi code z-390 21 is default i had it to 18


Bump your vcssa to 1.3 to make them train better. You can't change the rtls.


----------



## firthen

Hey guys, i hope i´m not that wrong here.

So i got recetly the 12700KF on the ASUS ROG Strix z690A gaming.
With stock settings and latest bios everything is doing fine.

Then i tried to enable XMP for my https://www.corsair.com/de/de/Kateg...ngeance-RGB-PRO-SL-Weiß/p/CMH32GX4M2D3600C18W
and boot into windows but after 10-30 sec beeing idle in windows pc freezes and restarts himself. Tried with both XMP 1 and 2. Same result.
I have no experience in overclocking/setting timings manually so maybe you can help find a way to fix this.

I ordered another ram kit https://www.corsair.com/de/de/Kateg.../DOMINATOR-PLATINUM-RGB/p/CMT32GX4M4C3600C18W
Dont know if they will work or do better at all.
Would appraciate any opionion which one is better kit at all.
Maybe also i guide/setting to overclock/set the timings to CL16 or smth.

And another question. 
Is the CPU AI OC a thing? Or should i still go for manuall oc? I´m not trying to push to the limits, just trying to find a decent midway for optimal performance and stability. 

Thanks in advance


----------



## Cam1

firthen said:


> Hey guys, i hope i´m not that wrong here.
> 
> So i got recetly the 12700KF on the ASUS ROG Strix z690A gaming.
> With stock settings and latest bios everything is doing fine.
> 
> Then i tried to enable XMP for my https://www.corsair.com/de/de/Kateg...ngeance-RGB-PRO-SL-Weiß/p/CMH32GX4M2D3600C18W
> and boot into windows but after 10-30 sec beeing idle in windows pc freezes and restarts himself. Tried with both XMP 1 and 2. Same result.
> I have no experience in overclocking/setting timings manually so maybe you can help find a way to fix this.
> 
> I ordered another ram kit https://www.corsair.com/de/de/Kateg.../DOMINATOR-PLATINUM-RGB/p/CMT32GX4M4C3600C18W
> Dont know if they will work or do better at all.
> Would appraciate any opionion which one is better kit at all.
> Maybe also i guide/setting to overclock/set the timings to CL16 or smth.
> 
> And another question.
> Is the CPU AI OC a thing? Or should i still go for manuall oc? I´m not trying to push to the limits, just trying to find a decent midway for optimal performance and stability.
> 
> Thanks in advance


Look for bscool advices there is different bios for your motherboard that can fix this issue i believe, you don't need to buy another, and they both looks the same btw
i think the "CMH32GX4M2D3600C18W" is dual rank so you know what bios to use.

AI oc is doing good with my specific motherboard.


----------



## ziomalxmpc

Hello, 
I have problem, how to set options in bios to run DDR4 3600Mhz 16-20-20 in 1 gear?
Factory timing parameters:
• Default (JEDEC): DDR4-2400 CL17-17-17 @1.2V
• XMP Profile #1: DDR4-3600 CL16-20-20 @1.35V
• XMP Profile #2: DDR4-3000 CL15-17-17 @1.35V

Default and XMP Profile #2 working, XMP Profile #1 don't working. What to do?

Ram: Kingston Renegade 16GB CL16 (https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/KF436C16RB1A_16.pdf)
KF436C16RB1A/16
16GB 2G x 64-Bit
DDR4-3600 CL16 288-Pin DIM

Motherboard: Gigabyte Z690 UD DDR4 
Processor: intel i5-12600K.

Before update BIOS I couldn't run even Profile #2...

Any suggestions? 

Best regards


----------



## ObviousCough

My i7 can handle the same good timings as my i5. I probably won't get around to trying 32GB until tomorrow or tuesday.


----------



## bscool

z690 Strix A d4 bios 901

4133c15-15-15 2x16 DR b die

1.55v dram

sa/dq 1.35(auto)


----------



## firthen

Since my both XMP profiles didnt work at all a tried to set the ram manuall which worked.
I set 18-22-22-42 and the 1.35V and the 3600Mhz it should suppose to run at with xmp.

Excuse my newbie question. So i would like to increase the speed like 4000 then i would just set this and maybe inscrease the voltage? I read that you have to change the timings like 19-22-22-42 to make it work too. But there are also a ton of other timings that can be manually changed. Can i keep them on auto or are those also needed to adjust? 

Also i read something about changing the gear from auto to 2. Is 1 better at all but can run higher speeds so you need to change to gear 2?


----------



## RetroWave78

bscool said:


> z690 Strix A d4 bios 901
> 
> 4133c15-15-15 2x16 DR b die
> 
> 1.55v dram
> 
> sa/dq 1.35(auto)


Was this possible on 0812 or earlier BIOS? Still yet to flash 0901.

Edit: is 1.55v safe for 24/7 use, are these modules set to 1.5v at default? Thanks.


----------



## bscool

RetroWave78 said:


> Was this possible on 0812 or earlier BIOS? Still yet to flash 0901.
> 
> Edit: is 1.55v safe for 24/7 use, are these modules set to 1.5v at default? Thanks.


My dimms default 1.55v. I dont know if it is safe. I had the same results on 812. No difference but 901 works better than 812 for SR. But 707 is better for some on SR b die than 707. Basically everyone has to test each bios for themself. DR b die seems less finicky than SR on Strix. SR some bios on strix just dont work well.


----------



## HvacGuru

RetroWave78 said:


> Was this possible on 0812 or earlier BIOS? Still yet to flash 0901.
> 
> Edit: is 1.55v safe for 24/7 use, are these modules set to 1.5v at default? Thanks.


I have had better luck getting DR running at a higher frequency on the Strix. DR works great on 812 for me. Like bscool said you need to try it for yourself. What works for one build, doesn't always work for another.


----------



## MikeS3000

12700k users, what is the maximum gear 1 memory controller frequency you can run? I'm stable at 1950 mhz on the memory controller running 4 x 8gb. I tried 2 sticks and one stick to see if I could push the memory controller frequency up. I can't boot at 2000 mhz on the controller. I use auto vcssa and vddq on my asus board up to 1950 mhz which seems to set 1.35v for each. I tried pushing up the vcssa and vddq and nothing gets it to POST at DDR 4000. Is this jus the silicon lottery or would you say that most 12700k cpus have worse memory controller than their big brother 12900k?


----------



## Tradition

MikeS3000 said:


> 12700k users, what is the maximum gear 1 memory controller frequency you can run? I'm stable at 1950 mhz on the memory controller running 4 x 8gb. I tried 2 sticks and one stick to see if I could push the memory controller frequency up. I can't boot at 2000 mhz on the controller. I use auto vcssa and vddq on my asus board up to 1950 mhz which seems to set 1.35v for each. I tried pushing up the vcssa and vddq and nothing gets it to POST at DDR 4000. Is this jus the silicon lottery or would you say that most 12700k cpus have worse memory controller than their big brother 12900k?


I can only go up to 1950 stable on my 12700k using 2 sticks with a single stick on BA2 slot i can go up to 4200 no problem
but if you take buildzoids 12900k its pretty much the same the 2nd channel wont go beyond 3900 

im running 3900 cl15 rn


----------



## warbucks

This is where I've landed so far with my Strix D4 and G.Skill 4000Cl14 kit. Still a few things I can tighten but now that I've gotten some DDR5, I'm switching my main rig over to the APEX and will move this to the test bench.


----------



## Larkonian

MikeS3000 said:


> 12700k users, what is the maximum gear 1 memory controller frequency you can run? I'm stable at 1950 mhz on the memory controller running 4 x 8gb. I tried 2 sticks and one stick to see if I could push the memory controller frequency up. I can't boot at 2000 mhz on the controller. I use auto vcssa and vddq on my asus board up to 1950 mhz which seems to set 1.35v for each. I tried pushing up the vcssa and vddq and nothing gets it to POST at DDR 4000. Is this jus the silicon lottery or would you say that most 12700k cpus have worse memory controller than their big brother 12900k?


These are the results of my 12700KF:

Dual DIMM single rank: 4133 1T boots with about 1.3v VCCSA but requires~1.42v for stability with tight timings. 4200 boots but is nowhere near stable.
Dual DIMM dual rank: 4133 2T stable with VCCSA at ~1.47 or 4100 2T with VCCSA at ~1.44. 4200 doesn't POST.

I haven't tested quad DIMM.


----------



## truehighroller1

My new memory is in. This is auto default settings. Starting point if you will. This will be fun.









Pushing it further.










MORE SPEEED


----------



## MikeS3000

Larkonian said:


> These are the results of my 12700KF:
> 
> Dual DIMM single rank: 4133 1T boots with about 1.3v VCCSA but requires~1.42v for stability with tight timings. 4200 boots but is nowhere near stable.
> Dual DIMM dual rank: 4133 2T stable with VCCSA at ~1.47 or 4100 2T with VCCSA at ~1.44. 4200 doesn't POST.
> 
> I haven't tested quad DIMM.


Very nice results! How high can I push VCCSA safely to see if 4000 will post? I've tried up to 1.45v and maybe it got to bios for a split second and then froze.


----------



## truehighroller1

Closer to timings locked.


----------



## Tradition

truehighroller1 said:


> Closer to timings locked.
> 
> View attachment 2539896



Just go for gear 1 3800 will do better than 4600


----------



## Tradition

Larkonian said:


> These are the results of my 12700KF:
> 
> Dual DIMM single rank: 4133 1T boots with about 1.3v VCCSA but requires~1.42v for stability with tight timings. 4200 boots but is nowhere near stable.
> Dual DIMM dual rank: 4133 2T stable with VCCSA at ~1.47 or 4100 2T with VCCSA at ~1.44. 4200 doesn't POST.
> 
> I haven't tested quad DIMM.


you have a golden chip


----------



## truehighroller1

Tradition said:


> Just go for gear 1 3800 will do better than 4600


I will. Testing a little bit of everything. I want to push this gear as far as I can first. Lock timings, then I'll push gear 1. These sticks are amazing so far.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

truehighroller1 said:


> I will. Testing a little bit of everything. I want to push this gear as far as I can first. Lock timings, then I'll push gear 1. These sticks are amazing so far.


What kit do you have and have you run Firestrike/Time Spy or SoTR?


----------



## Tradition

truehighroller1 said:


> I will. Testing a little bit of everything. I want to push this gear as far as I can first. Lock timings, then I'll push gear 1. These sticks are amazing so far.


here is my testing of gear 1 vs gear 2 
on sottr its not even a contest 311 vs 289


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Closer to timings locked.
> 
> View attachment 2539896


It looks like gear 2 on the Strix d4 is bios depends also. I know some bios versions I couldnt get past 4266 and some I could run 4400 max on DR b die. I havent tried this latest 901 in gear 2. Maybe I will I have that same 4400c17 kit also. Running the 4000c14 kit now but it is picky about gear 2 on z590 and I bet similar on z690 gear 2.


----------



## Larkonian

MikeS3000 said:


> Very nice results! How high can I push VCCSA safely to see if 4000 will post? I've tried up to 1.45v and maybe it got to bios for a split second and then froze.


I don't think it's as simple as safe or not safe, more like more safe or less safe. I think 1.45v is definitely into the "less safe" area.

If you can't boot consistently at 1.4v I wouldn't bother pursuing it further.


----------



## bscool

MikeS3000 said:


> Very nice results! How high can I push VCCSA safely to see if 4000 will post? I've tried up to 1.45v and maybe it got to bios for a split second and then froze.


Depending on bios version vddq needs to be set correctly or still wont boot for me on DR b die. I can not just set sa in my testing on Strix d4(on earlier bios version like 707 as example) vddq also need to be set correctl and can be very picky and needs tesing many different setting to find one to boot.. The latter bios are the most for giving and I can boot leaving them on auot which is 1.35 on my setup..

On older bios 1.45sa and 1.55 vddq is a good start to find if you IMC can even boot DR b die at 4000 to 4266.


----------



## m4ck

Updated results Any suggestions? I can run 1T for 3 hours TM5 but the game I'm currently maining Escape from Tarkov Doesn't like it and crashes. I've just adjusted mainly the primaries. I can also run cl14 16 16 34 stable but it need to much Dram. I've had issues going up to 4100 but maybe I'll now that I havea stable overclock.

Dram 1.48V
SA 1.25
VDDQ 1.3


----------



## bscool

@m4ck enable round trip latency or on RTL section set to dynamic should do the same thing. You will know it is enabled when rtls are within 2 of each other. A lot of you subtimings could go tighter if you want.

But for 4x8 that is great. Few can run 4x8 that high. I can only do 3733 with 4x8 b die. You could try my subtimings you should be able to use something similar.


----------



## truehighroller1

geriatricpollywog said:


> What kit do you have and have you run Firestrike/Time Spy or SoTR?



I'm pushing the timings as tight as possible then I'll oc the CPU then I'll run some test and post them up.


----------



## MikeS3000

Larkonian said:


> I don't think it's as simple as safe or not safe, more like more safe or less safe. I think 1.45v is definitely into the "less safe" area.
> 
> If you can't boot consistently at 1.4v I wouldn't bother pursuing it further.


Yeah, it's like a hard wall after 3900 gear 1. I'm nice and stable at 1.35v SA and then it doesn't seem like more SA voltage is really even helping at all to push beyond 3900.

Next question since I like to tinker. I have my 4x8 gb Hynix DJR G.skill Trident Z Neo about as tight of timings as it will go. I bought identical kits about a year apart and spent $235 total before tax. Is it worth selling the 4 sticks and then buying 2x16 gb b-die probably at DDR 3600 CL 16 or 14? I live fairly close to a Micro Center and they have these two kits in stock:
2x16 RipJaws

2x16 Trident Z Neo


----------



## truehighroller1

Alright now I'm going to OC the CPU.


----------



## Gsen999

warbucks said:


> This is where I've landed so far with my Strix D4 and G.Skill 4000Cl14 kit. Still a few things I can tighten but now that I've gotten some DDR5, I'm switching my main rig over to the APEX and will move this to the test bench.
> 
> View attachment 2539883
> View attachment 2539884


You on custom loop?


----------



## warbucks

Gsen999 said:


> You on custom loop?


I am. Running Optimus Signature v2 and two 360mm x 60mm rads.


----------



## weyden

Tradition said:


> that sounds about right the new 12 gen has a higher latency
> im using 3900cl15 and i get 52ns


Qual placa mãe voce tem?
Poderia compartilhar seus timings de 4800mhz mais quanto vc usar de SA,VDDQ,dram-voltage?

ps: Escrevi em portugues porque vi que voce é do Brasil Também!


----------



## robertr1

m4ck said:


> Updated results Any suggestions? I can run 1T for 3 hours TM5 but the game I'm currently maining Escape from Tarkov Doesn't like it and crashes. I've just adjusted mainly the primaries. I can also run cl14 16 16 34 stable but it need to much Dram. I've had issues going up to 4100 but maybe I'll now that I havea stable overclock.
> 
> Dram 1.48V
> SA 1.25
> VDDQ 1.3
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2539922


We are finding that current iterations of tm5 are not as effective as before. Easier to pass and then as you experienced, you crash in games.

A lot of us switched to Y cruncher and occt large avx2 extreme.

y cruncher 2.5b is a good initial test. Run it a few times. Then finish occt large avx2 extreme for an hr. 30 is fine for quick testing as well.

Now both of these are not a joke so you might be disappointed you can’t hit the same levels as before but you will be rock stable.


----------



## Cam1

MikeS3000 said:


> Yeah, it's like a hard wall after 3900 gear 1. I'm nice and stable at 1.35v SA and then it doesn't seem like more SA voltage is really even helping at all to push beyond 3900.
> 
> Next question since I like to tinker. I have my 4x8 gb Hynix DJR G.skill Trident Z Neo about as tight of timings as it will go. I bought identical kits about a year apart and spent $235 total before tax. Is it worth selling the 4 sticks and then buying 2x16 gb b-die probably at DDR 3600 CL 16 or 14? I live fairly close to a Micro Center and they have these two kits in stock:
> 2x16 RipJaws
> 
> 2x16 Trident Z Neo


What Z690 motherboard are you using ?


----------



## bass junkie xl

warbucks said:


> This is where I've landed so far with my Strix D4 and G.Skill 4000Cl14 kit. Still a few things I can tighten but now that I've gotten some DDR5, I'm switching my main rig over to the APEX and will move this to the test bench.
> 
> View attachment 2539883
> View attachment 2539884



hey bud where can i get msi dragon ball ? as asus mem tweak it doesnt work and asrock timing configurator doesnt show all the mem settings like ppd txp ect . ? could u send me a link thank you and merry x mas / happy new year


----------



## truehighroller1

Alright best result 4600Mhz memory gear 2. Despite my score being lower than my top score on this setup " not much, like 80 points " that's the best result I've had cpu score wise with this cpu.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 video card benchmark result - Intel Core i9-12900K Processor,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 (3dmark.com)

Diving into Gear 1


----------



## warbucks

bass junkie xl said:


> hey bud where can i get msi dragon ball ? as asus mem tweak it doesnt work and asrock timing configurator doesnt show all the mem settings like ppd txp ect . ? could u send me a link thank you and merry x mas / happy new year


Check the first post of this thread. Has links to all of them.


----------



## bass junkie xl

warbucks said:


> Check the first post of this thread. Has links to all of them.


face palm .... thank you !! 
asus mem tweak it work from page 1 of tools omg i havent had this work since 2020 !!!! 

hello PPD=0 here i come 

happy holidays


----------



## grey.clock

BIG thank you to *BSCOOL *


He walked me through getting everything tied down. In the end, Armory Crate had to go and I am finally sitting in the 40's on my daily PC without having to reformat or do anything crazy. I could probably go higher on everything if my IMC held up but 4000 starts to get unstable for my setup without single rank DDR4. It completed 6 cycles of anta extreme in testmem5 yesterday with the same settings I am including below. I will get around to editing the cfg for testmem5 to get the fabled 8 rounds while I sleep tonight... but I am pretty certain things are stable from how things are running so far. 

Asus z690 TUF
12700K
Oloy cl14 3600 2x16 (DR, mystery samsung die of some sort) ND4U1636144BRADE 
VDDQ @ auto
DRAM @ 1.45v
SA @ auto


----------



## truehighroller1

New Record for me here in cr23.


----------



## Cam1

Does anyone has reached more than 3900 Gear 1 stable with the Tuf + 12700K ? 

I think this combo just need a bios update since i saw many 12700K with strix or 12900K with Tuf getting 4000+ Gear 1

Always blaming imc capability looks not legit
Let's me know if i'm wrong


----------



## bscool

Cam1 said:


> Does anyone has reached more than 3900 Gear 1 stable with the Tuf + 12700K ?
> 
> I think this combo just need a bios update since i saw many 12700K with strix or 12900K with Tuf getting 4000+ Gear 1
> 
> Always blaming imc capability looks not legit
> Let's me know if i'm wrong


I would put my $$ on IMC. But who knows, I have been wrong about many things I thought I knew


----------



## Cam1

bscool said:


> I would put my $$ on IMC. But who knows, I have been wrong about many things I thought I knew


How much $ are we talking about ?  

Srlsy ! Show me one guy that get 4000+ Gear 1 stable with 12700K + Tuf combo !


----------



## truehighroller1

Beat my last score with the 4600 not much but still, color me surprised.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 video card benchmark result - Intel Core i9-12900K Processor,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 (3dmark.com)


----------



## bscool

@Cam1 Actuall @geriatricpollywog ran 4100 on Tuf with DR be die. Should have put money on it 









Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion


Would it be stupid to go from a 10900K at 5.2ghz all core to a 12600K? I wanted to wait for a bit but most of my games are still single core bound and I could pretty much swap for no cost with a 300$ 12600 and an MSI DDR4 board. Not really doing much multicore work. 12700K is the best choice...




www.overclock.net


----------



## pauldgroot

12700KF
Gigabyte Z690 Aorus Elite
32GB Crucial Ballistix 3600C16 BL2K8G36C16U4B (single rank Micron rev E, 4x8GB)
Disabled E-cores and raised uncore to 48x

First time overclocking ram, so if I can make some improvements then please let me know. I can't get anything over 3900MHz gear 1 to boot currently, don't know if it's my cpu or the bios. Gigabyte's bios is still a mess for me, I can't change voltage settings for vcore it seems and many ram timings don't stick like tWR or RTL settings.


----------



## bass junkie xl

in this picture my mouse is on TPPD is that power down mode for the latency boost.?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> @Cam1 Actuall @geriatricpollywog ran 4100 on Tuf with DR be die. Should have put money on it
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion
> 
> 
> Would it be stupid to go from a 10900K at 5.2ghz all core to a 12600K? I wanted to wait for a bit but most of my games are still single core bound and I could pretty much swap for no cost with a 300$ 12600 and an MSI DDR4 board. Not really doing much multicore work. 12700K is the best choice...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Yes, and it was with an SP68 12700K. I think I shared the 200% HCI Memtest. There was no difference in memory overclocking between 12700k and both 12900k I tested. I am using a binned 4000c14 DR kit.


----------



## grey.clock

bscool said:


> I would put my $$ on IMC. But who knows, I have been wrong about many things I thought I knew


Even my i5 easily did 4000mhz @t1/g1 with single rank RAM..... DR is just too much for the i5/i7 IMC imo..... Premium Trident Z Royal Elite 4400mhz $400 sticks that I sent back could not handle 4000mhz stable so they went back a few weeks ago. I feel bad for how many kits I went through but there was just no point keeping them if I was not going to jump to a i9. I have a better understanding for what I am buying now so hopefully I wont do this again next gen 

Edit: just saw the post above mine. Wonder what would be going on then? Perhaps with more voltage it would have ran since I always leave everything but the DRAM on auto.


----------



## bscool

@bass junkie xl ppd, I would like to see a test that verifiably shows the difference. I have tested and didnt see a difference. Maybe something like Intel Memory Latency checker can see it but Aidia64 cannot show it.

I know it had no effect on z590 with an 11th gen cpu. A lot of setting look like the do something but in testing I see no difference. Older gens you could see a couple ns decrease from ppd on or off.

When @safedisk shares a cmo he doesnt touch ppd, that should tell you something. Do you really think he doesnt know what setting do anything or not? He doesnt touch txp either. I wonder why?

Maybe he doesnt want to share his secrets


----------



## Cam1

could


geriatricpollywog said:


> Yes, and it was with an SP68 12700K. I think I shared the 200% HCI Memtest. There was no difference in memory overclocking between 12700k and both 12900k I tested. I am using a binned 4000c14 DR kit.


So you are the only person that can run 4000+ Gear 1 memory with 12700K + Tuf ?

Would you mind sharing the Bios settings you are using to get this stable ?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Cam1 said:


> could
> 
> 
> So you are the only person that can run 4000+ Gear 1 memory with 12700K + Tuf ?
> 
> Would you mind sharing the Bios settings you are using to get this stable ?


I switched to a Strix D4 and 12900k so I don’t have the exact hardware anymore. I shared the timings like a month ago. I could probably have done 4133 or more.


----------



## Cam1

It feels very strange that only one person can archive 4000+ with this combo.
Any 12700K + Tuf owners are walled at 3900 gear 1.
but 12700K + strix owners can do easily 4133


----------



## bscool

Cam1 said:


> It feels very strange that only one person can archive 4000+ with this combo.
> Any 12700K + Tuf owners are walled at 3900 gear 1.
> but 12700K + strix owners can do easily 4133


Ill put money on if you cannot run 4000+ on 707 on tuff you never will. 😁 with sr or dr b die gear 1


----------



## Cam1

geriatricpollywog said:


> My Asus Tuf Gaming Z690-Plus WIFI D4 is borderline unusable. My Gskill 4000c14 dual rank kit can’t post at any speed other than JDEC, even with the 0707 bios. This kit posts at 4040c14 Gear 1 on my ASRock Z690 OC Formula. I will be returning this board tomorrow for anything but Asus.
> 
> Edit: Put DIMMs in b-slots and it works fine at 4133 15-15-15


DIMMs in b-slots what do you mean ? Ram must be plugged in A-2 and B-2 no ?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Cam1 said:


> DIMMs in b-slots what do you mean ? Ram must be plugged in A-2 and B-2 no ?


I was running the dimms in the inside slots. Disregard that post.


----------



## bscool

@Cam1 I know you want to believe it is a bios update but there are 12600ks running 4000+ on tuf also.

Did you try bios 707? With 707 you may need sa around 1.45v and vddq 1.55 with DR. SR can be lower.

Edit added pic link 12600k 4000c15-15-15 2x16



https://d1ebmxcfh8bf9c.cloudfront.net/u505773/image_id_2606030.jpg


----------



## MikeS3000

Cam1 said:


> What Z690 motherboard are you using ?


Strix-A D4


----------



## playsin

12600K
ASUS PRIME Z690M-PLUS D4

overclock
CPU : P50/E40/C43
RAM : 32G(16X2) 4200 CL15


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------





































----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


BIOS SETING


----------



## kl0nk

Hi! running 12900k with strix z690-a d4.
Any idea why I can run 15 17 14 35 fully stable but if I increase CL to 16 17 14 35 it doesn't boot?
(running 4133, wanted to try 4266 that's why I tried cl 16 on 4133 first)
[edit] 1.55vdimm, 1.44sa, 1.5ddq, havn't tried lowering them yet


----------



## bscool

kl0nk said:


> Hi! running 12900k with strix z690-a d4.
> Any idea why I can run 15 17 14 35 fully stable but if I increase CL to 16 17 14 35 it doesn't boot?
> (running 4133, wanted to try 4266 that's why I tried cl 16 on 4133 first)
> [edit] 1.55vdimm, 1.44sa, 1.5ddq, havn't tried lowering them yet


What bios version are you using and what model is your memory?


----------



## kl0nk

bscool said:


> What bios version are you using and what model is your memory?


707
2x16 Tridentz neo 3600 14 15 15 35 1.45v
F4-3600C14D-32GTZN


----------



## GtiJason

Saw a few guys talking about power down mode settings such as tXP and PPD as I've been reading through some datasheets and you may find these pics I put together from the Mem related sections in Vol 1 and 2


----------



## bscool

kl0nk said:


> 707
> 2x16 Tridentz neo 3600 14 15 15 35 1.45v
> F4-3600C14D-32GTZN


Some of the bios version had a bug like you described where say 4000c15 worked but 4000c16 wouldn't boot. I don't remember the version because I have tested too many bios and memory configs the last week or so. 

For DR B die 808 I could run 4266c16 but overall bios 901 has been the best for me on DR b die. 4133c15-15-15 with low sa/vddq. 42-43ns latency using adia64. 

I have screenshot posted in the thread of most bioses i have tested.









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


I was doing some last minute Christmas shopping at BestBuy yesterday stumbled across a 12900k. Checked the Batch saw that it was made in Vietnam decided to pull the trigger. I was really unimpressed with my old one pretty sure it had a bad IC would not boot past 3800 with this kit. Old CPU...




www.overclock.net













ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


is there a newer "beta" bios out for this board newer then the 0807 on the site?




www.overclock.net


----------



## kl0nk

bscool said:


> Some of the bios version had a bug like you described where say 4000c15 worked but 4000c16 wouldn't boot. I don't remember the version because I have tested too many bios and memory configs the last week or so.
> 
> For DR B die 808 I could run 4266c16 but overall bios 901 has been the best for me on DR b die. 4133c15-15-15 with low sa/vddq. 42-43ns latency using adia64.
> 
> I have screenshot posted in the thread of most bioses i have tested.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> 
> I was doing some last minute Christmas shopping at BestBuy yesterday stumbled across a 12900k. Checked the Batch saw that it was made in Vietnam decided to pull the trigger. I was really unimpressed with my old one pretty sure it had a bad IC would not boot past 3800 with this kit. Old CPU...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> is there a newer "beta" bios out for this board newer then the 0807 on the site?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Thanks, sounds good! Just wanted to make sure it wasn't me who made some common mistake


----------



## Tradition

weyden said:


> Qual placa mãe voce tem?
> Poderia compartilhar seus timings de 4800mhz mais quanto vc usar de SA,VDDQ,dram-voltage?
> 
> ps: Escrevi em portugues porque vi que voce é do Brasil Também!


opa tudo certo 
uso uma z690m plus d4 
1.5v dram 
1.35v SA 
1.35v VDDQ 
os timings eu so ajustei os padrao e trfc pra 650 e tfaw pra 24
pq com gear 2 nao rende legal pra jogo entao foi mais pra testar msm


----------



## bartomedia

I have been testing ASUS XMP1 settings with bios 0812 using my Crucial Ballistix BL16G36C16U4WL.M16FE kit, this is a dual rank 3600mhz CL16 16-18-18-32 2x16mb.
I have been trying to overclock this kit to 4000 CL16 and while passing many tests when I reboot I got bad retraining and pretty much instant fail.
Anyway so now I am starting from scratch on XMP1 and undervolting as much as possible to stable limits, ASUS default XMP1 voltage settings on SA is 1.35v and Tx VDDQ 1.35v DRAM is 1.35v, I have managed to get this all down to SA is 1.0v and Tx VDDQ 1.2v DRAM is 1.293v, if I went any lower on the DRAM voltage the board would fail training RTLs, it would fail below 1.3v t train them correctly, so with entering my own ODT values training RTLs once again was correct and completely game and test stable. This is now great news for and ideal ground for working my way up on voltages and retargeting 4000cl16.
All testing was done on stock CPU but this leaves a question on why ASUS feels it necessary to add so much additional voltage on SA and Tx VDDQ as this for me and so many other users believe we need to add more voltage rather than less on the suggested values, anyway I am sure there is good reason as no two RAM sticks are the same, I suggest everyone to begin clocking up RAM from the very bottom, also try and find the correct ODT settings for your RAM helps a great deal in keeping your voltage lower.


----------



## reimar.suenkel

First try with 1,6V


----------



## ObviousCough

The SP of my 12600k is 62. I wonder if that has anything to do with not being able to run anything decent with 4x8 or 2x16. 




It's not doing so hot with DDR5 either.


----------



## truehighroller1

reimar.suenkel said:


> First try with 1,6V
> View attachment 2540064



I might try this myself. Can you post your other settings? Perhaps snapshot your odt settings using the inteltool memory timings section of the tool too? I noticed my odt timings changed significantly for my 4600mhz.


----------



## Agent-A01

Cam1 said:


> It feels very strange that only one person can archive 4000+ with this combo.
> Any 12700K + Tuf owners are walled at 3900 gear 1.
> but 12700K + strix owners can do easily 4133


I was able to run C14-15-15 Gear 1 4000MT/s on TUF with a 12700K on 707 bios. Other bios were impossible


----------



## Cam1

Agent-A01 said:


> I was able to run C14-15-15 Gear 1 4000MT/s on TUF with a 12700K on 707 bios. Other bios were impossible


Using A-2 and B-2 DIMM Slots ?
With a 12700K ? I see you have a 12900k
0707 bios could do it while the newest 0807 can't ?
What settings do you change to archive this miracle then ?


----------



## attentionharlot

since pretty much nobody runs asrock board and most people here are running B die, some findings with asrock z690 extreme and dr 2x16 rev. E (kit is crucial 3000mhz 15-16-16). 12600KF

dram 1.5V, vccsa 1.4V
vddtq/imc voltage is default 1.2, changing it seems to do nothing.

still testing cl15 but otherwise cl16, and pic related is stable so far (using linpack, memtest, occt memory stress). gear1. (edit CR2, board ignores completely if i set cr1)

i was able to get to 4100mhz g1 which needs more voltage, not stable at all yet . will be trying to find stable settings for 3900-4000 once i finish more stability testing on what i have now, doubt i'll be able without some not-daily voltages. it also didn't post from cold boot. can't get gear 2 to boot with anything that isn't stable from cold boot. i guess i need to look into ODT or RTL for higher frequencies and cold boot post but i have no idea how that works yet and can't copy anyone since pretty much nobody runs this motherboard and ram combination.


----------



## LionAlonso

attentionharlot said:


> since pretty much nobody runs asrock board and most people here are running B die, some findings with asrock z690 extreme and dr 2x16 rev. E (kit is crucial 3000mhz 15-16-16). 12600KF
> 
> dram 1.5V, vccsa 1.4V
> vcctq/imc voltage is default 1.2, changing it seems to do nothing.
> 
> still testing cl15 but otherwise cl16, and pic related is stable so far (using linpack, memtest, occt memory stress). gear1.
> 
> i was able to get to 4100mhz g1 which needs more voltage, not stable at all yet though. will be trying to find stable settings for 3900-4000 once what i finish more stability testing on what i have now, though i doubt i'll be able without some not-daily voltages. it also didn't post from cold boot. can't get gear 2 to boot with anything that isn't stable from cold boot. i guess i need to look into ODT or RTL for higher frequencies and cold boot post but i have no idea how that works yet and can't copy anyone since pretty much nobody runs this motherboard and ram combination.
> 
> View attachment 2540088


Well i have to say that those results are good for that terrible motherboard.
Atleast in my country its priced the same or even more than msi pro.
Seems like a no brain decision for me


----------



## attentionharlot

LionAlonso said:


> Well i have to say that those results are good for that terrible motherboard.
> Atleast in my country its priced the same or even more than msi pro.
> Seems like a no brain decision for me


here it's more expensive than msi PRO, similar price or slightly more expensive as aorus elite, cheaper than the TUF that a lot of people have though that one seems to be worse in almost every way to me. but yea nothing beats the msi pro value wise, no question about that


----------



## Frozburn

attentionharlot said:


> here it's more expensive than msi PRO, similar price or slightly more expensive as aorus elite, cheaper than the TUF that a lot of people have though that one seems to be worse in almost every way to me. but yea nothing beats the msi pro value wise, no question about that


I was looking at the asus strix d4, here it's double the price (even more), the msi pro cost me 190 eur and runs DR at 4000 CL 14 14 14 28 1.130 SA, 1.58 DRAM stable. I am trying to stabilize 4133 now at the same CL but still using the stock bios, will have to test the other ones soon.


----------



## LionAlonso

Frozburn said:


> I was looking at the asus strix d4, here it's double the price (even more), the msi pro cost me 190 eur and runs DR at 4000 CL 14 14 14 28 1.130 SA, 1.58 DRAM stable. I am trying to stabilize 4133 now at the same CL but still using the stock bios, will have to test the other ones soon.


That low SA? For gear 1 right? Also whats the vddq?


----------



## Frozburn

LionAlonso said:


> That low SA? For gear 1 right? Also whats the vddq?


 Gear 1. VDDQ is auto which is always 1.2 for me, haven't tried lowering it. Yes it's anta777 extreme stable 8 hours, haven't bothered with more yet. Aida latency is 41.7 lowest. Sub timings aren't very tight, need to work on that but not much experience with it. Been gaming lately, will try more ram tuning soon. The aida picture is with non tuned subtimings, the SOTR benchmark picture is with some random subtiming tuning but idk what I'm doing there so it's a work in progress. The copy with the tuned subtimings goes to 70k or so MB/s. This is some old picture at 32, I run it at 28 now but it's not like it makes a big difference anyway, just thought I'd leave it at 28.



















I also tried 4300 CL 16 G1 CR2 on some old G.skill 3600 CL 17 18 18 18 but it gives me some errors eventually. Probably need a better kit for those speeds but don't have any SR around except this. Might try it with a Patriot Viper 4400, it's only 100 EUR.


----------



## Agent-A01

Cam1 said:


> Using A-2 and B-2 DIMM Slots ?
> With a 12700K ? I see you have a 12900k
> 0707 bios could do it while the newest 0807 can't ?
> What settings do you change to archive this miracle then ?


Yes 12700K A-2 and B-2 slots.
No miracle settings on 0707. Last BIOS i tried with 12700K was probably 803


----------



## bscool

@Cam1 Another 12700k and z690 tuf I just saw DR b die 4100 gear 1 bios 808

He shows his timings and voltages.









[Sammelthread] - OC Prozessoren Intel Sockel 1700 (Alder Lake-S & Raptor Lake-S)


Ich warte auf die Parts von WC für den HK IV noch bis morgen, dann montiere ich halt den Noctua wenn der Kram nicht ankommt. :grrr:




www.hardwareluxx.de


----------



## HvacGuru

My DR showed up today. Just started playing with them. My SR would never do this..same board and the same cpu.


----------



## Skunk0001

Some new MSI beta BIOS dropped:





Beta/MP - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## JoeRambo

Skunk0001 said:


> Some new MSI beta BIOS dropped:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beta/MP - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


I have tested the Edge with 121 BIOS yesterday and it seems they are progressing with DR ram. Board was able to post 3866 without punching in manual ODT and PRE values like previuos BIOS'es required. 3900/4000 still won't boot no matter what.


----------



## ogider

2x16 DR 3200c14

4133 Gear 1 CR2
P50 E40 cache 42
SA 1.365
ddr4 1.6V
vddq 1.25


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> @Cam1 Another 12700k and z690 tuf I just saw DR b die 4100 gear 1 bios 808
> 
> He shows his timings and voltages.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Sammelthread] - OC Prozessoren Intel Sockel 1700 (Alder Lake-S & Raptor Lake-S)
> 
> 
> Ich warte auf die Parts von WC für den HK IV noch bis morgen, dann montiere ich halt den Noctua wenn der Kram nicht ankommt. :grrr:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hardwareluxx.de


I'll try to find a good 2x16gb b-die to try on my tuf+12700k. I'm also at the 3900mhz wall with 2x8 bdie.
Any suggestions? Can't find any good 2x16gb at decent prices.


----------



## drkrffxx

New here.

12700k + Asus TUF 0807 + 2x8 SR Patriot 4400 BDIE.

4000 G1 ****s the bed. At any timing, loose, tight, it don't matter. If it starts, bios enters in panic.
3900 G1 Boots, shows errors on stress tests.
3800 G1 Works flawlessly aparently at 15-15-15-36


----------



## LionAlonso

drkrffxx said:


> New here.
> 
> 12700k + Asus TUF 0807 + 2x8 SR Patriot 4400 BDIE.
> 
> 4000 G1 ****s the bed. At any timing, loose, tight, it don't matter. If it starts, bios enters in panic.
> 3900 G1 Boots, shows errors on stress tests.
> 3800 G1 Works flawlessly aparently at 15-15-15-36


12700k has worse IMC than 12900k
I guess it is up to silicon lottery
Im stable at 1.2 SA 1.25 VDDQ at 4000Mhz gear 1


----------



## drkrffxx

LionAlonso said:


> 12700k has worse IMC than 12900k
> I guess it is up to silicon lottery
> Im stable at 1.2 SA 1.25 VDDQ at 4000Mhz gear 1


I'm at 1.35v SA. 1.2v passes memory tests, but OCCT show CPU errors. 

I haven't really tweaked VDDQ, it's on auto.


----------



## LionAlonso

drkrffxx said:


> I'm at 1.35v SA. 1.2v passes memory tests, but OCCT show CPU errors.
> 
> I haven't really tweaked VDDQ, it's on auto.


Its ur cpu at stock?
for me SA didnt change anything at OCCT.
What test are u running?
Could be VCore or ac dc instability.
Auto VDDQ its 1.35 in tuf


----------



## drkrffxx

LionAlonso said:


> Its ur cpu at stock?
> for me SA didnt change anything at OCCT.
> What test are u running?
> Could be VCore or ac dc instability.
> Auto VDDQ its 1.35 in tuf


Memtest and Testmem5

CPU is at 4.8 Ghz all core, 4.3 Ghz uncore ratio, 3.8 Ghz ecores. 1.27v vcore LLC5

OCCT shows no errors with ram at loose timings, and is prone to show errors with low SA voltages, or too tight tRAS timing. It's odd.


----------



## LionAlonso

drkrffxx said:


> Memtest and Testmem5
> 
> CPU is at 4.8 Ghz all core, 4.3 Ghz uncore ratio, 3.8 Ghz ecores. 1.27v vcore LLC5
> 
> OCCT shows no errors with ram at loose timings, and is prone to show errors with low SA voltages, or too tight tRAS timing. It's odd.


But OCCT dram test? Avx or Sse? 
Thought u were talking about the cpu one.
i have not experienced that with my 12900k, homewer havent oc the cache.
Maybe it has something to do


----------



## drkrffxx

LionAlonso said:


> But OCCT dram test? Avx or Sse?
> Thought u were talking about the cpu one.
> i have not experienced that with my 12900k, homewer havent oc the cache.
> Maybe it has something to do


CPU test, sorry.


----------



## LionAlonso

drkrffxx said:


> CPU test, sorry.


Most likely because cache so.
Maybe SA has something to do with it.
Also cache OC with ecores on has strange behaviour


----------



## bscool

shrimpmaster said:


> I'll try to find a good 2x16gb b-die to try on my tuf+12700k. I'm also at the 3900mhz wall with 2x8 bdie.
> Any suggestions? Can't find any good 2x16gb at decent prices.


That is probably all your IMC can do. Even some people with 12900k can barely run 4000. For cheap b die. 3200c14 are usually the cheapest and should still run 4000c16-16-16- to [email protected] or less Might do [email protected] depends on lotto/luck.


----------



## HvacGuru

2 rigs with 12900k's and 4000 mhz DR ram. Same kit is in both rigs with the same ram overclock as seen in pic. Why the difference in L2, L3 Cache? Latency is in margin of error for both imho. Both cpu's are at stock clocks just for this test. I even used the same version on Aida64 and same Bios. Edit.. Seen NB Clock was different, but corrected with the same result?


----------



## bscool

@HvacGuru Did you run it multiple times to compare? Aida can vary quite a from run to run. I even used Intel Latency Checker recently as I heard it is more accurate and even it varies from run to run and reboot to reboot.

Also something could in Windows could have been running in the back ground. If you tested multiple times and after rebooting then I have no idea.

Also found out I had ran all kinds of mem and cpu stress test and no issues. Last night I fired up CSGO for the first time since getting 12th gen and insta crash to desktop when actual game starts.

Needed to set static v core with manual OC or set cpu oc back to defaults(was using it with auto vcore and llc auto with manual CPU OC) and works. Y cruncher, no problems, cb20, cb23m Realbench etc. But csgo and boom. But working now with 52 p, 40 e, cache auto 1.36vcore llc6. I havent messed with setting them lower just wanted to play a game.


----------



## HvacGuru

bscool said:


> @HvacGuru Did you run it multiple times to compare? Aida can vary quite a from run to run. I even used Intel Latency Checker recently as I heard it is more accurate and even it varies from run to run and reboot to reboot.
> 
> Also something could in Windows could have been running in the back ground. If you tested multiple times and after rebooting then I have no idea.
> 
> Also found out I had ran all kinds of mem and cpu stress test and no issues. Last night I fired up CSGO for the first time since getting 12th gen and insta crash to desktop when actual game starts.
> 
> Needed to set static v core with manual OC or set cpu oc back to defaults(was using it with auto vcore and llc auto with manual CPU OC) and works. Y cruncher, no problems, cb20, cb23m Realbench etc. But csgo and boom. But working now with 52 p, 40 e, cache auto 1.36vcore llc6. I havent messed with setting them lower just wanted to play a game.


Turned out the one with Windows 11 "with the low Cache" wasn't stable at the same voltage 1.57. Sad part it's the one I have my 3080Ti in. It has the a SP 90 vs 85 cpu. If I get time this weekend I will switch out the sticks and post the results. Need a new winter hobby!


----------



## bartomedia

That's why I do all my stability testing when my miner is fired up only, I can pass all sorts of tam test for hours, as soon as the GPU is pumping out 70c+ the stable ram seems to drop out in seconds.
Try just a few bumps up on dram voltage first which can help a great deal before messing with the other voltages.


----------



## LionAlonso

bartomedia said:


> That's why I do all my stability testing when my miner is fired up only, I can pass all sorts of tam test for hours, as soon as the GPU is pumping out 70c+ the stable ram seems to drop out in seconds.
> Try just a few bumps up on dram voltage first which can help a great deal before messing with the other voltages.


More voltage in Bios also helps to manage more heat in the DIMMS?


----------



## bartomedia

LionAlonso said:


> More voltage in Bios also helps to manage more heat in the DIMMS?


Applying more voltage increases signal integrity where it is just about borderline stable in the right test conditions. Firing up a 300w+ GPU that ramps up and down draws alot of current, almost 100 times more than the ram which creates a lot of signal noise and interference in the whole system, it's important to be methodical when diagnosing the trigger of the failure because it really is a needle in a haystack otherwise. How quick and fast something fails or if its progressively longer is usually a good indicator to where to start trying to correct the problem.


----------



## marjanoos

Two days ago I put new sticks to my mb (Patriot Viper Steel 4400 CL19). I'm little bit confused about RTL values. Is it okay to have 25/71 25/73? I've seen rather equal values like 71/71 73/73 in other user's screenshots. What does it indicate?


----------



## Tradition

drkrffxx said:


> Memtest and Testmem5
> 
> CPU is at 4.8 Ghz all core, 4.3 Ghz uncore ratio, 3.8 Ghz ecores. 1.27v vcore LLC5
> 
> OCCT shows no errors with ram at loose timings, and is prone to show errors with low SA voltages, or too tight tRAS timing. It's odd.


lowe your uncore if i go to 43 i get all king of weird errors 
at 42 smooth as silk


----------



## Tradition

marjanoos said:


> Two days ago I put new sticks to my mb (Patriot Viper Steel 4400 CL19). I'm little bit confused about RTL values. Is it okay to have 25/71 25/73? I've seen rather equal values like 71/71 73/73 in other user's screenshots. What does it indicate?
> 
> View attachment 2540325


Its normal its because they are single sided dimms and you only have 1 per channel you can try set the 73 to 71 also 
i did in mine and go 0.5ns less in aida


----------



## robertr1

Pretty much maxed out at this point without some more Bios support for better 1T and higher frequency from Asus. Overall, great platform and the board/bios has behaved as expected so overall a good experience.


----------



## truehighroller1

robertr1 said:


> Pretty much maxed out at this point without some more Bios support for better 1T and higher frequency from Asus. Overall, great platform and the board/bios has behaved as expected so overall a good experience.



If you open up asus memtweakit is you twr actually at 15? I've noticed asrock reads mine +1 what it actually is.


----------



## ceevee

Nice to see ASUS Z690M from @playsin . It's the only microATX board I can get so far, paired with 12700K (no CPU OC).

I have the same PRIME Z690M-PLUS D4 board (BIOS 0605) with 2 kits of F4-3600C16D-16GVK (4x8 @ 3600 16-16-16-36). I know the ASUS support page only states support in socket 1,2 (i.e. not all 4 slots). I cannot pass Karhu and TM5 with XMP profile or manual using XMP speeds/timings in Gear 1.

I ended up having to tune down to 4x8 @ 3200 14-14-14-34 Gear 1. DRAM @ 1.45, VCCSA @ 1.3, and VDDQ @ 1.35 (needed to pass POST after rebooting). Karhu 6400% and TM5 anta pass.

I would welcome any tips to get XMP speed/timing running, knowing that 4x8 is difficult.

EDIT: I was able to get 4x8 @ XMP, Gear 1 running with F4-3600C16D-16GVK by using the following settings. Passed Karhu 6400% and TM5 anta777 3 cycles:

AI overclock tuner: XMP I
All other settings Auto
Do not raise DRAM voltage beyond what is set by XMP, which is 1.35. I've run this B die at 1.45v on a Z490M board, but this was causing errors in Karhu with Z690M. Same case, same cooling
Set VDDQ to 1.45


----------



## truehighroller1

robertr1 said:


> Pretty much maxed out at this point without some more Bios support for better 1T and higher frequency from Asus. Overall, great platform and the board/bios has behaved as expected so overall a good experience.



This is what I'm talking about by saying it reading incorrectly.


----------



## robertr1

truehighroller1 said:


> This is what I'm talking about by saying it reading incorrectly.
> 
> View attachment 2540356


it’s a bug in memtweakit


----------



## truehighroller1

robertr1 said:


> it’s a bug in memtweakit



Well **** that means I might have found my instability issues. I've been basing my tweaks off of a bug....


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> @HvacGuru Did you run it multiple times to compare? Aida can vary quite a from run to run. I even used Intel Latency Checker recently as I heard it is more accurate and even it varies from run to run and reboot to reboot.
> 
> Also something could in Windows could have been running in the back ground. If you tested multiple times and after rebooting then I have no idea.
> 
> Also found out I had ran all kinds of mem and cpu stress test and no issues. Last night I fired up CSGO for the first time since getting 12th gen and insta crash to desktop when actual game starts.
> 
> Needed to set static v core with manual OC or set cpu oc back to defaults(was using it with auto vcore and llc auto with manual CPU OC) and works. Y cruncher, no problems, cb20, cb23m Realbench etc. But csgo and boom. But working now with 52 p, 40 e, cache auto 1.36vcore llc6. I havent messed with setting them lower just wanted to play a game.



I find this interesting. The issue I had last night was that I was playing warzone with my brothers for at least 2 hours then I started getting crashes to desktop, randomly at first. As I kept playing after checking temperatures voltages on memory sticks and everything else including trying to tweak a few voltages and everything seeming okay the crashes got more and more frequent to the point the game would no longer launch. Went back to stock everything and could play fine again..


----------



## LionAlonso

truehighroller1 said:


> Well **** that means I might have found my instability issues. I've been basing my tweaks off of a bug....


Anyways TWR at 24 is crazy high…
Shouldnt give you problems….
Edit: and looking further all ur secondary timings and thertiary are very loose.
Shouldnt be a problem at all…


----------



## truehighroller1

LionAlonso said:


> Anyways TWR at 24 is crazy high…
> Shouldnt give you problems….
> Edit: and looking further all ur secondary timings and thertiary are very loose.
> Shouldnt be a problem at all…


This is where I am right now with progress and testing the entire time with testmem5 the entire way to catch any issues with timings as well. I've noticed my tertiary's don't like being touched to much. My tRFC did not like going down to 380 so I turned it up to 460 and could pass and just left it there. I'm going to go lower tWRT L and S now and tRTP as well and retest. Then I'll try to lower tCWL one spot.


----------



## bscool

robertr1 said:


> it’s a bug in memtweakit


Or a bug/difference in Asrock timing config  been like that since z370, 390,490,590 etc. They read and calculated them differently. Also different vendors MB will give different readings. It depends also how it is calculated in bios. MSI vs Asus for example.


----------



## Tradition

truehighroller1 said:


> This is where I am right now with progress and testing the entire time with testmem5 the entire way to catch any issues with timings as well. I've noticed my tertiary's don't like being touched to much. My tRFC did not like going down to 380 so I turned it up to 460 and could pass and just left it there. I'm going to go lower tWRT L and S now and tRTP as well and retest. Then I'll try to lower tCWL one spot.
> 
> View attachment 2540372


You should be able to do alot better Im using micron e-die and my speeds are higher at 3900 than yours at 4133
make sure you increse the uncore to 42 43


----------



## jayfkay

Sorry for stupid question but which is the best bios for Z690-A right now?
Also it was just announced future bios will remove avx-512 support


----------



## robertr1

bscool said:


> Or a bug/difference in Asrock timing config  been like that since z370, 390,490,590 etc. They read and calculated them differently. Also different vendors MB will give different readings. It depends also how it is calculated in bios. MSI vs Asus for example.


If it was a bug in asrock and bios, then my rwdr and wrrd would error out via testing. Since tcwl+6 = wrrd. 6 being the base you need to add to twcl to get min wrrd/twtr_s


----------



## bscool

robertr1 said:


> If it was a bug in asrock and bios, then my rwdr and wrrd would error out via testing. Since tcwl+6 = wrrd. 6 being the base you need to add to twcl to get min wrrd/twtr_s


It also depends on twrpre as changing that changes tWR. A lot of timings are connected or interact.

tWR on auto and controlled by twrpre 28 and twrpden 28 in screenshot


----------



## robertr1

bscool said:


> It also depends on twrpre as changing that changes tWR. A lot of timings are connected or interact.
> 
> tWR on auto and controlled by twrpre 28 and twrpden 28 in screenshot


I‘m an idiot. I misread his post as tcwl. Ignore my last reply about tcwl. Sorry for that confusion.

You’re correct on twr. It’s been an issue for generations on ASUS.

Funny enough this prime p bios lets you set twr directly without going through twrpre for a change. While my z390 apex for example is always off by 1 if not done via twrpre


----------



## bscool

robertr1 said:


> I‘m an idiot. I misread his post as tcwl. Ignore my last reply about tcwl. Sorry for that confusion.
> 
> You’re correct on twr. It’s been an issue for generations on ASUS.
> 
> Funny enough this prime p bios lets you set twr directly without going through twrpre for a change. While my z390 apex for example is always off by 1 if not done via twrpre


I was confused, I wasnt sure if we were talking about the same thing. It is all good.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> I was confused, I wasnt sure if we were talking about the same thing. It is all good.


So, is asus tweakit reading it right? lol


----------



## LionAlonso

bscool said:


> It also depends on twrpre as changing that changes tWR. A lot of timings are connected or interact.
> 
> tWR on auto and controlled by twrpre 28 and twrpden 28 in screenshot


Have u tried tRRD_sg at 4?


----------



## truehighroller1

I've somehow managed to get some of the settings I always had issues with getting lower, lower finally.


----------



## bscool

LionAlonso said:


> Have u tried tRRD_sg at 4?


tRRD_s, if so yes. It helps a little but I just run my timings a little looser. 4 will work though.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> So, is asus tweakit reading it right? lol


Does it matter? Whatever timing you can get stable is what counts does it not?
I see some running tWR at 8 and 10 and they are stable. I run my timings a little looser and still decent latency.


----------



## Balaned

if money is no object what's the best DDR4 RAM I can buy (2x16GB) to remove physical memory from overclocking limitations? Budget is $450.
.


----------



## bscool

@Balaned

gskill 4000c14-15-15 2x16

what MB do you have?

Some have issues with 2x16 at 4000+. You can read thru the thread. Only 89 pages. But quick run down. MSI z690 A, Asus Tuf and Strix are the ones I know people can run 4000+ on from feedback.

Other MSI may or may not run 4000+, Gigabyte and Asrock still have issues from what I have seen on this site and others.

Edit 4000c14 hard to find right now so here is a b die list I made a few days ago [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


----------



## truehighroller1

Tradition said:


> You should be able to do alot better Im using micron e-die and my speeds are higher at 3900 than yours at 4133
> make sure you increse the uncore to 42 43
> 
> View attachment 2540373



I think I got it a little better now. I was playing warzone all night literally with my brothers online and it never flinched. I was able to get to %200+ in hcimemtest and testmem5 passes as well. Thank you guys. It didn't like lower tRFC.


----------



## shrimpmaster

Holy, this platform can run some tight timming and pass testmem5 easy. I can pass testmem5 with max trefi and trfc, but games crash and have inconsistent mouse feel when setting max trefi. It was not temperatures, test actually makes ram hotter and no errors. I actually had the exact same experience with preivous generation and different single rank b-die kit.Max trefi passes tests but IT'S NOT STABLE

Now I'm testing trtp 5, twr 10, before I was using 6, 12 and was stable in both games and tests.


----------



## robertr1

shrimpmaster said:


> Holy, this platform can run some tight timming and pass testmem5 easy. I can pass testmem5 with max trefi and trfc, but games crash and have inconsistent mouse feel when setting max trefi. It was not temperatures, test actually makes ram hotter and no errors. I actually had the exact same experience with preivous generation and different single rank b-die kit.Max trefi passes tests but IT'S NOT STABLE
> 
> Now I'm testing trtp 5, twr 10, before I was using 6, 12 and was stable in both games and tests.


I mentioned it before but TM5 is not very useful as this stage.
I moved to Y Cruncher 2.5b benchmark 3-4x times in a row followed by Occt large avx2 Extreme for an hour.

Pass those two and you’ll be stable across any game.


----------



## LionAlonso

robertr1 said:


> I mentioned it before but TM5 is not very useful as this stage.
> I moved to Y Cruncher 2.5b benchmark 3-4x times in a row followed by Occt large avx2 Extreme for an hour.
> 
> Pass those two and you’ll be stable across any game.


Those have more effect in cpu and mem controller.


----------



## ogider

very fast way to (among others) catch low SA voltage
y-crouncher


----------



## Skunk0001

Skunk0001 said:


> Some new MSI beta BIOS dropped:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Beta/MP - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


FYI, on the Edge at least, the latest beta BIOS there has the v18 microcode (check hwinfo summary), which disables AVX512 (despite the option to enable it being available and set in the BIOS...check CPU-Z/hwinfo summary).

More details and some speculation can be found here:








Intel completely disables AVX-512 on Alder Lake after all - Questionable interpretation of “efficiency” | News / Editorial | igor'sLAB


Intel is now set to disable "AVX-512" completely on all Alder Lake CPUs with an upcoming microcode update in new BIOS releases. Mainboard manufacturers were able to make the supposedly disabled…




www.igorslab.de





Since I like the idea of having more features, and my CPU and RAM behave fine for me with the previous version 110, I'll be sticking to that for the foreseeable.

Microsoft will probably try to push the new Microcodes through Windows Update, but for anyone that isn't aware, you can just rename the C:\Windows\System32\mcupdate_GenuineIntel.dll to something else, and it stops them from being loaded.


----------



## truehighroller1

ogider said:


> very fast way to (among others) catch low SA voltage
> y-crouncher



How do you use ycruncher? I'm looking at it and there's a lot of options and no clear way to simply use it from googling for what you guys are saying to use it for? Certain things I should choose to use ram only system checker? Size of test?

Thanks

Is this good?


----------



## ogider

for my fast mem check and SA..with 32GB setup
option
0
1
7

for 16 gonna be 6..

but if 16 will give the same results in catching a quick error as 32, I will not say.


----------



## truehighroller1

ogider said:


> for my fast mem check and SA..with 32GB setup
> option
> 0
> 1
> 7
> 
> for 16 gonna be 6..
> 
> but if 16 will give the same results in catching a quick error as 32, I will not say.



Thank you. I'm running the stress test now. She gets warm at default CPU settings alone lol. 78 Celsius so far and passing all test, 251 watts lol.

Thanks again man. Looks good.


----------



## bscool

shrimpmaster said:


> Holy, this platform can run some tight timming and pass testmem5 easy. I can pass testmem5 with max trefi and trfc, but games crash and have inconsistent mouse feel when setting max trefi. It was not temperatures, test actually makes ram hotter and no errors. I actually had the exact same experience with preivous generation and different single rank b-die kit.Max trefi passes tests but IT'S NOT STABLE
> 
> Now I'm testing trtp 5, twr 10, before I was using 6, 12 and was stable in both games and tests.


What games? Also bios version are you on? I know somoene on Strix bios 707 sr b die having similar issues with mem oc and not smooth. Edit he said it ended up being corrupt game files.

I am running DR b die higher clocks 4133c15 and tight timings and no isses. But the only game I play is csgo. Is there any free games you are having this issues with on steam you can recommend? If not free what game on steam and I might buy it to test?

I want to see if I have this issue or is a limit of some IMCs. My IMC is not being pushed to the limit. I can run 4266 but run 4133.

For y crucnher I like benchmate, plus it has all the other benchs liie cb20, cb23 etc super pi with it and nice readouts.

Plus for dumb/lazy people like me it is simpler to run with a few mouse clicks  and it is free.






BenchMate







benchmate.org


----------



## ogider

bscool said:


> For y crucnher I like benchmate, plus it has all the other benchs liie cb20, cb23 etc super pi with it and nice readouts.


wow 81c temp pik with 291W? Direct die cooling ?


----------



## ogider

Here is mine MSI 52 4133










But I prefer 5.0 with 220W


----------



## truehighroller1

I guess I'm doing okay then. I might be able to squeeze more out but I need alcohol first been long two nights tweaking this thing lol.


----------



## bscool

ogider said:


> wow 81c temp pik with 291W? Direct die cooling ?


Arctic 2 420 AIO.


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> What games? Also bios version are you on? I know somoene on Strix bios 707 sr b die having similar issues with mem oc and not smooth.
> 
> I am running DR b die higher clocks 4133c15 and tight timings and no isses. But the only game I play is csgo. Is there any free games you are having this issues with on steam you can recommend? If not free what game on steam and I might buy it to test?
> 
> I want to see if I have this issue or is a limit of some IMCs. My IMC is not being pushed to the limit. I can run 4266 but run 4133.
> 
> For y crucnher I like benchmate, plus it has all the other benchs liie cb20, cb23 etc super pi with it and nice readouts.
> 
> Plus for dumb/lazy people like me it is simpler to run with a few mouse clicks  and it is free.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BenchMate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> benchmate.org


I was playing Forza horizon 5. And when I tried maxed out trefi game froze and crashed after a few hours. Tried twice same result, default trefi no crash.
I'm done with that game, I mostly play apex legends now, and that didn't crash with maxed out trefi, but my mouse movements feel way less consistent. Not smoothness issue, it's like not consistent latency, or something.

It's not IMC issue. As it happens on both 3866 and 3900mhz. It's also stable on linpack xtreme.


----------



## Gsen999

bscool said:


> Arctic 2 420 AIO.


In a push/pull?


----------



## bscool

Gsen999 said:


> In a push/pull?


No stock fans, bought used for $100 off Amazon.


----------



## Tradition

truehighroller1 said:


> I think I got it a little better now. I was playing warzone all night literally with my brothers online and it never flinched. I was able to get to %200+ in hcimemtest and testmem5 passes as well. Thank you guys. It didn't like lower tRFC.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2540478


that is more like it awesome


----------



## Frozburn

bscool said:


> What games? Also bios version are you on? I know somoene on Strix bios 707 sr b die having similar issues with mem oc and not smooth.
> 
> I am running DR b die higher clocks 4133c15 and tight timings and no isses. But the only game I play is csgo. Is there any free games you are having this issues with on steam you can recommend? If not free what game on steam and I might buy it to test?
> 
> I want to see if I have this issue or is a limit of some IMCs. My IMC is not being pushed to the limit. I can run 4266 but run 4133.
> 
> For y crucnher I like benchmate, plus it has all the other benchs liie cb20, cb23 etc super pi with it and nice readouts.
> 
> Plus for dumb/lazy people like me it is simpler to run with a few mouse clicks  and it is free.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BenchMate
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> benchmate.org


Is there a way to make this cruncher program test forever and stop on error so I can leave it running overnight? Got the other cruncher program as well but the test ends pretty fast. There is some option that says run forever but I have no clue how to activate it.


----------



## bscool

Frozburn said:


> Is there a way to make this cruncher program test forever and stop on error so I can leave it running overnight? Got the other cruncher program as well but the test ends pretty fast. There is some option that says run forever but I have no clue how to activate it.


I dont know. If there is I dont know how to do it.


----------



## grey.clock

truehighroller1 said:


> How do you use ycruncher? I'm looking at it and there's a lot of options and no clear way to simply use it from googling for what you guys are saying to use it for? Certain things I should choose to use ram only system checker? Size of test?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Is this good?
> 
> View attachment 2540497



try running it via Benchmate for a easier experience..... BenchMate


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> I dont know. If there is I dont know how to do it.



With the og one I posted that I was using first yes. It literally says infinite under the stability tester option. I stopped it after two iterations. Just put it in your bedroom as a heater lol and turn off the furnace.

I chose the option for mid whatever it was " 17 I think ' then it asked me again and I just hit enter again and it started running all of the test none stop.


----------



## shrimpmaster

A little tip for people who want to stress test memory and simulate a game load.
Use eth mining software on your gpu while stress testing memory. It doesn't use any cpu or ddr4 resources, doesn't slow down testing and adds that gpu load/heat just like a game.


----------



## bass junkie xl

hey guys been following this thread for a while i got my asus strix wifi d4 in and 12900k ( sp 88 ) and my 8gb x 4 sticks of team group extreme 4133 cl-18-18-18-38 1.40v xmp are stable @ 4000 mhz cl-15-15-15-35 1.50 v/ 1.32 vccio / 1.25 vddq . 12900k @ 5.1/4.8 ring E cores off in gear 1mode stable tested 3 cycles of tm5 anta extreme , 1 hr of prime 95 blend avx , 1 hr occt large data avx2 , 1 hr asus real bench with 32 gb ram and gpu , 30 min cine bench r23 so far . 8 gb x 4 @ 4000 c15 gear 1 hard to do ? 

u guys see any other tweaks i could do here ?


----------



## Frozburn

Looking for some advice myself on what I could change and if I should at all. No experience with sub timings, just trying random things. I can run 4133 CL 14 but it gives me an error eventually, it might be because of VDDQ. My VDDQ is always 1.2, it can never go higher.. no idea why. Doesn't work on any BIOS. 2x16 Dual rank b-die.


----------



## HvacGuru

Giving this ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 a test run. Not that impressed with it. It touched 100c for 1 second during the bench @ 313w. Wish I had room to test the 420!


----------



## acoustic

Asking a 280mm AIO to cool 313watts a lot, unless you have a very low ambient..


----------



## bscool

HvacGuru said:


> Giving this ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 a test run. Not that impressed with it. It touched 100c for 1 second during the bench @ 313w. Wish I had room to test the 420!


Do you have the lga 1700 mount?

My temps dropped 15+c usin lga1700 vs lga1151 mount.

And 313watts? lol yeah that is a little toasty. Even custom loop will get hot with that much wattage.


----------



## SpirosKGR

Could you recommend 32GB (2x16}. Crucial Ballistic 3200MHz (.BL2K16G32C16U4R micron rev e ) for 12700K? Can i run this kit at gear 1 and what max speed?

( bought them from Amazon for 102€ )
( Gaming: Warzone at 1440p)

Also i found 2nd hand this kit Gskill Royal 32GB 3600 (BL2K16G32C16U4R) for 200€ 
i don't know if the +100€ worth it though.


----------



## HvacGuru

bscool said:


> Do you have the lga 1700 mount?
> 
> My temps dropped 15+c usin lga1700 vs lga1151 mount.
> 
> And 313watts? lol yeah that is a little toasty. Even custom loop will get hot with that much wattage.


I didn't know y cruncher pulled that much. Cinebench 23 only pulls 260w at the same clocks. I do have the 1700 mount also. I could have swore that my Corsair 115 held at 90-95*c. Just making sure everything is stable. It will never run that hard playing Black Ops or Vanguard. It runs between 40-50*c while gaming @ 5300 all core. Not many AIO's will cool at 300+ watts, but it never hurts to try.


----------



## truehighroller1

Going all in now. TO THE MOON.


----------



## truehighroller1

The vscca is sensitive at this level. I went from .45 offset down to .448 and it seems to be more stable. I also had to bump up my vddq to 1.45v in order to set 1.634v dram.


----------



## warbucks

Switched to bios 0901 from 0707. Voltages are quite a bit lower to pass these timings. Running 1.35 SA | 1.35 VDDQ. Will loosen some timings and see if I can push to 4133Mhz or higher.


----------



## grey.clock

HvacGuru said:


> Giving this ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 280 a test run. Not that impressed with it. It touched 100c for 1 second during the bench @ 313w. Wish I had room to test the 420!


would a 360 fit? I know they score about the same in tests but the larger radiator with a push/pull setup might allow for a greater area over which to diffuse the heat after things are all warmed up.


----------



## HvacGuru

grey.clock said:


> would a 360 fit? I know they score about the same in tests but the larger radiator with a push/pull setup might allow for a greater area over which to diffuse the heat after things are all warmed up.


I bought one, just haven't tested it yet. They were both on sale at Christmas 80.00 and 100.00. The fans on the 280 only turn 1700 rpm and don't move enough air imho(They are very quiet). I have a couple fans to test out on the 280, before trying the 360 out.


----------



## Derpinheimer

zhrooms said:


> For the love of god, me and others have mentioned it multiple times now, but people don't seem to bother reading the thread, just the last page/few pages.
> *If you just got your board and processor*, the first thing you should do, is to set *System Agent* voltage to *1.42*, *DRAM* voltage to *1.5*, leave *VDDQ* on Auto or set it manually to *1.35V*, then *100:133* Ratio and Gear *1:1*, *2T/N* in the DRAM timing section, *now*  you can start overclocking the memory, it'll be guaranteed to work up to 4133, if you have good enough sticks (any B-die) and the correct motherboard+BIOS combination.
> For example @pt0x-, that's your first mistake, going with the wrong BIOS (0003), 0707 is significantly better at RAM overclocking, it's the *only* BIOS any ASUS owner should use (Strix/TUF) as of now, unless you desperately need the legacy game toggle (E-Core parking, because you refuse to disable E-Cores altogether), but then you have to settle for a lower DRAM frequency (IMC).
> 
> No idea how some of you can have issues on MSI boards, we have like a mountain of evidence that shows MSI Z690-A Pro can do 4200 with 2x16GB Dual Rank sticks, like are you completely forgetting about changing SA voltages or something? If that's the case no wonder you can't boot/run above 3600.


I did exactly this and cant boot beyond 3700.

SA Voltage 1.42
VDDQ Voltage 1.35V
DRAM Voltage 1.5V
DRAM Clock Ratio 133
Gear 1
17-17-17-34-420

Will not post. Even raising timings to absurd 20-20-20-60-500-2T does not post. Memory is in the slot farthest from the socket, and the one 2 steps closer. CPU overclocks removed.

Gear 2 works. Using 12700k, MSI Z690-A Pro, and Oloy DDR4 3600 14-14-14-34


----------



## truehighroller1

Had to tweak it a little more. Tweaked it down .002 more volts to .446 for dead nuts locked in.


----------



## Frozburn

Derpinheimer said:


> I did exactly this and cant boot beyond 3700.
> 
> SA Voltage 1.42
> VDDQ Voltage 1.35V
> DRAM Voltage 1.5V
> DRAM Clock Ratio 133
> Gear 1
> 17-17-17-34-420
> 
> Will not post. Even raising timings to absurd 20-20-20-60-500-2T does not post. Memory is in the slot farthest from the socket, and the one 2 steps closer. CPU overclocks removed.
> 
> Gear 2 works. Using 12700k, MSI Z690-A Pro, and Oloy DDR4 3600 14-14-14-34


If it's B-die dual rank ram, try 1.58 or 1.6v DRAM voltage. Mine only runs at 1.58 or higher (4000 CL14 gear 1 cr2) and running it at those voltages is fine for daily anyway, just put some fan on them. Also try lower SA voltage. My kit hates high SA so I use 1.2 SA and 1.2 VDDQ, but it's also stable at 1.13 SA.


----------



## GtiJason

HvacGuru said:


> I didn't know y cruncher pulled that much. Cinebench 23 only pulls 260w at the same clocks. I do have the 1700 mount also. I could have swore that my Corsair 115 held at 90-95*c. Just making sure everything is stable. It will never run that hard playing Black Ops or Vanguard. It runs between 40-50*c while gaming @ 5300 all core. Not many AIO's will cool at 300+ watts, but it never hurts to try.


Yeah, YCruncher is the new x265 4K at HWBot but with less kills under it's belt. The faster your memory the hotter it gets. Up until Rocket Lake the best config was Dual Rank B-Die at around 4600c15 no max mem or limiting mem in OS. Now on Alder 4133c14 is OK but still think it prefers the higher bandwidth. Hopefully we can find out soon but as of recently at least high freq was tough for DR B-Die and all these D4 boards are nearly worthless (multi threaded) on LN2 cooling, SS Phase change is enough to max em out. Hope the rumor about Bing testing D5 to D4 adapters is true and without visible latency hit or just make a High end 2 dimm D4 board. Sure I've found 5600c36 - 6000c40 Trident kit's on sale but at $500-550 and most likely samsung ic's. Soon enough better IC's will be available, just like DDR4 was at this time we had Samsung D Die and Hynix MFR. Soon came AFR to make those obsolete and soon after that we got E-Die that did the same followed by B Die in late 2015


----------



## truehighroller1

Ok Here's almost all of bscool's settings finally.. Took forever to get there though man.


----------



## truehighroller1

The thing I'm noticing with memory voltage on my d4 which helped me get to bscool's settings. I have to run 1.64v~ vdd or memory voltage which is fine with proper cooling but, my mb will not boot to those higher voltage settings at 1.35 vddq. I have to go higher with the vddq voltage for it to post at a higher memory voltage setting then 1.58v.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> The thing I'm noticing with memory voltage on my d4 which helped me get to bscool's settings. I have to run 1.64v~ vdd or memory voltage which is fine with proper cooling but, my mb will not boot to those higher voltage settings at 1.35 vddq. I have to go higher with the vddq voltage for it to post at a higher memory voltage setting then 1.58v.


Did you try the cmo files I uploaded. It had everything already entered. You have some timings off from mine. Not sure how much that effects things. Some are lower and will make it harder to boot.

I know from testing timings can be very forgiving or just 1 timing off/change can make it not boot. I do have a really good imc but still certain timings off I cant boot.

One that stands out to me is tCWL keeping that within 1 of tCL. Make it easier to boot and needs less voltage. I usually run 14 or 16 depending on tCL.


----------



## bscool

@truehighroller1 Also tWR/tRTP ratio I think it might help to keep 2 to 1. So tWR 12 tRTP 6. Or tWR 16 and tRTP 8

Your tWR is 11 and tRTP is 8 to it is off from what I use. those are the two that stand out. Some others are off but those and tCWL are what I would look at.

Maybe they make no difference but that is what I see lookng at your timings.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> @truehighroller1 Also tWR/tRTP ratio I think it might help to keep 2 to 1. So tWR 12 tRTP 6. Or tWR 16 and tRTP 8
> 
> Your tWR is 11 and tRTP is 8 to it is off from what I use. those are the two that stand out. Some others are off but those and tCWL are what I would look at.
> 
> Maybe they make no difference but that is what I see lookng at your timings.



The only post I see with your cmo is this one but, that's 4000mhz.









ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


@newls1 I could set your timings and see what i get ;) Not exactly same as yours but close enough. 71/73 Edit added same timings with rtls 71/71 how did you get 71/71? teach me please! Adjust your bclk to 101 and see what it goes to? I think im gonna have to play with bclk to get them to...




www.overclock.net





Thank you for the help by the way.

I lined those two up.


----------



## weyden

Guys, my pc case stays open. I still need a memory fan using 1.6v dram?


----------



## Redwoodz

What is this thread, some sponsored project to drive customers? I wouldn't agree to any terms and conditions other than OCN's posted in a free forum thread.

Anyhow all this just points to is that bandwidth is king, and only DDR5 allows Alder lake to outperform.


----------



## truehighroller1

Redwoodz said:


> What is this thread, some sponsored project to drive customers? I wouldn't agree to any terms and conditions other than OCN's posted in a free forum thread.
> 
> Anyhow all this just points to is that bandwidth is king, and only DDR5 allows Alder lake to outperform.



NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 video card benchmark result - Intel Core i9-12900K Processor,ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 (3dmark.com) 

Performs just fine for me.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> The only post I see with your cmo is this one but, that's 4000mhz.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> @newls1 I could set your timings and see what i get ;) Not exactly same as yours but close enough. 71/73 Edit added same timings with rtls 71/71 how did you get 71/71? teach me please! Adjust your bclk to 101 and see what it goes to? I think im gonna have to play with bclk to get them to...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thank you for the help by the way.
> 
> I lined those two up.


Here is a bios 901 cmo I just made for 4133c15-16-16 for DR b die. I have some stuff turned off like lighting and Armour Crate. You will see all the changes when you load the cmo. CPU is at defaults. sa/vddq auto/1.35 dram 1.55.









4133c15-16-16b901.CMO


CMO File



1drv.ms


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Redwoodz said:


> What is this thread, some sponsored project to drive customers? I wouldn't agree to any terms and conditions other than OCN's posted in a free forum thread.
> 
> Anyhow all this just points to is that bandwidth is king, and only DDR5 allows Alder lake to outperform.


I completely agree that the terms and conditions of this thread are ridiculous, I encourage everyone to violate them, and I refuse to contribute anything meaningful to the discussion.

However, DDR4 can outperform DDR5.









I scored 48 427 in Fire Strike


Intel Core i9-12900K Processor, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 10}




www.3dmark.com












I scored 23 520 in Time Spy


Intel Core i9-12900K Processor, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 10}




www.3dmark.com







https://www.overclock.net/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,onerror=redirect,width=1920,height=1920,fit=scale-down/https://www.overclock.net/attachments/1641166468548-png.2540732/


----------



## marjanoos

Any ideas what to improve? That bad latency result is driving me crazy even if my timings are tight.


----------



## bscool

@marjanoos It is most likely software running in the background. Something for rgb lighting, mouse/keyboard, etc. Show your task manager to see whats all running.


----------



## MikeS3000

Yeah, do a boot in safe mode, no networking and run Aida again. That's your best case, but most unrealistic result. The difference in latency then comes down to background programs. See if you can find the culprit and try not to have them running if possible.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Here is a bios 901 cmo I just made for 4133c15-16-16 for DR b die. I have some stuff turned off like lighting and Armour Crate. You will see all the changes when you load the cmo. CPU is at defaults. sa/vddq auto/1.35 drma 1.55.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4133c15-16-16b901.CMO
> 
> 
> CMO File
> 
> 
> 
> 1drv.ms



Got it finally. I did have to bump my memory voltage up a little compared to yours and my vccsa voltage a little as well though. The auto settings didn't work right for me " were not stable ". I'm sitting at 1.584 volts memory and 1.376 voltage vccsa and 1.35 vddq which is still set to auto.


----------



## marjanoos

MikeS3000 said:


> Yeah, do a boot in safe mode, no networking and run Aida again. That's your best case, but most unrealistic result. The difference in latency then comes down to background programs. See if you can find the culprit and try not to have them running if possible.


Tried safe mode but results are even worse (about 2ns in main latency - tried couple times).

Those are the background processes, I cleared some obvious already but it changes nothing. Sorry for some Polish names, those are just some built in Windows apps like Search or Settings.










EDIT: Apparently cleaning helped a little but still I think it could be about 2ns less. What do you think about transfers? Do they look okay?


----------



## bscool

CC engine msi dragon center adds latency. Same as Asus Armoury Crate. I dont know why people install them. Unless they use them to control RGB you have to live with increase latency.


----------



## Derpinheimer

Derpinheimer said:


> I did exactly this and cant boot beyond 3700.
> 
> SA Voltage 1.42
> VTTD Voltage 1.35V
> DRAM Voltage 1.5V
> DRAM Clock Ratio 133
> Gear 1
> 17-17-17-34-420
> 
> Will not post. Even raising timings to absurd 20-20-20-60-500-2T does not post. Memory is in the slot farthest from the socket, and the one 2 steps closer. CPU overclocks removed.
> 
> Gear 2 works. Using 12700k, MSI Z690-A Pro, and Oloy DDR4 3600 14-14-14-34





Frozburn said:


> If it's B-die dual rank ram, try 1.58 or 1.6v DRAM voltage. Mine only runs at 1.58 or higher (4000 CL14 gear 1 cr2) and running it at those voltages is fine for daily anyway, just put some fan on them. Also try lower SA voltage. My kit hates high SA so I use 1.2 SA and 1.2 VDDQ, but it's also stable at 1.13 SA.


Yep, its B-Die. No luck at 1.6V on DRAM. Tried buildzoids settings as well (SA 1.3V, VTTD 1.5V); no dice. Also tried 1.2V SA. Still a hard wall at 3700.

EDIT: Tried beta bios 124. Wow it sucks! Hard wall lowered to 3500.
EDIT2: Tried launch bios 100. It's the best for me. Using ODT 60/48/80 & tWRPRE 34, tRDPRE 8, tWRPDEN 34 per someone else, the hard wall is raised to 3800, which I think is acceptable.

Timings are 14-14-14-26-340 @ 1.45V. 3800MHz, gear 1, 100:100 ratio. SA 1.2V, VTTD 1.2V. Identical settings do not work on bios 124 or 110


----------



## grey.clock

Redwoodz said:


> What is this thread, some sponsored project to drive customers? I wouldn't agree to any terms and conditions other than OCN's posted in a free forum thread.
> 
> Anyhow all this just points to is that bandwidth is king, and only DDR5 allows Alder lake to outperform.


nah this thread is a testament that you are wasting money buying ddr5 for this generation of intel/alder lake.


----------



## acoustic

Redwoodz said:


> What is this thread, some sponsored project to drive customers? I wouldn't agree to any terms and conditions other than OCN's posted in a free forum thread.
> 
> Anyhow all this just points to is that bandwidth is king, and only DDR5 allows Alder lake to outperform.


Huh?

Back to the AMD side you go, peasant.


----------



## bass junkie xl

7 cyles of TM5 sorry about the blue color its the dark windows theme . saving to bios 8gb x 4 gear 1 might try the cmo file bs cool posted for 4133 . 4133 did boot the other day never tested it went down to 4k


----------



## GtiJason

acoustic said:


> Huh?
> 
> Back to the AMD side you go, peasant.


What are these "Terms and Conditions" things I'm hearing about ? I'm not seeing anything, maybe someone can help me out so I too can see what you see and we can all be fun gi's together


----------



## Tradition

geriatricpollywog said:


> I completely agree that the terms and conditions of this thread are ridiculous, I encourage everyone to violate them, and I refuse to contribute anything meaningful to the discussion.
> 
> However, DDR4 can outperform DDR5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I scored 48 427 in Fire Strike
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9-12900K Processor, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 10}
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.3dmark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I scored 23 520 in Time Spy
> 
> 
> Intel Core i9-12900K Processor, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 x 1, 32768 MB, 64-bit Windows 10}
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.3dmark.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,onerror=redirect,width=1920,height=1920,fit=scale-down/https://www.overclock.net/attachments/1641166468548-png.2540732/


what clocks are you using?


----------



## Mobama

12700K at 5.1GHz / 48 ring 1.21 load voltage under OCCT Small AVX 2 temps under 80c on a loop.
4000 - 14-15-15-28-240 at 1.65 Vdimm - 1.4 SA - 1.35 VDDQ
Latest MSI Z690 Pro - A BIOS Version 124U2

CR1 is bootable but I could not get that stable at 4000MHz no matter what, I will test it out with lower frequency sooner or later. tRFC might be able to tighten more I have not tried. tWR is locked at 16 as it had very minimal effect for me and tertiaries are as tight as they could be.

As for TM5 Absolut I need to run over night to make sure it is fully stable.


----------



## Lurifaks

bass junkie xl said:


> 7 cyles of TM5 sorry about the blue color its the dark windows theme . saving to bios 8gb x 4 gear 1 might try the cmo file bs cool posted for 4133 . 4133 did boot the other day never tested it went down to 4k


Great to see, what does it require of volts


----------



## ogider

edit delete


----------



## Revv23

attentionharlot said:


> since pretty much nobody runs asrock board and most people here are running B die, some findings with asrock z690 extreme and dr 2x16 rev. E (kit is crucial 3000mhz 15-16-16). 12600KF
> 
> dram 1.5V, vccsa 1.4V
> vddtq/imc voltage is default 1.2, changing it seems to do nothing.
> 
> still testing cl15 but otherwise cl16, and pic related is stable so far (using linpack, memtest, occt memory stress). gear1. (edit CR2, board ignores completely if i set cr1)
> 
> i was able to get to 4100mhz g1 which needs more voltage, not stable at all yet . will be trying to find stable settings for 3900-4000 once i finish more stability testing on what i have now, doubt i'll be able without some not-daily voltages. it also didn't post from cold boot. can't get gear 2 to boot with anything that isn't stable from cold boot. i guess i need to look into ODT or RTL for higher frequencies and cold boot post but i have no idea how that works yet and can't copy anyone since pretty much nobody runs this motherboard and ram combination.
> 
> View attachment 2540088


I couldnt even get 3200 mhz on my steel legend with any timings so switched to MSI


----------



## tzawad

Hi, 
Small request, please give me any comments regarding the RAM settings; I'm staying at 3600 Mhz for now (G.Skill F4-3600C14D-32GTZRA). The only things I have changed in the XMP profile settings are:
tRFC from 630 to >>> 288 then tRFC2/4 to 214/132 respectively. Are these settings OK?


----------



## bass junkie xl

Lurifaks said:


> Great to see, what does it require of volts


1.5 v dram , 1.32 vccio , 1.25 vddq , 

is there anything I could try to get below 44 NS ? any timings here outa wack kinda just did this on my own. 
cl 14 is a nope and cr1 is a nope .


----------



## shrimpmaster

tzawad said:


> Hi,
> Small request, please give me any comments regarding the RAM settings; I'm staying at 3600 Mhz for now (G.Skill F4-3600C14D-32GTZRA). The only things I have changed in the XMP profile settings are:
> tRFC from 630 to >>> 288 then tRFC2/4 to 214/132 respectively. Are these settings OK?
> 
> View attachment 2541071
> 
> 
> View attachment 2541072


Is there any advantage in setting trfc 2/4 on z690?


----------



## LionAlonso

shrimpmaster said:


> Is there any advantage in setting trfc 2/4 on z690?


No, they auto select


----------



## Tradition

tzawad said:


> Hi,
> Small request, please give me any comments regarding the RAM settings; I'm staying at 3600 Mhz for now (G.Skill F4-3600C14D-32GTZRA). The only things I have changed in the XMP profile settings are:
> tRFC from 630 to >>> 288 then tRFC2/4 to 214/132 respectively. Are these settings OK?
> 
> View attachment 2541071
> 
> 
> View attachment 2541072


Increse your clocks to at least 3900mhz and try cl15 you should see a lot better results latency on b-die should be arround 47ns

if you wanna keep 3600 increse your trefi to 65535
and lower your tfaw should see a good boost alredy


----------



## MikeS3000

Tradition said:


> Increse your clocks to at least 3900mhz and try cl15 you should see a lot better results latency on b-die should be arround 47ns
> 
> if you wanna keep 3600 increse your trefi to 65535
> and lower your tfaw should see a good boost alredy


Still a bit inexperience on memory overclocking. I read that there is a more serious risk of OS corruption with too high of a trefi and too low of a trfc that may not be as detectable running memory stress tests. What's the consensus on this? Also, is the 65535 trefi applicable to all types of DDR4 or just B-die?


----------



## Balaned

Is fastish DDR4 (4000 CL 15 for example.) still competitive with the currently higher end DDR5 (6000 CL36 to pick one.)? The only articles I seem to find with comparisons favorable to DDR4 are using older 4800/5200 DDR5. This would be for gaming and productivity, mainly video editing with a 12900K. Thank you.


----------



## Tradition

Tradition said:


> Increse your clocks to at least 3900mhz and try cl15 you should see a lot better results latency on b-die should be arround 47ns





MikeS3000 said:


> Still a bit inexperience on memory overclocking. I read that there is a more serious risk of OS corruption with too high of a trefi and too low of a trfc that may not be as detectable running memory stress tests. What's the consensus on this? Also, is the 65535 trefi applicable to all types of DDR4 or just B-die?


i use micron e-die and use 65535 b-die ive seen ppl using 65535 or 40000 if your not confortable running too high 
ive never had os corruption that i coudnt recover from so im not sure to what point that is an issue


----------



## truehighroller1

Balaned said:


> Is fastish DDR4 (4000 CL 15 for example.) still competitive with the currently higher end DDR5 (6000 CL36 to pick one.)? The only articles I seem to find with comparisons favorable to DDR4 are using older 4800/5200 DDR5. This would be for gaming and productivity, mainly video editing with a 12900K. Thank you.



I think ddr5 is better but it's a mess right now. I can see the higher scores on CPU test showing the higher bandwidth helps but to expensive and to little, benefit imo.


----------



## thrillhaus

What kind of performance scaling do you get with higher memory clocks on Alder Lake? I'm used to the Ryzen situation where memory clock has a significant effect due to 1:1 with the infinity fabric clock.


----------



## truehighroller1

thrillhaus said:


> What kind of performance scaling do you get with higher memory clocks on Alder Lake? I'm used to the Ryzen situation where memory clock has a significant effect due to 1:1 with the infinity fabric clock.


If you're referring to DDR5, I'm seeing about a six frames per second benefit tops, compared to tight DDR4.

If you're referring to just memory clock DDR4 wise higher frequency wise, I don't think the possibilities there because you can't get the timings tight enough to get the bandwidth high enough quick enough to benefit compared to me running 4133 megahertz compared to 4,600 MHz. I just couldn't get mine stable at 4,600 MHz tighter timings or 4400 MHz tighter timings for that matter. I'm seeing better benefits from 4133 megahertz 14-15-15 and 15-16-16 period.


----------



## shrimpmaster

New 1001 bios for z690 tuf. 
Tried 4000mhz 16-16-16 again. Error in Testmem5 absolut after 3min with 1.4v SA. Pretty much same as previous bios. My system just can't do 4000mhz 1:1...


----------



## LionAlonso

shrimpmaster said:


> New 1001 bios for z690 tuf.
> Tried 4000mhz 16-16-16 again. Error in Testmem5 absolut after 3min with 1.4v SA. Pretty much same as previous bios. My system just can't do 4000mhz 1:1...


how is your cache behaviour? some user reported that it locked at 3600


----------



## Arni90

thrillhaus said:


> What kind of performance scaling do you get with higher memory clocks on Alder Lake? I'm used to the Ryzen situation where memory clock has a significant effect due to 1:1 with the infinity fabric clock.


Certainly nothing close to Coffee Lake and Comet Lake
Scaling seems similar to Rocket Lake: slightly more than Zen 3, slightly less than Zen 2


----------



## Man4cl

shrimpmaster said:


> New 1001 bios for z690 tuf.
> Tried 4000mhz 16-16-16 again. Error in Testmem5 absolut after 3min with 1.4v SA. Pretty much same as previous bios. My system just can't do 4000mhz 1:1...


Try 1.5 vdim, 1.37vcsa and 1.4 vddq 











SR 3600CL17 Ripjaws kit 2x8gb


----------



## eeroo94

shrimpmaster said:


> New 1001 bios for z690 tuf.
> Tried 4000mhz 16-16-16 again. Error in Testmem5 absolut after 3min with 1.4v SA. Pretty much same as previous bios. My system just can't do 4000mhz 1:1...


Yes, every bios since 0707 can do over 4000 as long as you have good IMC.


----------



## Lorenzo Lanas

shrimpmaster said:


> New 1001 bios for z690 tuf.
> Tried 4000mhz 16-16-16 again. Error in Testmem5 absolut after 3min with 1.4v SA. Pretty much same as previous bios. My system just can't do 4000mhz 1:1...


Samere here with an MSI PRO Z690-A and 2x8 Gb Ballistix 3600 MHz (Micron E-die) where I can reach 3900 MHz in gear1. 3900 is my upper limit, beyond that point, I get TestMem and OCCT errors. I still not have tried to reduce any timings nor increase the voltage ... but I'll wait on next stable BIOS version 🤞


----------



## tzawad

Tradition said:


> Increse your clocks to at least 3900mhz and try cl15 you should see a lot better results latency on b-die should be arround 47ns
> 
> Ok, is the CL15-15-15-30 a good start for 3900mhz? What voltage parameters should I set?
> 
> 
> if you wanna keep 3600 increse your trefi to 65535
> and lower your tfaw should see a good boost alredy


tfaw 28; trefi 65535; looks better in AIDA, thanks for the tips

Is the CL15-15-15-30 a good start for 3900mhz? What voltage parameters should I set?


----------



## Nerval

I'm about to assemble my z690 edge & 12900k soon, would like to know what is the easiest way to update bios version ? and is there a way for me to update bios and keep old bios settings?
or I need to change everything again every bios update


----------



## tzawad

shrimpmaster said:


> Is there any advantage in setting trfc 2/4 on z690?


I changed to auto mode; there is no difference in AIDA's results. 
I was following the opinion of one of the users on another forum


----------



## bscool

Nerval said:


> I'm about to assemble my z690 edge & 12900k soon, would like to know what is the easiest way to update bios version ? and is there a way for me to update bios and keep old bios settings?
> or I need to change everything again every bios update


As far as I know on MSI you cant use settings file from different bios versions unless they have changed it on z690. So you have to manually re enter everything.


----------



## postem

truehighroller1 said:


> I think ddr5 is better but it's a mess right now. I can see the higher scores on CPU test showing the higher bandwidth helps but to expensive and to little, benefit imo.


If DDR5 wasnt unicorn memory especially the good ones. Im trying to distribute retail POS terminals (those used to pay with cc or dbit) and there is a component shortage. We will probably be lucky if we have good availability by the time of AM5 and raptor lake. For bandwidth alone probably best would be to get the best ddr5 you could find.


shrimpmaster said:


> New 1001 bios for z690 tuf.
> Tried 4000mhz 16-16-16 again. Error in Testmem5 absolut after 3min with 1.4v SA. Pretty much same as previous bios. My system just can't do 4000mhz 1:1...


Where you get ? Site still on 807


----------



## reapola

Upgraded to 64Gb (4x16gb) on a Gigabyte Z690 Gaming X and couldn't get it to post @XMP with even 2 dimms of Dominator platinum 3600Mhz 14-16-16-36 (samsung B-die), never mind 4. It would post with the jdec/2666 and the highest I could boot with was 3000Mhz - no amount of voltage increases/shouting would get it to train and post.

Anyway, read about the issues with Z690 and gigabyte on here so went out and bought an MSI Edge and it booted straight away with no tweaking at [email protected] with 4 dimms. Initially left SA on auto but it was pumping 1.35V so I have reduced that down to 1.3V with dram on 1.45V (XMP) and VDDQ at auto. Only other tweaking is reducing tRFC to 300 and left it overnight running testmem5/anta777 which took 8hours and thankfully passed this morning.

TL;DR DDR4 Z690...Gigabyte = bad, MSI = good.


----------



## mickyc357

reapola said:


> Upgraded to 64Gb (4x16gb) on a Gigabyte Z690 Gaming X and couldn't get it to post @XMP with even 2 dimms of Dominator platinum 3600Mhz 14-16-16-36 (samsung B-die), never mind 4. It would post with the jdec/2666 and the highest I could boot with was 3000Mhz - no amount of voltage increases/shouting would get it to train and post.
> 
> Anyway, read about the issues with Z690 and gigabyte on here so went out and bought an MSI Edge and it booted straight away with no tweaking at [email protected] with 4 dimms. Initially left SA on auto but it was pumping 1.35V so I have reduced that down to 1.3V with dram on 1.45V (XMP) and VDDQ at auto. Only other tweaking is reducing tRFC to 300 and left it overnight running testmem5/anta777 which took 8hours and thankfully passed this morning.
> 
> TL;DR DDR4 Z690...Gigabyte = bad, MSI = good.
> 
> View attachment 2541592


Did you try the new f6 bios ?
I have a Gigabyte board ready to install..


----------



## reapola

Yeah it was F6, cleared CMOS and initially tried with 4 then 2 dimms - XMP settings (or manual) wouldn't post and it sat trying to train for a couple of minutes before it went to a failed boot.

If I was in your situation and could return the motherboard I would rather than be in my situation of a month in and having to sell second hand for a loss.

edit: just so I don't come across as a shill for MSI, my other motherboards are Gigabyte but these are Aorus X570 (unraid server) and B550 (daughters pc)


----------



## MikeS3000

Question about Y-crunch 2.5b benchmark via Benchmate. At DDR 3800 I have no issues running the benchmark. At DDR 3900 I get through the first part of the benchmark and then keep getting "coefficient is too large" error and the benchmark stops. Is this typically due to an unstable memory controller? I've tested my timings at 3800 and 3900 on TM5 without error.


----------



## eeroo94

MikeS3000 said:


> Question about Y-crunch 2.5b benchmark via Benchmate. At DDR 3800 I have no issues running the benchmark. At DDR 3900 I get through the first part of the benchmark and then keep getting "coefficient is too large" error and the benchmark stops. Is this typically due to an unstable memory controller? I've tested my timings at 3800 and 3900 on TM5 without error.


Yes, that error is a sign of instability.


----------



## MikeS3000

eeroo94 said:


> Yes, that error is a sign of instability.


Kind of figured that. Bumped down to 3866 and Y cruncher completes. I'm at 1.35v SA and 1.35v VDDQ. Any suggestions to get 3900 stable?


----------



## eeroo94

MikeS3000 said:


> Kind of figured that. Bumped down to 3866 and Y cruncher completes. I'm at 1.35v SA and 1.35v VDDQ. Any suggestions to get 3900 stable?


Might be hitting a wall, personally I'm running 3900 stable with 1.24v SA and 1.3v VDDQ with my 2x16GB B-die and 12700KF.


----------



## Tradition

tzawad said:


> tfaw 28; trefi 65535; looks better in AIDA, thanks for the tips
> 
> Is the CL15-15-15-30 a good start for 3900mhz? What voltage parameters should I set?
> 
> View attachment 2541449


yeah looks good you can always try for lower secondary timings 

buildzoid has some tutorials on bdie OC on z690 maybe check them out


----------



## Tradition

MikeS3000 said:


> Kind of figured that. Bumped down to 3866 and Y cruncher completes. I'm at 1.35v SA and 1.35v VDDQ. Any suggestions to get 3900 stable?


try lowering your uncore my y cruncher wont run because of uncore


----------



## MikeS3000

Tradition said:


> try lowering your uncore my y cruncher wont run because of uncore


Uncore is on auto. Also running 4x8gb so harder on IMC. May just be a hard wall for 4x8. Maybe I'll take two sticks out to see if there's a difference.


----------



## Tradition

MikeS3000 said:


> Uncore is on auto. Also running 4x8gb so harder on IMC. May just be a hard wall for 4x8. Maybe I'll take two sticks out to see if there's a difference.


oh yeah 4x8 i cant get past 3700 stable on my system so you are alredy beyond what i would expect


----------



## MikeS3000

Tradition said:


> oh yeah 4x8 i cant get past 3700 stable on my system so you are alredy beyond what i would expect


Well I guess that's good news. I'm so tempted to stop by local Micro Center and pickup this open box kit of 2x16 gb DDR-3600 CL14 Ripjaws V for $191. My current setup is Hynix DJR 4x8gb Trident Z Neo 16-19-19-39 so maybe I could sell the 4 sticks on Ebay.

Next question, why are 4 single ranks sticks slower than 2 single rank sticks on this platform with the exact same settings? I was on AMD for the last several years and when I added 2 additional sticks to my setup I picked up performance in memory intensive benchmarks. I'm slower on this platform.


----------



## Tradition

MikeS3000 said:


> Well I guess that's good news. I'm so tempted to stop by local Micro Center and pickup this open box kit of 2x16 gb DDR-3600 CL14 Ripjaws V for $191. My current setup is Hynix DJR 4x8gb Trident Z Neo 16-19-19-39 so maybe I could sell the 4 sticks on Ebay.
> 
> Next question, why are 4 single ranks sticks slower than 2 single rank sticks on this platform with the exact same settings? I was on AMD for the last several years and when I added 2 additional sticks to my setup I picked up performance in memory intensive benchmarks. I'm slower on this platform.


2x16 is optimal 

i have no idea im gessing the controller is just crap 
they are daisy chained and some amd boards are T topology that might be why


----------



## weyden

Sameone tested the New gigabyte BIOS? Improve something? Notes says better vrm!


----------



## SpirosKGR

Lorenzo Lanas said:


> 3900 MHz in gear1.


If you don’t mind share your timings/settings at 3900MHz with the Ballistix kit in gear 1?
Very much appreciated


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

Got G.Skill 2 x 16 GB 4000 CL16 for my Strix D4 and it’s coming up with an orange light on the motherboard and won’t post. Any way to get it to work?


----------



## bscool

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Got G.Skill 2 x 16 GB 4000 CL16 for my Strix D4 and it’s coming up with an orange light on the motherboard and won’t post. Any way to get it to work?


There are a lot of things to try.

Does JEDEC work? If yes.....

Have you tried lower clock like 3600 or 3866? If that works then could be your IMC wont run 4000.

Also what bios version are you on?

Model # of memory?

Are they on correct slots? A2 and B2

If they are try 1 stick at a time.

increase io/sa...................


----------



## Lorenzo Lanas

SpirosKGR said:


> If you don’t mind share your timings/settings at 3900MHz with the Ballistix kit in gear 1?
> Very much appreciated


Sure, no problemo...




















Everything is auto except the frequency:


----------



## postem

Hi people, unfortuallly i have some potato memory



Lorenzo Lanas said:


> Sure, no problemo...
> View attachment 2541792


I have exactly the same memory, but it seen no matter what i do, latency down not come down. Sure, im not expecting this kit to reach Sub 50, but still, i cant even get into lower 50s. When i first setup this kit, previous bios, i was getting 56ns. Now, comming from 3600 to 3900, and even reducing timings i cant get any meaningful reduction in latency. This is expected?









Using the XMP2 profile, with extended timings, get some lower values


----------



## Peanuts4

Most of the memory advice I've read about Alderlake and DDR4 3200 vs. 3600+ sounds like it was copied and pasted from the Ryzen threads. Being that Intel's last gen didn't really seem to care is it the same or does Alderlake see any real advantage of 3200 vs. 3600 and higher speeds? Or is there a sweet spot I haven't read about in terms of speeds/timings?


----------



## bscool

@postem Looks about right for your timings. They are loose. Tighten them up and you should be in the mid to upper 40s depending on OS.

memory oc hasnt really changed in the last few gens MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


----------



## bscool

Peanuts4 said:


> Most of the memory advice I've read about Alderlake and DDR4 3200 vs. 3600+ sounds like it was copied and pasted from the Ryzen threads. Being that Intel's last gen didn't really seem to care is it the same or does Alderlake see any real advantage of 3200 vs. 3600 and higher speeds? Or is there a sweet spot I haven't read about in terms of speeds/timings?


More benefit from memory OC than CPU oc the last few gens on Intel. Out of the box most are already close to the limit on CPU clocks unless you get a "golden chip" and have great cooling.

Test to comfirm about memory oc





__





PCBuilding


KingFaris10's Site




kingfaris.co.uk









__





PCBuilding


KingFaris10's Site




kingfaris.co.uk





On z690 it is the same is the short answer. Sweet spot is gear 1 4000c14 range. Top IMCs can run 4266 to 4300.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

bscool said:


> There are a lot of things to try.
> 
> Does JEDEC work? If yes.....
> 
> Have you tried lower clock like 3600 or 3866? If that works then could be your IMC wont run 4000.
> 
> Also what bios version are you on?
> 
> Model # of memory?
> 
> Are they on correct slots? A2 and B2
> 
> If they are try 1 stick at a time.
> 
> increase io/sa...................


I reset the BIOS to optimized defaults before putting the new memory in. It hasn’t posted once.

0901

F4-4000C16D-32GVKA

Yes.

I was going to try that, will give it a go.


----------



## bscool

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> I reset the BIOS to optimized defaults before putting the new memory in. It hasn’t posted once.
> 
> 0901
> 
> F4-4000C16D-32GVKA
> 
> Yes.
> 
> I was going to try that, will give it a go.


It sounds like a defect dim then. If wont even post at jedec, with no XMP set. 

But from what i know defective dim usually wont even let you into the bios.

You could try turning off psu and then hold clear cmos for 30 seconds. But sounds like bad dim to me.

Try 1 at a time to find defective stick if that is what it is.


----------



## postem

bscool said:


> @postem Looks about right for your timings. They are loose. Tighten them up and you should be in the mid to upper 40s depending on OS.
> 
> memory oc hasnt really changed in the last few gens MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


Memory is really potato, tightening the primaries almost always lead to errors, trying 16-17-17-36 windows stable but memtest86 insta errors. 1.45v. Tried too with 4000mt, at least windows run, but also errors on memtest86.

Im itching to get a 4000 16-16-16 gskill kit, but its 3x the price of the kit i have now.


----------



## bscool

postem said:


> Memory is really potato, tightening the primaries almost always lead to errors, trying 16-17-17-36 windows stable but memtest86 insta errors. 1.45v. Tried too with 4000mt, at least windows run, but also errors on memtest86.
> 
> Im itching to get a 4000 16-16-16 gskill kit, but its 3x the price of the kit i have now.


I am not sure if you are asking for help making a statement? The way you potsed your timings and aida64 with ? about latency is expected.

But you havent tuned any subtimings.

Subtimings will make more of a difference than just tunning main 3-4 timings.

And if those are your tuned sub timings I cant imagine what you started with.


----------



## postem

bscool said:


> I am not sure if you are asking for help making a statement? The way you potsed your timings and aida64 with ? about latency is expected.
> 
> But you havent tuned any subtimings.
> 
> Subtimings will make more of a difference than just tunning main 3-4 timings.
> 
> And if those are your tuned sub timings I cant imagine what you started with.


Only thing i done was using XMP2 profile that managed to decrease latency with tighter subtimings. I dont know much about secondaries, bu just from what i saw these seen to be important to decrease the latency.


----------



## bscool

postem said:


> Only thing i done was using XMP2 profile that managed to decrease latency with tighter subtimings. I dont know much about secondaries, bu just from what i saw these seen to be important to decrease the latency.


Ok I see now you adjusted some. It looks like you could adjust a lot more. It takes forever to figure them all out when you are starting out though. Weeks to months if you have never done it before.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

bscool said:


> It sounds like a defect dim then. If wont even post at jedec, with no XMP set.
> 
> But from what i know defective dim usually wont even let you into the bios.
> 
> You could try turning off psu and then hold clear cmos for 30 seconds. But sounds like bad dim to me.
> 
> Try 1 at a time to find defective stick if that is what it is.


You’re going to laugh at me…I just hadn’t pushed the sticks in all the way at the bottom lol.

These sticks have temperature sensors which I’m chuffed about  my previous 2 x 8 GB Corsair 4000 CL16 didn’t!


----------



## bscool

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> You’re going to laugh at me…I just hadn’t pushed the sticks in all the way at the bottom lol.
> 
> These sticks have temperature sensors which I’m chuffed about  my previous 2 x 8 GB Corsair 4000 CL16 didn’t!


Oh it happens. I do stupid/silly stuff all the time. Things I think should work dont, things that shouldnt work do. I am like w#tf? lol


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

bscool said:


> Oh it happens. I do stupid/silly stuff all the time. Things I think should work dont, things that shouldnt work do. I am like w#tf? lol


Haha. Well it certainly is my dumb moment of the day!


----------



## postem

bscool said:


> Ok I see now you adjusted some. It looks like you could adjust a lot more. It takes forever to figure them all out when you are starting out though. Weeks to months if you have never done it before.


Thanks gonna take the suggestions from the guide first.


----------



## HvacGuru

Bios 812 has been the best one for me. To scared to try any of the new ones!


----------



## Agent-A01

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> You’re going to laugh at me…I just hadn’t pushed the sticks in all the way at the bottom lol.
> 
> These sticks have temperature sensors which I’m chuffed about  my previous 2 x 8 GB Corsair 4000 CL16 didn’t!


I was literally about to say to see if those sticks were pushed in all the way. Easy mistake to make for everyone.


----------



## MotomEniac

shrimpmaster said:


> New 1001 bios for z690 tuf.
> Tried 4000mhz 16-16-16 again. Error in Testmem5 absolut after 3min with 1.4v SA. Pretty much same as previous bios. My system just can't do 4000mhz 1:1...


Can you point us towards that bios, I can't find it on the official site. Thanks


----------



## truehighroller1

HvacGuru said:


> Bios 812 has been the best one for me. To scared to try any of the new ones!
> View attachment 2541829



If you don't mind hvac, what are your voltages you're using bud? I appreciate it.


----------



## HvacGuru

truehighroller1 said:


> If you don't mind hvac, what are your voltages you're using bud? I appreciate it.


Edit Sorry that was my Windows 11 pc. My Windows 10 rig isn't hooked up right now. I will switch over and post the correct voltages with a screen shot shortly. I have my 3080ti in this rig and was gaming. Forgot I switched computers lol. So you don't think I am crazy the fast on is on the floor lol.


----------



## shrimpmaster

MotomEniac said:


> Can you point us towards that bios, I can't find it on the official site. Thanks











[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Could just need a new BIOS update from Asus. I'm sure GSkill tested and binned the RAM. After I had contact with the Gskill Support…the more VDD / VDDQ I need with my Strix 690-F and 6000 C36..it must be something with the bios / board…. The worst case would be to delete the 6000 c36 from...




www.overclock.net





Stability is the same for me with this bios. Stable 3866/3900 15-15-15 1T. SR b-die. I'm going to give max trefi a try again. But I'm pretty sure it's going to have same issues. Passes every test but gives me issues.
I also had issue with tRAS, running it at 36 now. It would pass every test even when set to 30 but gives me stability issues, even memory training failed to properly set RTLs when tRAS was 30 or 32, which tells me something is really not stable.

I can pass testmem5 with twr 8, trtp 5, trfc 250, trefi max, wtrs/l 1/6, rrds/l 4/4, tfaw 16. But that is not what's best for game performance of stability from my experience.
This is what I'm running right now:









Also saw no difference in setting terciareis manually, but i'm running SR anyway and those mostly affect dual rank.


----------



## bscool

Just my 2 cent if you are on z690 Strix d4 with dr b die and 901 is working well for you stay there. 

Skip bios 1001 unless you just like to tinker and/or are having issues. 

Cant remember if I already posted about it in this thread. Link to my feedback if someone cares 









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug. vmaxstress option name changed for future function DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto https://www.dropbox.com/s/yc8c82hmp29g3gn/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0811.rar?dl=0...




www.overclock.net













ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


I have a pretty odd issue here, can anyone help me figure this one out please?! Been noticing this issue since I originally started this build 3 weeks ago, but now its time for me to find the fix. I have messed with all sorts of settings in bios to try to fix this, including messing with TVB...




www.overclock.net


----------



## raad11

Anything better than 0707 for DR B-Die yet? For Strix D4?

And has anyone gotten a new BIOS to work on the Prime Z690M-Plus D4? Official release is only up to 0605 or something and it doesn't let you change System Agent voltage (you can set a new value in BIOS but it ignores it and stays to 0.9x V range). I'm running a 12400 in it so it may be related to that since I've seen one other user her with the same board and a 12600K and it changes SA voltage to over 1.4v on Auto. 12400 on this board boots at 3800 and 3867 but crashes soon after. It'll run Windows and even some games at 3800 before crashing out. I think it's because SA voltage is too low. VDDQ TX changes just fine and it even jacks it up to 1.35v when you overclock memory.



playsin said:


> 12600K
> ASUS PRIME Z690M-PLUS D4
> 
> overclock
> CPU : P50/E40/C43
> RAM : 32G(16X2) 4200 CL15
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> View attachment 2539996
> 
> View attachment 2539997
> 
> View attachment 2539998
> 
> View attachment 2539999
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> BIOS SETING
> 
> 
> View attachment 2540001
> 
> View attachment 2540002
> 
> View attachment 2540003
> 
> View attachment 2540004
> 
> View attachment 2540005
> 
> View attachment 2540006
> 
> View attachment 2540007
> 
> View attachment 2540008
> 
> View attachment 2540009
> 
> View attachment 2540010
> 
> View attachment 2540011
> 
> View attachment 2540012
> 
> 
> View attachment 2540014


Awesome results for RAM. What kind of heatsinks are those?


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Just my 2 cent if you are on z690 Strix d4 with dr b die and 901 is working well for you stay there.
> 
> Skip bios 1001 unless you just like to tinker and/or are having issues.
> 
> Cant remember if I already posted about it in this thread. Link to my feedback if someone cares
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> attempts to improve xmp , fixed a core ranking / core vid reading bug. vmaxstress option name changed for future function DC LL tracked to vrm LL at auto https://www.dropbox.com/s/yc8c82hmp29g3gn/ROG-MAXIMUS-Z690-FORMULA-ASUS-0811.rar?dl=0...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> I have a pretty odd issue here, can anyone help me figure this one out please?! Been noticing this issue since I originally started this build 3 weeks ago, but now its time for me to find the fix. I have messed with all sorts of settings in bios to try to fix this, including messing with TVB...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


It's interesting that you are having troubles.

Was 4133 C14 stable before and is now erroring(frequently or just one error)?
If so maybe it's because spread spectrum is now disabled(or rounded up via bclk)

My bclk reports 100mhz exactly whereas before I needed to apply 100.25mhz for it to be reported as 100.
If that's the case, perhaps the extra .25mhz (results in about 12mhz more DDR4 frequency) is causing instability.

Maybe I misunderstood your post and 4133C14 was never stable

Anyways for me it runs the same vs 0811 bios on TUF.
I was not able to lower VCCSA like you were on 901 vs previous 0707

3 runs of anta777 extreme stable.












raad11 said:


> Anything better than 0707 for DR B-Die yet? For Strix D4?


Better seems to vary per user as always. If you aren't having issues there's no reason to upgrade as of now.



shrimpmaster said:


> This is what I'm running right now:
> View attachment 2541844
> 
> 
> Also saw no difference in setting terciareis manually, but i'm running SR anyway and those mostly affect dual rank.


What did you test specifically? Terteriaries bring a lot of gains if tuned.

And them affecting dual rank only is not true. The timings that end with DR are specific to dual rank.
Those won't have any affect on you.

You are running only 3866 with 2x8GB.
You should be able to lower many of those timings by a lot.

Try copying my timings for tertiaries and see the difference in aida64


----------



## Frozburn

Agent-A01 said:


> It's interesting that you are having troubles.
> 
> Was 4133 C14 stable before and is now erroring(frequently or just one error)?
> If so maybe it's because spread spectrum is now disabled(or rounded up via bclk)
> 
> My bclk reports 100mhz exactly whereas before I needed to apply 100.25mhz for it to be reported as 100.
> If that's the case, perhaps the extra .25mhz (results in about 12mhz more DDR4 frequency) is causing instability.
> 
> Maybe I misunderstood your post and 4133C14 was never stable
> 
> Anyways for me it runs the same vs 0811 bios on TUF.
> I was not able to lower VCCSA like you were on 901 vs previous 0707
> 
> 3 runs of anta777 extreme stable.
> 
> View attachment 2541857
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Better seems to vary per user as always. If you aren't having issues there's no reason to upgrade as of now.
> 
> 
> 
> What did you test specifically? Terteriaries bring a lot of gains if tuned.
> 
> And them affecting dual rank only is not true. The timings that end with DR are specific to dual rank.
> Those won't have any affect on you.
> 
> You are running only 3866 with 2x8GB.
> You should be able to lower many of those timings by a lot.
> 
> Try copying my timings for tertiaries and see the difference in aida64


Nice results. What are your voltages and ram kit?


----------



## bscool

@Agent-A01 4133c14 was never stable for me on any bios. I just posted those screenshots for reference of what it can run/bench on that bios. I posted a few memtest in this thread for most bios versions I have tested on Strix d4. 

The microcode changed to 18 with bios 1001 and it definitely changed thing for the worse on my CPU. Dropped my E core sp from 77 to 70.

4133c15 has been stable most bioses except the first couple 223 and 605 or whatever it was. 707 on were good and also can pass memtest 4133c15 to 4266c16.

I am sure i can get bios 1001 working I just didnt feel like messing with it(cache clocking up when on auto). 

But now that I updated to 10001 it seems to have changed some thing that is not seen. My cache always use to clock up to 4700 when left on auto but manually setting P and E cores. 

Now after bios 1001 it wont. Even after using EZ Flash and bios Flashback to older bios versions.

Not the end of the world(but annoying) I just have to manually set cache clock and cache voltage now when manually ocing the CPU.

Not the first time I have had issues with Asus bios EZ Flash and Flashback not flashing everything. On last gen z590 Apex using Flashback would not flash micrcode, had to use EZ flash to get microcode to flash.

I even tried another OS as i thought maybe it wa something in Windows that changed so the cache didnt want to clock up and it wasnt the OS.


----------



## bscool

@shrimpmaster Sr benefit the same as DR on z690 ddr4. Here are some SR I have tested.


----------



## Agent-A01

Frozburn said:


> Nice results. What are your voltages and ram kit?


2x16 G.Skill 4000 CL17-18-18 @ 1.4V kit
VDIMM 1.52
VCCSA 1.39
VDDQ 1.35

Wish I had the Strix-A, it would reduce VCCSA a lot from optimem3 trace layout.



bscool said:


> @Agent-A01 4133c14 was never stable for me on any bios. I just posted those screenshots for reference of what it can run/bench on that bios. I posted a few memtest in this thread for most bios versions I have tested on Strix d4.


Gotcha. Not sure if any bios update will stabilize C14. You may need >1.6v to get it or you're running into a temperature stability wall.

What VDIMM do you need for C15 4133?



bscool said:


> The microcode changed to 18 with bios 1001 and it definitely changed thing for the worse on my CPU. Dropped my E core sp from 77 to 70.


I've seen others mention SP ratings go down on newer bios too, wonder if ASUS algorithm is different or more accurate



bscool said:


> 4133c15 has been stable most bioses except the first couple 223 and 605 or whatever it was. 707 on were good and also can pass memtest 4133c15 to 4266c16.
> 
> I am sure i can get bios 1001 working I just didnt feel like messing with it(cache clocking up when on auto).
> 
> But now that I updated to 10001 it seems to have changed some thing that is not seen. My cache always use to clock up to 4700 when left on auto but manually setting P and E cores.
> 
> Now after bios 1001 it wont. Even after using EZ Flash and bios Flashback to older bios versions.
> 
> Not the end of the world(but annoying) I just have to manually set cache clock and cache voltage now when manually ocing the CPU.
> 
> Not the first time I have had issues with Asus bios EZ Flash and Flashback not flashing everything. On last gen z590 Apex using Flashback would not flash micrcode, had to use EZ flash to get microcode to flash.
> 
> I even tried another OS as i thought maybe it wa something in Windows that changed so the cache didnt want to clock up and it wasnt the OS.


I've seen weird anomalies too before on these earlier bios, like loading once stable profiles becoming unstable no matter what you do.
Haven't had any real issues since the later 08xx BIOS luckily.

But you're running E cores which isn't something I've tested at all. Always ran 4.7 cache manually set.
In a couple more BIOS updates I may try enabling E cores. But I am still on Windows 10 so idk, don't want to be beta testing windows 11 lol


----------



## bscool

@Agent-A01 I tried 1.6v for 4133c14 and still errored. Didnt try too hard to get it stable since 4133c15 is easy @1.55v 1.35io/1.35dq on bios 901.

On bios 707 right now trying to decide to flash to 901 or try 1001 again. I just know I had weird issues on 1001 and not in the mood to spend hour or days f#in with stuff like csgo crashing or saying game file has errors/corrupt. 

Never had that happen with any other bios. Maybe it is related to the new microcode, not sure.


----------



## robertr1

New daily. 16/4200 is equally stable but 15/4100 is slightly faster.


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> @shrimpmaster Sr benefit the same as DR on z690 ddr4. Here are some SR I have tested.


I was talking about setting manual terciareis. For me it doesn't change aida64, SoTR or linpack performance. But on single rank only sg/dg matter. And the most important ones are already at 7/4. There are too set to 15, if set to 12 do nothing in my testing. Same linpack tflops, same aida64, same SoTR fps.

And setting everything to the absolute minimum can make game performance worse. Like WTRs/l at 2/6 performs worse than 4/8. trfc below a certan point doesn't improve performance and actually makes things feel less smooth.


----------



## wkamil

shrimpmaster said:


> I was talking about setting manual terciareis. For me it doesn't change aida64, SoTR or linpack performance. But on single rank only sg/dg matter. And the most important ones are already at 7/4. There are too set to 15, if set to 12 do nothing in my testing. Same linpack tflops, same aida64, same SoTR fps.
> 
> And setting everything to the absolute minimum can make game performance worse. Like WTRs/l at 2/6 performs worse than 4/8. trfc below a certan point doesn't improve performance and actually makes things feel less smooth.


And what is your Aida64 results?


----------



## GtiJason

shrimpmaster said:


> I was talking about setting manual terciareis. For me it doesn't change aida64, SoTR or linpack performance. But on single rank only sg/dg matter. And the most important ones are already at 7/4. There are too set to 15, if set to 12 do nothing in my testing. Same linpack tflops, same aida64, same SoTR fps.
> 
> And setting everything to the absolute minimum can make game performance worse. Like WTRs/l at 2/6 performs worse than 4/8. trfc below a certan point doesn't improve performance and actually makes things feel less smooth.


It's all about learning what timings are directly related to each other and what changing 1 timing up/down will possibly do to another timing that may or may not be seen / adjustable in the bios.
Start with the most important ones for performance as they usually affect the rest. Cas latency / CMD Rate / CWL etc. Yeah sometimes higher is better than lower because raising 1 timing pair sg/dg like in your example (15 to 12 does nothing maybe RDWR) might allow you to lower something more important like say CWL. tRFC might seem strange because setting 180 is slower than 220 but like gpu OC it's good to test after an adjustment to make sure performance is going in the direction you intend. Going too low on main timing could be messing up a supporting timing like tRFC2/4. Here is the 1st group of timings I keep in mind when starting with a new kit, board or platform. I'll keep this simple as it's very important if you want to save 30ns on a 5 minute run LOL

CWL If you lower this by 1 
WRRD_sg/dg these lower by 1
WTR_L/S and that makes these lower by 1
WR which raises this by 1 do to this relationship ... tWR = tWRPRE - tCWL - 4


----------



## shrimpmaster

wkamil said:


> And what is your Aida64 results?


I do not care about aida64. I care about game performance and how game feels.


----------



## wkamil

shrimpmaster said:


> I do not care about aida64. I care about game performance and how game feels.


I didn't ask about your feelings.
Can you take Aida64 measurements and share them just for comparison, please? Thanks in advance.


----------



## shrimpmaster

wkamil said:


> I didn't ask about your feelings.
> Can you take Aida64 measurements and share them just for comparison, please? Thanks in advance.


Ainda64 doesn't even give accurate results with Alder Lake. What's the point? People with 12900k get less latency, you can get higher than theoretical max bandwidth because it hits the cache! Win11 vs win10 different results.

I still don't get why people obsess over getting the lowest possible timings just to show of their absolutely useless aida64 benchmarks. Does it improve your actual experience? No.. I actually makes it worse after a certain point. Soo why?


----------



## rkneeshaw

Long thread, quite the read.

Where do we stand on MSI Pro BIOS versions and breaking through the 3600 DR wall? 

I'm on 110 and I can't get my bdie kit over 3600 unless I manually set terminations, then I can run 3800 stable, but no more:
vDimm 1.47
vddq 1.35
sa 1.35
rtt wr 60
rtt nom 48
rtt park 80

Anyone with the 3600Mhz wall using 1.24 or 1.24u2 with good results?


----------



## jayfkay

Same experience for me. I heard the latest beta bios helps. MSI Global English Forum Haven't tried yet


----------



## wkamil

shrimpmaster said:


> Ainda64 doesn't even give accurate results with Alder Lake. What's the point? People with 12900k get less latency, you can get higher than theoretical max bandwidth because it hits the cache! Win11 vs win10 different results.
> 
> I still don't get why people obsess over getting the lowest possible timings just to show of their absolutely useless aida64 benchmarks. Does it improve your actual experience? No.. I actually makes it worse after a certain point. Soo why?


It took you longer to write this post than to use Aida64, but thanks for clarification.


----------



## rkneeshaw

I hope I am not speaking too soon, but 1.24U2 bios on MSI a-Pro is a game changer for me. Previous wall was 3600Mhz, or 3800 with manual termination settings.










 

4300 would boot into windows, but would BSOD eventually
4266 was a bit better but still had an odd crash of an app here and there
4200 survives 2 minutes of stress testing with untuned timings (but stopped there for now because I use ambient ram cooling and 1.6 will get too hot)

This was achieved on raw testing settings:
1.42sa
1.35vddq
1.6vdimm
fixed all core 51/41/41 @ 1.3v

Haven't dialed in timings
Haven't rolled down voltages yet
This is just raw testing. I couldn't even post with anything over 3800 before!


----------



## MikeS3000

I bit the bullet and purchased an open box G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR-3600 14-15-15-35 kit for $191 at my local Microcenter. I'm selling my 4x8gb Hynix DJR. Time to play with the big kids. I've been tweaking and testing all weekend. I think I'm stuck at DDR-4000 for my 12900k. 4100 and 4133 both can boot but they fail Y-cruncher very quickly so I think I'm at the limit of my IMC. Anything that I can change that would make a tangible difference? These settings are TM5 Anta777 extreme stable. Voltages are 1.50v vdimm, 1.35v SA and 1.35v VDDQ.


----------



## HvacGuru

truehighroller1 said:


> If you don't mind hvac, what are your voltages you're using bud? I appreciate it.


These are the correct voltages. Windows 10 rig. Posted my Windows 11 rig last night. Sorry about that!


----------



## truehighroller1

HvacGuru said:


> These are the correct voltages. Windows 10 rig. Posted my Windows 11 rig last night. Sorry about that!
> 
> View attachment 2541940



Thank you hvac. I appreciate it.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> On bios 707 right now trying to decide to flash to 901 or try 1001 again. I just know I had weird issues on 1001 and not in the mood to spend hour or days f#in with stuff like csgo crashing or saying game file has errors/corrupt.


What error was it? 0xC000005?




shrimpmaster said:


> I was talking about setting manual terciareis. For me it doesn't change aida64, SoTR or linpack performance. But on single rank only sg/dg matter. And the most important ones are already at 7/4. There are too set to 15, if set to 12 do nothing in my testing. Same linpack tflops, same aida64, same SoTR fps.
> 
> And setting everything to the absolute minimum can make game performance worse. Like WTRs/l at 2/6 performs worse than 4/8. trfc below a certan point doesn't improve performance and actually makes things feel less smooth.


SG/DG/DD matter. Only DR doesn't matter.

I've seen great gains in memory bound applications, gaming included, by tuning tertieries.

ROTR and linpack are both bad benchmarks for that. They are not memory bound.



shrimpmaster said:


> Ainda64 doesn't even give accurate results with Alder Lake. What's the point? People with 12900k get less latency, you can get higher than theoretical max bandwidth because it hits the cache! Win11 vs win10 different results.
> 
> I still don't get why people obsess over getting the lowest possible timings just to show of their absolutely useless aida64 benchmarks. Does it improve your actual experience? No.. I actually makes it worse after a certain point. Soo why?


While it's true that aidia64 gives skewed results, it's still useful in seeing before/after results.

It's a good tool for others to compare results to each other.
And not true for 12900K getting lower latency. My 12700K resulted in the same latency.


----------



## wkamil

Agent-A01 said:


> SG/DG/DD matter. Only DR doesn't matter.
> I've seen great gains in memory bound applications, gaming included, by tuning tertieries.












Any advice, what can I improve with my timings? Frequency is maxed (I think my IMC is limitation here).


----------



## Agent-A01

wkamil said:


> Any advice, what can I improve with my timings? Frequency is maxed (I think my IMC is limitation here).


Since you are running 3866, you should be able to lower those by a lot.
You mentioned that's your highest frequency.
Limitation is likely 1T, 2T should see >4000 but 3866 1T is good spot to land at IMO.

If this is b-die here are some suggestions.

_tRAS = 28

tRFC = 320 (safe)._
At that speed, you could likely run around 280~ provided temps are less than ~45c but 320 is a good starting point.

_tCWL 12._
If it posts it's typically stable, it's good for lowering RTLs. Observe the changes from 67. Should land at 65 RTL.

_tWRRD_SG = 26
tWWRD_DG = 22_
These will lower tWTR_L and S to 6/2 respectively.

_tRDRD_SG = 6_
In my experience, this one requires more vDIMM. If that's the case for you, not worth chasing stability on it.

tWRWR and tRDRD timings bring a lot more bandwidth so try these out.
You may be able to run these lower than the safe values

_tWRWR_ SG = 6 
tWRWR_DD/DR = 7(safe) or 6 / 5

tRDRD_SG = 6
tRDRD_DD/DR = 7 (safe) or 6 / 5

tRDWR_DG/SG/DD/DR = 12 (safe)_
You may be able to run these at 10 across the board.

There's a lot of timings to tune and I suggest not applying all of these at once as it would be impossible to figure out which is the cause for problems.

Test tRAS, tRFC, tCWL individually. Then work on tertiaries as pairs. like tRDRD_DD and DR at the same time.
I suppose if you wanted to you could yolo it and try the setting safe timings but that's up to you.

Lastly, some timings may require more VDDQ or VCCSA and it's up to you to determine if it's worth increasing those to lower them below safe values.


----------



## HvacGuru

Started tighten up the timings today. New best for me. I have the same ram in my other rig and can't get past 4000 Mhz. 
On a side note...Just ordered all the parts for my first water cooled system today. Should be fun!


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> What error was it? 0xC000005?


It was an error that popped up from steam/csgo about Pack File Coruption.

Back on bios 1001 now with manual cache anc l2 voltage set and things are working.

Looks like for me the new microcode cause me to need way more L2 voltage. Before I left it on auto which I think was 1.05v? Now i need close to 1.3v for 36 min and max 46 cache clocks.

Going down to 44 cache still needs 1.24 range.

What do you need for L2 voltage and what do you run your cache at?

Before i never had to touch cache/L2 votlage on auto it was fine.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> It was an error that popped up from steam/csgo about Pack File Coruption.
> 
> Back on bios 1001 now with manual cache anc l2 voltage set and things are working.
> 
> Looks like for me the new microcode cause me to need way more L2 voltage. Before I left it on auto which I think was 1.05v? Now i need close to 1.3v for 36 min and max 46 cache clocks.
> 
> Going down to 44 cache still needs 1.24 range.
> 
> What do you need for L2 voltage and what do you run your cache at?
> 
> Before i never had to touch cache/L2 votlage on auto it was fine.


Well have you checked the max cache frequency with the newer BIOS? It may be boosting higher than the previous bios. 
Cache frequency on L2 hits a hard wall and starts requiring way more L2 voltage.

It's important to know that L2 voltage only applies when E cores are enabled. With them disabled it's a redundant voltage and cache is purely dependent on vcore.

I don't use E cores at the moment so I can't tell you what I need for L2 cache. But 1.3v does sound about right for 46 cache clock.
I doubt it was actually 1.05v before at the same frequency, most likely it was that at idle when ring is clocked down but would ramp up with higher frequencies.

I'll probably play with e cores sometime soon to see if it's worth it for me(primarily gaming)


----------



## bscool

@Agent-A01 max cache I can run is still the same on bios 1001 46 if I set manually. 

That is why I left it on auto in the past it would clock to 47. 

Now if I set manual max cache of 47 crashes even with really high like 1.36v L2. 

Will be intersting to see if other on Strix d4 have issues with cache on atuo(although most probably dont use auto) when going to bios 1001 or bios versions with the new MC.

I see @truehighroller1 went to bios 1001 on Strix d4 and he posted a screeenshot and his cache is still clocking up to 4700 when on auto with manual P and E core OC.


----------



## Agent-A01

@bscool 

So the ringbus will clock higher when e cores are asleep. Is there a way for you to figure out what frequency it reaches while e cores are in use?
My thoughts are that the ringbus is clocking higher than before while e-cores are active versus the previous bios.


----------



## solon

rkneeshaw said:


> I hope I am not speaking too soon, but 1.24U2 bios on MSI a-Pro is a game changer for me. Previous wall was 3600Mhz, or 3800 with manual termination settings.
> 
> View attachment 2541938
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4300 would boot into windows, but would BSOD eventually
> 4266 was a bit better but still had an odd crash of an app here and there
> 4200 survives 2 minutes of stress testing with untuned timings (but stopped there for now because I use ambient ram cooling and 1.6 will get too hot)
> 
> This was achieved on raw testing settings:
> 1.42sa
> 1.35vddq
> 1.6vdimm
> fixed all core 51/41/41 @ 1.3v
> 
> Haven't dialed in timings
> Haven't rolled down voltages yet
> This is just raw testing. I couldn't even post with anything over 3800 before!


 can you share 1.24U2 Bios?


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> @bscool
> 
> So the ringbus will clock higher when e cores are asleep. Is there a way for you to figure out what frequency it reaches while e cores are in use?
> My thoughts are that the ringbus is clocking higher than before while e-cores are active versus the previous bios.


How can they be clocking higher when I am setting a static E core of 40?

And cache is set at min 36 and max 46.

Ill have to think about it because I dont see how if I am doing the same thing it should change how it works now.

edit look at @truehighroller1 his is working like mine use to. He is setting P and E cores manually and with cache auto it clocks up to 4700. [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> How can they be clocking higher when I am setting a static E core of 40?
> 
> And cache is set at min 36 and max 46.
> 
> Ill have to think about it because I dont see how if I am doing the same thing it should change how it works now.


Well it's possible ring clock can be higher than the e-cores while they are active but that would require testing.
We all know ring cannot clock as high as the cores but e-cores aren't the same type of core.

Try setting E core to 36 and cache min to 37 and see if you can run a benchmark that stresses e cores.

Also ring down bin is set to auto or disabled?


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Well it's possible ring clock can be higher than the e-cores but that would require testing.
> We all know ring cannot clock as high as the cores but e-cores aren't the same type of core.
> 
> Try setting E core to 36 and cache min to 37 and see if you can run a benchmark that stresses e cores.
> 
> Also ring down bin is set to auto or disabled?


Interesting, So i just tried setting various things not going to to list them all.

Set E core to Auto and P core to 52 made Auto Cache stay locked at 3600

Same setting as above but with E [email protected] still locked Cache to 3600.

But I figured it out, setting static P core is what kills my cache clock when on Auto cache.

As example in screen I will post

P core auto

E core 40

cache all setting Auto, now clocks to 4700 like it use it.


----------



## rkneeshaw

solon said:


> can you share 1.24U2 Bios?


Yeah it was posted over here: MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> How can they be clocking higher when I am setting a static E core of 40?
> 
> And cache is set at min 36 and max 46.
> 
> Ill have to think about it because I dont see how if I am doing the same thing it should change how it works now.
> 
> edit look at @truehighroller1 his is working like mine use to. He is setting P and E cores manually and with cache auto it clocks up to 4700. [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


@shamino1978 

I can't get anything worth a damn stable on that bios. Not 4400 not 4600 not 4000 not 4133. Not a damn thing. I even cleared CMOS and went back to my sr a2 die sticks even, nothing loads worth a damn for me with 1001 bios. I spent 6 hours on it. Went up and down every voltage possible. I give up it's junk for me. I don't understand how it went backwards performance wise. I don't get it.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> @shamino1978
> 
> I can't get anything worth a damn stable on that bios. Not 4400 not 4600 not 4000 not 4133. Not a damn thing. I even cleared CMOS and went back to my sr a2 die sticks even, nothing loads worth a damn for me with 1001 bios. I spent 6 hours on it. Went up and down every voltage possible. I give up it's junk for me. I don't understand how it went backwards performance wise. I don't get it.


That is how it goes, not all bioses are better. Newer doesnt equal better.

Many times I have seen the best bioses are within the first few releases. As an example z390 Hero best bios is 0602. The 2nd bios released.

Seen this many times over the last few gens. The latter bioses can be worse in many cases.

I think they try to fix things for people having issues and it makes things worse for people that didnt have issues. So best not to update if you dont have issues. I just like to play so I usually try new bioses.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> That is how it goes, not all bioses are better. Newer doesnt equal better.
> 
> Many times I have seen the best bioses are within the first few releases. As an example z390 Hero best bios is 0602. The 2nd bios released.
> 
> Seen this many times over the last few gens. The latter bioses can be worse in many cases.
> 
> I think they try to fix things for people having issues and it makes things worse for people that didnt have issues. So best not to update if you dont have issues. I just like to play so I usually try new bioses.



Agreed. I tried. I throw in the towel.


----------



## robertr1

Why are you guys upgrading to the new bios where all they did was remove avx512 as an option?

Ring can exceed ecores frequency. I’m running 45x cache when ecores are loaded up at 42x. Not sure how safe it is to be running L2 voltage at 1.3+ either. Be careful there.

One thing that does not unfortunately work or I haven’t found a way is to set the min cache to 45x which I know works with ecores working and set max cache to 50x which I know works if ecores are disabled. This is what auto does anyway but it seems you can’t hard set it to exhibit similar behaviour. @shamino1978 is this something that can be bios tuned or a limitation of thread director? Ideally we would like find our max ring frequency with and without ecores and then set those as min and max with ring down bin enabled.


----------



## stn1

robertr1 said:


> Why are you guys upgrading to the new bios where all they did was remove avx512 as an option?
> 
> Ring can exceed ecores frequency. I’m running 45x cache when ecores are loaded up at 42x. Not sure how safe it is to be running L2 voltage at 1.3+ either. Be careful there.
> 
> One thing that does not unfortunately work or I haven’t found a way is to set the min cache to 45x which I know works with ecores working and set max cache to 50x which I know works if ecores are disabled. This is what auto does anyway but it seems you can’t hard set it to exhibit similar behaviour. @shamino1978 is this something that can be bios tuned or a limitation of thread director? Ideally we would like find our max ring frequency with and without ecores and then set those as min and max with ring down bin enabled.


Mind you with ecores off ring voltage overrides vcore. So just by increasing cache to x50 your vcore settings will be overridden. So it would be difficult to test how much ring you can have without ecores, without voltage override


----------



## pitter

Need suggestions for improvements 

I am clueless as how to tune RTL/IOL , but thats the only thing left to do i think ,
i am on windows 11 so i cannot get ASrock Timing configurator to work , but i am close to max on my ram timings i guess.

I couldn't boot at 4133 even with 1.55 DIMM voltage ( now i am at 1.5 ) so i left it at 4000-15-15-15-32 cpu just core 50 cache 47 E-cores disabled 1.27 manual vcore LLC4. I 've been told if i tune my RTL/IOL i should get close to 40ns . But i dont even know where to see those on my BIOS ( ASUS STRIX -A GAMING ) .

I'd appreciate if someone can help me via DM to help me lower ns a bit more ( I got room on my cpu as well ( SP P-Cores 98 ) , but i've found if i go above 5.0ghz it requires more voltage that push temperatures so high on cinebench or AIDA stress test and even crashes , VCCSA is 1.35 default


----------



## pitter

HvacGuru said:


> Started tighten up the timings today. New best for me. I have the same ram in my other rig and can't get past 4000 Mhz.
> On a side note...Just ordered all the parts for my first water cooled system today. Should be fun!
> 
> View attachment 2542000


how much DRAM Voltage? I got mine stable at 4000 15-15-15-32 atm , but i couldnt boot 4133 even with 1.55. Also , if you don't mind how could you set the Vcore in "adaptive" ? You leave Vcore on Auto and play with offset ? I have mine set 1.27 manually and temperatures don't drop below 30 because Vcore is set static.


----------



## LionAlonso

stn1 said:


> Mind you with ecores off ring voltage overrides vcore. So just by increasing cache to x50 your vcore settings will be overridden. So it would be difficult to test how much ring you can have without ecores, without voltage override


Setting ring with ecores on also override vcore right? 
if i change from auto my 12900k idles at more vcore.
0.7v auto vs 1.1 or so with cache at 4.2


----------



## jediblr

pitter said:


> i am on windows 11 so i cannot get ASrock Timing configurator to work


ASrock Timing configurator work perfectly on win 11


----------



## Derpinheimer

rkneeshaw said:


> I hope I am not speaking too soon, but 1.24U2 bios on MSI a-Pro is a game changer for me. Previous wall was 3600Mhz, or 3800 with manual termination settings.
> 
> View attachment 2541938
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4300 would boot into windows, but would BSOD eventually
> 4266 was a bit better but still had an odd crash of an app here and there
> 4200 survives 2 minutes of stress testing with untuned timings (but stopped there for now because I use ambient ram cooling and 1.6 will get too hot)
> 
> This was achieved on raw testing settings:
> 1.42sa
> 1.35vddq
> 1.6vdimm
> fixed all core 51/41/41 @ 1.3v
> 
> Haven't dialed in timings
> Haven't rolled down voltages yet
> This is just raw testing. I couldn't even post with anything over 3800 before!


Is this the beta bios that's been floating around awhile?

I have some interesting update on my B-die on a MSI Z690-A Pro, oloy 3600 14-14-14-32 and 12700k.

With bios 124, it won't post on XMP.
A new 12700k sample WILL. So apparently there are some absolute garbage IMC out there, maybe??

Strangely both 12700k will post at 3800mhz on bios 100

Both 12700k will post with hynix MJR 4000 cl18.


----------



## rkneeshaw

The one I'm running is 1.24U2, I only saw it posted once before, and its been reposted in the MSI owners thread. I haven't tried 1.24, but 1.24U2 is different. I couldnt post or boot anything above 3800 on 110, and couldnt post above 3700 on 100. Both cases I had to manually guess and set terminations. With 1.24U2, its all auto, it just boots. Was able to boot 4300 even, but wasn't stable so i'm on 4200 now, all gear 1 with dual rank 2x16 bdie.

EDIT: I mean the terminations are all set to auto. I had to manually set SA voltage to 1.42v to make this happen. VDDQ is on auto (and BIOS chose 1.2v).


----------



## sneida

can my 12700k imc be so bad, that 4000mhz cl16-16-16 (xmp, with 1.4v) gear 1 cmd 2T does not work? Tried with lots of different voltage settings (vddq, sa, dram) - not a chance (throws errors in tm5 within 10 seconds).

what works fine: 3600cl14 gear 1 cmd 1t trfc 350t, dram 1.45v, sa+vddq 1.25v. 

board: tuf d4 (0808)


----------



## Agent-A01

sneida said:


> can my 12700k imc be so bad, that 4000mhz cl16-16-16 (xmp, with 1.4v) gear 1 cmd 2T does not work? Tried with lots of different voltage settings (vddq, sa, dram) - not a chance (throws errors in tm5 within 10 seconds).
> 
> what works fine: 3600cl14 gear 1 cmd 1t trfc 350t, dram 1.45v, sa+vddq 1.25v.
> 
> board: tuf d4 (0808)


That's very possible. Have you tried the latest bios to see if it helps at all?


----------



## Derpinheimer

sneida said:


> can my 12700k imc be so bad, that 4000mhz cl16-16-16 (xmp, with 1.4v) gear 1 cmd 2T does not work? Tried with lots of different voltage settings (vddq, sa, dram) - not a chance (throws errors in tm5 within 10 seconds).
> 
> what works fine: 3600cl14 gear 1 cmd 1t trfc 350t, dram 1.45v, sa+vddq 1.25v.
> 
> board: tuf d4 (0808)


Yes, see my post above. Can't run 3600 CL14 at any voltage, with the terminations manually set. Literally just swap the CPU to a different 12700k and it boots; no bios changes. 

looks like you got a good 12700k based on my sample of 2 😆


----------



## drkrffxx

sneida said:


> can my 12700k imc be so bad, that 4000mhz cl16-16-16 (xmp, with 1.4v) gear 1 cmd 2T does not work? Tried with lots of different voltage settings (vddq, sa, dram) - not a chance (throws errors in tm5 within 10 seconds).
> 
> what works fine: 3600cl14 gear 1 cmd 1t trfc 350t, dram 1.45v, sa+vddq 1.25v.
> 
> board: tuf d4 (0808)


Mine boots with errors at 3900 and 3800.

3733 14-14-14-28 is the tightest I've managed to make it run without errors. I was about to sit down and do further testing.

12700k TUF D4 0808 too.


----------



## Derpinheimer

rkneeshaw said:


> The one I'm running is 1.24U2, I only saw it posted once before, and its been reposted in the MSI owners thread. I haven't tried 1.24, but 1.24U2 is different. I couldnt post or boot anything above 3800 on 110, and couldnt post above 3700 on 100. Both cases I had to manually guess and set terminations. With 1.24U2, its all auto, it just boots. Was able to boot 4300 even, but wasn't stable so i'm on 4200 now, all gear 1 with dual rank 2x16 bdie.
> 
> EDIT: I mean the terminations are all set to auto. I had to manually set SA voltage to 1.42v to make this happen. VDDQ is on auto (and BIOS chose 1.2v).


Well I can say this much. The worse of my two 12700k chips now posts with XMP on 124u2 (previously did not on 124)!

EDIT: "bad 12700k" could post up to 3700. "better 12700k" successfully posted [email protected] & 1.55V . Stability not yet determined. But 124U2 is a godsend!


----------



## sneida

drkrffxx said:


> Mine boots with errors at 3900 and 3800.
> 
> 3733 14-14-14-28 is the tightest I've managed to make it run without errors. I was about to sit down and do further testing.
> 
> 12700k TUF D4 0808 too.


what voltages pls?


----------



## drkrffxx

sneida said:


> what voltages pls?


1.49v DRAM
1.25v SA
Rest auto


----------



## pitter

jediblr said:


> ASrock Timing configurator work perfectly on win 11
> View attachment 2542111


can you link me please ? I didnt find a version that works


----------



## raad11

Nevermind


----------



## rkneeshaw

ok finally got this dialed in.

I just couldn't stabilize 4200. So I settled for 4133c16 @ 1.47vdimm










MSI Z690-A Pro on 1.24U2 beta bios
x51 all core (x41 ecore, x44 ring)
SA 1.32v
gskill 3600c14 1.45v 2x16 DR bdie kit
Overclocked to 4133c16 1.47v

Odd thing is that now my CPU OC became unstable. When I could only run 3600 I was able to do a 5.2ghz all-core OC. But since running 4133 I can only hit 5.1Ghz stable now. Only effects the pcores. Weird.


----------



## jediblr

pitter said:


> can you link me please ? I didnt find a version that works


ASrock Timing configurator 4.0.13 AsrTCSetup(v4.0.13).7z


----------



## bscool

Edit


----------



## robertr1

rkneeshaw said:


> ok finally got this dialed in.
> 
> I just couldn't stabilize 4200. So I settled for 4133c16 @ 1.47vdimm
> 
> 
> 
> Odd thing is that now my CPU OC became unstable. When I could only run 3600 I was able to do a 5.2ghz all-core OC. But since running 4133 I can only hit 5.1Ghz stable now. Only effects the pcores. Weird.


When your ram runs faster it lets the cpu do more work. It’s very common to need more vcore to stabilize a cpu after mem tuning.


----------



## hawkslayr

Where can I download the 0808 bios for the Asus TUF Wifi?


----------



## sneida

hawkslayr said:


> Where can I download the 0808 bios for the Asus TUF Wifi?


[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread first page got an overview (3rd post): TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0808


----------



## hawkslayr

sneida said:


> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread first page got an overview (3rd post): TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 BETA BIOS 0808


Thanks for the link, I appreciate it a lot! 

I thought 0808 was the latest bios but seems like there is a 0901 and 1001 version as well, do you know where I can them too?


----------



## bscool

Finally figured out what the deal was with my cache. Basically "user error" 

I had been using per core and cache worked like it should clocking up and down.

"setting synch all cores from bios auto disables csates, you can enabled cstates manually
csates needs to be enabled for ecores to sleep opportuinistically thus for ring to boost up"

"cstates are disabled if you set "synch allcores" but not if u set by core usage and so on
so it could have just been parked in a different "mode"










[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Try ODT 40/240/240/48/48. Before you do that, load optimized defaults and save an exit. Go back into bios and run XMP 1 or XMP2 then go to dram timing control and look for skews and odt control. Key in that for both dimm channels. Run tm5 again and see if it works. If still fails, increase...




www.overclock.net













[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


cstates are disabled if you set "synch allcores" but not if u set by core usage and so on so it could have just been parked in a different "mode"




www.overclock.net


----------



## sneida

hawkslayr said:


> Thanks for the link, I appreciate it a lot!
> 
> I thought 0808 was the latest bios but seems like there is a 0901 and 1001 version as well, do you know where I can them too?


as far as i have seen 0901 is not available for tuf, latest pre 1001 was 0811 or 12.

1001: [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
(unfortunately not all bios updates are listed on 1st page)


----------



## HvacGuru

pitter said:


> how much DRAM Voltage? I got mine stable at 4000 15-15-15-32 atm , but i couldnt boot 4133 even with 1.55. Also , if you don't mind how could you set the Vcore in "adaptive" ? You leave Vcore on Auto and play with offset ? I have mine set 1.27 manually and temperatures don't drop below 30 because Vcore is set static.





pitter said:


> how much DRAM Voltage? I got mine stable at 4000 15-15-15-32 atm , but i couldnt boot 4133 even with 1.55. Also , if you don't mind how could you set the Vcore in "adaptive" ? You leave Vcore on Auto and play with offset ? I have mine set 1.27 manually and temperatures don't drop below 30 because Vcore is set static.


1.56 for DRAM. Set to adaptive and use a negative offset. Start at -.05 and see if it passes y- cruncher. Reduce it until it passes. My system ides at 18-22c. No reason at all to use static Vcore imo


----------



## Tsun

Has anyone seen 1.24U2 BIOSes for MSI motherboards other than Z690-A? I'm looking for Edge in particular.


----------



## MikeS3000

robertr1 said:


> When your ram runs faster it lets the cpu do more work. It’s very common to need more vcore to stabilize a cpu after mem tuning.


This scenario has been driving me nuts. I worked all weekend on getting my RAM stable at DDR 4000. I have been using ASUS AI Overclocking for now as I have not had time to tune the CPU. I decided to run OCCT Large extreme and normal SSE and I get many errors on different cores after 7 to 15 minutes. I kept same AI overclocking settings and tried XMP 3600 and it passed no problem. It's amazing that my CPU package temps dropped 10 degrees just enabling XMP. The VSSA and VDDQ were the same for both tests. I ended up changing the AI Overclock optimism scale from default 100 to 93. This bumped adaptive voltage just a little bit and I passed an hour of OCCT Large SSE normal just now. I had no idea that RAM overclocks could affect CPU stability and temperature to that extreme, but it makes sense now.


----------



## jayfkay

it seems the Z690-A Pro beta bios from 28th dec already removed AVX-512 support


----------



## truehighroller1

Sitting at home got bored decided to go back to 4400mhz on 0901 and managed to get the following stable so far.

Update:

Pushed her little more and almost broke into 71 seconds in y cruncher.


----------



## drkrffxx

sneida said:


> what voltages pls?


Yesterday's tweaking session wasn't all that fruitful when it came to rising speeds. I did manage to tighten the timings a bit with some more voltage.

Was 3733 14-14-14-28 T1 G1 @ 1.50v
Now 3733 14-14-14-24 T1 G1 @ 1.53v

3800+ refuses to do passes without errors, no mater what timings.

4000 is still boots into a black screen. I wonder what a bios update can do.

And... While we are at it, how can I save my settings if I update bios? Asus profiles get lost when updating I think, don't they?


----------



## truehighroller1

drkrffxx said:


> Yesterday's tweaking session wasn't all that fruitful when it came to rising speeds. I did manage to tighten the timings a bit with some more voltage.
> 
> Was 3733 14-14-14-28 T1 G1 @ 1.50v
> Now 3733 14-14-14-24 T1 G1 @ 1.53v
> 
> 3800+ refuses to do passes without errors, no mater what timings.
> 
> 4000 is still boots into a black screen. I wonder what a bios update can do.
> 
> And... While we are at it, how can I save my settings if I update bios? Asus profiles get lost when updating I think, don't they?


Save it to a text file on a USB stick. Or if using the same bios version save it as a cmo file to USB stick.


----------



## truehighroller1

Booooom.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Booooom.


If you hit f6 at the end of the run it shows more stats.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> If you hit f6 at the end of the run it shows more stats.



I was wondering how you were doing that actually lol.


----------



## truehighroller1

There you go. Even better. I cannot touch the wrwr settings to knock them down anymore as it does not like it at all. Giving it more vscca makes it angry as well lol. I don't know if it's bad or good but I gave it a tad more termination voltage for the vtt and vscca as well under tweakers paradise... Default is .9 and I bumped them up to 1.0.


----------



## ObviousCough

I have to RMA my DDR5 kit because it won't do XMP at any voltage or frequency.


So I'm back in this thread.

XMP passed in Gear 1 on my Aorus Ultra











Edit: My 2x16GB 3800CL14 kit booted at 4000 no problem. The board didn't detect memory change and just went straight to windows with the last kits voltage settings which also had the frequency set to 4000.


----------



## 2500k_2

ObviousCough said:


> I have to RMA my DDR5 kit because it won't do XMP at any voltage or frequency.
> 
> 
> So I'm back in this thread.
> 
> XMP passed in Gear 1 on my Aorus Ultra
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit: My 2x16GB 3800CL14 kit booted at 4000 no problem. The board didn't detect memory change and just went straight to windows with the last kits voltage settings which also had the frequency set to 4000.


aida? Has the latency decreased compared to your 4 dimm boards?
RTL 69 for cl 14 was also for 4dimm boards


----------



## pitter

HvacGuru said:


> 1.56 for DRAM. Set to adaptive and use a negative offset. Start at -.05 and see if it passes y- cruncher. Reduce it until it passes. My system ides at 18-22c. No reason at all to use static Vcore imo


adaptive and what turbo voltage ? Auto ?


----------



## robertr1

bscool said:


> Finally figured out what the deal was with my cache. Basically "user error"
> 
> I had been using per core and cache worked like it should clocking up and down.
> 
> "setting synch all cores from bios auto disables csates, you can enabled cstates manually
> csates needs to be enabled for ecores to sleep opportuinistically thus for ring to boost up"
> 
> "cstates are disabled if you set "synch allcores" but not if u set by core usage and so on
> so it could have just been parked in a different "mode"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> Try ODT 40/240/240/48/48. Before you do that, load optimized defaults and save an exit. Go back into bios and run XMP 1 or XMP2 then go to dram timing control and look for skews and odt control. Key in that for both dimm channels. Run tm5 again and see if it works. If still fails, increase...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> 
> cstates are disabled if you set "synch allcores" but not if u set by core usage and so on so it could have just been parked in a different "mode"
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


If you set Min to auto with Down bin enabled and max to whatever number you're highest stable at with ecores on (assuming you're running ecores). It'll work as intended.


----------



## LionAlonso

robertr1 said:


> If you set Min to auto with Down bin enabled and max to whatever number you're highest stable at with ecores on (assuming you're running ecores). It'll work as intended.


So like that the max value is used when ecores are on or only when the pcores are on and ecores parked?


----------



## bscool

robertr1 said:


> If you set Min to auto with Down bin enabled and max to whatever number you're highest stable at with ecores on (assuming you're running ecores). It'll work as intended.


Yeah I didnt know that it only does that with per core oc. If using all core it will not function like that unless you manually enable c states.

According to @shamino1978

"setting synch all cores from bios auto disables csates, you can enabled cstates manually
*csates needs to be enabled for ecores to sleep opportuinistically thus for ring to boost up*"


"*cstates are disabled if you set "synch allcores*" but not if u set by core usage and so on
*so it could have just been parked in a different "mode*"


----------



## HvacGuru

pitter said:


> adaptive and what turbo voltage ? Auto ?


Auto...I also use TVB Voltage Optimization On


----------



## robertr1

bscool said:


> Yeah I didnt know that it only does that with per core oc. If using all core it will not function like that unless you manually enable c states.
> 
> According to @shamino1978
> 
> "setting synch all cores from bios auto disables csates, you can enabled cstates manually
> *csates needs to be enabled for ecores to sleep opportuinistically thus for ring to boost up*"
> 
> 
> "*cstates are disabled if you set "synch allcores*" but not if u set by core usage and so on
> *so it could have just been parked in a different "mode*"


I have sync all cores enabled. Maybe at some point I went in and enabled c states but can’t recall.


----------



## robertr1

LionAlonso said:


> So like that the max value is used when ecores are on or only when the pcores are on and ecores parked?


If you have ecores enabled, the max value is what the max would be with setting min and max to the same.

The main benefit here is to let the cache down clock when not it in use. I noticed there were weird lock ups when running adaptive voltage and windows power plan set to balanced.

I realized it’s because the cache was hardset to min 44 and max 44. Once I set cache min to auto and it was able to down clock, all is fine


----------



## LionAlonso

robertr1 said:


> If you have ecores enabled, the max value is what the max would be with setting min and max to the same.
> 
> The main benefit here is to let the cache down clock when not it in use. I noticed there were weird lock ups when running adaptive voltage and windows power plan set to balanced.
> 
> I realized it’s because the cache was hardset to min 44 and max 44. Once I set cache min to auto and it was able to down clock, all is fine


I mean, if you let min at auto and you put max to 44, its worse than max on auto when ecores enabled,
Because when e cores enabled it will be the same 3,6 Ghz and when they are parked it will be 4,4 instead of 4,7?


----------



## robertr1

LionAlonso said:


> I mean, if you let min at auto and you put max to 44, its worse than max on auto when ecores enabled,
> Because when e cores enabled it will be the same 3,6 Ghz and when they are parked it will be 4,4 instead of 4,7?


With a manual core oc, leaving the cache on auto/auto doesn't boost past 3600mhz ever thus the workaround. Could be a bios bug? but yeah that's the behavior on this prime p board.


----------



## LionAlonso

robertr1 said:


> With a manual core oc, leaving the cache on auto/auto doesn't boost past 3600mhz ever thus the workaround. Could be a bios bug? but yeah that's the behavior on this prime p board.


I have tried it on tuf, seems the max cache selected overrides also max cache with e cores on (3600 at auto) so not bad.


----------



## shrimpmaster

For me, this 1001 bios is the best soo far for single rank b-die.
On previous bios without the 1T tweak, 1T was simply not stable. With 0003, 0803, 0807 bios 1t was stable, but had some issues posting with 2T, that are completely solved with 1001.
On the other hand, if I try super tight primaries it just won't post, like 3866mhz or 4000mhz 14-14-14. But those were never stable anyway soo not that relevant.

Offtopic: Input feels better on this bios. But it's something that only people that play same game 5h+ a day will notice. It's not like it's lower latency, it just feels noticeably better.


----------



## bass junkie xl

shrimpmaster said:


> For me, this 1001 bios is the best soo far for single rank b-die.
> On previous bios without the 1T tweak, 1T was simply not stable. With 0003, 0803, 0807 bios 1t was stable, but had some issues posting with 2T, that are completely solved with 1001.
> On the other hand, if I try super tight primaries it just won't post, like 3866mhz or 4000mhz 14-14-14. But those were never stable anyway soo not that relevant.
> 
> Offtopic: Input feels better on this bios. But it's something that only people that play same game 5h+ a day will notice. It's not like it's lower latency, it just feels noticeably better.


what board bro ? 

I'm on bios 901 on Strix d4 with single rank bdie 8gb x 4 sticks @ 4000 15-15-15-35 1.55v does 44 NS in Adia with 12900k. 

should I try this out 1001 ? 
I tried command rate 1 instant nope lol on 901. 

I just installed a artic liquid freezer 2 ,420mm AIO man is it a beast cooler score of 197- 202. 

I can run 12900k @ 5.1 big 4.0 small 4.3 ring cine bench r23 for 30 mins and be only 76-81c avg


----------



## shrimpmaster

bass junkie xl said:


> what board bro ?
> 
> I'm on bios 901 on Strix d4 with single rank bdie 8gb x 4 sticks @ 4000 15-15-15-35 1.55v does 44 NS in Adia with 12900k.
> 
> should I try this out 1001 ?
> I tried command rate 1 instant nope lol on 901.
> 
> I just installed a artic liquid freezer 2 ,420mm AIO man is it a beast cooler score of 197- 202.
> 
> I can run 12900k @ 5.1 big 4.0 small 4.3 ring cine bench r23 for 30 mins and be only 76-81c avg


z690 TUF, should be the same for strix.
1T is more for people running single rank.

I'm running 3866mhz 15-15-15-36 1T 1.45v. My IMC is not stable at anything over 3900mhz and prefers 133:100. 4000mhz errors in like 3min in testmem5 just like any other bios. I didn't try higher than 1.4v SA, but with 1.35v it takes less than 1min to error .


----------



## ObviousCough

I wasted all morning and most of the afternoon trying to get my DR sticks to work. I truly believe the IMC in this i5 is just too weak.

It's doing great with single rank sticks though


----------



## bscool

bass junkie xl said:


> what board bro ?
> 
> I'm on bios 901 on Strix d4 with single rank bdie 8gb x 4 sticks @ 4000 15-15-15-35 1.55v does 44 NS in Adia with 12900k.
> 
> should I try this out 1001 ?
> I tried command rate 1 instant nope lol on 901.
> 
> I just installed a artic liquid freezer 2 ,420mm AIO man is it a beast cooler score of 197- 202.
> 
> I can run 12900k @ 5.1 big 4.0 small 4.3 ring cine bench r23 for 30 mins and be only 76-81c avg


4x8 1t will be tough. 2x8 1t is easier.

Maybe I missed it but I assumed @shrimpmaster is running 2x8. If he is running 4x8 1t kudos


----------



## bass junkie xl

ObviousCough said:


> I wasted all morning and most of the afternoon trying to get my DR sticks to work. I truly believe the IMC in this i5 is just too weak.
> 
> It's doing great with single rank sticks though


im on 8gb x 4 with the same but 2tbut little more optomized 44 ns 1 t should be less then 44 ns if tuned


----------



## EarlZ

bass junkie xl said:


> im on 8gb x 4 with the same but 2tbut little more optomized 44 ns 1 t should be less then 44 ns if tuned
> 
> View attachment 2542507


What voltages are these on?


----------



## bass junkie xl

EarlZ said:


> What voltages are these on?


1.52v dram / 1.26 vcssa / 1.25vddq


----------



## bscool

bass junkie xl said:


> 1.52v dram / 1.26 vcssa / 1.25vddq


I wonder what you could do on DR b die. Looks like you have a golden IMC. I would think 4266 easy. 4000 4x8 with tight subs is crazy good.

Sorry if i already posted this before. Couldnt remember if i posted it or just thought it. 

I think I have IMC envy lol


----------



## bass junkie xl

bscool said:


> I wonder what you could do on DR b die. Looks like you have a golden IMC. I would think 4266 easy. 4000 4x8 with tight subs is crazy good.
> 
> Sorry if i already posted this before. Couldnt remember if i posted it or just thought it.
> 
> I think I have IMC envy lol


I haven't tested 16gb x 2 yet I would like to see what I can do . 

it's only a sp 88 p cores the imc seems ok so far . 

if I pulled out 2 of the 4 sticks and ran just 2 sticks of 8gb x2 you think I could oc bit further ? . these sticks are team group extreme 8gb x 4 of 4133 MHz cl-18-18-18-38 1.40v stock factory xmp . they do 4133 cl-16-16-16-36 1.5v on my cheap gigabyte z390 pro wifi with my 9900 ks . I have been eyeing up the g.skill black ( RGB ) Trident z 16 GB x 2 of 3200 cl-14-14-34 1.35v kit to try out for 299$ canadian


----------



## bscool

bass junkie xl said:


> I haven't tested 16gb x 2 yet I would like to see what I can do .
> 
> it's only a sp 88 p cores the imc seems ok so far .
> 
> if I pulled out 2 of the 4 sticks and ran just 2 sticks of 8gb x2 you think I could oc bit further ? . these sticks are team group extreme 8gb x 4 of 4133 MHz cl-18-18-18-38 1.40v stock factory xmp . they do 4133 cl-16-16-16-36 1.5v on my cheap gigabyte z390 pro wifi with my 9900 ks . I have been eyeing up the g.skill black ( RGB ) Trident z 16 GB x 2 of 3200 cl-14-14-34 1.35v kit to try out for 299$ canadian


H#LL yeah brother DO IT!!! I wanna see what you can do. I bet 4266c16 easy. By do it I mean try 2x8.

I can do 4266c15 SR and 4266c16 DR. I would bet your IMC is better than mine. I can only do 3733 last time i tried 4x8. Unless i had some timings set too tight. But you hitting 4000 on 4x8 is impressive.

Guessing dram you will need around 1.55v. sa and dq around 1.3 to 1.35 is my guess but you obviously dont need my help. You are doing better than i can on 4x8.


----------



## bass junkie xl

bscool said:


> H#LL yeah brother DO IT!!! I wanna see what you can do. I bet 4266c16 easy. By do it I mean try 2x8.
> 
> I can do 4266c15 SR and 4266c16 DR. I would bet your IMC is better than mine. I can only do 3733 last time i tried 4x8. Unless i had some timings set too tight. But you hitting 4000 on 4x8 is impressive.
> 
> Guessing dram you will need around 1.55v. sa and dq around 1.3 to 1.35 is my guess but you obviously dont need my help. You are doing better than i can on 4x8.


wow thats fast and tight ! 4266 c16 is even pretty nuts let alone 15 . 

really wish we could set. RTL/iol offset to get our RTL/iol lower on Strix z690 . 

I remember on .my auss xi code z390 I could seta RTL/I'll offset of 23 / 23 some times 24/24 get them about 3 - 5 notches lower.


----------



## bscool

bass junkie xl said:


> wow thats fast and tight ! 4266 c16 is even pretty nuts let alone 15 .
> 
> really wish we could set. RTL/iol offset to get our RTL/iol lower on Strix z690 .
> 
> I remember on .my auss xi code z390 I could seta RTL/I'll offset of 23 / 23 some times 24/24 get them about 3 - 5 notches lower.


You will should be in the 42ns range with single ranks and tight timings. I have posted some benches in this thread not at my z690 pc now or I would post one.

On the 3200c14 DR they are good. But if you can find 4000c16-16-16 kit for similar price i would get those. That way you know they can do 4000 easy and with a little more voltage should tighten up. So they should do 4133c15-16-16 to [email protected] to 1.55v.

With the 3200c14 more lotto as gskill has so many more bins out now i think less chance of getting really good 3200c14 bins like you could in the past. But what do i know. Just my theory.

In the last year or two I have had most of the top bins and they are all failry close i just think as time goes on the chance of getting a 3200c14 kit than can run 4000c14 is going to be very rare now that gskill sells a 4000c14 kit and they are dificult to find.

I have a 4000c14 kit and it is better than all the 2 dozen plus kits I have or had. 

Harder to find a kit that can do [email protected] or [email protected] with tight subs. Takes a really good kit.

But running 2x8 will give you a good idea if it is even worth getting a 2x16. 

If you can still only run 4000c15 with 2x8 no sense to get 2x16.

I think your IMC will scale with 2 sticks. But only one way to find out, try it


----------



## sneida

question (since i can go 3600cl14 gear1 t1 only, no higher frequency even with relaxed timings on gear 1): is it worth trying different ram slots (1 + 3 instead of currently using 2+4)?


----------



## bscool

sneida said:


> question (since i can go 3600cl14 gear1 t1 only, no higher frequency even with relaxed timings on gear 1): is it worth trying different ram slots (1 + 3 instead of currently using 2+4)?


It is the 1t I bet. try 2t and probably 4000+.

Different dim slot will be worse is my bet but try it and know from first hand experience.

Edit i see in another thread you said 2t doesnt work. Did you ever try bio 707 or the newest 1001?

Also if you post screen of your timings someone might be able to see if something is too tight.


----------



## sneida

bscool said:


> It is the 1t I bet. try 2t and probably 4000+.
> 
> Different dim slot will be worse is my bet but try it and know from first hand experience.
> 
> Edit i see in another thread you said 2t doesnt work. Did you ever try bio 707 or the newest 1001?


4000 cl16 gear 2 t1 works (did no extensive stability testing though) - its gear 1 that does not work >3600mhz. i tried multiple bios versions, 1001 not yet (since the avx situation is not totally clear - if its possible to go back).


----------



## bscool

sneida said:


> 4000 cl16 gear 2 t1 works (did no extensive stability testing though) - its gear 1 that does not work >3600mhz. i tried multiple bios versions, 1001 not yet (since the avx situation is not totally clear - if its possible to go back).


Hmm that is really weird you can run 3600 1t in gear 1, but going 2t in gear 1 you cant go any higher.

if you post screen of your timings someone might be able to see if something is too tight.

From what i know bios 707 was the best one on the TUF and now 1001 is good for b die. I am on Strix and 707 and 901 were best for me.

sa and vddq need to be manually set for higher clocks.


----------



## sneida

bscool said:


> Hmm that is really weird you can run 3600 1t in gear 1, but going 2t in gear 1 you cant go any higher.
> 
> if you post screen of your timings someone might be able to see if something is too tight.


I will try that again and post screenshots, thank you.

would you say 3800/3866 cl15 g1 2t should be faster than 3600 cl14 g1 1t? latency-wise its nearly no difference, i have a hard time finding data about the actual influence of 1t vs 2t on current intel platforms.


----------



## bscool

sneida said:


> I will try that again and post screenshots, thank you.
> 
> would say 3800/3866 cl15 g1 2t should be faster than 3600 cl14 g1 1t? latency-wise its nearly no difference, i have a hard time finding data about the actual influence of 1t vs 2t on current intel platforms.


Well I would rather run 2t and 2-300 higher mhz but some people like 1t and other tight subs. I dont thnk it matters outside of benchmarks.

I mean really I just do it for fun. I couldnt tell 3200xmp from 4000. Maybe i am the outlier 

I bet if they did double blind test for money many people would fail and lose their $. 

Just like audio test and cables if done and asked to put $$ if you can tell the difference people go silent. But I better not go down that road and stir up a hornets nest


----------



## sneida

bscool said:


> Well I would rather run 2t and 2-300 higher mhz but some people like 1t and other tight subs. I dont thnk it matters outside of benchmarks.
> 
> I mean really I just do it for fun. I couldnt tell 3200xmp from 4000. Maybe i am the outlier
> 
> I bet if they did double blind test for money many people would fail and lose their $.
> 
> Just like audio test and cables if done and asked to put $$ if you can tell the difference people go silent. But I better not go down that road and stir up a hornets nest


yesyes, its mostly a fun hobby - most of the pc investements (update cycles) i don't do because i "need" them. but still, i would love to just run my 4000cl16 1.4v memory at that speed...


----------



## bscool

sneida said:


> yesyes, its mostly a fun hobby - most of the pc investements (update cycles) i don't do because i "need" them. but still, i would love to just run my 4000cl16 1.4v memory at that speed...


I think it is do able if your imc can do it. Might need 1.45 dram. Depends on how good your sticks are.


----------



## hawkslayr

Which bios have people with DR b-die had the best oc results on the TUF?


----------



## Ichirou

@bscool Now I'm curious; is ~4,174 MHz CL14 flat not really achievable on Gear 1 Z690 for others? It's easy for my kit, but I don't know whether to interpret that as a good or bad, considering that you are already aware of how I can't do over 4,200+ consistently. Maybe it implies above average, but not amazing, memory slots?


----------



## bass junkie xl

bscool said:


> You will should be in the 42ns range with single ranks and tight timings. I have posted some benches in this thread not at my z690 pc now or I would post one.
> 
> On the 3200c14 DR they are good. But if you can find 4000c16-16-16 kit for similar price i would get those. That way you know they can do 4000 easy and with a little more voltage should tighten up. So they should do 4133c15-16-16 to [email protected] to 1.55v.
> 
> With the 3200c14 more lotto as gskill has so many more bins out now i think less chance of getting really good 3200c14 bins like you could in the past. But what do i know. Just my theory.
> 
> In the last year or two I have had most of the top bins and they are all failry close i just think as time goes on the chance of getting a 3200c14 kit than can run 4000c14 is going to be very rare now that gskill sells a 4000c14 kit and they are dificult to find.
> 
> I have a 4000c14 kit and it is better than all the 2 dozen plus kits I have or had.
> 
> Harder to find a kit that can do [email protected] or [email protected] with tight subs. Takes a really good kit.
> 
> But running 2x8 will give you a good idea if it is even worth getting a 2x16.
> 
> If you can still only run 4000c15 with 2x8 no sense to get 2x16.
> 
> I think your IMC will scale with 2 sticks. But only one way to find out, try it


great advice , i have been eyeing up the g.skill 32gb 4000 cl 14-15-15-35 1.55v kit but its 723 $ here in canada where the 3200 cl 14 32 gb kit is 299 $ candian 

ill save my bprofile to bios and pull out 2 sticks and run just 2 sticks of 8gb and seeif i can do more then 4000 c15 that i have now


----------



## Ichirou

@bscool
I can boot to desktop at 4,000 MHz 13-14-14-28 1T G1 up to ~1.74V, but 1.75V or more will not boot, and I need more voltage to stabilize CL13. Any ideas?

Boots with VDDQ at 1.50V (doesn't boot at 1.45V or 1.55V), and VCCSA at 1.45V+, at 1.74V VDIMM.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> @bscool Now I'm curious; is ~4,174 MHz CL14 flat not really achievable on Gear 1 Z690 for others? It's easy for my kit, but I don't know whether to interpret that as a good or bad, considering that you are already aware of how I can't do over 4,200+ consistently. Maybe it implies above average, but not amazing, memory slots?


I am sure others can do it but few have really high binned sticks or want to run 1.6v plus that it takes to run those clocks and timings. Most are on DR from what I can see. If they do have 2x8 it is older sticks that are just run of the mill b die. Few people are buying the high bin SR like you did or @Carillo used to run 43000 I think they were the gskill 4800c17 kit which cost about as much as my 4000c14 2x16 kit.

I dont know what to think about you not being able to run 4266+. It would be interesting if you got the MSI board @Carillo used and see if you can hit 4300. But even then it could something with your memory(bios compatibilty) that doesnt want to do that? Not sure really. Only way to really know is buy the MSI A and try it. Or settle for 4133 to 4174.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> @bscool
> I can boot to desktop at 4,000 MHz 13-14-14-28 1T G1 up to ~1.74V, but 1.75V or more will not boot, and I need more voltage to stabilize CL13. Any ideas?
> 
> Boots with VDDQ at 1.50V (doesn't boot at 1.45V or 1.55V), and VCCSA at 1.45V+, at 1.74V VDIMM.


I have no idea about voltages that high. Never tried them as I would never use them anyway.

I do know after a certain voltage you have to use less than 4 gig of memory or something like that. You limit how much mem Windows sees or Windows will not post. Or ask on Hwbot thread.

@GtiJason will know


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> I am sure others can do it but few have really high binned sticks or want to run 1.6v plus that it takes to run those clocks and timings. Most are on DR from what I can see. If they do have 2x8 it is older sticks that are just run of the mill b die. Few people are buying the high bin SR like you did or @Carillo used to run 43000 I think they were the gskill 4800c17 kit which cost about as much as my 4000c14 2x16 kit.
> 
> I dont know what to think about you not being able to run 4266+. It would be interesting if you got the MSI board @Carillo used and see if you can hit 4300. But even then it could something with your memory(bios compatibilty) that doesnt want to do that? Not sure really. Only way to really know is buy the MSI A and try it. Or settle for 4133 to 4174.


It does seem that according to the MSI Z690 Edge's QVL, the board does support up to 4,600 MHz Samsung B-die kits on Single Rank. Whereas for the ASUS Strix, they only officially support up to 4,266 MHz. So I would not be surprised if the Edge was tuned to maximize compatibility for Samsung B-die kits. Even their Micron/Spectek QVL shows promising compatibility for 4x16 GB Single Rank, high DIMM count kits, which would probably play well with my Micron B-die kit.

I'm not sure how I missed this when I was deciding between the Strix and the Edge. Seems like an ignorant oversight on my part. I will fetch the Edge and test on that instead once the LGA1700 bracket arrives in the mail.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> It does seem that according to the MSI Z690 Edge's QVL, the board does support up to 4,600 MHz Samsung B-die kits on Single Rank. Whereas for the ASUS Strix, they only officially support up to 4,266 MHz. So I would not be surprised if the Edge was tuned to maximize compatibility for Samsung B-die kits. Even their Micron/Spectek QVL shows promising compatibility for Single Rank, high DIMM count kits.
> 
> I'm not sure how I missed this when I was deciding between the Strix and the Edge. Seems like an ignorant oversight on my part. I will fetch the Edge and test on that instead once the LGA1700 bracket arrives in the mail.


I am curious to see. Just me being me I dont thnk it will matter but only one way to find out  I dont think you will be able to run 4300 but it will be even better if you get it and prove me wrong.


----------



## bscool

@Ichirou If it was the Strix I wouldnt be able to run 4266 1t sr. I can probably do 4300 just never tried.

Do you want me to put my SR back in and break your heart with 4300 

JK I have no idea if it will boot 4300.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> I am curious to see. Just me being me I dont thnk it will matter but only one way to find out  I dont think you will be able to run 4300 but it will be even better if you get it and prove me wrong.


I honestly don't mind taking a minor loss to swap to the Edge and part with the Strix if it means better memory overclocking and ridding myself of all this frustration.


bscool said:


> @Ichirou If it was the Strix I wouldnt be able to run 4266 1t sr. I can probably do 4300 just never tried.
> 
> Do you want me to put my SR back in and break your heart with 4300
> 
> JK I have no idea if it will boot 4300.


By all means, shoot. I'm already convinced that this Strix I got is a dud. I can probably resell it for cash without losing too much. Kept it pristine along with everything in the box.


----------



## wkamil

Agent-A01 said:


> Since you are running 3866, you should be able to lower those by a lot.
> You mentioned that's your highest frequency.
> Limitation is likely 1T, 2T should see >4000 but 3866 1T is good spot to land at IMO.
> 
> If this is b-die here are some suggestions.
> 
> _tRAS = 28
> 
> tRFC = 320 (safe)._
> At that speed, you could likely run around 280~ provided temps are less than ~45c but 320 is a good starting point.
> 
> _tCWL 12._
> If it posts it's typically stable, it's good for lowering RTLs. Observe the changes from 67. Should land at 65 RTL.
> 
> _tWRRD_SG = 26
> tWWRD_DG = 22_
> These will lower tWTR_L and S to 6/2 respectively.
> 
> _tRDRD_SG = 6_
> In my experience, this one requires more vDIMM. If that's the case for you, not worth chasing stability on it.
> 
> tWRWR and tRDRD timings bring a lot more bandwidth so try these out.
> You may be able to run these lower than the safe values
> 
> _tWRWR_ SG = 6
> tWRWR_DD/DR = 7(safe) or 6 / 5
> 
> tRDRD_SG = 6
> tRDRD_DD/DR = 7 (safe) or 6 / 5
> 
> tRDWR_DG/SG/DD/DR = 12 (safe)_
> You may be able to run these at 10 across the board.
> 
> There's a lot of timings to tune and I suggest not applying all of these at once as it would be impossible to figure out which is the cause for problems.
> 
> Test tRAS, tRFC, tCWL individually. Then work on tertiaries as pairs. like tRDRD_DD and DR at the same time.
> I suppose if you wanted to you could yolo it and try the setting safe timings but that's up to you.
> 
> Lastly, some timings may require more VDDQ or VCCSA and it's up to you to determine if it's worth increasing those to lower them below safe values.


So... that's the best i could do










I think, it's...


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> I honestly don't mind taking a minor loss to swap to the Edge and part with the Strix if it means better memory overclocking and ridding myself of all this frustration.
> 
> By all means, shoot. I'm already convinced that this Strix I got is a dud. I can probably resell it for cash without losing too much. Kept it pristine along with everything in the box.


Maybe if i get really bored ill try 4300 but it really doesnt matter. We know mine can do 4266 1t I showed you screenshots. it wont make yours any faster.

So I really dont know. Maybe variation in MB or it doesnt like you ram. It will be interesting to see what the MSI does. I like testing/seeing stuff like this.


----------



## bscool

wkamil said:


> So... that's the best i could do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think, it's...


I put my timings next to yours. You might be able to tighten some subs if you want to try. If not leave well enough alone 

I know some of yours are tighter than mine


----------



## ogider

my 2x16 f43200c14d-32gtz working with 10900k at 4400c15 flat 1.55V very tight timings.

same stick on z690 msi a pro was 4000 c14 -15-15 g1 c2 on most bioses 4100 c15 flat on some and 4133c15 15 15 on 124bios

Intresting is finally with 124 i could drop ddr4 V from 1.6V to 1.55V.

Im able to boot and load windows with 4200 c 15 15 15 g1 c2 but best so fare was 15 min tm5 before errors.

also not sure if I whana fight for this. 

4133 req 1.365-1.390 sa depends on luck with mainboard memory trening cicle. So i guess semi tight or tight 4200 gonna need more than 1.4 SA.

of course, I have not read anywhere whether above 1.4 SA is harmful ... but I will probably keep my daily profile at a maximum of 1.4 SA

Of course, I will still try when new bios appear ... Maybe on one of them it is possible to lower the trdrd from 7 to 6
we are also limited imc probably

For now Im stayin with 4133 c15 flat


----------



## Agent-A01

wkamil said:


> So... that's the best i could do
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think, it's...


tRTP lower? Should be fine to run at 6

What about tRDWR_DR an DD to 13?

tWRRD_DR & DD to > 7 or 8?

Other than that, timings look good.

Post before/after aida64 results


----------



## Ichirou

4,000 MHz
13-14-14-28-1T
Gear 1

Work in progress...


----------



## truehighroller1

Ichirou said:


> 4,000 MHz
> 13-14-14-28-1T
> Gear 1
> 
> Work in progress...


Bios 0003??


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Bios 0003??


It is old bios. 901 is better for DR b die.


----------



## Ichirou

truehighroller1 said:


> Bios 0003??





bscool said:


> It is old bios. 901 is better for DR b die.


Yeah, I've been testing out various BIOSes to try to stabilize this OC, and it feels like 0003 is doing fairly well.
The rest is voltage tweaking.


----------



## ObviousCough

Z690i Aorus Ultra getting the job done.

1.5v TX VDDQ
1.55v DRAM
1.42 SA









Too bad the IMC in my cpu is too weak for DR sticks.


----------



## bass junkie xl

ObviousCough said:


> Z690i Aorus Ultra getting the job done.
> 
> 1.5v TX VDDQ
> 1.55v DRAM
> 1.42 SA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Too bad the IMC in my cpu is too weak for DR sticks.



nice , can u pass etleast 3 hrs of tm5 but with anta extreme 7 profile ?


----------



## ObviousCough

bass junkie xl said:


> nice , can u pass etleast 3 hrs of tm5 but with anta extreme 7 profile ?


16GB doesn't take 3 hours. But sure.


----------



## truehighroller1

New record for me. 4133 15-16-16-32. I'm playing with my voltages more now which made the difference.


----------



## Luggage

ObviousCough said:


> 16GB doesn't take 3 hours. But sure.


Depends on how many cycles and how high "Time %" you set


----------



## Ichirou

Anyone know what timings aside from the primaries helps reduce voltage requirement? Is it just loosening tRRD_ and tWTR_?


----------



## MikeS3000

So I wasted a week chasing instability when it was an easy fix. Been trying to roughly copy some DDR 4000 settings on here from other users at 15-15-15-35. I would get a couple TM5 Anta777 Extreme errors, but would pass 1usmus v3, pass a few y-cruncher benchmarks and then sometimes it would fail. I kept thinking it was the VCCSA voltage causing crashes. Nope, simply the primary timings were too tight. I'm at 16-16-16-32 and it passes everything. 1.5v DRAM, 1.35v VCCSA and VDDQ. How do I get 15-15-15-35 stable? Just more DRAM voltage? Anything I can tighten up for these timings if I can't reach CL 15? I'm looking for a daily driver, not just for benching.


----------



## bscool

@MikeS3000 Yeah probably 1.55v for that 4000c15 to 4133c15 range. But some stick just wont do it. lotto just gotta try it and see.

Or try 4000c15-16-16 will be easier to run or 4133c15-16-16 if you can clock higher.

temps are crucial when memtesting tighter subs in that 45c plus range more likely to error.


----------



## HvacGuru

Separated the fans from the pump on the Artic 280 . Not to bad for 289 watts. The IMC side is good lol. I use TVB and per core and it's really a 5.0 ghz clock at full load. It does hold it's higher clocks longer then before. They start at 5.4 ghz


----------



## andrew149

So what is everyone thinking for the best board out of all the options I went for the Asus Strik? Was there anything better or is it the gigabyte aorus


----------



## andrew149

Delete


----------



## MikeS3000

bscool said:


> @MikeS3000 Yeah probably 1.55v for that 4000c15 to 4133c15 range. But some stick just wont do it. lotto just gotta try it and see.
> 
> Or try 4000c15-16-16 will be easier to run or 4133c15-16-16 if you can clock higher.
> 
> temps are crucial when memtesting tighter subs in that 45c plus range more likely to error.


I'll have to man up and push 1.55v then. I can boot 4100 and 4133 but it fails Y-cruncher in seconds every time. Not sure how to stabilize it. I could drop in my old trusty Hynix sticks to see if they can boot 4100 and 4133 and not error in y-cruncher. That would rule out the IMC as the culprit. I'm getting nearly identical Y-cruncher results at CL 15 and 16. Maybe that's just a result of instability at too low of voltage. I've got a 140mm fan on the RAM fulltime that keeps me between 41 and 45 deg when memtesting so should be good with that. My b-die is XMP 3600 1.45v 14-15-15-35 so a higher bin but not the top bin like your 4000 c14.


----------



## hawkslayr

This is what I have been able to do so far, it passes 3 cycles of tm5 anta extreme, 30 mins occt (both sse and avx2) and y-cruncher pi-2.5b. Basically just copied secondaries and tertiaires from people I saw in this thread and set primaries myself after not being able to copy flat 15s.

However I'm wondering if it's normal that I couldn't get tRCD below 16 and if there is any way I could get it to 15 atleast? I'm also wondering if it actually makes a difference to have set tRP to 14 or I will still get the same performance as if it was set to 16 like tRCD?

I tried setting tRFC to 300 but got error 12 in tm5.

If someone has any suggestions on what I could tighten I'd be glad to hear them.

VDIMM 1.55 and SA/VDDQ 1.35


----------



## bscool

hawkslayr said:


> This is what I have been able to do so far, it passes 3 cycles of tm5 anta extreme, 30 mins occt (both sse and avx2) and y-cruncher pi-2.5b. Basically just copied secondaries and tertiaires from people I saw in this thread and set primaries myself after not being able to copy flat 15s.
> 
> However I'm wondering if it's normal that I couldn't get tRCD below 16 and if there is any way I could get it to 15 atleast? I'm also wondering if it actually makes a difference to have set tRP to 14 or I will still get the same performance as if it was set to 16 like tRCD?
> 
> I tried setting tRFC to 300 but got error 12 in tm5.
> 
> If someone has any suggestions on what I could tighten I'd be glad to hear them.
> 
> VDIMM 1.55 and SA/VDDQ 1.35


I have never tried tRP lower. No idea how it acts. I run it same as tRCD.

Did you try 4133c16-16-16, sometimes 133 dividers are easier to get stable.

Or 4000c15-15-15 might be better. Maybe you already tried. either way no big deal outside of benchmarks.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> I have never tried tRP lower. No idea how it acts. I run it same as tRCD.
> 
> Did you try 4133c16-16-16, sometimes 133 dividers are easier to get stable.
> 
> Or 4000c15-15-15 might be better. Maybe you already tried. either way no big deal outside of benchmarks.


tRP lower than tRCD was only ever possible on AMD, but maybe Z690 now allows it?


----------



## FeelsBadMan

I'm on the Strix D4 (bios 0901) with a 12700K and 2x8 SR Patriot Viper 4400C19 sticks and I can be completely stable passing anta777 Extreme 3 cycles multiple times at 4000MT/s with the settings below with just 1.25 Vccsa and 1.35 VDDQ (maybe even lower haven't tried for both), 1.54 VDIMM. I'm trying to do 4100, but even trying 1.43 Vccsa, 1.45 VDDQ, 1.5 VDIMM at 4100-18-18-18-36 CR2 500trfc auto secondaries-tertiaries I get errors. Is there anything I'm missing or something else I could try? Also I've noticed my latency on aida with the stable settings isn't as low compared to other people with same primaries and same or even looser secondaries-tertiaries.


----------



## Gsen999

FeelsBadMan said:


> I'm on the Strix D4 (bios 0901) with a 12700K and 2x8 SR Patriot Viper 4400C19 sticks and I can be completely stable passing anta777 Extreme 3 cycles multiple times at 4000MT/s with the settings below with just 1.25 Vccsa and 1.35 VDDQ (maybe even lower haven't tried for both), 1.54 VDIMM. I'm trying to do 4100, but even trying 1.43 Vccsa, 1.45 VDDQ, 1.5 VDIMM at 4100-18-18-18-36 CR2 500trfc auto secondaries-tertiaries I get errors. Is there anything I'm missing or something else I could try? Also I've noticed my latency on aida with the stable settings isn't as low compared to other people with same primaries and same or even looser secondaries-tertiaries.
> 
> View attachment 2542865


12700k imc is worse than that of the 12900k. Most likely the imc


----------



## drkrffxx

I have managed to set my primary timings to 14-14-14-20 at 3733 T1 G1, does it make sense to continue pursuing tRAS lower than 20? Does it even make a difference being at 20 instead of the usual 2x CL?


----------



## Ichirou

drkrffxx said:


> I have managed to set my primary timings to 14-14-14-20 at 3733 T1 G1, does it make sense to continue pursuing tRAS lower than 20? Does it even make a difference being at 20 instead of the usual 2x CL?


tRAS can be as low as it can go as long as it is stable and performance isn't regressive


----------



## drkrffxx

Ichirou said:


> tRAS can be as low as it can go as long as it is stable and performance isn't regressive


Good, thank you. 14-14-14-14 here I go haha

EDIT: I was kidding, but it seems off to a good start.


















I cannot get 3800+ without errors at any timing, so it's probably my IMC being ****. But I feel like I have a decent kit on my hands going to waste by the IMC or BIOS, not sure.


----------



## X909

On 12700k I guess it's the IMC. I had two and their IMC where way worse than that of both 12900k I tested later. 

But with 4 DIMMs and the 12900k I struggle in the same clock range than you


----------



## donald24

There is some saying about never to trust a POST memspeed before even benchmarking it, if not following req's are met:

MCH Full check enabled
MRC Fast boot disabled

Before even posting my experiences with it, what do you guys think about this statement?


----------



## bscool

donald24 said:


> There is some saying about never to trust a POST memspeed before even benchmarking it, if not following req's are met:
> 
> MCH Full check enabled
> MRC Fast boot disabled
> 
> Before even posting my experiences with it, what do you guys think about this statement?


I say do what works for you. Test and verify for yourself what someone says or tells you. Try it, if it works for you do it.

I dont follow that "rule" and I dont have issues on z690. On older gens like z490 I did that, didnt on z590 because training takes much longer and never had issues.

Some things that you/people did on older gens you dont have to continue to do on new gens.


----------



## FeelsBadMan

Gsen999 said:


> 12700k imc is worse than that of the 12900k. Most likely the imc


oh ok, thought IMC is the same on both cpus and it's just silicon lottery, if I had known that a few months ago and how much of a better bin 12900K P-cores are, maybe would have gone with that one. Now waiting for the 13900K I guess


----------



## bscool

Edit...........nothing to see here


----------



## truehighroller1

I will be keeping her at 4133 I guess. I managed to drop my llc to 4 and get everything stable which I couldn't do before. That dropped my temps a bit.


----------



## Balaned

I can't locate a reason for this but my TWR settings won't stick even though changes are accurately reported in the BIOS. For example, I'll set TWR to 12 but in WIndows it will show as 24 via Timing Configurator. I'll cold reboot into the BIOS and the setting still shows as 12 there but 24 in Windows. I double checked the value in MemTweakIt, also 24. So which is accurate?

Asus TUF Z690 D4 BIOS 0807, 12900K, 2x16GB DR B-Die at 4133/15/16/16/32 1.54v, 1.35v SA & VDDQ.


----------



## bscool

Balaned said:


> I can't locate a reason for this but my TWR settings won't stick even though changes are accurately reported in the BIOS. For example, I'll set TWR to 12 but in WIndows it will show as 24 via Timing Configurator. I'll cold reboot into the BIOS and the setting still shows as 12 there but 24 in Windows. I double checked the value in MemTweakIt, also 24. So which is accurate?
> 
> Asus TUF Z690 D4 BIOS 0807, 12900K, 2x16GB DR B-Die at 4133/15/16/16/32 1.54v, 1.35v SA & VDDQ.


Post your memtweakit first page timings.

tWR is also controlled by tWRPE and tWRPEN are you setting those in the bios?

I believe when I tested it only tWRPEN had an effect on tWR. I dont touch tWRPE or tWRPEN on z690 only tWR.

Edit I am on z690 Asus MB no idea if MSI or gigybyte etc are the same or differ on this.

I know on older gens this rule above is slightly different as tWRPE will effect tWR also. From what I remember been a while since I messed with z490/z590 hard to keep it all straight


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Post your memtweakit first page timings.
> 
> tWR is also controlled by tWRPE and tWRPEN are you setting those in the bios?
> 
> I believe when I tested it only tWRPEN had an effect on tWR. I dont touch tWRPE or tWRPEN on z690 only tWR.



TWRPDEN controls it.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> TWRPDEN controls it.


So do you use TWRPEN or just set tWR? The end result is the same I believe, but could be wrong.


Edit on z690 I edited my post above as on older gens slightly different from what I remember. TWRPE controlled it or could.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> So do you use TWRPE or just set tWR? The end result is the same I believe, but could be wrong.
> 
> 
> Edit on z690 I edit my post above as on older gens slightly different from what I remember.



I noticed that you just set yours. I just use the twrpden to set it and then set the twrpe to the same value and it seems to make a difference speed wise for me.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I noticed that you just set yours. I just use the twrpden to set it and then set the twrpe to the same value and it seems to make a difference speed wise for me.


Hmm maybe I guess I dont know.

When @safedisk shared his cmo he didnt set tWRPE or tWRPEN he just sets tWR. I assume he knows what is best but maybe he keeps tWRPE his "secret"? no idea.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Hmm maybe I guess I dont know.
> 
> When @safedisk shared his cmo he didnt set tWRPE he just sets tWR. I assume he knows what is best but maybe he keeps tWRPE his "secret"? no idea.


Probably. Yeah, twrpre does nothing when set to affect the twr. If you set just the twrpden it affects it. That's how I figured it out. Then if you do that, you'll notice that the twrpre stays the same value, mine will default to 40 for instance on both values. I can set the twrpden to 30 and it will affect the twr as intended and the twrpre will stay at 40 so I go back in and then tweak that down to 30 as well.


----------



## bscool

Wait so you saw me setting TWRPE? I think that was me testing settings. I dont normally set that.

Now I am confused if you ment I tWR or TWRPE and TWRPEN.

For the record  I just set tWR


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Wait so you saw me setting TWRPE? I think that was me testing settings. I dont normally set that.
> 
> Now I am confused if you ment I tWR or TWRPE and TWRPEN.
> 
> For the record  I just set tWR



Yeah I meant I noticed that you set the twr manually. When you gave me that cmo file I noticed it.


----------



## bscool

For the record one again. I only set tWR I want the judge to make note of it


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> For the record one again. I only set tWR I want the judge to make note of it


Hmm, that's interesting then it looks like your twrpre and den change the values too. They must have just made it easier for people to just change it. Makes sense IMO. I just didn't pay attention to that. I just followed the memhelper guide though.


----------



## robertr1

Been running this for a few days. Added some blck action to the OC. A nice bump overall. No "bad effects" still running adaptive and balanced plan in windows for day to day.


----------



## Balaned

I only took a screengrab of TweakIt and not at PC currently. I hope this is good enough. You can see the TWR shows 23 here but it's still 12 in the BIOS. So what setting do I alter to get this lower? Thanks.


----------



## truehighroller1

Balaned said:


> I only took a screengrab of TweakIt and not at PC currently. I hope this is good enough. You can see the TWR shows 23 here but it's still 12 in the BIOS. So what setting do I alter to get this lower? Thanks.
> 
> View attachment 2543138



Change your tWRPDEN in bios to 30. That will fix it.


----------



## Balaned

Nice, thank you so much!


----------



## bscool

Balaned said:


> Nice, thank you so much!


Or just set twr as the earlier discussion is easier to me. Leave 2 twrpes alone.


----------



## Agent-A01

Swapped to strix-a and was able to reduce vdimm by .03v. 

Only need 1.49 for C15 4133. Also got rid of those pesky 0xc0000005 app crashes(very random despite tm5 stable)


----------



## Effeb

Hi there, could someone tell me if this is standard behavior or not?

I've got a z690 tuf, and right now I'm using 1.25v sa, 1.42v dram and 1.35v vddq. If I try and raise dram voltage to 1.5v it doesn't post (the overclock actually becomes unstable way before that at 1.44~ v), but if I lower sa and/or vddq and then raise dram voltage it does get into windows (for example 1.2v sa and 1.3v vddq allow 1.5v dram to boot, it isn't stable though).

Is it normal for them to be tied this way? If not how do I fix it? The msi z690 pro-a I had before for a short while didn't seem to have a problem just raising voltages.

System specs:
Corsair rm1000x
asus z690 tuf plus d4
gskill F4–4133C19D–16GTZR
Patriot viper steel ‎PVS416G413C9K
12700k
evga 3080 xc3 ultra

current oc:


----------



## bscool

Effeb said:


> Hi there, could someone tell me if this is standard behavior or not?
> 
> I've got a z690 tuf, and right now I'm using 1.25v sa, 1.42v dram and 1.35v vddq. If I try and raise dram voltage to 1.5v it doesn't post (the overclock actually becomes unstable way before that at 1.44~ v), but if I lower sa and/or vddq and then raise dram voltage it does get into windows (for example 1.2v sa and 1.3v vddq allow 1.5v dram to boot, it isn't stable though).
> 
> Is it normal for them to be tied this way? If not how do I fix it? The msi z690 pro-a I had before for a short while didn't seem to have a problem just raising voltages.
> 
> System specs:
> Corsair rm1000x
> asus z690 tuf plus d4
> gskill F4–4133C19D–16GTZR
> Patriot viper steel ‎PVS416G413C9K
> 12700k
> evga 3080 xc3 ultra
> 
> current oc:
> View attachment 2543190


Yeah it is tricky gotta find the right voltages for each. Trial and error.

On strix equal sa/vddq work for me on later bios versions.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Effeb said:


> Hi there, could someone tell me if this is standard behavior or not?
> 
> I've got a z690 tuf, and right now I'm using 1.25v sa, 1.42v dram and 1.35v vddq. If I try and raise dram voltage to 1.5v it doesn't post (the overclock actually becomes unstable way before that at 1.44~ v), but if I lower sa and/or vddq and then raise dram voltage it does get into windows (for example 1.2v sa and 1.3v vddq allow 1.5v dram to boot, it isn't stable though).
> 
> Is it normal for them to be tied this way? If not how do I fix it? The msi z690 pro-a I had before for a short while didn't seem to have a problem just raising voltages.
> 
> System specs:
> Corsair rm1000x
> asus z690 tuf plus d4
> gskill F4–4133C19D–16GTZR
> Patriot viper steel ‎PVS416G413C9K
> 12700k
> evga 3080 xc3 ultra
> 
> current oc:
> View attachment 2543190


I’m confused, do you have 2 different memory kits?


----------



## bscool

geriatricpollywog said:


> I’m confused, do you have 2 different memory kits?


I was on my phone when i first read it, good catch. If 4x8 that will be tougher to run on Tuf. Both are b die so shoulndt mattter too much about being different kits but harder to run.

Looking at his rtls he must be running 4x8 if it was 2x8 would only be 1 rtl visible.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> I was on my phone when i first read it, good catch. If 4x8 that will be tougher to run on Tuf. Both are b die so shoulndt mattter too much about being different kits but harder to run.
> 
> Looking at his rtls he must be running 4x8 if it was 2x8 would only be 1 rtl visible.


From a strategy perspective, he should run Memtest and find a setting that is stable, then increase clockspeed incrementally until it’s unstable, then add voltage and repeat.


----------



## Ichirou

Can somebody provide me with a stable 4,000+ 14-flat ATB readout? I want to compare my timings to see if I'm off somewhere.
I'm managing to get closer to stability, but I keep getting errors regarding timings being off.


----------



## Agent-A01

Ichirou said:


> Can somebody provide me with a stable 4,000+ 14-flat ATB readout? I want to compare my timings to see if I'm off somewhere.
> I'm managing to get closer to stability, but I keep getting errors regarding timings being off.


----------



## Ichirou

Agent-A01 said:


> View attachment 2543200


Thanks, much appreciated!


----------



## safedisk

bscool said:


> Hmm maybe I guess I dont know.
> 
> When @safedisk shared his cmo he didnt set tWRPE or tWRPEN he just sets tWR. I assume he knows what is best but maybe he keeps tWRPE his "secret"? no idea.


I just didn't set it haha
If I have time, I will set TWRPE and TWRPEN and share the settings


----------



## Ichirou

@safedisk 
Hey, do you have any idea on how to get rid of Error 6, 2, and 12 in TM5 1usmus?


----------



## robertr1

For "IVR VDDQ Transmitter" testing, to see if it's relevant for D4 I did the following:

Stable setup with "Auto" = 1.35v
Stable setup with it set to 1.20v was absolutely fine and equally stable
Moved upto the next frequency bump on mem which I know is unstable and bumped it to 1.5v. No difference. Adding more DRAM + SA didn't help either

In Hwinfo this shows up at "VDDQ TX Voltage" fyi

It would seem this is more of a D5 related voltage.


----------



## acoustic

VDDQ TX Voltage definitely makes a different on DDR4. I have issues posting at 4000 unless it's dialed in correctly.


----------



## Tradition

acoustic said:


> VDDQ TX Voltage definitely makes a different on DDR4. I have issues posting at 4000 unless it's dialed in correctly.


what are you using 
i can post ddr4 but it wont be stable 
i got it to be stable in 1 boot then after a reboot started erroring out again


----------



## acoustic

Tradition said:


> what are you using
> i can post ddr4 but it wont be stable
> i got it to be stable in 1 boot then after a reboot started erroring out again


12700K, TUF D4, GSKILL Royal 4000CL16

It's not stable for me either, but it won't post unless VDDQ is manually set to 1.4v


----------



## pitter

acoustic said:


> 12700K, TUF D4, GSKILL Royal 4000CL16
> 
> It's not stable for me either, but it won't post unless VDDQ is manually set to 1.4v


have you tried 1.35? thats the default for asus bios


----------



## acoustic

pitter said:


> have you tried 1.35? thats the default for asus bios


Yes, it wouldn't post at 1.35v on Auto, or below 1.35v.


----------



## truehighroller1

acoustic said:


> Yes, it wouldn't post at 1.35v on Auto, or below 1.35v.


What vdiim voltage?


----------



## hawkslayr

robertr1 said:


> For "IVR VDDQ Transmitter" testing, to see if it's relevant for D4 I did the following:
> 
> Stable setup with "Auto" = 1.35v
> Stable setup with it set to 1.20v was absolutely fine and equally stable
> Moved upto the next frequency bump on mem which I know is unstable and bumped it to 1.5v. No difference. Adding more DRAM + SA didn't help either
> 
> In Hwinfo this shows up at "VDDQ TX Voltage" fyi
> 
> It would seem this is more of a D5 related voltage.


What motherboard do you have? Because on my TUF I had to set VDDQ at 1.42 for it to boot when I had VDIMM set to 1.6v in my attempt of 4200c16 and anything below it failed to post.

So what I'm thinking so far is that has something to do with how much VDIMM voltage the motherboard allows.


----------



## acoustic

truehighroller1 said:


> What vdiim voltage?


1.5v @ 4000 14-14-14-28-280


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> 1.5v @ 4000 14-14-14-28-280


Bet u need more like 1.55 to 1.6v plus to run those timing if tight subs.

Edit to be clear I am talking d ram voltage


----------



## truehighroller1

acoustic said:


> 1.5v @ 4000 14-14-14-28-280


Hmm. Yeah that's weird.




hawkslayr said:


> What motherboard do you have? Because on my TUF I had to set VDDQ at 1.42 for it to boot when I had VDIMM set to 1.6v in my attempt of 4200c16 and anything below it failed to post.
> 
> So what I'm thinking so far is that has something to do with how much VDIMM voltage the motherboard allows.


That's what I was getting at too. But still it seems like his is showing that behavior just at lower voltages then we see on ours.



bscool said:


> Bet u need more like 1.55 to 1.6v plus to run those timing if tight subs.


Agreed.


----------



## isipisi

*Okey BCLK OC is the way to go!*

Set Ram to 100:133 (this will run at 133:133 after blck oc), Set BCLK to 133 ajust your pcore ecore and ring muiltis i did 5177 pcore 3850 ecore 4247 ring
Ram is 3900 mhz


----------



## truehighroller1

isipisi said:


> Okey BCLK OC is the way to go!
> 
> Set Ram to 100:133, Set BCLK to 133 ajust your pcore ecore and ring muiltis i did 5177 pcore 3850 ecore 4247 ring
> Ram is 3900 mhz


Daddy likes. I will probably give this a go next myself.


----------



## bscool

It is a bug. Not accurate.


----------



## isipisi

truehighroller1 said:


> Daddy likes. I will probably give this a go next myself.


 i would love to see your results


----------



## bscool

isipisi said:


> i would love to see your results


You know that is a bug and not accurate? Old news.


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> Bet u need more like 1.55 to 1.6v plus to run those timing if tight subs.
> 
> Edit to be clear I am talking d ram voltage


Nah it's stable memory wise, but the IMC can't handle 4000. That's when I dropped down to 3700 14-14-14-28 @ 1.48v .. stable. That's last time I was home to tweak.

We'll see how it goes on the more mature BIOS releases when I get home. First thing I'm trying is 4000 again lol

Also, I was mistaken. It was 4000 @ 15-15-15-28-280. I haven't been home in a while


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> You know that is a bug and not accurate? Old news.


I didn't know about this. So the ycruncher doesn't show the uptick that should follow then?


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> Nah it's stable memory wise, but the IMC can't handle 4000. That's when I dropped down to 3700 14-14-14-28 @ 1.48v .. stable. That's last time I was home to tweak.
> 
> We'll see how it goes on the more mature BIOS releases when I get home. First thing I'm trying is 4000 again lol
> 
> Also, I was mistaken. It was 4000 @ 15-15-15-28-280. I haven't been home in a while


How do you know those timings are stable @ 4000…? I thought you can't even boot it?


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I didn't know about this. So the ycruncher doesn't show the uptick that should follow then?


No. Try it for yourself though.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> No. Try it for yourself though.


Won't try it if there's no reason. I chased 4400 for no reason already even though it was stable..


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> How do you know those timings are stable @ 4000…? I thought you can't even boot it?


Oh it would boot no problem! pass memtest, etc. It just would crash in Halo Infinite (IMC issue) or throw IMC errors after rebooting a few times randomly.

If I went Gear2, it was perfectly stable again. Gotta love that 12700k IMC.


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> Oh it would boot no problem! pass memtest, etc. It just would crash in Halo Infinite (IMC issue) or throw IMC errors after rebooting a few times randomly.
> 
> If I went Gear2, it was perfectly stable again. Gotta love that 12700k IMC.


Post some screenshots with voltages if it running [email protected] I'll PayPal or whatever method $100


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> Post some screenshots with voltages if it running [email protected] I'll PayPal or whatever method $100


Read the edit to that post - I already corrected myself. It was 4000 15-15-15 @ 1.5v. I've also explained to you before that I have no access to my PC until March.

The 14-14-14 was for 3700.

I also have no reason to lie, nor do I appreciate the inquisition.


----------



## rkneeshaw

acoustic said:


> VDDQ TX Voltage definitely makes a different on DDR4. I have issues posting at 4000 unless it's dialed in correctly.


Interesting result. On my MSI z690-a pro with bios 1.24u2 I have this set to auto (1.25v) and run 4133c16 gear 1 stable. If I try to set this to 1.35v it wont post. vdimm is 1.47v.


----------



## acoustic

rkneeshaw said:


> Interesting result. On my MSI z690-a pro with bios 1.24u2 I have this set to auto (1.25v) and run 4133c16 gear 1 stable. If I try to set this to 1.35v it wont post. vdimm is 1.47v.


This is on the ASUS TUF D4, so I'm not sure if the MSI board handles it differently. Auto on the TUF is 1.35v for my 2x16 DR kit.


----------



## robertr1

hawkslayr said:


> What motherboard do you have? Because on my TUF I had to set VDDQ at 1.42 for it to boot when I had VDIMM set to 1.6v in my attempt of 4200c16 and anything below it failed to post.
> 
> So what I'm thinking so far is that has something to do with how much VDIMM voltage the motherboard allows.


Prime P:

As you can see 1.20v vddq tx is just as stable as "auto" which is 1.35. Naturally, a 150mv delta in voltages would have some impact but nothing. Again, I went upto 1.5 to next the next frequency bump and that didn't help either.


----------



## robertr1

If you want accurate memory info, run MLC instead of Aida. I get it, it's UI isn't as pretty but the numbers are accurate and now skewed by bclk etc. 









Intel® Memory Latency Checker v3.9a


Intel® Memory Latency Checker (Intel® MLC) is a tool used to measure memory latencies and b/w, and how they change with increasing load on the system.




www.intel.com


----------



## Ichirou

As someone who's thoroughly tested VDDQ all the way up to 1.55V, I can attest to it refusing to post if I go below 1.35V.
But I can't really seem to find any meaningful results regarding whether or not it is helpful, though.

On BIOS 0812 anyway, it will not register any value above 1.60V; anything I set above is simply reduced to 1.60V in HWInfo.
However, it does feel like setting VDDQ at this value (1.60V) helps with a stability a _little bit_.

I've tried _so_ many combinations of VDIMM/VDDQ/VCCSA so far that you can't even imagine, lol.
Hours upon hours of constant tweaking in the ±0.005V range for all of them. This is what I'm trying to stabilize:








Dual Channel shouldn't be a problem so long as I can figure out what settings or BIOS will stabilize this.
This kit really loves to be pushed hard and will stay stable on idle desktop with almost literally any kind of tight subs you could ever imagine.

The errors in TM5 with 1usmus are almost always 6, 2, or 12. The rest of the errors are just built off of these errors, so they're not significant.
Been loosening and tightening all sorts of different timings, but it's always the same errors.


----------



## acoustic

VDDQ cannot go above 1.6v, per Shamino. Also the vdroop on that line means your effective, at 1.6v BIOS, is around 1.55v. 

Shamino spoke about VDDQ and how the rail works a few months ago.


----------



## Ichirou

acoustic said:


> VDDQ cannot go above 1.6v, per Shamino. Also the vdroop on that line means your effective, at 1.6v BIOS, is around 1.55v.
> 
> Shamino spoke about VDDQ and how the rail works a few months ago.


Yeah, I do recall finding some posts about how VDDQ functioned. So just leave VDDQ set at 1.60V then?
I wonder why you can even set up to 2.20V if it'll get softcapped at 1.60V anyway.


----------



## Derpinheimer

rkneeshaw said:


> Interesting result. On my MSI z690-a pro with bios 1.24u2 I have this set to auto (1.25v) and run 4133c16 gear 1 stable. If I try to set this to 1.35v it wont post. vdimm is 1.47v.


Similar here, also on same bios and board. VDDQ above 1.25v reduces stability. I can post but it will throw errors in MT5


----------



## pitter

I know this is memory thread but was wondering if its normal that only 1core stays at 66c while the rest 7cores 75-77c while cinebench load? Idle are the same


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Bet u need more like 1.55 to 1.6v plus to run those timing if tight subs.
> 
> Edit to be clear I am talking d ram voltage


I will say that's about what I need for that setup too(around 1.5v)


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> Yeah, I do recall finding some posts about how VDDQ functioned. So just leave VDDQ set at 1.60V then?
> I wonder why you can even set up to 2.20V if it'll get softcapped at 1.60V anyway.


Source [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread

"
tx vddq is fivr'ed , its almost impossible to use too much voltage on fivr rails since they trip early. you're pretty much maxed out at that 1.6v, theres a vdroop and you're more doing around 1.55v real. fivr rails never ever really do much above 1.6v even when you raise vccin to 3v lol no matter what u set.
theoretically this should be the same level as dram voltage but in practice it may not always be the case plus the fact that one may do higher dram voltage than 1.6v which is more than its capable of . what is your dram voltage?"


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> I will say that's about what I need for that setup too(around 1.5v)


You can run 4000c14-14-14 with tight subs are 1.5v dram?

I am not doubting you(edit obviously I am doubting or I wouldnt wanna see screes lol, I am jealous i cant run that 😁 ) just would like to see it. I have had 2-3 dozen b die kits over the last couple of years and none of mine will do that and pass memtests.

That is GOD tier b die. [email protected]

My best kit is the Gskill 4000c14 kit and it cant do that.

@geriatricpollywog can you ran the above clocks and voltages? i know you have one of the best dr b die kits out there. I think you had 3 kits of the 4000c14.

New Sig The Skeptical OCer


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Source [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread
> 
> "
> tx vddq is fivr'ed , its almost impossible to use too much voltage on fivr rails since they trip early. you're pretty much maxed out at that 1.6v, theres a vdroop and you're more doing around 1.55v real. fivr rails never ever really do much above 1.6v even when you raise vccin to 3v lol no matter what u set.
> theoretically this should be the same level as dram voltage but in practice it may not always be the case plus the fact that one may do higher dram voltage than 1.6v which is more than its capable of . what is your dram voltage?"


Right then; I'll leave it at 1.60V as I've noticed a very marginal improvement in stability.
The question now is trying to get rid of these pesky errors. I'm not sure what the cause is, since no matter what I tweak (even VDIMM up to 1.85V), it's always the same few errors.

I'd like to think that the DIMM is overheating, but it doesn't feel like it to me. For whatever reason, this premium Galax kit does not come with a temperature sensor.
And I can physically touch the heatspreaders with no issue at all (they aren't even that warm to begin with), so I'm leaning towards something else being the problem.
In any case, I'll try blasting more fans at it, and closer, just to see if that changes anything.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> You can run 4000c14-14-14 with tight subs are 1.5v dram?
> 
> I am not doubting you(edit obviously I am doubting or I wouldnt wanna see screes lol, I am jealous i cant run that 😁 ) just would like to see it. I have had 2-3 dozen b die kits over the last couple of years and none of mine will do that and pass memtests.
> 
> That is GOD tier b die. [email protected]
> 
> My best kit is the Gskill 4000c14 kit and it cant do that.
> 
> @geriatricpollywog can you ran the above clocks and voltages? i know you have one of the best dr b die kits out there. I think you had 3 kits of the 4000c14.
> 
> New Sig The Skeptical OCer


Yes that was TM5 stable.
When I get bored I'll post results, IDK about waiting 3 hours for anta777 extreme though.. Lol

This is the 4000C17 at 1.4v kit. I'm not sure that even the 4000C14 is better on average because it requires way more voltage


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Yes that was TM5 stable.
> When I get bored I'll post results, IDK about waiting 3 hours for anta777 extreme though.. Lol
> 
> This is the 4000C17 at 1.4v kit. I'm not sure that even the 4000C14 is better on average because it requires way more voltage


Yeah that is fine even aida64 bench and the timings is fine. No need to run memtest.

Some of the ram I have. I have had most of the top DR b die bins release in the last year or so. Various 3600c14, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] etc and many more.

None will do 4000c14 Even SR I have [email protected] too many to list. So I have an idea of good memory and that is Unicorn ram [email protected]

@PhoenixMDA I think you have a kit that does [email protected] dont you?


----------



## Formula383

Any update on gigabyte bios? Really itching to get my 12900k running 4000MT!


----------



## geriatricpollywog

bscool said:


> You can run 4000c14-14-14 with tight subs are 1.5v dram?
> 
> I am not doubting you(edit obviously I am doubting or I wouldnt wanna see screes lol, I am jealous i cant run that 😁 ) just would like to see it. I have had 2-3 dozen b die kits over the last couple of years and none of mine will do that and pass memtests.
> 
> That is GOD tier b die. [email protected]
> 
> My best kit is the Gskill 4000c14 kit and it cant do that.
> 
> @geriatricpollywog can you ran the above clocks and voltages? i know you have one of the best dr b die kits out there. I think you had 3 kits of the 4000c14.
> 
> New Sig The Skeptical OCer


She'll do it, but not without errors. I set vdimm to 1.5 in the bios but HWInfo64 is reporting 1.51


----------



## bscool

geriatricpollywog said:


> She'll do it, but not without errors. I set vdimm to 1.5 in the bios but HWInfo64 is reporting 1.51


Thank you for testing.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Yeah that is fine even aida64 bench and the timings is fine. No need to run memtest.
> 
> Some of the ram I have. I have had most of the top DR b die bins release in the last year or so. Various 3600c14, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] etc and many more.
> 
> None will do 4000c14 Even SR I have [email protected] too many to list. So I have an idea of good memory and that is Unicorn ram [email protected]


Ran y-cruncher twice for testing and it passed. 

Setting 1.5v in bios results is 1.492v, it throws an error half way through the test.
Bios set 1.50625 = 1.51 required to pass.












Now I'm testing 4133 c15-15-15 @ 1.47v.
Ran y-cruncher 4 or 5 times so far with no issues


----------



## Ichirou

geriatricpollywog said:


> She'll do it, but not without errors. I set vdimm to 1.5 in the bios but HWInfo64 is reporting 1.51
> 
> View attachment 2543336


Needed extra VDIMM to get rid of Error 6? Promising to know. I will keep fiddling around with VDIMM myself to see if I can stabilize my kit.

In other news, if somebody provides me with a CMO for 4000 14-flat at 1.50V VDIMM, I can test it out and see whether my kit can do it.
Just don't want to configure everything.

Any suggestions for safe max VCCSA to test up to?


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Ran y-cruncher twice for testing and it passed.
> 
> Setting 1.5v in bios results is 1.492v, it throws an error half way through the test.
> Bios set 1.50625 = 1.51 required to pass.
> 
> View attachment 2543346
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Now I'm testing 4133 c15-15-15 @ 1.47v.
> Ran y-cruncher 4 or 5 times so far with no issues
> 
> View attachment 2543347


Thank you. That is impressive and depressive for me lol buying all this ram and not getting any that good.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Thank you. That is impressive and depressive for me lol buying all this ram and not getting any that good.


What voltage do you need for your best kit?
Did you ever buy the kit i have?


----------



## Agent-A01

Ichirou said:


> Needed extra VDIMM to get rid of Error 6? Promising to know. I will keep fiddling around with VDIMM myself to see if I can stabilize my kit.
> 
> In other news, if somebody provides me with a CMO for 4000 14-flat at 1.50V VDIMM, I can test it out and see whether my kit can do it.
> Just don't want to configure everything.


Why do you think your kit will do those timings? It's quite evident even top bin kits struggle to get anywhere close with 1.5v.

I think you're wasting your time chasing that setup. settle for something like 14-15-15


----------



## Ichirou

Agent-A01 said:


> Why do you think your kit will do those timings? It's quite evident even top bin kits struggle to get anywhere close with 1.5v.
> 
> I think you're wasting your time chasing that setup. settle for something like 14-15-15


I actually acquired a highly binned Galax Samsung B-die kit that boots to desktop and idles at 13-13-11-14-1T Gear 1 at 4,000 MHz, lol
Just gotta figure out the voltages to reduce the errors. Don't really seem to see any meaningful difference between 1.75V and 1.85V for that config.
Temperature is probably involved as well, so I'm gonna blast a ton of fans at it next time I test.
So, I'm curious to see _just how binned_ my kit really is.


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> What voltage do you need for your best kit?
> Did you ever buy the kit i have?


Mmm I dont document stuff so going by memory. 4400c16 on z490 1.55 with tight subs a few kits can do that but for z690 gear 1 the best kit I have is this 4000c14 ripjaw 2x16 and it does [email protected] Never tried lowering it. I dont think it could go down much so i never messed with it.

I know i cant run 4000c14-14-14 though. I dont even think I could at 1.6v. Maybe with these new bios updates i could, I guess I havent tried I figured it is the sticks.

I have a 4000c17-17-17 kit but 2x8 not 2x6. It scales good can do 4800-5000 on z590 for benches. Not stable. Like [email protected]? stable never tried it lower clock and tighter timings.

My best 2x8 is 4000c15-16-16 kit close is 2x8 4800c18 gskill. But a waste of $$. I think I paid around $400 for that 2x8 4800 kit and it is not very good. but none of my 2x8 are as good as the 4000c14 2x16.

Too many kits to list those are my better bins. I mean in reality they are all so close it doesnt matter. Just when pusing for that little extra some wont tighten up or clock high. Expensive toys that just sit doing nothing lol.

I have 2 11900k systems z590 Apex and unify X, z490 Apex 10700k,. z390 hero 9900kf, z390 Apex 9900k and bunch of ram. Most of my other system I have give to family and friends as gifts.

Here is the last one I gave to my neice.

z490 Unify 10850k, 4000c16-16-16 DR neo oc to 4400c16 3070 gpu. Nothing "too crazy" but for a 9 year old she like it


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Mmm I dont document stuff so going by memory. 4400c16 on z490 1.55 with tight subs a few kits can do that but for z690 gear 1 the best kit I have is this 4000c14 ripjaw 2x16 and it does [email protected] Never tried lowering it. I dont think it could go down much so i never messed with it.
> 
> I know i cant run 4000c14-14-14 though. I dont even think I could at 1.6v. Maybe with these new bios updates i could, I guess I havent tried I figured it is the sticks.
> 
> I have a 4000c17-17-17 kit but 2x8 not 2x6. It scales good can do 4800-5000 on z590 for benches. Not stable. Like [email protected]? stable never tried it lower clock and tighter timings.
> 
> My best 2x8 is 4000c15-16-16 kit close is 2x8 4800c18 gskill. But a waste of $$. I think I paid around $400 for that 2x8 4800 kit and it is not very good. but none of my 2x8 are as good as the 4000c14 2x16.
> 
> Too many kits to list those are my better bins. I mean in reality they are all so close it doesnt matter. Just when pusing for that little extra some wont tighten up or clock high. Expensive toys that just sit doing nothing lol.
> 
> I have 2 11900k systems z590 Apex and unify X, z490 Apex 10700k,. z390 hero 9900kf, z390 Apex 9900k and bunch of ram. Most of my other system I have give to family and friends as gifts.
> 
> Here is the last one I gave to my neice.
> 
> z490 Unify 10850k, 4000c16-16-16 DR neo oc to 4400c16 3070 gpu. Nothing "too crazy" but for a 9 year old she like it


I never imagined that 4,000 MHz 14-flat would be so hard to achieve. Isn't it possible with pretty much any not-super-old B-die as long as you push enough volts?


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> I never imagined that 4,000 MHz 14-flat would be so hard to achieve. Isn't it possible with pretty much any not-super-old B-die as long as you push enough volts?


Well you tell me I have had well over a dozen SR d bie and they cant do 4000c14-14-14. From what I am seeing takes top bin to do that or watercooling?

Could just be me not knowing what i am doing.

Edit I see you said with enough volts. That will help but not all b die scales with voltage or not to the same degree.

Can you do 4000c14-14-14 with tight subs and pass memtests? With a reasonable voltage like 1.6v or less? Post screens if you do.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Well you tell me I have had well over a dozen SR d bie and they cant do 4000c14-14-14. From what I am seeing takes top bin to do that or watercooling?
> 
> Could just be me not knowing what i am doing.


I'll try it!!! 😂


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> I'll try it!!! 😂


Try to do it with 1.5v or lowest voltage, curious.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Try to do it with 1.5v or lowest voltage, curious.


Like this?

It's not 1.5 exactly but, 1.54v isn't bad right? I can try to go lower by all means but will take some time no doubt.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Like this?


Can it pass memory or stress test? y cruncher?


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Well you tell me I have had well over a dozen SR d bie and they cant do 4000c14-14-14. From what I am seeing takes top bin to do that or watercooling?
> 
> Could just be me not knowing what i am doing.
> 
> Edit I see you said with enough volts. That will help but not all b die scales with voltage or not to the same degree.
> 
> Can you do 4000c14-14-14 with tight subs and pass memtests? With a reasonable voltage like 1.6v or less? Post screens if you do.


Huh. Well the Galax kit I have is actually my first Samsung B-die kit, so I was not aware. Is it just unstable, or does it full-blown refuse to boot?

I'll test it out later today; have to do some work first.


----------



## bscool

Bunch of dream crushers if you guys can do it and I have all this mem and cant


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Can it pass memory or stress test? y cruncher?


I don't know. I'll try though lol.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> Huh. Well the Galax kit I have is actually my first Samsung B-die kit, so I was not aware. Is it just unstable, or does it full-blown refuse to boot?
> 
> I'll test it out later today; have to do some work first.


Both, some kits wont boot and some crash.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Both, some kits wont boot and some crash.



I had it close but it needs tweaking. It made it through y cruncher 100% then had an error and then trying to tweak voltages made it have an error faster which means I was close then lost it voltage wise...

I have my setup right before trying it saved which was 100% stable so I can go right back to that point but I'm going to bed 😂. Long night with the wife last night in a good way, and I'm tired af.


----------



## Agent-A01

Ichirou said:


> I actually acquired a highly binned Galax Samsung B-die kit that boots to desktop and idles at 13-13-11-14-1T Gear 1 at 4,000 MHz, lol
> Just gotta figure out the voltages to reduce the errors. Don't really seem to see any meaningful difference between 1.75V and 1.85V for that config.
> Temperature is probably involved as well, so I'm gonna blast a ton of fans at it next time I test.
> So, I'm curious to see _just how binned_ my kit really is.


1.75 -1.85 to post those timings? Not looking good IMO.

Try 14-14-14-28 @ 4000.

Post voltages after you figure out what you need to pass y-cruncher at least twice.
My guess, it isn't that good as a bin as you think it is.

Edit reading ahead seems you cant do those timings. How about [email protected] or 4133 at 15-15-15?



bscool said:


> Mmm I dont document stuff so going by memory. 4400c16 on z490 1.55 with tight subs a few kits can do that but for z690 gear 1 the best kit I have is this 4000c14 ripjaw 2x16 and it does [email protected] Never tried lowering it. I dont think it could go down much so i never messed with it.
> 
> I know i cant run 4000c14-14-14 though. I dont even think I could at 1.6v. Maybe with these new bios updates i could, I guess I havent tried I figured it is the sticks.
> 
> I have a 4000c17-17-17 kit but 2x8 not 2x6. It scales good can do 4800-5000 on z590 for benches. Not stable. Like [email protected]? stable never tried it lower clock and tighter timings.
> 
> My best 2x8 is 4000c15-16-16 kit close is 2x8 4800c18 gskill. But a waste of $$. I think I paid around $400 for that 2x8 4800 kit and it is not very good. but none of my 2x8 are as good as the 4000c14 2x16.
> 
> Too many kits to list those are my better bins. I mean in reality they are all so close it doesnt matter. Just when pusing for that little extra some wont tighten up or clock high. Expensive toys that just sit doing nothing lol.
> 
> I have 2 11900k systems z590 Apex and unify X, z490 Apex 10700k,. z390 hero 9900kf, z390 Apex 9900k and bunch of ram. Most of my other system I have give to family and friends as gifts.
> 
> Here is the last one I gave to my neice.
> 
> z490 Unify 10850k, 4000c16-16-16 DR neo oc to 4400c16 3070 gpu. Nothing "too crazy" but for a 9 year old she like it


Well you've played with a lot more kits than I have. My last b-die setup was some 3200CL14-14-14 4x8GB kit.
Ran it on my z490 no problem with [email protected] That was on a xii hero though, a good board for 4x dimms.

Right now this is looking to be stable. More than half a dozen y-cruncher runs and 100%+ coverage of memtestpro.

1.47vdimm










Just for ****s and giggles, I applied 1.55v and was able to run aida64 bench @ 4133 C14-14-14


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Well you've played with a lot more kits than I have. My last b-die setup was some 3200CL14-14-14 4x8GB kit.
> Ran it on my z490 no problem with [email protected] That was on a xii hero though, a good board for 4x dimms.
> 
> Right now this is looking to be stable. More than half a dozen y-cruncher runs and 100%+ coverage of memtestpro.
> 
> 1.47vdimm
> 
> Just for ****s and giggles, I applied 1.55v and was able to run aida64 bench @ 4133 C14-14-14


From the looks of it your 4000c17 kit on z690 is better than any of mine. I havent tried those exact setting but from what I know I dont think any of my kits can do that. thank you for testing it and posting


----------



## Ichirou

Welp, trying to loosen to 14-flat with pretty much everything the same and generous voltages won't even POST; extremely bad training somewhere...
Auto everything doesn't work either.....



> Goes back to 13-all just to be sure it still works
> Instantly posts and boots to desktop


I don't even......


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> Welp, trying to loosen to 14-flat with pretty much everything the same and generous voltages won't even POST; extremely bad training somewhere...
> Auto everything doesn't work either.....
> 
> 
> 
> I don't even......


Sounds like you have a timing off.

Edit wait auto everything doesnt boot, turn off psu hold clear cmos for 30 sec.


lol edit 2 I see you got it working.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

I was able to pass y-cruncher at 4100 14-15-15-28. Now I feel better about not being able to pass memtest at nonsensical timings.

4100 14-15-15-28: y-cruncher
4200 14-15-15-28: HCI memtest 200%, TM5 1usmus
4310 14-15-15-28: SoTR and AIDA


----------



## bscool

geriatricpollywog said:


> I was able to pass y-cruncher at 4100 14-15-15-28. Now I feel better about not being able to pass memtest at nonsensical timings.
> 
> 4100 14-15-15-28: y-cruncher
> 4200 14-15-15-28: HCI memtest 200%, TM5 1usmus
> 4310 14-15-15-28: SoTR and AIDA
> 
> View attachment 2543387


I agree

"lowest not always = performance"

source Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion


----------



## acoustic

Ichirou said:


> Yeah, I do recall finding some posts about how VDDQ functioned. So just leave VDDQ set at 1.60V then?
> I wonder why you can even set up to 2.20V if it'll get softcapped at 1.60V anyway.


More VDDQ is not necessarily always more stability. I would test different values until you find the one that brings stability or allows you to drop your SA/VDIMM.


----------



## Ichirou

@bscool @geriatricpollywog 
Tested 0901. Wouldn't POST no matter what I tried. 0812, instantly posts with my config...


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Ichirou said:


> @bscool @geriatricpollywog
> Tested 0901. Wouldn't POST no matter what I tried. 0812, instantly posts with my config...


Try @bscool's config.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> @bscool @geriatricpollywog
> Tested 0901. Wouldn't POST no matter what I tried. 0812, instantly posts with my config...


901 was picky for some on SR. from what I know 707 was best for most on SR.

901 worked fine for me though on SR.

Can you get to bios on 901? Look at microcode should be 12 I think. Pic of were to view MC

Maybe try flashing 901 again using EZ flash or Flashback or both.


----------



## Agent-A01

Ichirou said:


> @bscool @geriatricpollywog
> Tested 0901. Wouldn't POST no matter what I tried. 0812, instantly posts with my config...


Sounds like you're trying to copy other people's settings without trial and error.
Leave everything at auto and try primary timings first.


----------



## bscool

@Ichirou If using a cmo from another bios version to load setting that can cause issues. Not saying you are doing that but mentioning in case.


----------



## Ichirou

Yeah, I'm just going to Auto all of the subtimings and focus on the primaries first. Getting timeout errors likely from timing misconfiguration.
Will report back later.

On a side note, is there any way to adjust the timings without having to go into the BIOS every time? I know XTU can be used for the voltages.
Edit: Nevermind, it seems that Intel XTU allows me to basically tweak everything except for VDIMM and VDDQ (unfortunately). But good enough for the rest.

@bscool
So far, just for the hell of it, I decided to do Auto for all subtimings and extremely loose primaries. 16-all at 4,000 MHz. I still get Error 6 and 2.
Definitely something wrong that's not necessarily voltage. Leaning towards BIOS or motherboard itself. I can't believe I never considered this possibility myself.
I thought it was strange how I'd dump up to an extra 0.1V at the RAM and still get no semblance of stability.


----------



## acoustic

Error 6 is IMC related if I'm not mistaken, not memory.


----------



## Ichirou

acoustic said:


> Error 6 is IMC related if I'm not mistaken, not memory.


Yes, that was my suspicion as well, and has been since the very beginning. But no matter what voltages I try with VCCSA and VDDQ, both high and low, I still get Error 6 and 2.
Back when we had VCCIO, it was almost always a sweet spot issue with VCCIO specifically, but now that that's no longer a thing, I have no idea of what could be causing them.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Ichirou said:


> Yes, that was my suspicion as well, and has been since the very beginning. But no matter what voltages I try with VCCSA and VDDQ, both high and low, I still get Error 6 and 2.
> Back when we had VCCIO, it was almost always a sweet spot issue with VCCIO specifically, but now that that's no longer a thing, I have no idea of what could be causing them.


You might get different results with a different CPU sample. @bscool was pulling out his hair like you are now about not being able to boot 3866c14 on Rocket Lake. I sold him a CPU that I tested at 3866c14 and it booted right up for him.


----------



## Ichirou

geriatricpollywog said:


> You might get different results with a different CPU sample. @bscool was pulling out his hair like you are now about not being able to boot 3866c14 on Rocket Lake. I sold him a CPU that I tested at 3866c14 and it booted right up for him.


So you suspect that the CPU itself might be faulty? Or could it be a mounting pressure issue with me not using an LGA1700 bracket, as @bscool had previously warned?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Ichirou said:


> So you suspect that the CPU itself might be faulty? Or could it be a mounting pressure issue with me not using an LGA1700 bracket, as @bscool had previously warned?


That's also a possibility. I've always used the EKWB LGA 1700 backplate with this CPU.


----------



## Ichirou

geriatricpollywog said:


> That's also a possibility. I've always used the EKWB LGA 1700 backplate with this CPU.


I guess I'll need to retest once the Noctua LGA1700 bracket arrives in the mail.

Carillo tested this CPU at 4,300 CL14 1T, so I don't think that the IMC is an issue. However, he did use an MSI Edge as opposed to an ASUS Strix, so that might be something to consider.


----------



## acoustic

Ichirou said:


> Yes, that was my suspicion as well, and has been since the very beginning. But no matter what voltages I try with VCCSA and VDDQ, both high and low, I still get Error 6 and 2.
> Back when we had VCCIO, it was almost always a sweet spot issue with VCCIO specifically, but now that that's no longer a thing, I have no idea of what could be causing them.


You might not be able to run 4000 due to the IMC not taking it, regardless of voltage. Could also be the motherboard..


----------



## Ichirou

acoustic said:


> You might not be able to run 4000 due to the IMC not taking it, regardless of voltage. Could also be the motherboard..


As mentioned prior, the CPU was tested at 4,300 14-flat 1T Gear 1, but on an MSI, so I'm thinking the motherboard might be garbage.

Hell, back when I was trying to push for 4,200+ myself, as @bscool is aware, I had a ton of issues trying to do so.
And when I binned the individual slots, A2 was significantly weaker than B2 even on Gear 2; the latter would boot more aggressive overclocks while the former would just say no.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> As mentioned prior, the CPU was tested at 4,300 14-flat 1T Gear 1, but on an MSI, so I'm thinking the motherboard might be garbage.
> 
> Hell, back when I was trying to push for 4,200+ myself, as @bscool is aware, I had a ton of issues trying to do so.
> And when I binned the individual slots, A2 was significantly weaker than B2 even on Gear 2; the latter would boot much more aggressive overclocks while the former would just say no.


Get that msi board on the way. I wanna see the difference. I dont hold much hope for the lga 1700 mount helping with things on the strix.

After messing with washer mod on my z690 I didn't notice any difference in men ocs. So I have a feeling my idea about mounting pressure isn't going to matter for u.


----------



## acoustic

Gotta love these overpriced boards of garbage quality.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Ichirou said:


> As mentioned prior, the CPU was tested at 4,300 14-flat 1T Gear 1, but on an MSI, so I'm thinking the motherboard might be garbage.
> 
> Hell, back when I was trying to push for 4,200+ myself, as @bscool is aware, I had a ton of issues trying to do so.
> And when I binned the individual slots, A2 was significantly weaker than B2 even on Gear 2; the latter would boot more aggressive overclocks while the former would just say no.


Have you tried cleaning the ram slots?


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> Gotta love these overpriced boards of garbage quality.


Boy won't that be something iif he does have a bad board. I see ddr5 guys saying apex is like this also on some boards. Still too early to tell but if true not good.


----------



## Ichirou

geriatricpollywog said:


> Have you tried cleaning the ram slots?


Cleaning... the RAM slots?
The board's fresh out of the box for at most like, two weeks tops.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Ichirou said:


> Cleaning... the RAM slots?
> The board's fresh out of the box for at most like, two weeks tops.


@Falkentyne has found dirty ram slots on new boards that limit RAM OC. Cleaning with Deoxit fixed the issue.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> Cleaning... the RAM slots?
> The board's fresh out of the box for at most like, two weeks tops.


Do you have chicken bones? Know any vodoo?😁

I am outta ideas


----------



## Ichirou

geriatricpollywog said:


> @Falkentyne has found dirty ram slots on new boards that limit RAM OC. Cleaning with Deoxit fixed the issue.


That... sounds like an expensive investment in a very specific cleaning product that would probably not help in my case...


----------



## Agent-A01

Ichirou said:


> That... sounds like an expensive investment in a very specific cleaning product that would probably not help in my case...


Contact cleaner? Like $5 a can. CRC electronic cleaner can be found in any store


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Agent-A01 said:


> Contact cleaner? Like $5 a can. CRC electronic cleaner can be found in any store


Deoxit is like $20 for a tiny can.

Rubbing alcohol worked on NES cartridge slots.


----------



## Agent-A01

geriatricpollywog said:


> Deoxit is like $20 for a tiny can.
> 
> Rubbing alcohol worked on NES cartridge slots.


I've cleaned a lot of electronics in the past, including water submerged damage.
99.9% isopropyl alcohol(higher means less water content) and contact cleaner can work wonders.

I just looked up deoxit, $20 for a 5oz can. That's a terrible buy. CRC cleaner is just as good. 11oz can is $6.
No need to spend more


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> What voltage do you need for your best kit?
> Did you ever buy the kit i have?


Are you air or water cooling your memory?


----------



## reptilianbrain

Hey guys what's the currently recommended DDR4 z690 motherboard for 12900k? I almost got Strix z690-A but read here that there are BIOS/memory issues with Strix but then it seems there are BIOS/memory issues.
Should I go for Strix z690-A or for MSI Edge at this point? For good VRM / DDR4 / 12900k?
I am using 420mm Liquid Freezer II


----------



## Ichirou

reptilianbrain said:


> Hey guys what's the currently recommended DDR4 z690 motherboard for 12900k? I almost got Strix z690-A but read here that there are BIOS/memory issues with Strix but then it seems there are BIOS/memory issues.
> Should I go for Strix z690-A or for MSI Edge at this point? For good VRM / DDR4 / 12900k?
> I am using 420mm Liquid Freezer II


Anecdotal evidence, but after going through so much trouble with the Strix Z690-A, I might swap to the MSI Edge.
But I haven't done so yet, so I can't give you a 1:1 comparison right now.


----------



## Derpinheimer

Agent-A01 said:


> Yes that was TM5 stable.
> When I get bored I'll post results, IDK about waiting 3 hours for anta777 extreme though.. Lol
> 
> This is the 4000C17 at 1.4v kit. I'm not sure that even the 4000C14 is better on average because it requires way more voltage


Who makes the 4000C17 kit?


----------



## reptilianbrain

Ichirou said:


> Anecdotal evidence, but after going through so much trouble with the Strix Z690-A, I might swap to the MSI Edge.
> But I haven't done so yet, so I can't give you a 1:1 comparison right now.


Oh damn, what is the trouble?


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Are you air or water cooling your memory?


Only air













Derpinheimer said:


> Who makes the 4000C17 kit?


It's the G.Skill trident royal kit



Ichirou said:


> Anecdotal evidence, but after going through so much trouble with the Strix Z690-A, I might swap to the MSI Edge.
> But I haven't done so yet, so I can't give you a 1:1 comparison right now.


Send it to me. I have a spare 12900K to see if it's user error or board problem


----------



## Ichirou

reptilianbrain said:


> Oh damn, what is the trouble?


Again, anecdotal, but for me with a prebinned 12900k, all slots except for B2 cannot boot at 4,200+ MHz, and, I constantly get errors in TM5 no matter how loose I set the timings and/or play around with voltages even at the high end.


Agent-A01 said:


> Send it to me. I have a spare 12900K to see if it's user error or board problem


If you're willing to leave collateral and maybe cover shipping to some extent, sure, I'm down for it.


----------



## Agent-A01

Ichirou said:


> If you're willing to leave collateral and maybe cover shipping to some extent, sure, I'm down for it.


Where do you live? I assume Canada?


----------



## reptilianbrain

Is AORUS Pro ddr4 a safe board?


----------



## Ichirou

Agent-A01 said:


> Where do you live? I assume Canada?


Yep. Toronto specifically.
And regarding the shipping, I think each of us paying our side of the shipping would do fine.

I ordered an MSI Edge by the way, so I'll give that a test as well.


reptilianbrain said:


> Is AORUS Pro ddr4 a safe board?


Avoid Gigabyte; too many reports of incompatibility especially with the RAM to warrant a recommend.


----------



## MikeS3000

I've got my memory stable at 4000 16-16-16-32 @ 1.5v. I was using a 140mm fan sitting on top of my GPU and that kept the sticks at 45c or lower during TM5 and no problems passing. I decided to run the same settings and stress test without the fan (since it's kind of ugly in the case) and passed the test again but sticks got up to 57 and 58c. Is it still worth it to put a fan on b-die at those voltages or should I be good to go without a fan at those worst case scenario temperatures?


----------



## Ichirou

MikeS3000 said:


> I've got my memory stable at 4000 16-16-16-32 @ 1.5v. I was using a 140mm fan sitting on top of my GPU and that kept the sticks at 45c or lower during TM5 and no problems passing. I decided to run the same settings and stress test without the fan (since it's kind of ugly in the case) and passed the test again but sticks got up to 57 and 58c. Is it still worth it to put a fan on b-die at those voltages or should I be good to go without a fan at those worst case scenario temperatures?


Any sort of additional heat from other components such as the GPU would probably cause it to error and potentially corrupt your PC.


----------



## reptilianbrain

Ichirou said:


> Avoid Gigabyte; too many reports of incompatibility especially with the RAM to warrant a recommend.


even if my RAM is on their QVL? (32GB Ballistix 3600)


----------



## Ichirou

reptilianbrain said:


> even if my RAM is on their QVL? (32GB Ballistix 3600)


You would only be guaranteed the XMP speeds. Any overclocking above it is not guaranteed.


----------



## MikeS3000

Ichirou said:


> Any sort of additional heat from other components such as the GPU would probably cause it to error and potentially corrupt your PC.


So my 11 year old son has been gracious enough to "test" my system with 4+ hours of Fortnite. Ram temps peak at 55c. I'll never be in a situation where I am running an intensive RAM application and gaming. I'm new to B-die and keep hearing about temperature sensitivity. My Hynix DJR could run upper 50s to low 60's without a hitch. What the sweet spot for temps on b-die at higher frequencies with tight timings?


----------



## Ichirou

MikeS3000 said:


> So my 11 year old son has been gracious enough to "test" my system with 4+ hours of Fortnite. Ram temps peak at 55c. I'll never be in a situation where I am running an intensive RAM application and gaming. I'm new to B-die and keep hearing about temperature sensitivity. My Hynix DJR could run upper 50s to low 60's without a hitch. What the sweet spot for temps on b-die at higher frequencies with tight timings?


Different kits, dies, batches, etc. will respond to temperature differently.
With Samsung B-die, the rule of thumb is to stay under 40-50C. But that's just a guideline; there's no reason you cannot push a kit harder as long as you do not get errors.


----------



## MikeS3000

Ichirou said:


> Different kits, dies, batches, etc. will respond to temperature differently.
> With Samsung B-die, the rule of thumb is to stay under 40-50C. But that's just a guideline; there's no reason you cannot push a kit harder as long as you do not get errors.


I think my RAM is maxed out. I can't do over 4000 as my IMC is too weak and causes y-cruncher errors at 4100 and 4133 almost instantly with high VCCSA and relaxed timings. I've settled on DDR 4000. I tested 15-15-15-35 at 1.55v with the fan and still produced 3 errors in TM5. I probably should break that 140mm fan back out if I'm rolling the dice with file corruption over 50c. Thanks for your help.


----------



## rkneeshaw

reptilianbrain said:


> Hey guys what's the currently recommended DDR4 z690 motherboard for 12900k? I almost got Strix z690-A but read here that there are BIOS/memory issues with Strix but then it seems there are BIOS/memory issues.
> Should I go for Strix z690-A or for MSI Edge at this point? For good VRM / DDR4 / 12900k?
> I am using 420mm Liquid Freezer II


Strix or the MSI a-pro sound like the front runners. Edge vs a-pro? I dont know if there's much difference, pick the one that has the features you want. Performance wise all three seem to be the better DDR4 boards. The Tuf probably can get an honorable mention too. That said, all of these boards have/had BIOS issues and you need to get the right BIOS version to have good overclocking success.


----------



## Ichirou

MikeS3000 said:


> I think my RAM is maxed out. I can't do over 4000 as my IMC is too weak and causes y-cruncher errors at 4100 and 4133 almost instantly with high VCCSA and relaxed timings. I've settled on DDR 4000. I tested 15-15-15-35 at 1.55v with the fan and still produced 3 errors in TM5. I probably should break that 140mm fan back out if I'm rolling the dice with file corruption over 50c. Thanks for your help.


What kind of results did you observe as you were playing around with VCCSA? I am interested as I am trying to pinpoint an ideal VCCSA as well for myself.
What are the errors in TM5?


----------



## MikeS3000

Ichirou said:


> What kind of results did you observe as you were playing around with VCCSA? I am interested as I am trying to pinpoint an ideal VCCSA as well for myself.
> What are the errors in TM5?


It's not TM5 that will reveal them, at least not quickly. I use Benchmate and run Y-cruncher 2.5b. If you get errors in that test with relaxed timings that you know that your RAM can run then my understanding it that the IMC is causing the errors. At DDR 4000 I run 1.35v VCCSA, 1.40v VDDQ and 1.50v DRAM. At 4100 and 4133 I have slowly pushed VCCSA up incrementally to 1.50v to see if Y-cruncher will pass. No dice. At way too low VCCSA it errors almost instantly. Around 1.50v I can get it to run most of the test and then it fails.


----------



## Ichirou

MikeS3000 said:


> It's not TM5 that will reveal them, at least not quickly. I use Benchmate and run Y-cruncher 2.5b. If you get errors in that test with relaxed timings that you know that your RAM can run then my understanding it that the IMC is causing the errors. At DDR 4000 I run 1.35v VCCSA, 1.40v VDDQ and 1.50v DRAM. At 4100 and 4133 I have slowly pushed VCCSA up incrementally to 1.50v to see if Y-cruncher will pass. No dice. At way too low VCCSA it errors almost instantly. Around 1.50v I can get it to run most of the test and then it fails.


Very informative, thanks. Even in TM5 1usmus right now, I keep getting Error 6's, which implies "bad IMC voltage", but I can't seem to find a good setting.
I tried loosening the primaries to extremely high values and would still get them.
However, my 12900k's been prebinned, so the IMC should theoretically not be an issue. Hence, I'm leaning towards the motherboard (or maybe BIOS) causing issues.

Could you recommend an extremely safe config for me to test? Like one that should be guaranteed to pass, or else there's something definitely wrong.
My Samsung B-die kit is heavily binned and takes almost literally anything I throw at it. Can do 4,000 MHz @ 13-13-11-14-1T Gear 1 super tight subtimings with primarily Error 6.
But even if I loosen the kit to 16-flat with Auto subtimings, I still get Error 6... Doesn't matter what VDIMM I throw at the kit (anywhere from 1.50V up to 1.85V even).


----------



## Agent-A01

Ichirou said:


> Yep. Toronto specifically.
> And regarding the shipping, I think each of us paying our side of the shipping would do fine.
> 
> I ordered an MSI Edge by the way, so I'll give that a test as well.


Well estimate the cost to ship to nashville, TN.

Are there import duties?


----------



## Apfelkuchen

Ichirou said:


> Avoid Gigabyte; too many reports of incompatibility especially with the RAM to warrant a recommend.


So this is still not fixed? I had hoped that after months they might have improved on this... guess I'll get an msi


----------



## Ichirou

Agent-A01 said:


> Well estimate the cost to ship to nashville, TN.
> 
> Are there import duties?


If I ship it as a gift and value it under $100, there won't be any import fees. However, I can't attest to the postal service quality nowadays. It's a glorious mess, as you are probably aware. Shipping is $32.65 CAD, tracked. That's about $26 USD. (Insurance is irrelevant since I cannot claim more than $100 unless you want to pay duties.)










Apfelkuchen said:


> So this is still not fixed? I had hoped that after months they might have improved on this... guess I'll get an msi


It's improving with some BIOS updates, but they are still far away in consistency compared to ASUS/MSI.
If you only want to run RAM at XMP under like, 3,800 MHz, then it's probably fine, I guess.


----------



## Apfelkuchen

The goal would be around 4133 c16 area, so not exactly XMP... man, I wish they got their **** together, I like the boards a lot more than the other vendors. Pricing for all of these is crazy, asking 200+ for what I'd consider mediocre entry boards


----------



## Agent-A01

Ichirou said:


> If I ship it as a gift and value it under $100, there won't be any import fees. However, I can't attest to the postal service quality nowadays. It's a glorious mess, as you are probably aware. Shipping is $32.65 CAD, tracked. That's about $26 USD. (Insurance is irrelevant since I cannot claim more than $100 unless you want to pay duties.)


Well we can touch base later after you try out the edge. If that solves your problems I think you mentioned you would return the board.


----------



## Ichirou

Agent-A01 said:


> Well we can touch base later after you try out the edge. If that solves your problems I think you mentioned you would return the board.


Yeah, I think that's a better idea at this time. I've already ordered it, so I might as well use it first to further isolate the issue.

I cannot refund the Strix anymore, but even if I was still in the return period, the store I bought it from (Canada Computer) only accepts it unopen unless it is faulty. (The store wasn't like this before; back then they would accept any return with a 15% restock fee. So it must be a new Corona rule.) Sadly, I know that they'll argue that the board _isn't_ faulty as it can still boot and run fine (they always test major components on the spot), but simply cannot accept any meaningful overclocks, which is the end goal here.

It's fine though. Z690 is still fresh and I don't think board prices will go down any time soon, so I have plenty of time to resell it at a discount.


----------



## Augustas

Does anybody here have any experience with the tomahawk? The board is just so inconsistent. One minute I can post and run benchmarks at 4000mhz then it doesn’t want to post again. Even if I run previously bootable timings it doesn’t want to know.


----------



## Ichirou

Augustas said:


> Does anybody here have any experience with the tomahawk? The board is just so inconsistent. One minute I can post and run benchmarks at 4000mhz then it doesn’t want to post again. Even if I run previously bootable timings it doesn’t want to know.


You need to find your kit's optimal RTT skews; the BIOS is having trouble training them each boot.


----------



## Augustas

Ichirou said:


> You need to find your kit's optimal RTT skews; the BIOS is having trouble training them each boot.


 I feel like my cpu/ram have more to give, but this mobo/bios is holding them back.









1.24SA, 1.24VDDQ, 1.55RAM


----------



## Ichirou

Augustas said:


> I feel like my cpu/ram have more to give, but this mobo/bios is holding them back.
> View attachment 2543561
> 
> 
> 1.24SA, 1.24VDDQ, 1.55RAM


@bscool ^
Try doing up to 4,300 MHz with more voltage, and try 1T. Also, your tFAW is really high; try reducing to like, 16.

Does disabling E-cores on that BIOS grant you AVX-512? Or does the 1.1 BIOS block it? I know that the MSI Z690 DDR4 only has two BIOSes right now (1.0 and 1.1).


----------



## bscool

reptilianbrain said:


> Hey guys what's the currently recommended DDR4 z690 motherboard for 12900k? I almost got Strix z690-A but read here that there are BIOS/memory issues with Strix but then it seems there are BIOS/memory issues.
> Should I go for Strix z690-A or for MSI Edge at this point? For good VRM / DDR4 / 12900k?
> I am using 420mm Liquid Freezer II


DR or SR b die and care about running 4000+? DR strix, SR either. Dont you love how everyone gives you different input


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> @bscool ^
> Try doing up to 4,300 MHz with more voltage, and try 1T. Also, your tFAW is really high; try reducing to like, 16.
> 
> Does disabling E-cores on that BIOS grant you AVX-512? Or does the 1.1 BIOS block it? I know that the MSI Z690 DDR4 only has two BIOSes right now (1.0 and 1.1).


So i should try your setting that dont work. Why dont you try my setting that work for me?

It is like you are set in stone your board should run whatever you decide it should, instead of using what works and has been tested by others.

Edit 1001 is the bios that disable/removes avx512.


----------



## Augustas

Ichirou said:


> @bscool ^
> Try doing up to 4,300 MHz with more voltage, and try 1T. Also, your tFAW is really high; try reducing to like, 16.
> 
> Does disabling E-cores on that BIOS grant you AVX-512? Or does the 1.1 BIOS block it? I know that the MSI Z690 DDR4 only has two BIOSes right now (1.0 and 1.1).


Yeah, I have AVX-512. I’ll set tFAW now. I can’t post at 1t as of right now. Not sure which voltage would help with that.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> So i should try your setting that dont work. Why dont you try my setting that work for me?
> 
> I put $$ on @Agent-A01 gets your board running higher than you. Youuse weird azz setting and are stubborn as far a I can tell
> 
> Edit 1001 is the bios that disable/removes avx512.


I meant that for @Augustas actually.
I was more pointing you out about how he managed to run 4000 14-flat at 1.55V

In regards to adding/removing AVX-512, is it just BIOS-based, or could it end up being a permanent change on the motherboard?


Augustas said:


> Yeah, I have AVX-512. I’ll set tFAW now. I can’t post at 1t as of right now. Not sure which voltage would help with that.


I don't think 1T is something you can simply fix with voltage; I believe it's just whether or not the kit can do it natively. So binning.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> I meant that for @Augustas actually.
> I was more pointing you out about how he managed to run 4000 14-flat at 1.55V
> 
> I don't think 1T is something you can simply fix with voltage; I believe it's just whether or not the kit can do it natively. So binning.


Oh sorry here I went off on a rant  I still stick by that thogh and edit my post above


----------



## Augustas

I can’t even post 4100mhz with 1.45 SA and VDDQ even though I can post at 4000mhz at much lower voltages which leads me to believe that it’s the motherboard as opposed to my cpu. 
the kit is dual rank b die 4000mhz cl17-17-17-37 1.35V


----------



## bscool

@Ichirou I think 1t is more IMC limitation. Where or why do you think it is memory?

Also MB 2 dimm board much easier to run 1t. Using same ram and cpu. Compare z490 Unify vs Apex as example


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> @Ichirou I think 1t is more IMC limitation. Where or why do you think it is memory?
> 
> Also MB 2 dimm board much easier to run 1t. Using same ram and cpu. Compare z490 Unify vs Apex as example


I've noticed some people on Reddit who had comparable Micron E-die kits (it's always the same kits people are buying), and some could do 1T while others couldn't even on similar systems.
Of course, it could be an IMC limitation, as you say. I wouldn't be sure. I don't even think it can be tested.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> I've noticed some people on Reddit who had comparable Micron E-die kits (it's always the same kits people are buying), and some could do 1T while others couldn't even on similar systems.
> Of course, it could be an IMC limitation, as you say. I wouldn't be sure. I don't even think it can be tested.


Well it can be tested I just told you how i have tested it. I dont know anymore.

Same cpu and mem switch from unify and wont run 1t put in Apex and runs 1t.

Sorry I should have explained it I just assume peope know things. One of my many faults


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Only air
> 
> View attachment 2543501
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's the G.Skill trident royal kit
> 
> 
> 
> Send it to me. I have a spare 12900K to see if it's user error or board problem


Hey do you run it with the glass off all the time? Just curious I see people complain about temps with 011 cases.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Well it can be tested I just told you how i have tested it. I dont know anymore.
> 
> Same cpu and mem switch from unify and wont run 1t put in Apex and runs 1t.


I know of some people who have used similar kits that do and don't support 1T, so I'm not really sure.
Regardless, I don't think raising voltage would suddenly make 1T work if it doesn't already.

It could be a CPU thing, or it could be a motherboard thing too, as you say. Or binning for both/either.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> @bscool ^
> Try doing up to 4,300 MHz with more voltage, and try 1T. Also, your tFAW is really high; try reducing to like, 16.
> 
> Does disabling E-cores on that BIOS grant you AVX-512? Or does the 1.1 BIOS block it? I know that the MSI Z690 DDR4 only has two BIOSes right now (1.0 and 1.1).


I amn still confused why did quote me then? Who should try 1t? The only people that can run 1t is SR, no one I see you quoting runs SR. @Augustas is on DR and 1t will not work.

Edit 1t on DR will be harder to run and if it can it will be at lower frequencys.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> I amn still confused why did quote me then? Who should try 1t? The only people that can run 1t is SR, no one I see you quoting runs SR. @Augustas is on DR and 1t will not work.


The quote was more about the previous discussion we were having about you being curious about people who could run 4,000 14-flat at sub-1.60V. And this person could. I think it was yesterday.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> The quote was more about the previous discussion we were having about you being curious about people who could run 4,000 14-flat at sub-1.60V. And this person could. I think it was yesterday.


Ill talk about it in here instead of ddr4 thread you posted in. I am looking forward to you gettting the MSI board. Why cant it be 2 day Amazon


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Ill talk about it in here instead of ddr4 thread you posted in. I am looking forward to you gettting the MSI board. Why cant it be 2 day Amazon


Wouldn't make a difference since Noctua used generic air mail to send the LGA1700 bracket for Austria.
The rep said it could take up to three weeks to arrive. And considering corona + weather conditions, I'm inclined to believe that.
I'd probably get the board sooner, since it was processed and shipped out same day today via UPS.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> Wouldn't make a difference since Noctua used generic air mail to send the LGA1700 bracket for Austria.
> The rep said it could take up to three weeks to arrive. And considering corona + weather conditions, I'm inclined to believe that.
> I'd probably get the board sooner, since it was processed and shipped out same day today via UPS.


I thought you were building a custom loop or have one?

Just the Noctua for testing I take it.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> I thought you were building a custom loop or have one?
> 
> Just the Noctua for testing I take it.


Yeah, the custom loop parts haven't all arrived yet. As @Section31 strongly advised, I should hold off on any significant fittings purchases until _after _I start to piece things together and measure the tubing and whatnot (I'm going straight for hard tubing). Don't want buy too many or too few fittings, after all.

The Noctua's just a placeholder to allow me to do this benching and testing before finalizing the system. It didn't cost too much anyway, and there's always someone willing to buy it second-hand. I think this test bench was actually a good idea in hindsight, considering how the Strix might not be as good as I expected. If I had locked it in, it might've been difficult to justify an exchange later on.

Currently, the water cooling parts I've purchased, including the shipping and import fees, amounts to $1,700 USD, give or take some change. And that's before factoring in the fittings I'll also have to buy. This is a pretty expensive hobby, no joke. I can see why people get very barebones watercooling builds or go for the cheapest AliExpress parts available.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Hey do you run it with the glass off all the time? Just curious I see people complain about temps with 011 cases.


Well since i put in the strix board it's been off. I'm lazy lol.

Typically run it with everything on except the side panel.
The temps are fine if you remove the crappy dust filters(restrictive).


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Ran y-cruncher twice for testing and it passed.
> 
> Setting 1.5v in bios results is 1.492v, it throws an error half way through the test.
> Bios set 1.50625 = 1.51 required to pass.


Ok finally tested and 1.5v in bios y cruncher wont run and memtest errors within seconds so yours are littlte better it sounds like. I need to set 1.51v in bios to run y cruncher and memtest doesnt error within seconds.

How many kits have you bought of DR? Dont tell me that was your first kit 

Didnt screenshot y cuncher just this aida64

*Disclaimer* this is *not memtest stable*, for bench/testing only. 😁


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Ok finally tested and 1.5v in bios y cruncher wont run and memtest errors within seconds so yours are littlte better it sounds like. I need to set 1.51v in bios to run y cruncher and memtest doesnt error within seconds.
> 
> How many kits have you bought of DR? Dont tell me that was your first kit
> 
> Didnt screenshot y cuncher just this aida64
> 
> *Disclaimer* this is *not memtest stable*, for bench/testing only. 😁


Yeah I was playing with this all last night. I couldn't get the damn thing stable playing with those voltages on 14-14-14 4000 Hertz.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Yeah I was playing with this all last night. I couldn't get the damn thing stable playing with his voltages on 14-14-14 4000 Hertz.


Could u run any benches?

Thinking /looking back I might have used my best kit in my nieces build. They did [email protected] in z590 apex gear 2 for benches, not memtest. Live n learn lol


----------



## rkneeshaw

Ichirou said:


> I know that the MSI Z690 DDR4 only has two BIOSes right now (1.0 and 1.1).


FWIW I am using the 1.24u2 bios and it’s way better than those crappy 1.0 and 1.1 versions. Couldn’t get over 3800 with those, but she boots and trains 4133 all day now. Even 4200 booted and trained fine but I couldn’t keep it stable at the voltages/temps I wanted.


----------



## Frozburn

Does anyone have a stable 4300 G1 CL16 or something on 124u2? Currently running 4000 CL14 + tight subtimings on the default bios, SR could do 4300 but DR just doesn't like more than 4133 on the stock bios so I'll be trying 1.24U2 as well.


----------



## Augustas

rkneeshaw said:


> FWIW I am using the 1.24u2 bios and it’s way better than those crappy 1.0 and 1.1 versions. Couldn’t get over 3800 with those, but she boots and trains 4133 all day now. Even 4200 booted and trained fine but I couldn’t keep it stable at the voltages/temps I wanted.


Could you please send me or link me that bios. I’ve had to revert back to 3800mhz on the 1.1 as I can’t get it to consistently boot.


----------



## rkneeshaw

Augustas said:


> Could you please send me or link me that bios. I’ve had to revert back to 3800mhz on the 1.1 as I can’t get it to consistently boot.


Yeah, its over in the MSI Z690-A Pro thread: MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread

I think you'll find totally different results with 1.24U2


----------



## Augustas

rkneeshaw said:


> Yeah, its over in the MSI Z690-A Pro thread: MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread
> 
> I think you'll find totally different results with 1.24U2


Damn, I have the tomahawk. Haven’t had any joy with any bios on this board and am thinking about getting the strix instead.


----------



## rkneeshaw

Augustas said:


> Damn, I have the tomahawk. Haven’t had any joy with any bios on this board and am thinking about getting the strix instead.


Look a page back in that thread to the link to the 1.24 bios, I think there's a beta tomahawk in that folder.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Could u run any benches?
> 
> Thinking /looking back I might have used my best kit in my nieces build. They did [email protected] in z590 apex gear 2 for benches, not memtest. Live n learn lol


Yeah it ran a aida64. I could probably run CBr23 too.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Yeah it ran a aida64. I could probably run CBr23 too.


Yeah it is crazy to me that I have bought that many kits and still none are just crazy good. That was fun little experiment though with a few of us all trying the same setting more or less and voltage to kind bin against each other.


----------



## Ichirou

Frozburn said:


> Does anyone have a stable 4300 G1 CL16 or something on 124u2? Currently running 4000 CL14 + tight subtimings on the default bios, SR could do 4300 but DR just doesn't like more than 4133 on the stock bios so I'll be trying 1.24U2 as well.


SR will always be easier to drive than DR, that's just how things go. I'm pretty sure the people running 4,300 CL14 Gear 1 are SR users.

I will be curious to see your results comparing the default 1.00 to 1.24U2. Would also be nice to know whether that newer BIOS kills off AVX-512 with E-cores off.

Also, what is the difference between these two?


----------



## bass junkie xl

Augustas said:


> Damn, I have the tomahawk. Haven’t had any joy with any bios on this board and am thinking about getting the strix instead.


Strix d4 here with a 12900k and 8gb x 4 sticks @ 4000 cl 15 tight other timings gear 1 no issues @ 1.5 - 1.55 v. doing 43.9 NS . 

4100 needs cl 16 
4133 needs 17-18-18-38. 

I almost went MSI but went with Strix instead. I have not tried 8gb x2 or 16gb x 2 yet I'm sure I would be able to do better then 4000 cl15 .
I'm on 8gb x4


----------



## Hemius

Hello everyone!

Could anyone reply my questions and help with further OC? Would really appreciate any help.

Specs are:
CPU - i7 12700k (no OC)
MOBO - Gigabyte AORUS Elite DDR4 with F6a BIOS Ver.
RAM - 2 kits of 8Gbx2 Patriot Viper Steel pvs416g440c9k afaik Samsung B-Die
CPU is cooled with custom loop

Fot the moment I got absolutely stable 3600 with 16-18-18-36 timings (was not tightening secondaries) with V1.420, latency is about 58ns. With Gear mode 2 was getting it around 80ns.

After changing to Gear mode 1 manually got my CR changed from CR1 to CR2 automatically. Is there a way to change it back manually and is there a need for this?

Also I cannot get this memory running on more than 3800 (not found absolutely stable timings for the moment, approx it will be 18-20-20-40 with V1.420) with 4 modules installed,
1. system not starting with V over 1.420,
2. not starting with loose timings with 4000 with V1.420 .

Goes 4400 easily with 2 modules... Is there a way to bypass this?





Spoiler: Benchmark results


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Ok finally tested and 1.5v in bios y cruncher wont run and memtest errors within seconds so yours are littlte better it sounds like. I need to set 1.51v in bios to run y cruncher and memtest doesnt error within seconds.
> 
> How many kits have you bought of DR? Dont tell me that was your first kit
> 
> Didnt screenshot y cuncher just this aida64
> 
> *Disclaimer* this is *not memtest stable*, for bench/testing only. 😁


Only 1 b-die DR kit.
Why would I need to purchase a dozen kits when mine can pass y-cruncher 4000C14 with 1.5v 

I've had a few b-die 2x8 and 4x8 kits but not 2x16s.
I'd still be on my last 4x8 kit if I didn't need to buy a new kit but I sold it with a system I built for a buddy.

That kit would do like C17 4400 on the XII hero, daily I ran the same timings, 4133 @ c15-15-15 @ 1.53
I'm not sure if that's good compared to other top bins of today



Hemius said:


> Hello everyone!
> 
> Could anyone reply my questions and help with further OC? Would really appreciate any help.
> 
> Specs are:
> CPU - i7 12700k (no OC)
> MOBO - Gigabyte AORUS Elite DDR4 with F6a BIOS Ver.
> RAM - 2 kits of 8Gbx2 Patriot Viper Steel pvs416g440c9k afaik Samsung B-Die
> CPU is cooled with custom loop
> 
> Fot the moment I got absolutely stable 3600 with 16-18-18-36 timings (was not tightening secondaries) with V1.420, latency is about 58ns. With Gear mode 2 was getting it around 80ns.
> 
> After changing to Gear mode 1 manually got my CR changed from CR1 to CR2 automatically. Is there a way to change it back manually and is there a need for this?
> 
> Also I cannot get this memory running on more than 3800 (not found absolutely stable timings for the moment, approx it will be 18-20-20-40 with V1.420) with 4 modules installed,
> 1. system not starting with V over 1.420,
> 2. not starting with loose timings with 4000 with V1.420 .
> 
> Goes 4400 easily with 2 modules... Is there a way to bypass this?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler: Benchmark results
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2543677


Gigabyte has some teething issues with DDR4.
I suggest sticking with 3800 for now and revisiting after a couple BIOS updates

Yes you can change to CR1 manually. It will limit your max frequency to around 3866~ though. But you do have 4x dimms so it may not be possible.
Try CR1 3600 GR1. Then move up a step at a time. If it won't post try adding system agent voltage or vddq


----------



## reptilianbrain

bscool said:


> DR or SR b die and care about running 4000+? DR strix, SR either. Dont you love how everyone gives you different input


I have 2x BL2K32G36C16U4B (32GB 3600) I assume it's DualRank? Do you think it's worth aiming to OC it?


----------



## Hemius

Agent-A01 said:


> Only 1 b-die DR kit.
> Why would I need to purchase a dozen kits when mine can pass y-cruncher 4000C14 with 1.5v
> 
> I've had a few b-die 2x8 and 4x8 kits but not 2x16s.
> I'd still be on my last 4x8 kit if I didn't need to buy a new kit but I sold it with a system I built for a buddy.
> 
> That kit would do like C17 4400 on the XII hero, daily I ran the same timings, 4133 @ c15-15-15 @ 1.53
> I'm not sure if that's good compared to other top bins of today
> 
> 
> 
> Gigabyte has some teething issues with DDR4.
> I suggest sticking with 3800 for now and revisiting after a couple BIOS updates
> 
> Yes you can change to CR1 manually. It will limit your max frequency to around 3866~ though. But you do have 4x dimms so it may not be possible.
> Try CR1 3600 GR1. Then move up a step at a time. If it won't post try adding system agent voltage or vddq


Where do I find Command Rate setting in BIOS/UEFI? There is no such option or I'm totally blind... It's running ok in gear mode 1 on 3600 but CR1, in the moment stability test on 3800 GR1 CR2 V1.420 18-20-20-40 is running


----------



## Agent-A01

Hemius said:


> Where do I find Command Rate setting in BIOS/UEFI? There is no such option or I'm totally blind... It's running ok in gear mode 1 on 3600 but CR1, in the moment stability test on 3800 GR1 CR2 V1.420 18-20-20-40 is running


Should be under Tweaker > Advanced memory tweaking > memory channel timings > Command rate = 1


----------



## bscool

reptilianbrain said:


> I have 2x BL2K32G36C16U4B (32GB 3600) I assume it's DualRank? Do you think it's worth aiming to OC it?


I dont know anything about Crucial and no idea how z690 ddr4 does with 2x32.


----------



## Tsun

Ichirou said:


> Also, what is the difference between these two?


TI is white version available in some countries, mostly China:





MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFI DDR4


MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFI DDR4




cn.msi.com


----------



## Hemius

Agent-A01 said:


> Should be under Tweaker > Advanced memory tweaking > memory channel timings > Command rate = 1


Thanks a lot!
Running stable on CR1 GR1 3600 16-18-18-36 with no secondaries tuned

In your opinion now for getting better results which way is preferable?
1. Changing MOBO to MSI or Asus ROG Strix with same memory?
2. Trying to change memory to 2x16 with higher frequencies? Something with 4000 or 4200 or it will be a bad idea?
3. Waiting for new BIOS firmware for Aorus? Is it known that it's possible to get higher frequencies with new updates?
4. Update to DDR5? How much drawbacks are in this way? Except price


----------



## Agent-A01

Hemius said:


> Thanks a lot!
> Running stable on CR1 GR1 3600 16-18-18-36 with no secondaries tuned
> 
> In your opinion now for getting better results which way is preferable?
> 1. Changing MOBO to MSI or Asus ROG Strix with same memory?
> 2. Trying to change memory to 2x16 with higher frequencies? Something with 4000 or 4200 or it will be a bad idea?
> 3. Waiting for new BIOS firmware for Aorus? Is it known that it's possible to get higher frequencies with new updates?
> 4. Update to DDR5? How much drawbacks are in this way? Except price


1. See #3
2. Not a terrible idea but it's not worth the change unless you just want a better overclocking ram kit.
3. Good idea to wait. Yes bios updates can/will improve ddr4/5 OC and stability.
4. DDR5 has plenty of issues in getting stability, more so than DDR4. Better to wait.


----------



## Ichirou

Tsun said:


> TI is white version available in some countries, mostly China:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFI DDR4
> 
> 
> MPG Z690 EDGE TI WIFI DDR4
> 
> 
> 
> 
> cn.msi.com


Damn, I would've liked a white MSI board. Why isn't it sold here, I wonder?


Hemius said:


> Thanks a lot!
> Running stable on CR1 GR1 3600 16-18-18-36 with no secondaries tuned
> 
> In your opinion now for getting better results which way is preferable?
> 1. Changing MOBO to MSI or Asus ROG Strix with same memory?
> 2. Trying to change memory to 2x16 with higher frequencies? Something with 4000 or 4200 or it will be a bad idea?
> 3. Waiting for new BIOS firmware for Aorus? Is it known that it's possible to get higher frequencies with new updates?
> 4. Update to DDR5? How much drawbacks are in this way? Except price


Unless you want to go through the whole process of getting everything swapped out and retesting everything again plus having to resell parts, it's probably not worth swapping at this point in time unless you are unsatisfied with the results you're getting on the Aorus. There's no guarantee whether Gigabyte will ever achieve any meaningful improvements with their BIOSes, and I wouldn't get your hopes up about it either.

32 GB DIMMs are always the hardest to overclock. 4x16 GB Micron B-die would be the most ideal if you need 64 GB. But pretty rare to find.


----------



## Frozburn

Ichirou said:


> SR will always be easier to drive than DR, that's just how things go. I'm pretty sure the people running 4,300 CL14 Gear 1 are SR users.
> 
> I will be curious to see your results comparing the default 1.00 to 1.24U2. Would also be nice to know whether that newer BIOS kills off AVX-512 with E-cores off.
> 
> Also, what is the difference between these two?


I'll test it next week and post results.


----------



## X909

bass junkie xl said:


> Strix d4 here with a 12900k and 8gb x 4 sticks @ 4000 cl 15 tight other timings gear 1 no issues @ 1.5 - 1.55 v. doing 43.9 NS .
> 
> 4100 needs cl 16
> 4133 needs 17-18-18-38.
> 
> I almost went MSI but went with Strix instead. I have not tried 8gb x2 or 16gb x 2 yet I'm sure I would be able to do better then 4000 cl15 .
> I'm on 8gb x4


4 Ghz+ with 4 sticks? Nice... I stuck with 3733 with 4x DR B-Die. What voltages do you use? Any other tricks?


----------



## bass junkie xl

X909 said:


> 4 Ghz+ with 4 sticks? Nice... I stuck with 3733 with 4x DR B-Die. What voltages do you use? Any other tricks?


my kit is team group extreme 4133 cl 18 xmp 1.40v factory settings there on the Strix qvl . 
do I if that helps or its my imc is good who knows. 

I tried this day one 

manual ( not xmp ) 

4000 mzh 
16-17-17-38 
1.50 v dram 
auto vccio ( 1.32v ) 
vddq 1.25v 

booted then enabled round trip latency to get 
69/71 69/71 RTL

booted passed tm5 

went 15-15-15-35 @ 1 .55v dram left rest the same booted checked RTL Iol same 69/71 k rebooted passed tm5 then tighned other timings passed again. 

I can't do cl 14 or t1 . I am already pushing it so I'm happy for now


----------



## drkrffxx

BTW, guys. Both Asrock Timing and Memtweak give me an error to load and neither display my timings correctly, or at all. Is there any other program I could try to see the whole picture on my timings and try and get some help to tighten them further? Or is there a bios setting that allow those program to read the timings?

Board is a TUF D4.


----------



## bscool

drkrffxx said:


> BTW, guys. Both Asrock Timing and Memtweak give me an error to load and neither display my timings correctly, or at all. Is there any other program I could try to see the whole picture on my timings and try and get some help to tighten them further? Or is there a bios setting that allow those program to read the timings?
> 
> Board is a TUF D4.


Are you using the z690 versions listed in first post of this thread? they work for me.


----------



## bass junkie xl

drkrffxx said:


> BTW, guys. Both Asrock Timing and Memtweak give me an error to load and neither display my timings correctly, or at all. Is there any other program I could try to see the whole picture on my timings and try and get some help to tighten them further? Or is there a bios setting that allow those program to read the timings?
> 
> Board is a TUF D4.


I always get this error to and forget evrytime.bow to fix it .... 

so I google it and a forum comes up of me asking and a user posted show to fix it lol .

enable real time memory timing in bios option should do it thats what it's called on Asus anyways


----------



## drkrffxx

bscool said:


> Are you using the z690 versions listed in first post of this thread? they work for me.


Yes.



bass junkie xl said:


> enable real time memory timing in bios option should do it thats what it's called on Asus anyways


I think this did it.










Primaries and secondaries I think they are somewhat decent. The rest I understand ****. So any advice is welcomed. It's single sided bdie.


----------



## bscool

Funny mine works with Real Time Memory Training enabled or disabled.


----------



## Ichirou

@bscool @Agent-A01
F*** yeah
*4,000 MHz 13-15-13-20-1T Gear 1
1.60V VDIMM
1.25V VCCSA
1.35V VDDQ*








The only thing that sucks is that I need like possibly up to three fans blowing at it.
tRFC and tREFI are not yet tightened, and cache clock is only at 40x so that sucks too. AIDA64 numbers are bad because of these.
I'll work on tweaking those three later to see if I can boost AIDA64 scores. A couple more timings are still loose as well.

_Now I wonder what I should do about that MSI Edge that's coming in the mail..._


----------



## Derpinheimer

Is there a difference between setting latencies in MSI Dragonball vs the BIOS? I am not able to post at 4000 (14-15-15-32-350) but if I boot at 4000 (15-15-15-32-350), I've passed MT5 extreme (6 passes) with 4000 (14-15-14-32-350)

This is at 1.5V DRAM, 1.2V VCCSA, 1.2v VDDQ


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> @bscool @Agent-A01
> F*** yeah
> *4,000 MHz 13-15-13-20-1T Gear 1
> 1.60V VDIMM
> 1.25V VCCSA
> 1.35V VDDQ*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing that sucks is that I need like possibly up to three fans blowing at it.
> tRFC and tREFI are not yet tightened, and cache clock is only at 40x so that sucks too. AIDA64 numbers are bad because of these.
> I'll work on tweaking those three later to see if I can boost AIDA64 scores. A couple more timings are still loose as well.
> 
> _Now I wonder what I should do about that MSI Edge that's coming in the mail..._


That's a nice OC, but do you know TM5 default @1usmus_v3 doesn't mean nothing for stability, right? Try Anta777 Extreme1 or ABSOLUT.


----------



## Ichirou

Derpinheimer said:


> Is there a difference between setting latencies in MSI Dragonball vs the BIOS? I am not able to post at 4000 (14-15-15-32-350) but if I boot at 4000 (15-15-15-32-350), I've passed MT5 extreme (6 passes) with 4000 (14-15-14-32-350)
> 
> This is at 1.5V DRAM, 1.2V VCCSA, 1.2v VDDQ


Some motherboards have issues training with super tight timings even if the actual RAM itself can support them.
As long as you get an ATC or IXTU readout, it will show the true values loaded into the system, even if they're changed after boot.
You know whether they are properly reflected if you do some timing changes and notice more/less stability between tests without restarting.

For example, with my kit (just above), my BIOS can boot to desktop at 13-13-11-14-1T, but that's unstable. However, if I raise tRCD, tCL 13 doesn't always boot.
I've played around with the RTTs, but it's still pretty annoying that way, so I just change at runtime.


ViTosS said:


> That's a nice OC, but do you know TM5 default @1usmus_v3 doesn't mean nothing for stability, right? Try Anta777 Extreme1 or ABSOLUT.


That's why I have a y-cruncher run as well. I use 1usmus because it's quicker and allows me to tweak the RAM faster.

Never had any issue running my other Micron B-die kit at super tight timings with just 1usmus and 1.63V. Still dailying that PC as we speak.


----------



## bscool

Derpinheimer said:


> Is there a difference between setting latencies in MSI Dragonball vs the BIOS? I am not able to post at 4000 (14-15-15-32-350) but if I boot at 4000 (15-15-15-32-350), I've passed MT5 extreme (6 passes) with 4000 (14-15-14-32-350)
> 
> This is at 1.5V DRAM, 1.2V VCCSA, 1.2v VDDQ


Yes it is different your rtls are not getting trained when setting cas in windows. RTLs should be tigther when trained with c14 vs c15.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Yes it is different your rtls are not getting trained when setting cas in windows. RTLs should be tigther when trained with c14 vs c15.


That reminds me, I should try manually tweaking the RTL/IOLs. I know it's complex with Z690 but I think I have an idea for how it works. Will post results after I've tweaked the rest.

I've just called it a day for today since I feel like I've reached a bit of a milestone by stabilizing this kit to start. Voltages are probably still a little loose.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> That reminds me, I should try manually tweaking the RTL/IOLs. I know it's complex with Z690 but I think I have an idea for how it works. Will post results after I've tweaked the rest.
> 
> I've just called it a day for today since I feel like I've reached a bit of a milestone by stabilizing this kit to start. Voltages are probably still a little loose.


So you can manually tweak rtls on z690?


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> So you can tweak rtls on z690?


I think you can. But it's just a bit more confusing due to everything being named different.
I'll experiment and let you know how it turns out.

I know my kit on default does 25/65 auto-trained to CL13, but without booting at that tCL, it's 25/67.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> I think you can. But it's just a bit more confusing due to everything being named different.
> I'll experiment and let you know how it turns out.
> 
> I know my kit on default does 25/65 auto-trained to CL13, but without booting at that tCL, it's 25/67.


I already know the answer. You can tell me what you find out


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> I think you can. But it's just a bit more confusing due to everything being named different.
> I'll experiment and let you know how it turns out.
> 
> I know my kit on default does 25/65 auto-trained to CL13, but without booting at that tCL, it's 25/67.


You cant, Couldnt on z590 either. But try it.


----------



## bass junkie xl

maybe if we had a RTL / Iiol offset like we did on z390 that would be sweet


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> So you can manually tweak rtls on z690?


Not really.

To lower RTLs you have to lower tCL/tWCL


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> Not really.
> 
> To lower RTLs you have to lower tCL/tWCL


I know. I was playing dumb. Well not playing


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> I know. I was playing dumb. Well not playing


We all have our days.. Lol


----------



## bscool

Agent-A01 said:


> We all have our days.. Lol


Tell me about it


----------



## MikeS3000

I think these timings are as tight as I can go at DDR 4000. I passed TM5 Anta Extreme twice to be sure there are no errors. Temps peak at 45c with a 140mm fan. Do you see any other areas of improvement or even more important, any timings that could get me into trouble with stability?

Edit: NVM. Failed Y-cruncher stress testing. Going to relax tRFC, tRRD_L, tRTP, tWRRD_sg and dg (to decrease tWTR L and S)
Edit 2: I changed tRFC to 300 and tRRD_L to 6 and it ran an hour of Y-cruncher without crashes. Damn, I never should have gone down the RAM tuning rabbit hole. This takes some patience.


----------



## Derpinheimer

Ichirou said:


> Some motherboards have issues training with super tight timings even if the actual RAM itself can support them.
> As long as you get an ATC or IXTU readout, it will show the true values loaded into the system, even if they're changed after boot.
> You know whether they are properly reflected if you do some timing changes and notice more/less stability between tests without restarting.
> 
> For example, with my kit (just above), my BIOS can boot to desktop at 13-13-11-14-1T, but that's unstable. However, if I raise tRCD, tCL 13 doesn't always boot.
> I've played around with the RTTs, but it's still pretty annoying that way, so I just change at runtime.
> 
> That's why I have a y-cruncher run as well. I use 1usmus because it's quicker and allows me to tweak the RAM faster.
> 
> Never had any issue running my other Micron B-die kit at super tight timings with just 1usmus and 1.63V. Still dailying that PC as we speak.





bscool said:


> Yes it is different your rtls are not getting trained when setting cas in windows. RTLs should be tigther when trained with c14 vs c15.


Hmm interesting. I am able to boot at 15-15-14-32-2T but even locking the RTLs wont allow the CL to go down to 14.. which is strange, since thats apparently what im doing when setting the CL within MSI Dragon Ball? Im pretty confident the values are applying; HWInfo shows them change. If I lower them too far they'll start throwing errors or freezing in MT5. 
Also to note is the RTLs are 71-71-69-69 and I cant modify them at all from that and be able to boot. 

1USMUS, what is that?


----------



## bscool

Derpinheimer said:


> Hmm interesting. I am able to boot at 15-15-14-32-2T but even locking the RTLs wont allow the CL to go down to 14.. which is strange, since thats apparently what im doing when setting the CL within MSI Dragon Ball? Im pretty confident the values are applying; HWInfo shows them change. If I lower them too far they'll start throwing errors or freezing in MT5.
> Also to note is the RTLs are 71-71-69-69 and I cant modify them at all from that and be able to boot.
> 
> 1USMUS, what is that?


I dont understand how do you lock RTLs? You cant.

Edit on z690 you cannot manually set them like you could older gens. That stopped on z590 except Asrock OC board could set RTLs.


----------



## Derpinheimer

bscool said:


> I dont understand how do you lock RTLs? You cant.
> 
> Edit on z690 you cannot manually set them like you could older gens. That stopped on z590 except Asrock OC board could set RTLs.


Looks like youre right, the setting is there but it doesnt actually do anything I can tell upon further testing.


----------



## jayfkay

ok result for an i5








however it's not stable (tm5 extreme error at test 5) and I CBA troubleshooting, so back to cl15 for now.



Derpinheimer said:


> but it doesnt actually do anything I can tell upon further testing.


oh it does something. for me it was the only setting thus far that forced me to reset cmos instead of going to "Memory overclock failed, resetting.." screen.


----------



## Derpinheimer

jayfkay said:


> ok result for an i5
> View attachment 2544126
> 
> however it's not stable (tm5 extreme error at test 5) and I CBA troubleshooting, so back to cl15 for now.
> 
> 
> oh it does something. for me it was the only setting thus far that forced me to reset cmos instead of going to "Memory overclock failed, resetting.." screen.


Hmm you're right on that, it did prevent post with some combo of settings. BTW, how are you doing that on this board? I take a stick of memory out, let it partially post, shut down, put memory back in, "CPU OR MEMORY CHANGED" notification, then everything is fine.


----

As an aside, I found out that using the AC&DC Loadline Calibration from the CPU Settings page will let me get lower load voltages. Seems by pure chance 1.27 vcore was close to the limit for 100% stability on my 12700k @ 5.1. Got to 1.26 with AC/DC @ 16/16. Still unable to change the base VID to help with other boost levels aside from all-core.

I disabled those two CEP settings under CPU Settings and it seems the cores still dont want to boost beyond 5.1 under CPU-Z or CB23 single core benches. During random idle periods the system does occasionally go to 5.2/5.3 but who cares if theres no load..


----------



## jayfkay

Derpinheimer said:


> Hmm you're right on that, it did prevent post with some combo of settings. BTW, how are you doing that on this board? I take a stick of memory out, let it partially post, shut down, put memory back in, "CPU OR MEMORY CHANGED" notification, then everything is fine.


just with the jumper. if that fails, i take power and battery off for 5 minutes


----------



## truehighroller1

jayfkay said:


> just with the jumper. if that fails, i take power and battery off for 5 minutes



I like two hours battery out and power off. Seems to help better then the usual 1 minute rule.


----------



## robertr1

Derpinheimer said:


> Hmm you're right on that, it did prevent post with some combo of settings. BTW, how are you doing that on this board? I take a stick of memory out, let it partially post, shut down, put memory back in, "CPU OR MEMORY CHANGED" notification, then everything is fine.
> 
> 
> ----
> 
> As an aside, I found out that using the AC&DC Loadline Calibration from the CPU Settings page will let me get lower load voltages. Seems by pure chance 1.27 vcore was close to the limit for 100% stability on my 12700k @ 5.1. Got to 1.26 with AC/DC @ 16/16. Still unable to change the base VID to help with other boost levels aside from all-core.
> 
> I disabled those two CEP settings under CPU Settings and it seems the cores still dont want to boost beyond 5.1 under CPU-Z or CB23 single core benches. During random idle periods the system does occasionally go to 5.2/5.3 but who cares if theres no load..


Adding ac/dc and removing vcore by the same amount is the same thing just fyi


----------



## GoodGuyAvi

Hi guys ! I need some advice 🙏🙌🏻

I’m trying to upgrade my ddr4 from 3600 to 4000hz.
Currently using Crucial 2x16 Ballistix RGB DDR4 3600 MHz (CL16)
I set the X.M.P to gear 1 (3600hz) and i have absolutely stable set up.
However I’m trying to move to 32Gb but 4000 (or higher) without manually setting everything up.
Any recommendations which brand of DDR4 should I go for easy set up plug and play ?
Reading all that pages of information I realized that is not easy to go higher than 3600 on my motherboard. Maybe some of you running similar set up with better clocked ram. 
(PS I checked compatibility list but is impossible to find anything)

Again thank you everyone for answering





CPU- Intel i9 - 12900k (unlocked)
GPU- RTX 3080ti (MSI GAMING X TRIO 12G)
MotherBoard- ASUS TUF Z690 PLUS WIFI D4 (Bios Version 0807)
Powersupply- RM1000x (80 PLUS Gold)
SSD- Samsung 980 Pro (2TB)
RAM- Crucial 32GB Ballistix RGB DDR4 3600 MHz (CL16)
Liquid Cooler- 360mm KRAKEN Z73
Fans- LianLI SL120 (10 in total)
Case- LianLI 011D XL (ROG Certified)
Windows- 11 Pro


----------



## bscool

GoodGuyAvi said:


> Hi guys ! I need some advice 🙏🙌🏻
> 
> I’m trying to upgrade my ddr4 from 3600 to 4000hz.
> Currently using Crucial 2x16 Ballistix RGB DDR4 3600 MHz (CL16)
> I set the X.M.P to gear 1 (3600hz) and i have absolutely stable set up.
> However I’m trying to move to 32Gb but 4000 (or higher) without manually setting everything up.
> Any recommendations which brand of DDR4 should I go for easy set up plug and play ?
> Reading all that pages of information I realized that is not easy to go higher than 3600 on my motherboard. Maybe some of you running similar set up with better clocked ram.
> (PS I checked compatibility list but is impossible to find anything)
> 
> Again thank you everyone for answering
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> CPU- Intel i9 - 12900k (unlocked)
> GPU- RTX 3080ti (MSI GAMING X TRIO 12G)
> MotherBoard- ASUS TUF Z690 PLUS WIFI D4 (Bios Version 0807)
> Powersupply- RM1000x (80 PLUS Gold)
> SSD- Samsung 980 Pro (2TB)
> RAM- Crucial 32GB Ballistix RGB DDR4 3600 MHz (CL16)
> Liquid Cooler- 360mm KRAKEN Z73
> Fans- LianLI SL120 (10 in total)
> Case- LianLI 011D XL (ROG Certified)
> Windows- 11 Pro


Replying to you again here. So are you willing to do any manualy tweaking or you just want XMP and go?

Also do you want RGB or non RGB?


----------



## GoodGuyAvi

bscool said:


> Replying to you again here. So are you willing to do any manualy tweaking or you just want XMP and go?
> 
> Also do you want RGB or non RGB?


Oh sorry I didn’t understood you right !!!
I would love to use only XMP. (Im not really good with manual clocking) 
Would love to see RGB units 

Thank you soo much for help sir🙌🏻🙏


----------



## bscool

GoodGuyAvi said:


> Oh sorry I didn’t understood you right !!!
> I would love to use only XMP. (Im not really good with manual clocking)
> Would love to see RGB units
> 
> Thank you soo much for help sir🙌🏻🙏


For best chance of XMP I would stick to 3600. 4000 might work but you also might have to adjust sa/vddq. But in reality even with 3600 you may have to but much less likely.


Ill list a few kits and two 4000 if you want to live on the edge 







Are you a human?







www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Trident Z Neo (For AMD Ryzen) Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin RGB DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-32GTZN - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo (For AMD Ryzen) Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin RGB DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-32GTZN with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZN - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZN with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZNA - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZNA with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com





Next are 4000 and may work at XMP.






Are you a human?







www.newegg.com













G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com


----------



## GoodGuyAvi

bscool said:


> For best chance of XMP I would stick to 3600. 4000 might work but you also might have to adjust sa/vddq. But in reality even with 3600 you may have to but much less likely.
> 
> 
> Ill list a few kits and two 4000 if you want to live on the edge
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a human?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Trident Z Neo (For AMD Ryzen) Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin RGB DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-32GTZN - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo (For AMD Ryzen) Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin RGB DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C16D-32GTZN with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZN - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZN with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZNA - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTZNA with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Next are 4000 and may work at XMP.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you a human?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Neo Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C16D-32GTZNA with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com


ah thank you very much 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙏


----------



## edkieferlp

I got this ram and XMP1 and II worked out of box. It set SA VID, VRAM and VDDQ tx to 1.35v aross all three. I can run 3800 (haven't tried higher) with no adjustments, I did lower SA VID to 1.30v.
Its not tighest timing but pretty good with 16, 18, 18 ,38









Crucial Ballistix RGB 16GB DDR4 3600 Desktop Memory - Newegg.com


Buy Crucial Ballistix RGB 3600 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 16GB (8GBx2) CL16 BL2K8G36C16U4BL (BLACK) with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com


----------



## Derpinheimer

robertr1 said:


> Adding ac/dc and removing vcore by the same amount is the same thing just fyi


Is it? It seems vcore is the baseline voltage and moving AC/DC up affects vdroop


----------



## Falkentyne

Derpinheimer said:


> Is it? It seems vcore is the baseline voltage and moving AC/DC up affects vdroop


No.
Moving DC Loadline up affects "reported" VID droop, not vcore. DCLL has no direct connection to vcore, although CEP _might_ require a correct DCLL. (Moving DCLL up to a higher value is the same effect on VID as decreasing (reducing, or increasing vcore droop) loadline calibration with respect to vcore--higher resistance=more droop, except DCLL is only "prediction" of vdroop on vcore (this is assuming that the DCLL value in milliohms is the same as your loadline calibration setting). ACLL affects vcore (only on adaptive/offset modes, but not on fixed vcore. Note that Gigabyte's "Override" mode, added in Z490 is NOT fixed vcore, which they separately call "fixed" mode for actual direct vcore control--it overrides the native VID of the CPU, something done automatically on laptops when you "set" a vcore on an unlocked laptop BIOS).

For motherboards with AC/DC Loadline control and WITHOUT die-sense vcore readouts (meaning your vcore will usually report higher than what it truly is), manual tuning of DC Loadline to match Loadline Calibration (if you know the mohms value of your LLC for your motherboard) can help you get a more accurate vcore estimation by looking at VID instead. The nice thing about this is that this can even be done on fixed vcore mode, but this gets VERY complicated to do accurately, as you need to get a proper estimated value for "AC Loadline" to get your target VID the same as your bios manually set vcore. (remember fixed vcore ignores AC Loadline and any V/F offsets as well as TVB). Only a crazy person would spend that much time trying to do that with fixed vcore mode. (DCLL=LLC mohms so vdroop on LLC is the same as vdroop on VID is the easy part, getting starting VID to match starting vcore on fixed vcore is the stupidly hard part!)

(with adaptive modes it's much easier since ACLL then affects starting vcore)

DCLL _may_ affect how CEP works with respect to V/F points and CEP phantom toggling your CPU (I have no time to test such things, someone else will have to), but DCLL is only for predicted vdroop. On adaptive/offset modes, the only thing that affects vcore is ACLL, TVB Voltage optimizations, V/F point offsets, manual global offsets, and Loadline Calibration.

I have yet to see a single motherboard where DC Loadline actually affected vcore itself. I do remember some testing I did on Z390 on a Gigabyte board with adaptive mode, where a DC Loadline of 0.01 mOhms gave 15mv lower "VR VOUT" than a DC Loadline value of 2.1 mohms (ACLL and Loadline calibration were kept constant), but I have no idea if this is caused by some sort of signal bias or reflection making the VRM report a slightly off-balanced value, as DCLL of 0.01 mOhms is no vdroop on the VID at all (at 200 amps, for example), while a DCLL of 2.1 mOhms is over 300mv of vdroop. (you can do the math, take a 1520mv (1.520v base voltage), 2.1 mOhms of loadline resistance and 193 amps of current.
1520mv - ( 2.1 * 193) = 1114.7mv or 1.114v. But load VR VOUT only changed by 15mv (without a multimeter hooked up to the VRM output pins, no idea if it's really 15mv).
Note that on fixed vcore (1.520v bios set) and Loadline Calibration (this was a gigabyte board), LLC=Standard (this is 1.6 mOhms...the only way to get 2.1 mOhms on "Standard" was to disable 2 cores on a 9900k), DCLL didn't affect VR VOUT whatsoever not even by 1mv.

Anyway, MSI calling their voltage mode "Override mode" is enough to seriously confuse some people, since Asus/MSI's "override" mode is actual fixed vcore control, while Gigabyte's override mode is "VID control" and their fixed vcore mode is called "fixed' mode. I've already seen a few people get caught by this when changing boards.


----------



## shrimpmaster

Found 2x16gb 3200c14 ripjaws v for 185€ new.
Do you think it's worth it? I'm afraid they won't be that good and an downgrade compared to my tridentz 2x8gb that I'm running stable at 3866 15-15-15 1.45v
Ripjaws v use 8 layer pcb compared to 10 layer on tridentz.

PC 12700k, z690 tuf 2x8 b-die.


----------



## KenanD10

Hi guys,
Recently i’ve began oc’ing my Ram sticks. The Patriot Viper steel 4400 cl19 kits.
I’ve seem numerous people clock it to 3800 cl14 and i tried it aswell. The problem is when i set my ram frequency to 3800 cl14 it boots but when i check CPU Z or Aida it says that my frequency is still on 3600? I can’t seem to fix this.. anyone has an idea how i can fix this?
Thanks in advance!


----------



## KenanD10

KenanD10 said:


> Hi guys,
> Recently i’ve began oc’ing my Ram sticks. The Patriot Viper steel 4400 cl19 kits.
> I’ve seem numerous people clock it to 3800 cl14 and i tried it aswell. The problem is when i set my ram frequency to 3800 cl14 it boots but when i check CPU Z or Aida it says that my frequency is still on 3600? I can’t seem to fix this.. anyone has an idea how i can fix this?
> Thanks in advance!


Edit: i got a z690 Gigabyte Elite ddr4 board aswell for the info!


----------



## bscool

KenanD10 said:


> Edit: i got a z690 Gigabyte Elite ddr4 board aswell for the info!


No idea other than need a later bios. I have seen gigabyte users having issues running higher clocks and tight timings on z690 d4 MBs.


----------



## KenanD10

bscool said:


> No idea other than need a later bios. I have seen gigabyte users having issues running higher clocks and tight timings on z690 d4 MBs.


I’ve got the latest bios already . Dammnit im outta options and don’t know what to do.


----------



## bscool

KenanD10 said:


> I’ve got the latest bios already . Dammnit im outta options and don’t know what to do.


Yeah it is down to bios from what I am seeing. Many z690 Gigabyte users are struggling with memory oc.

Are you using 2x8 or 4x8?

4x8 is much harder to run. If you are only running 2x8 it sounds like bios or some setting is the issue. I am on z690 Asus so cant help you.


----------



## davids40

👋
12700K 48/38 Noctua NH-D15S
-----> cpu 1.25 vcore, cpu SA 1.2v cpu vddq 1.2v

MSI MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4

2*16Go DR G.SKILL F4-3600C16D-32GTZN 1.45vdimm

may i hope better for DDR4 ?



this DDR4 oc very bad , but timings are goods for me after mod


----------



## KenanD10

bscool said:


> Yeah it is down to bios from what I am seeing. Many z690 Gigabyte users are struggling with memory oc.
> 
> Are you using 2x8 or 4x8?
> 
> 4x8 is much harder to run. If you are only running 2x8 it sounds like bios or some setting is the issue. I am on z690 Asus so cant help you.


I’n on 2x8 yes


----------



## steve_reg

Hey guys, is there any advantage of having Samsung B-die over micron RevE, assuming no OC with both at same speed-timings for Intel/gaming? ex: both at 3600C16. I heard Intel doesn't like revE, is that true?

I have the 12700K, Aorus Z690 Elite and 2x Crucial 16gb kits (4x8 SR 32gb total) -Ballistix 3600Mhz Cl 16-18-18-38- but didn't build the system yet. I can get this bdie kit used for cheap and try to sell mine later:
F4-3600C16D-32GTZN*C* -> 2x16gb 3600Mhz Cl 16-19-19-39
Bdie finder says (notice it is missing the C, idk if that matters):
Series SKU Speed Size 
G.Skill Trident Z Neo (rgb) F4-3600C16D-32GTZN 3600C16 / 8.9ns 2x16GB / DR

The advantage I see is being able to upgrade to 64gb in the future and less compatible issues for being only 2 sticks, but they are dual rank so I think it will end the same... has anyone tried both on Intel? do you think it is worth getting them?


----------



## Taraquin

steve_reg said:


> Hey guys, is there any advantage of having Samsung B-die over micron RevE, assuming no OC with both at same speed-timings for Intel/gaming? ex: both at 3600C16. I heard Intel doesn't like revE, is that true?
> 
> I have the 12700K, Aorus Z690 Elite and 2x Crucial 16gb kits (4x8 SR 32gb total) -Ballistix 3600Mhz Cl 16-18-18-38- but didn't build the system yet. I can get this bdie kit used for cheap and try to sell mine later:
> F4-3600C16D-32GTZN*C* -> 2x16gb 3600Mhz Cl 16-19-19-39
> Bdie finder says (notice it is missing the C, idk if that matters):
> Series SKU Speed Size
> G.Skill Trident Z Neo (rgb) F4-3600C16D-32GTZN 3600C16 / 8.9ns 2x16GB / DR
> 
> The advantage I see is being able to upgrade to 64gb in the future and less compatible issues for being only 2 sticks, but they are dual rank so I think it will end the same... has anyone tried both on Intel? do you think it is worth getting them?


If running xmp you get a very modest advantage with B-die as they run 3600 at 16-16-16 which no rev E-kits I know of can do, best is probably 16-18-18. If you overclock B-die is superior due to RCDRD, RC and RFC.


----------



## Taraquin

Not a Z690, but ram oc on B660: Got this 100% stable now on some cheap 2x8gb 3000cl15 rev E. Crucial ballistix sport. The kit also does 14-19-19, but need 1.48V dimm for that and RCDRD dislikes that high voltage so I may need 20 for it which nullifies the cl14 advantage. Unfortunately CPU or MB can`t do more than 3600 in gear 1 atm, but hopefully a new bios can fix it, I ran the same stick at a ryzen 3600 setup at 3800-15-20-11 so the got some headroom left 

In Shadow of the tomb raider lowest 1080p fps went from 180fps CPU game avg on 3000 xmp to 240fps CPU game avg using the above setting. 33% is not that bad.


----------



## edkieferlp

Taraquin said:


> View attachment 2544394
> View attachment 2544395
> 
> 
> Not a Z690, but ram oc on B660: Got this 100% stable now on some cheap 2x8gb 3000cl15 rev E. Crucual ballistix sport. The kit also does 14-19-19, but need 1.48V dimm for that and RCDRD dislikes that high voltage so I may need 20 for it which Unfortunately CPU or MB can`t do more than 3600 in gear 1 atm, but hopefully a new bios can fix it, I ran the same stick at a ryzen 3600 setup at 3800-15-20-11 so the got some headroom left
> 
> In Shadow of the tomb raider lowest 1080p fps went from 180fps CPU game avg on 3000 xmp to 240fps CPU game avg using the above setting. 33% is not that bad.


Isn't max for tREFI =65535 
Anyway, I have Micron E , 2 8gig sticks running 3800 with stock timings of 3600 (16, 18, 18, 38 CR2, gear 1).


----------



## Taraquin

edkieferlp said:


> Isn't max for tREFI =65535
> Anyway, I have Micron E , 2 8gig sticks running 3800 with stock timings of 3600 (16, 18, 18, 38 CR2, gear 1).


I thought it was, but someone said Alder lake accepts up to 133072 so I tried that, haven't gotten above 80000 stable so far though. You probably have better binning than me 

Post your timings and I can help you tweak, probably got 10-20% performance potential as RC, FAW and a few others tends to suck xmp.


----------



## bscool

Just because you can enter a larger or smaller# doesn't mean it actually applies or improves performance. That applies to many timings. Test to verify it makes a consistent measure able difference.


----------



## bscool

Also bclk over clock makes. Aida64 inaccurate.


----------



## Taraquin

bscool said:


> Just because you can enter a larger or smaller# doesn't mean it actually applies or improves performance. That applies to many timings. Test to verify it makes a consistent measure able difference.


I never change timings that`s don`t improve performance, but a few always does to various degrees: Primaeries, RRD, FAW, WR, RTP, RC, RFC, CWL, RDWR, REFI. Of these I consider RC, RFC and REFI the most impactful that often can be adjusted a lot without changing voltage much. The primaeries scales positive or negative with voltage so the are harder to tune on many kits.


----------



## bscool

Taraquin said:


> I never change timings that`s don`t improve performance, but a few always does to various degrees: Primaeries, RRD, FAW, WR, RTP, RC, RFC, CWL, RDWR, REFI. Of these I consider RC, RFC and REFI the most impactful that often can be adjusted a lot without changing voltage much. The primaeries scales positive or negative with voltage so the are harder to tune on many kits.


You set tREFI to 70000. So that improves performance from 65535? How did you test and verify this?


----------



## bass junkie xl

so last night i was reading threw this forum like the last 3 pages and i swear i read a post of user saying 

he changed a few ram timings and got inconsistant rtl / iol training and there was setting he changed to fix it . 

so i woke up today @ 11 am looked for the post couldnt find it anywere .... 

looked through all my histroy of my chrome and cell phones . damn it


----------



## Taraquin

bscool said:


> You set tREFI to 70000. So that improves performance from 65535? How did you test and verify this?


65536 to 70000 made little difference, but I`m now at 80000 and that gives me slightly faster time in dram calc test (1,5sec vs 65536), a bit better aida score, I had to raise dram volt by 0.02V though.


----------



## bscool

bass junkie xl said:


> so last night i was reading threw this forum like the last 3 pages and i swear i read a post of user saying
> 
> he changed a few ram timings and got inconsistant rtl / iol training and there was setting he changed to fix it .
> 
> so i woke up today @ 11 am looked for the post couldnt find it anywere ....
> 
> looked through all my histroy of my chrome and cell phones . damn it


I know the post and user you are talking about. Your not missing anything with that post gone.

RTLs should be within 2 if round trip latency is enabled. People over analyze about getting them even.


----------



## bscool

Taraquin said:


> 65536 to 70000 made little difference, but I`m now at 80000 and that gives me slightly faster time in dram calc test (1,5sec vs 65536), a bit better aida score, I had to raise dram volt by 0.02V though.


If works for you that is good. I see no difference and if anything a regression.


----------



## Taraquin

bscool said:


> If works for you that is good. I see no difference and if anything a regression.


Maybe it interacts with one or more other timings? I'm mostly familiar with Ryzen, REFI I have don't little tuning one eccept for an old skylake.


----------



## bscool

Taraquin said:


> Maybe it interacts with one or more other timings? I'm mostly familiar with Ryzen, REFI I have don't little tuning one eccept for an old skylake.


As far as I know it will default to 65535 range when set above that.

On z590 you could not set it above 65535, so I think it has something to do with ddr5 and they just carry it over to z690 ddr4 bios. Could be wrong just my guess.

Edit ddr5 also has gear 4 which ddr4 doesnt. So take 65535 x4=262,140 which is around the highest the bios lets you set.


----------



## bass junkie xl

bscool said:


> I know the post and user you are talking about. Your not missing anything with that post gone.
> 
> RTLs should be within 2 if round trip latency is enabled. People over analyze about getting them even.


im @ 69/71 69/71 once and while if it CMOS reset it does 69/71 70/71 . do u remember what setting he said so it trains proper ?


----------



## bscool

bass junkie xl said:


> im @ 69/71 69/71 once and while if it CMOS reset it does 69/71 70/71 . do u remember what setting he said so it trains proper ?


There is no setting that is probably why he edited it. If there was i would know. Ok, maybe I wouldnt, but it has been like this since z590 and not much has changed.

RTLs get trained the way they do for a reason. Increasing sa can help.

"the rtl is trained by rank precisely because the rank margins and delay time needed is not uniform"


Source [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


----------



## bass junkie xl

bscool said:


> There is no setting that is probably why he edited it. If there was i would know. Ok, maybe I wouldnt, but it has been like this since z590 and not much has changed.
> 
> RTLs get trained the way they do for a reason. Increasing sa can help.
> 
> "the rtl is trained by rank precisely because the rank margins and delay time needed is not uniform"
> 
> 
> Source [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


figured as much. auto vcssa is 1.32v 1.5v dram and 1.25v vddq on my 8gb x 4 sticks of 4000 cl-15-15-15-35 gear 1. 

some times it trains not 69/71 69/71 it will do like 69/70. 69/71


----------



## bscool

bass junkie xl said:


> figured as much. auto vcssa is 1.32v 1.5v dram and 1.25v vddq on my 8gb x 4 sticks of 4000 cl-15-15-15-35 gear 1.
> 
> some times it trains not 69/71 69/71 it will do like 69/70. 69/71


And quit posting that 4x8 4000c15 just makes everyone on 4x8 feel bad


----------



## bass junkie xl

bscool said:


> And quite posting that 4x8 4000c15 just makes everyone on 4x8 feel bad


okay i won't , lol


----------



## postem

steve_reg said:


> Hey guys, is there any advantage of having Samsung B-die over micron RevE, assuming no OC with both at same speed-timings for Intel/gaming? ex: both at 3600C16. I heard Intel doesn't like revE, is that true?
> 
> I have the 12700K, Aorus Z690 Elite and 2x Crucial 16gb kits (4x8 SR 32gb total) -Ballistix 3600Mhz Cl 16-18-18-38- but didn't build the system yet. I can get this bdie kit used for cheap and try to sell mine later:
> F4-3600C16D-32GTZN*C* -> 2x16gb 3600Mhz Cl 16-19-19-39
> Bdie finder says (notice it is missing the C, idk if that matters):
> Series SKU Speed Size
> G.Skill Trident Z Neo (rgb) F4-3600C16D-32GTZN 3600C16 / 8.9ns 2x16GB / DR
> 
> The advantage I see is being able to upgrade to 64gb in the future and less compatible issues for being only 2 sticks, but they are dual rank so I think it will end the same... has anyone tried both on Intel? do you think it is worth getting them?


Ballistix 3600Mhz Cl 16-18-18-38 32 Kit here.
Best i could get on 12700K was 3900MT, 16-18-18-38, 50-52ns. Everytime i even try to lower 38 to 36 i get memory errors. Cant reduce any of the primaries even at 1.5v, nor run 4000 without errors, windows post but lots of errors at 4000+. The only thing i can do is tight secondaries and tertiaries, and it seen to work reasonable well, can keep the primaries at 3900 but cant for anything reduce those primaries. For a very cheap kit here, i think its doable. My gskill 16gb 3600-16-16-16 can do 45 out of box, but i want 32gb here.

The only possible improvement i can see is ripsaw or gskill 4000 16-16-16-36 kit, but its costing same as 6000mt DDR5, probably tunned can get below 40 but not worth the price, i would purchase a overpriced DDR5 instead if i would go this route, but i decided to wait raptor lake to upgrade.


----------



## bscool

postem said:


> Ballistix 3600Mhz Cl 16-18-18-38 32 Kit here.
> Best i could get on 12700K was 3900MT, 16-18-18-38, 50-52ns. Everytime i even try to lower 38 to 36 i get memory errors. Cant reduce any of the primaries even at 1.5v, nor run 4000 without errors, windows post but lots of errors at 4000+. The only thing i can do is tight secondaries and tertiaries, and it seen to work reasonable well, can keep the primaries at 3900 but cant for anything reduce those primaries. For a very cheap kit here, i think its doable. My gskill 16gb 3600-16-16-16 can do 45 out of box, but i want 32gb here.
> 
> The only possible improvement i can see is ripsaw or gskill 4000 16-16-16-36 kit, but its costing same as 6000mt DDR5, probably tunned can get below 40 but not worth the price, i would purchase a overpriced DDR5 instead if i would go this route, but i decided to wait raptor lake to upgrade.


Couple issues. unless you really know what you are doing no way some noob is running 6000+ ddr5. Plus much higher cost of good ddr5 mb. At least in the USA it will cost you $400-600+ to run ddr5 mem and MB vs ddr4 I would estimate plus chance of new people getting ddr5 working at 6000+ with tuned subtimings slim to none.


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> Couple issues. unless you really know what you are doing no way some noob is running 6000+ ddr5. Plus much higher cost of good ddr5 mb. At least in the USA it will cost you $400-600+ to run ddr5 mem and MB vs ddr4 I would estimate plus chance of new people getting ddr5 working at 6000+ with tuned subtimings slim to none.


@Silent Scone 

Unless you have Asus hand you everything for free like some people here have. Me and you on the other hand won't be having that happen though will we now, because you know we're not engineers as silent scone squawked at me last night. I am an engineer and work on jet engines for a living among other things but hey whatever we're no body's according to him.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> As far as I know it will default to 65535 range when set above that.
> 
> On z590 you could not set it above 65535, so I think it has something to do with ddr5 and they just carry it over to z690 ddr4 bios. Could be wrong just my guess.
> 
> Edit ddr5 also has gear 4 which ddr4 doesnt. So take 65535 x4=262,140 which is around the highest the bios lets you set.


The limitation of trefi on older platforms is because of intel's bit range of trefix9 being 7bits in size.
That's 127max. Now that limitation is increased to 8bits(255 max) on Z690 hence the max 261,120.

I don't understand why bios allows for higher than that as trefi is an integer value not decimal so it probably is reduced to 261k anyways.

tREFIx9 is the max time allowed before a refresh command happens across ranks. For 255(what it's set to by default for me) equals 261,120 max. 255*1024DCLK
Why is that relevant? Well tREFI goes hand-in-hand with trefix9. The two determine how many cycles of these refresh periods occur.

Default is set to ~8x refresh commands per tREFI window
More refresh commands is worse for performance as there is less time for data to be stored. That next set of data must wait for the refresh to complete

For example with the old value of trefix9 = 127 * 1024 = 130,048
The lowest possible amount of refresh intervals is 2(best possible performance). 130048/2 = 65024.

That's why you may have seen people setting this value.
You can't have less than two refresh intervals so the max value of 65535 shouldn't do anything as it also plays into the 7bit limitation.
65535*2= 130670 which is an 8bit integer

Now that we can set 262K we can force only 1 refresh command.

You know how in practice things are different compared to the datasheets so who knows until benchmarks are made.

Be a guinea pig and try out 130560 for example.

Or you could test this.
With 261,120/4 refresh windows = trefi 65,280.
See if there is a performance difference between 65,279(now there has to be 5 refresh commands) or trefi 65,281(rollover? my guess it does nothing for performance until you set trefi = 87040 = 3 refresh intervals)

Anyways I'm rambling you can apply higher values.. Is it worth it? IDK, I haven't tested it.


----------



## postem

bscool said:


> Couple issues. unless you really know what you are doing no way some noob is running 6000+ ddr5. Plus much higher cost of good ddr5 mb. At least in the USA it will cost you $400-600+ to run ddr5 mem and MB vs ddr4 I would estimate plus chance of new people getting ddr5 working at 6000+ with tuned subtimings slim to none.


Yeah, prices in Brazil (here) are even more atrocious, we have big taxes, so double that value. Im getting around 50ns with this ballistix sport kit, i would need to pay 400$ to get 4000 16-16-16 DDR4, i guess it will probably not do much of a difference especially considering im on 12700K. DDR5 is still too much troublesome, i mean, it can problably be funny to tight the timings, but who knows how much compatibility issues gonna get. I will either wait raptor lake or 14th gen to go DDR5, also gonna wait some better motherboard values.

I never OC memory before, but with this potato memory i found it was helpful, basically just increase frequency and secondaries / tertiary i managed to get latency down from 62 to 50-52.

So far, how low is the minimum theoretical latency we can achieve on Alder lake with DDR4 unicorn memory?


----------



## postem

edkieferlp said:


> I got this ram and XMP1 and II worked out of box. It set SA VID, VRAM and VDDQ tx to 1.35v aross all three. I can run 3800 (haven't tried higher) with no adjustments, I did lower SA VID to 1.30v.
> Its not tighest timing but pretty good with 16, 18, 18 ,38
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Crucial Ballistix RGB 16GB DDR4 3600 Desktop Memory - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy Crucial Ballistix RGB 3600 MHz DDR4 DRAM Desktop Gaming Memory Kit 16GB (8GBx2) CL16 BL2K8G36C16U4BL (BLACK) with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com


If on Asus (the only i tried) just use XMP2 if you didnt want to bother with anything else, i found XMP2 reduces 5-7ns and its stable, the profile includes secondaries tightned.


----------



## edkieferlp

postem said:


> If on Asus (the only i tried) just use XMP2 if you didnt want to bother with anything else, i found XMP2 reduces 5-7ns and its stable, the profile includes secondaries tightned.


Ok, I was on XMP2 for a while, seemed fine but that was @3600 I think, I will look at it more in-depth as I am on XMP1 @3800 with REFI at 33k.
Edit: yeah timings are a little better but tRRDS tRRDL tFAW are still loose. tRFC did go from 665 to 631.


----------



## Taraquin

postem said:


> Ballistix 3600Mhz Cl 16-18-18-38 32 Kit here.
> Best i could get on 12700K was 3900MT, 16-18-18-38, 50-52ns. Everytime i even try to lower 38 to 36 i get memory errors. Cant reduce any of the primaries even at 1.5v, nor run 4000 without errors, windows post but lots of errors at 4000+. The only thing i can do is tight secondaries and tertiaries, and it seen to work reasonable well, can keep the primaries at 3900 but cant for anything reduce those primaries. For a very cheap kit here, i think its doable. My gskill 16gb 3600-16-16-16 can do 45 out of box, but i want 32gb here.
> 
> The only possible improvement i can see is ripsaw or gskill 4000 16-16-16-36 kit, but its costing same as 6000mt DDR5, probably tunned can get below 40 but not worth the price, i would purchase a overpriced DDR5 instead if i would go this route, but i decided to wait raptor lake to upgrade.


Prims aren't the most important, secs/tertieries often matter more. You can try rcdrd 19/rp 19 and go 4000, rrd 4/4, faw 16, wr/rtp 12/6, rfc 592 or lower it 16, 32 etc or as low as stable.


----------



## Taraquin

Agent-A01 said:


> The limitation of trefi on older platforms is because of intel's bit range of trefix9 being 7bits in size.
> That's 127max. Now that limitation is increased to 8bits(255 max) on Z690 hence the max 261,120.
> 
> I don't understand why bios allows for higher than that as trefi is an integer value not decimal so it probably is reduced to 261k anyways.
> 
> tREFIx9 is the max time allowed before a refresh command happens across ranks. For 255(what it's set to by default for me) equals 261,120 max. 255*1024DCLK
> Why is that relevant? Well tREFI goes hand-in-hand with trefix9. The two determine how many cycles of these refresh periods occur.
> 
> Default is set to ~8x refresh commands per tREFI window
> More refresh commands is worse for performance as there is less time for data to be stored. That next set of data must wait for the refresh to complete
> 
> For example with the old value of trefix9 = 127 * 1024 = 130,048
> The lowest possible amount of refresh intervals is 2(best possible performance). 130048/2 = 65024.
> 
> That's why you may have seen people setting this value.
> You can't have less than two refresh intervals so the max value of 65535 shouldn't do anything as it also plays into the 7bit limitation.
> 65535*2= 130670 which is an 8bit integer
> 
> Now that we can set 262K we can force only 1 refresh command.
> 
> You know how in practice things are different compared to the datasheets so who knows until benchmarks are made.
> 
> Be a guinea pig and try out 130560 for example.
> 
> Or you could test this.
> With 261,120/4 refresh windows = trefi 65,280.
> See if there is a performance difference between 65,279(now there has to be 5 refresh commands) or trefi 65,281(rollover? my guess it does nothing for performance until you set trefi = 87040 = 3 refresh intervals)
> 
> Anyways I'm rambling you can apply higher values.. Is it worth it? IDK, I haven't tested it.


I understand little of this, but what suggested values above 65280 should one try? 
After digging some I see several use 130560, that makes 2 intervals right? So 87040 should be the intermediate before trying 130560? On my Ryzen it defaults to 15600 at 4000 ram speed, but can't be changed there.


----------



## Agent-A01

Taraquin said:


> I understand little of this, but what suggested values above 65024 should one try?  Is 65024 an ideal value?


Hard to give anyone an 'ideal' value as it also plays into tRFC and other factors like temperature.
Barring temperature's, with tREFIx9 = 255(z690+) 65280(or higher) would be optimal.

tREFIx9 255*1024=261,120
261,120/65280 = 4 refresh intervals.

That means there will only be 4 refreshes per tREFI cycle.
261,120/65024 = 4.02~. 

My guess is since it's impossible to do 4.02 refreshes per tREFI cycle it forces a total of 5 refreshes instead.

Past 65280, 87040 should be the next 'optimal' step in realizing actual performance increases.
Need to benchmark this to prove this.


----------



## Taraquin

Agent-A01 said:


> Hard to give anyone an 'ideal' value as it also plays into tRFC and other factors like temperature.
> Barring temperature's, with tREFIx9 = 255(z690+) 65280(or higher) would be optimal.
> 
> tREFIx9 255*1024=261,120
> 261,120/65280 = 4 refresh intervals.
> 
> That means there will only be 4 refreshes per tREFI cycle.
> 261,120/65024 = 4.02~.
> 
> My guess is since it's impossible to do 4.02 refreshes per tREFI cycle it forces a total of 5 refreshes instead.
> 
> Past 65280, 87040 should be the next 'optimal' step in realizing actual performance increases.
> Need to benchmark this to prove this.


Temp is not an issue on rev E, they work with hairdryer blowing a them  Can try both 65280 and 87040 and see if it makes a difference, must the run time variance which made 80000 look better than 65535 since they are both in 4 refreshes


----------



## Taraquin

edkieferlp said:


> Isn't max for tREFI =65535
> Anyway, I have Micron E , 2 8gig sticks running 3800 with stock timings of 3600 (16, 18, 18, 38 CR2, gear 1).


I checked a bit more, my rev E won't do 18 rcdrd at 3600 at cr1, maybe cr2 could work, your bin is much better than mine. Have you tried lowering rfc? My bin is okay there as 520 is 100% stable, 512 might be aswell.


----------



## Antsu

Agent-A01 said:


> Hard to give anyone an 'ideal' value as it also plays into tRFC and other factors like temperature.
> Barring temperature's, with tREFIx9 = 255(z690+) 65280(or higher) would be optimal.
> 
> tREFIx9 255*1024=261,120
> 261,120/65280 = 4 refresh intervals.
> 
> That means there will only be 4 refreshes per tREFI cycle.
> 261,120/65024 = 4.02~.
> 
> My guess is since it's impossible to do 4.02 refreshes per tREFI cycle it forces a total of 5 refreshes instead.
> 
> Past 65280, 87040 should be the next 'optimal' step in realizing actual performance increases.
> Need to benchmark this to prove this.


Briefly tested this with AIDA64 and saw absolutely no difference between my usual 65000 and 65280 / 87040. EDIT: sadly no difference in SuperPI either.



postem said:


> So far, how low is the minimum theoretical latency we can achieve on Alder lake with DDR4 unicorn memory?


40ns is pretty much the barrier for daily driving on nice sticks and average IMC. If you are talking about literal unicorn bins on both the memory and CPU IMC, maybe 38.Xns is possible.


----------



## Agent-A01

Antsu said:


> Briefly tested this with AIDA64 and saw absolutely no difference between my usual 65000 and 65280 / 87040.


AIDA64 isn't something that can measure benefits of tREFI. Need another benchmark like superpi or something that's affected by memory performance.


----------



## Taraquin

Agent-A01 said:


> AIDA64 isn't something that can measure benefits of tREFI. Need another benchmark like superpi or something that's affected by memory performance.


Dram calc test maybe? Certain games? Going from 40000 to 65535 which I tried first gave me a few fps i shadow of the tomb raider. I'm beginning to dislike auda more and more, we need a better latency test 

Since aida scales much with speed and 100MHz equals 1ns (atleast on 5600X if timings equal) I bet slightly below 40ns should be possible. i2hard got 43ns woth 4133cl15 and , a few can do 4300 gear 1 and may get some subs below theirs. 









Some room for improvement for ras (rc get 49 with this, and rfc, but pretty good overall. With ras at 27 and rfc at 264 42ns might be doable.


----------



## Silent Scone

truehighroller1 said:


> @Silent Scone
> 
> Unless you have Asus hand you everything for free like some people here have. Me and you on the other hand won't be having that happen though will we now, because you know we're not engineers as silent scone squawked at me last night. I am an engineer and work on jet engines for a living among other things but hey whatever we're no body's according to him.


Hello,

Nice assumption on your part - perhaps this is where you're going wrong rather than looking closer to home. As I've already stated to you in the Maximus thread if you have any affirmation that engineering sampled boards are somehow better than retail then feel free to share. One would think bringing facts to your argument would be the first step for someone who claims to be an engineer .

All of the components in my Z690 build are retail and purchased myself, so you might want to have a rethink. At this point, you're complaining so much that everyone has forgotten what you were struggling with in the first place, and retracting from anything useful being posted.

Perhaps give it a rest.


----------



## Agent-A01

Taraquin said:


> Dram calc test maybe? Certain games? Going from 40000 to 65535 which I tried first gave me a few fps i shadow of the tomb raider. I'm beginning to dislike auda more and more, we need a better latency test
> 
> Since aida scales much with speed and 100MHz equals 1ns (atleast on 5600X if timings equal) I bet slightly below 40ns should be possible. i2hard got 43ns woth 4133cl15 and , a few can do 4300 gear 1 and may get some subs below theirs.
> 
> View attachment 2544482
> 
> Some room for improvement for ras (rc get 49 with this, and rfc, but pretty good overall. With ras at 27 and rfc at 264 42ns might be doable.


Yes the problem with aida64 is it's too variable. Back to back runs can show latency like this for me. 45.5ns > 42.4 ns > 44ns etc. Same for read/write copy

I'll play around with it tomorrow and see how it does in a memory bound game


----------



## Taraquin

Agent-A01 said:


> Yes the problem with aida64 is it's too variable. Back to back runs can show latency like this for me. 45.5ns > 42.4 ns > 44ns etc. Same for read/write copy
> 
> I'll play around with it tomorrow and see how it does in a memory bound game


Shadow of the tomb raider 1080p lowest is recommended. Look at CPU game avg\min, that is how much fps the CPU puts out. SOTTR bench scales with everything: Speed, timings (not so much primaries, but rc, rfc, rrd, faw, wr\rtp sees good scaling), cache, cores etc. Going from 3000cl15 xmp to 3000cl15 asus tweaked xmp gave me 18fps (it only changes rfc from 560 to 525, rrd from 9\11 to 6\9 and faw from 43 to 28 I think it was).


----------



## Antsu

Agent-A01 said:


> Yes the problem with aida64 is it's too variable. Back to back runs can show latency like this for me. 45.5ns > 42.4 ns > 44ns etc. Same for read/write copy
> 
> I'll play around with it tomorrow and see how it does in a memory bound game


On a stripped install where there is absolutely nothing running in the background it's actually pretty consistent. I got 39.7ns three times in a row today. Run only the latency test a few times in a row and see what is the lowest.


----------



## edkieferlp

Taraquin said:


> I checked a bit more, my rev E won't do 18 rcdrd at 3600 at cr1, maybe cr2 could work, your bin is much better than mine. Have you tried lowering rfc? My bin is okay there as 520 is 100% stable, 512 might be aswell.


I am at 631 RTC right now with 3800, I was thinking of going to 610 as I want to stay on the safe side as much as possible. right now I am also on stock Vdim = 1.36v, I might bump that up some but want to stay under 1.4v.
I do have a question on asus Memtweek-it and Asrock memory configurator, if memory is right neither is portable and is there any preference here, I see a lot of guys running Asrock one

Someone posted this guide which I was following.








MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## Taraquin

edkieferlp said:


> I am at 631 RTC right now with 3800, I was thinking of going to 610 as I want to stay on the safe side as much as possible. right now I am also on stock Vdim = 1.36v, I might bump that up some but want to stay under 1.4v.
> I do have a question on asus Memtweek-it and Asrock memory configurator, if memory is right neither is portable and is there any preference here, I see a lot of guys running Asrock one
> 
> Someone posted this guide which I was following.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper
> 
> 
> C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com


Rfc doesnt scale with voltage on rev E so you can try lowering it at same volt. 544 works good at 3800 on my ryzen setup. Try numbers divideable by 16 if on 16gb modules or 8 if 8gb like me. 592, 576 or 560 could work for you if you have DR.


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> Just because you can enter a larger or smaller# doesn't mean it actually applies or improves performance. That applies to many timings. Test to verify it makes a consistent measure able difference.


Can confirm. Tried it made 0 difference. Actually setting 90000 or more made it worse, like it applied default trefi again.

I've been doing some more tweaking with bios 1001 on my SR b-die since i found a bit of instability again. It seems 1T is not stable at 3866 in this bios, but it passes all testes, linpack, tm5, y-cruncher. I tried everything, from relaxed timings to higher voltages. Also noticed sometimes RTLs were getting misaligned, that also tells me something not stable.

I'm now running 3866 15-15-15 2T. Running max trefi and it seems good(need more time to be sure), even set all the terciaries just because it looks good(dr/dd make 0 difference on SR config).
TM5 passes with pretty much everything that post for me, except primaries or when vdimm/sa is too low.
tRFC posts from 250 with 1.45v vdimm. Can post at even lower tRFC with higher voltage on the memory, and doesn't error at all in any test. I even left the GPU mining while running tm5 soo RAM would get hotter (45ºC) no errors at all.


----------



## truehighroller1

Silent Scone said:


> Hello,
> 
> Nice assumption on your part - perhaps this is where you're going wrong rather than looking closer to home. As I've already stated to you in the Maximus thread if you have any affirmation that engineering sampled boards are somehow better than retail then feel free to share. One would think bringing facts to your argument would be the first step for someone who claims to be an engineer .
> 
> All of the components in my Z690 build are retail and purchased myself, so you might want to have a rethink. At this point, you're complaining so much that everyone has forgotten what you were struggling with in the first place, and retracting from anything useful being posted.
> 
> Perhaps give it a rest.


Not complaining. You're just trying to troll and I won't let that happen. Grow up.

Update after your childfish reaction to my comment, after your childish comments.

So childish. Grow up. I've been here longer then you and contributed more then you ever will, get over it. You're not helping this community.


----------



## steve_reg

Taraquin said:


> If running xmp you get a very modest advantage with B-die as they run 3600 at 16-16-16 which no rev E-kits I know of can do, best is probably 16-18-18. If you overclock B-die is superior due to RCDRD, RC and RFC.


Thanks for the feedback, so let's say I tune down the bdie kit to match revE primaries and RFC, both at 1.35v 3600Mhz Cl16-18-18-38 CR1 RFC630 for example, and leave everything elso on auto (no XMP).

Is there any real advantage for the bdie kit on this scenario for intel plataform? I am curious why some people say revE doesn't like intel... latency? hard on mem controller? I am assuming both will have the exactly same performance in games/aplications by this example.



postem said:


> Ballistix 3600Mhz Cl 16-18-18-38 32 Kit here.
> Best i could get on 12700K was 3900MT, 16-18-18-38, 50-52ns. Everytime i even try to lower 38 to 36 i get memory errors. Cant reduce any of the primaries even at 1.5v, nor run 4000 without errors, windows post but lots of errors at 4000+. The only thing i can do is tight secondaries and tertiaries, and it seen to work reasonable well, can keep the primaries at 3900 but cant for anything reduce those primaries. For a very cheap kit here, i think its doable. My gskill 16gb 3600-16-16-16 can do 45 out of box, but i want 32gb here.
> 
> The only possible improvement i can see is ripsaw or gskill 4000 16-16-16-36 kit, but its costing same as 6000mt DDR5, probably tunned can get below 40 but not worth the price, i would purchase a overpriced DDR5 instead if i would go this route, but i decided to wait raptor lake to upgrade.


This is the best I could do on my previous 9900k+z390 elite, that mb wouldn't go over 3700 so I adjusted the timings following an old BZ video (bassicly copied his settings lol).

I already have the Z690 Elite DDR4 so not going for DDR5. Thanks for sharing your results I will definitelly try some OC/tuning timings.

BTW I saved this info from somewhere related to revE and not sure if true or not. Maybe someone can shine a light since I also didn't fully understand, is it related to latency or MT/s? how do I calculate/convert it?
My 2x kits are:
C9BKV (CT40A1G8SA-055M:E) 
C9BLM (CT40A1G8SA-045M:E) 

_*In Micron part numbers the -045 or -075 or whatever is the speed grade, and it actually signifies the transfer time. -045 is 0.45ns transfer time, which works out to 4400MT/s speed grade.*_


----------



## Taraquin

steve_reg said:


> Thanks for the feedback, so let's say I tune down the bdie kit to match revE primaries and RFC, both at 1.35v 3600Mhz Cl16-18-18-38 CR1 RFC630 for example, and leave everything elso on auto (no XMP).
> 
> Is there any real advantage for the bdie kit on this scenario for intel plataform? I am curious why some people say revE doesn't like intel... latency? hard on mem controller? I am assuming both will have the exactly same performance in games/aplications by this example.
> 
> 
> 
> This is the best I could do on my previous 9900k+z390 elite, that mb wouldn't go over 3700 so I adjusted the timings following an old BZ video (bassicly copied his settings lol).
> 
> I already have the Z690 Elite DDR4 so not going for DDR5. Thanks for sharing your results I will definitelly try some OC/tuning timings.
> 
> BTW I saved this info from somewhere related to revE and not sure if true or not. Maybe someone can shine a light since I also didn't fully understand, is it related to latency or MT/s? how do I calculate/convert it?
> My 2x kits are:
> C9BKV (CT40A1G8SA-055M:E)
> C9BLM (CT40A1G8SA-045M:E)
> 
> _*In Micron part numbers the -045 or -075 or whatever is the speed grade, and it actually signifies the transfer time. -045 is 0.45ns transfer time, which works out to 4400MT/s speed grade.*_


If timings are equal B-die has no advantage. B-dies advantages is that they can run much lower rcdrd, rc and rfc than any other kit, sometimes this gives slight advantage at xmp, for instance is 3200cl14-14-14 a few percent faster than other kits which runs 3200cl16-18-18, but the true strength us running rc sub 45 and rfc sub 300 at 3800+


----------



## Agent-A01

Taraquin said:


> Shadow of the tomb raider 1080p lowest is recommended. Look at CPU game avg\min, that is how much fps the CPU puts out. SOTTR bench scales with everything: Speed, timings (not so much primaries, but rc, rfc, rrd, faw, wr\rtp sees good scaling), cache, cores etc. Going from 3000cl15 xmp to 3000cl15 asus tweaked xmp gave me 18fps (it only changes rfc from 560 to 525, rrd from 9\11 to 6\9 and faw from 43 to 28 I think it was).


For super pi 32m, my best run was on 87040 tREFI.
5m 11.225s

My next best run was 65280 tREFI with 5m 12.150s

Best run for 65279 was 5m 14.757s

Best run for 65535 was 5m 14.958s.

So I can say that there is some benefit of going to 87k over other values.
I ran each one 3 times and took the best of the three so make of it what you will.

Need more benchmarks to reaffirm these gains/penalties.


----------



## Taraquin

Any tip on how to set tCCD_L?


----------



## edkieferlp

Ok to set tWR (write recovery time) lower, you need to set tWRPDEN, can anyone confirm this?


----------



## Agent-A01

Taraquin said:


> Any tip on how to set tCCD_L?


It's in the bios. Cas to Cas Delay L



edkieferlp said:


> Ok to set tWR (write recovery time) lower, you need to set tWRPDEN, can anyone confirm this?


Yes, also set tWRPRE to the same value.


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> It's in the bios. Cas to Cas Delay L
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, also set tWRPRE to the same value.


Thanks, yes I saw that tWRPRE had same value as tWRPDEN but when I did a quick test at the desktop with MemTweakit only the tWRPDEN effected tWR.
But I'll set both to match.


----------



## postem

Antsu said:


> Briefly tested this with AIDA64 and saw absolutely no difference between my usual 65000 and 65280 / 87040. EDIT: sadly no difference in SuperPI either.
> 
> 
> 40ns is pretty much the barrier for daily driving on nice sticks and average IMC. If you are talking about literal unicorn bins on both the memory and CPU IMC, maybe 38.Xns is possible.
> View attachment 2544483


Still, reducing 50 to 40 means 20% minus latency, but that doesnt really translate to much better performance across board. Also this whole 12th plataform includes a latency penalty over 8/9/10 gen


----------



## Agent-A01

edkieferlp said:


> Thanks, yes I saw that tWRPRE had same value as tWRPDEN but when I did a quick test at the desktop with MemTweakit only the tWRPDEN effected tWR.
> But I'll set both to match.


Don't worry about it, calculation bug


----------



## postem

Taraquin said:


> Dram calc test maybe? Certain games? Going from 40000 to 65535 which I tried first gave me a few fps i shadow of the tomb raider. I'm beginning to dislike auda more and more, we need a better latency test
> 
> Since aida scales much with speed and 100MHz equals 1ns (atleast on 5600X if timings equal) I bet slightly below 40ns should be possible. i2hard got 43ns woth 4133cl15 and , a few can do 4300 gear 1 and may get some subs below theirs.
> 
> Some room for improvement for ras (rc get 49 with this, and rfc, but pretty good overall. With ras at 27 and rfc at 264 42ns might be doable.


Incredible how i could slap XMP 3600 on coffee lake and just get out of box 45ns. Well, that was the cost of the extra cores. If i just disable Ecores, can i somehow reduce memory latency across or is the length of the ring bus the culprit of it no matter if the ecores are active or not ?


----------



## bscool

65280 compare to 130560


----------



## Taraquin

Agent-A01 said:


> It's in the bios. Cas to Cas Delay L
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, also set tWRPRE to the same value.


Yeah, I've found it, but what value should I use?


----------



## Taraquin

postem said:


> Incredible how i could slap XMP 3600 on coffee lake and just get out of box 45ns. Well, that was the cost of the extra cores. If i just disable Ecores, can i somehow reduce memory latency across or is the length of the ring bus the culprit of it no matter if the ecores are active or not ?


Skylake and the follow ups just rocked at latency. My old i5 8400 with 2666cl12 tweaket rev E had a latency if 50ns, vs my 12400F with 3600cl15 tweaket rev E which has 54ns. In SOTTR the i5 8400 got 168fps avg 1080p lowest vs 240fps on the 12400F so the latter is almost 50% faster in that game. 400MHz single core and 6 treads and worse latency can't explain that


----------



## truehighroller1

I highly doubt this is stable but, I'm in windows with it. This is before letting it settle down so I will retest the latency shortly.










cbr23 runs it










Scared to test it further lol but latency calmed down little.










Fail as I figured.










Did a super pi though..


----------



## postem

Taraquin said:


> Skylake and the follow ups just rocked at latency. My old i5 8400 with 2666cl12 tweaket rev E had a latency if 50ns, vs my 12400F with 3600cl15 tweaket rev E which has 54ns. In SOTTR the i5 8400 got 168fps avg 1080p lowest vs 240fps on the 12400F so the latter is almost 50% faster in that game. 400MHz single core and 6 treads and worse latency can't explain that


Better cache and arch over memory latency. Probably Intel engineers balanced the costs and the results of increasing the ring.


----------



## Agent-A01

Taraquin said:


> Yeah, I've found it, but what value should I use?


I haven't seen any difference from auto compared to 6 or 7


----------



## EarlZ

Whats the recommended app for memory stability testing? What I've been using is HCI memtest and TM5 with extreme preset. Is there anything else that is more intensive?


----------



## knock

Taraquin said:


> Any tip on how to set tCCD_L?


tFAW = tCCD_S*4 so optimal is the same for _L. 

_S 4 and _L 6 is common though with a tFAW of 16.


----------



## geriatricpollywog

truehighroller1 said:


> I highly doubt this is stable but, I'm in windows with it. This is before letting it settle down so I will retest the latency shortly.
> 
> View attachment 2544715
> 
> 
> cbr23 runs it
> 
> View attachment 2544716
> 
> 
> Scared to test it further lol but latency calmed down little.
> 
> View attachment 2544720
> 
> 
> Fail as I figured.
> 
> View attachment 2544723
> 
> 
> Did a super pi though..
> 
> View attachment 2544725


Ignore latency for a second. Do you see better performance with 14-14-14 over 14-15-15? I can pass memtest at 14-15-15 at 4200 14-15-15 but my kit will error at 4133-14-14-14.


----------



## truehighroller1

geriatricpollywog said:


> Ignore latency for a second. Do you see better performance with 14-14-14 over 14-15-15? I can pass memtest at 14-15-15 at 4200 14-15-15 but my kit will error at 4133-14-14-14.


It felt a lot snappier but, I just couldn't get it stable. I wonder if I need more vccsa as my mb won't boot past .499 does a red light dance after that like it's a limit.. I went all the way up and down from +.495 down to .345 which is it's lower limit won't boot below .345. I tried loosening things here and there all to no avail but, it boots right into it.


----------



## Vlados

i can't post after 3900 on 12700k gear 1.
it looks like I hit the limit of the controller or can I still run it 4000+? I know for sure that the memory can start higher (I checked up to 4200 on gear 2)
MSI PRO Z690-A crucial 2x16 e-die
I tried VDDQ -1.28v, SA-1.35, RAM -1.47 
any suggestions?


----------



## rkneeshaw

Vlados said:


> i can't post after 3900 on 12700k gear 1.
> it looks like I hit the limit of the controller or can I still run it 4000+? I know for sure that the memory can start higher (I checked up to 4200 on gear 2)
> MSI PRO Z690-A crucial 2x16 e-die
> I tried VDDQ -1.28v, SA-1.35, RAM -1.47
> any suggestions?


Check bios version. Try latest 1.26 beta.


----------



## Pato__128

First Attempt 
Runs stable
Weak IMC limited to 3900mhz

12600k
0901 Strix z690 a
Samsung b die 

Any tips on reducing further latency further?


----------



## JoeRambo

Anyone else with Z690 EDGE and latest 1.22 beta BIOS from official web having troubles with LAN connection ? After update LAN adapter stays disabled and no connection, not cool MSI, not cool.


----------



## Frozburn

Has anyone tried 7D25v126 (Beta version) Z690-A






PRO Z690-A DDR4


PRO series motherboards, tuned for better performance by Core Boost, Memory Boost, Extended Heatsink Design, M.2 Shield Frozr, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, Lightning Gen5, Front Type-C, 2.5G LAN




www.msi.com


----------



## shrimpmaster

Guys, what sort of black magic is going on, on these new bios?
I'm on z690 tuf 1001 bios.
This bios is worse for 1t than previous. But I now need a lot lower voltage on my ram and on top of that can even run 3866 14-14-14 stable at 1.54v.
Before I needed 1.45v for 3866mhz 15-15-15, I know only need 1.43v.
I'm running testmem5 at 3866 14-14-14 and I'll post results here in 30min.


Edit: Ok error after 20min with 3866 14-14-14 1.54v.
Still big improvement, not going to try to stabilize it, prefer running 15-15-15 at lower voltages.
Anyone else noticed the lower vdimm requirements? I need a good 20 to 30mv less.


----------



## edkieferlp

shrimpmaster said:


> Guys, what sort of black magic is going on, on these new bios?
> I'm on z690 tuf 1001 bios.
> This bios is worse for 1t than previous. But I now need a lot lower voltage on my ram and on top of that can even run 3866 14-14-14 stable at 1.54v.
> Before I needed 1.45v for 3866mhz 15-15-15, I know only need 1.43v.
> I'm running testmem5 at 3866 14-14-14 and I'll post results here in 30min.
> 
> 
> Edit: Ok error after 20min with 3866 14-14-14 1.54v.
> Still big improvement, not going to try to stabilize it, prefer running 15-15-15 at lower voltages.
> Anyone else noticed the lower vdimm requirements? I need a good 20 to 30mv less.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2544931


Did you also try lower SA voltage maybe 1.20-1.25 will work better.


----------



## shrimpmaster

edkieferlp said:


> Did you also try lower SA voltage maybe 1.20-1.25 will work better.


I'm using 1.2v only for 3866mhz. For 4000mhz 1.25 instant errors, 1.4v takes few minutes but still errors


----------



## Augustas

JoeRambo said:


> Anyone else with Z690 EDGE and latest 1.22 beta BIOS from official web having troubles with LAN connection ? After update LAN adapter stays disabled and no connection, not cool MSI, not cool.


I was having trouble with the tomahawk lan connection on the latest beta bios. Had to reset bios to default values to get it to work again.


----------



## robertr1

EarlZ said:


> Whats the recommended app for memory stability testing? What I've been using is HCI memtest and TM5 with extreme preset. Is there anything else that is more intensive?


Most reliable combo I’ve found is running ycruncher 2.5b a couple of times first. If that fails, no need to go further.

If that’s fine, an hour of occt large/avx2 extreme. If that passes, you’re good to go.


----------



## rkneeshaw

Frozburn said:


> Has anyone tried 7D25v126 (Beta version) Z690-A
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PRO Z690-A DDR4
> 
> 
> PRO series motherboards, tuned for better performance by Core Boost, Memory Boost, Extended Heatsink Design, M.2 Shield Frozr, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2, Lightning Gen5, Front Type-C, 2.5G LAN
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.msi.com


Yes, working great for me, best yet. Check MSI z690a pro owner thread


----------



## Luggage

robertr1 said:


> Most reliable combo I’ve found is running ycruncher 2.5b a couple of times first. If that fails, no need to go further.
> 
> If that’s fine, an hour of occt large/avx2 extreme. If that passes, you’re good to go.


Or run the stand alone y-cruncher with all stress tests enabled for a bunch of cycles.


----------



## robertr1

Prime P bios! 









PRIME-Z690-P-WIFI-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com












PRIME-Z690-P-D4-ASUS-1011.CAP


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## pauldgroot

4x8GB Crucial Ballistix 3600C16 (Micron rev e) overclocked to 4000C15 on my 12700KF at 5GHz with 4,8GHz uncore. Seems like my IMC is pretty good running 4 dimms at 4000C15 in gear 1. Dtiched my Gigabyte Aorus Elite motherboard since I was having so many issues with it.


----------



## Taraquin

pauldgroot said:


> View attachment 2545037
> 
> 
> 4x8GB Crucial Ballistix 3600C16 (Micron rev e) overclocked to 4000C15 on my 12700KF at 5GHz with 4,8GHz uncore. Seems like my IMC is pretty good running 4 dimms at 4000C15 in gear 1. Dtiched my Gigabyte Aorus Elite motherboard since I was having so many issues with it.


Awesome binning on your rev Es, rcdrd 18 at 4000 is unusual. Mine needs 21. Rc (yours are 54) and rfc is also quite good, I can't do below 60 and 576.


----------



## edkieferlp

pauldgroot said:


> View attachment 2545037
> 
> 
> 4x8GB Crucial Ballistix 3600C16 (Micron rev e) overclocked to 4000C15 on my 12700KF at 5GHz with 4,8GHz uncore. Seems like my IMC is pretty good running 4 dimms at 4000C15 in gear 1. Dtiched my Gigabyte Aorus Elite motherboard since I was having so many issues with it.


What Vdram voltage are you running?

Is that stable, some of those timings are real tight for freq/4 dimm.


----------



## drkrffxx

Asus just made available the 1003 bios for the TUF.

EDIT
Updated and I got to boot at 4000 mhz. Made it to the desktop and crashed. A few times.

But never, ever before I had made it even to boot at 4000 G1. Only black acreen and no bios.


----------



## pauldgroot

I think it's stable, Cinebench, [email protected] extreme and y cruncher seem stable. Vdram is set at 1.45V, [email protected], VDDQ 1,35V
. Vcore is 1.275V under load at 5GHz.


----------



## edkieferlp

pauldgroot said:


> I think it's stable, Cinebench, [email protected] extreme and y cruncher seem stable. Vdram is set at 1.45V, [email protected], VDDQ 1,35V
> . Vcore is 1.275V under load at 5GHz.


Cool, I didn't think Micron E scales much past 1.4 but I am still at 1.35 right now.


----------



## shrimpmaster

drkrffxx said:


> Asus just made available the 1003 bios for the TUF.
> 
> EDIT
> Updated and I got to boot at 4000 mhz. Made it to the desktop and crashed. A few times.
> 
> But never, ever before I had made it even to boot at 4000 G1. Only black acreen and no bios.


Same here, noticed improvement with 4000 G1 stability. Managed to pass a full cycle of TM5 absolut with 1.45v SA. But started to get a lot of errors on second pass... It never ever passed a full pass of TM5 ever before. Still not close to stable. I know for a fact I would trow errors instant in Linpack Xtreme, which is in my opinion the fastest way to tell if IMC is unstable. For me works a lot better than anything else including tm5 or ycruncher.
If I have enough SA to run tm5 absolut it can run ycruncher, but may still fail linpack xtreme.


----------



## drkrffxx

drkrffxx said:


> I cannot get 3800+ without errors at any timing, so it's probably my IMC being ****. But I feel like I have a decent kit on my hands going to waste by the IMC or BIOS, not sure.


I'm gonna quote myself here









I'm liking this TUF 1003 BIOS so far.

EDIT: Left it overnight and it completed 9 cycles no errors. I didn't really like being stuck at 3733 before, such an odd number, it triggered me just the thought of it haha. 3800 is much nicer.

3900 might be possible but between 3800c14 and 3900c15 I think 3800 would be better for latency, what do you think?


----------



## Balaned

1003 on TUF is weird for me. I could previously run well at 4000/15/16/16 but now it won't boot there. However I can get 3800/14/15/15 stable which I couldn't previously with those timings. I believe I prefer the latter but still tinkering with the mem settings.


----------



## Taraquin

edkieferlp said:


> Cool, I didn't think Micron E scales much past 1.4 but I am still at 1.35 right now.


CL/CWL and frequency scales fine with voltage on rev E, but RCDRD and RFC don't seem to scale. On my kit 3600 15-19-19 520 RFC works fine at 1.43V, 14-19-19 520 RFC works fine at 1.48V, maybe 13-19-19 could work at 1.55V? Don't think so, but never know. Hynix except DJR don't seem to scale with voltage. AFR is a nightmare, often more trouble at 1.4V than 1.35V, but depends on rev, CJR doesn't seem to like much over 1.4V.


----------



## drkrffxx

Left home with 3866 14-14-14-14 @ dimm 1.56v; SA 1.25v; VDDQ 1.25v on the oven.

On the second pass as I left. I'm starting to be a little concerned by the voltage. If it passes, I might aswell call it a day. It is still 133Mhz gain at the same timings and 0.03v more as my previous stable effort (3733), just with the BIOS change.

Let's see if you guys already over 4000mhz have any gains.

EDIT:

It failed. No wonder. 3900c15 passed 6 cycles.

3800c14 vs 3900c15 what's your pick?


----------



## edkieferlp

Taraquin said:


> CL/CWL and frequency scales fine with voltage on rev E, but RCDRD and RFC don't seem to scale. On my kit 3600 15-19-19 520 RFC works fine at 1.43V, 14-19-19 520 RFC works fine at 1.48V, maybe 13-19-19 could work at 1.55V? Don't think so, but never know. Hynix except DJR don't seem to scale with voltage. AFR is a nightmare, often more trouble at 1.4V than 1.35V, but depends on rev, CJR doesn't seem to like much over 1.4V.


Ok , thanks I am at 3866 now with stock primaries (16, 18, 18, 38 CR2) and mild secondary timings, I bumped voltage to 1.37 but not sure that was even needed, I wonder what freq CL 15 at low voltages would work.
I may try that but not sure its worth it as performance is hard to see improvements other than benchmarks.

PS: only thing I noticed from 3800>3866 was my RTL went from 25/73, 25/73, to 25/73, 25/75 at 3866


----------



## shrimpmaster

Anyone else find SoTR very good to test actual ram timmings performance? 
Like I can set much lower timings but I'll be slower in SuperPi and SoTR yet Aida64 gives same or even better results.

I can set rdwr to 10-10 but performs best at 12-12. RRD can be 4-4 but performs the best at 4-6.
Tras is another good one, u can set it Soo low before it errors but gives lower performance at lower values


----------



## Taraquin

shrimpmaster said:


> Anyone else find SoTR very good to test actual ram timmings performance?
> Like I can set much lower timings but I'll be slower in SuperPi and SoTR yet Aida64 gives same or even better results.
> 
> I can set rdwr to 10-10 but performs best at 12-12. RRD can be 4-4 but performs the best at 4-6.
> Tras is another good one, u can set it Soo low before it errors but gives lower performance at lower values


I prefer SOTTR over aida. CPU game avg/min is what to watch.

3000cl15 xmp got me 180fps
3000cl15 xmp with Asus twraks gave me 198 fps
3600cl15 manual tweaks gave me 240fps

SOTTR seems to scale good with speed, timings etc.


----------



## jayfkay

shrimpmaster said:


> Anyone else find SoTR very good to test actual ram timmings performance?
> Like I can set much lower timings but I'll be slower in SuperPi and SoTR yet Aida64 gives same or even better results.
> 
> I can set rdwr to 10-10 but performs best at 12-12. RRD can be 4-4 but performs the best at 4-6.
> Tras is another good one, u can set it Soo low before it errors but gives lower performance at lower values


I observe the same in different games and even in windows sometimes (boot may be faster, stuff like aida may initialize faster)
Tightest timings =/= best performance


----------



## Taraquin

edkieferlp said:


> Ok , thanks I am at 3866 now with stock primaries (16, 18, 18, 38 CR2) and mild secondary timings, I bumped voltage to 1.37 but not sure that was even needed, I wonder what freq CL 15 at low voltages would work.
> I may try that but not sure its worth it as performance is hard to see improvements other than benchmarks.
> 
> PS: only thing I noticed from 3800>3866 was my RTL went from 25/73, 25/73, to 25/73, 25/75 at 3866


Try the timings I suggested. Hynix doesn't seem to like below cl16 when close to 4000.


----------



## SSJVegeta

Just got the MSI PRO Z690-A WIFI DDR4 and Intel 12700K. Time to start building and overclocking!


----------



## shrimpmaster

I just figured out why things were not stable with 1T command rate after bios 1001.
It was stable on all tests, but training sometimes failed to align rtls, in normal usage I felt something was off and sometimes not stable.
Turns out vddq tx is set to 1.2v in these bios. Previous bios it was at 1.35v.
Setting it manually to 1.35v fixed my issue.

This is the first time I have to mess with that voltage.
Anyone know the optimal value for vddq tx?
At 3900mhz 15-15-15 1t 1.45v 1.25v sa, 1.25v or more vddq tx works well. At 1.45v vddq tx board starts fail on aligning rtls (not good).


----------



## 2500k_2

Asus Rog Apex for $ 140  
0.93 in SA


----------



## bscool

z690 Strix d4 bios 1003 testing.

Didn't run long any term memtest but from intial testing I don't see any big differences other than vddq needs to be raised from 901.

Did not set a static vcore(which I usually do) just left vcore and llc on auto for intial testing.

52/42 cache auto c states enabled so cache can clock up to 47.


----------



## Taraquin

2500k_2 said:


> View attachment 2545416
> 
> 
> Asus Rog Apex for $ 140
> 0.93 in SA


What is the highest you got in gear 1 stable? Got you same MB but struggle to stabilize above 3600 i G1. You on the newest bios?

EDIT SA voltage is stuck at 0.9-0.96V in locked CPUs: MSI's Latest Z690 & B660 Motherboard BIOS Improves Intel Alder Lake Non-K Memory Compatibility (wccftech.com) 
*From MSI internal test, so far the result is as below,*
_All result is done by MP CPU, QS CPU might have inconsistent result as MP CPU_


Non-K + B chipset = cannot increase VCCSA (it sits around 0.91x to 0.92xV depending on IMC quality)
Non-K + Z chipset = cannot increase VCCSA (it sits around 0.91x to 0.92xV depending on IMC quality)
K + B chipset = can increase VCCSA (This scenario was not confirmed by Intel, but so far it worked)
K + Z chipset = can increase VCCSA
Damn Intel, this is an unexpected nerf.


----------



## VGeorge

I've been trying to stabilize 4133c15 with 4x8 using the strix d4 on the latest bios (1003).
In one word, it's been a nightmare.
I have no idea whether the changes I make increase stability or not.
I'm using y-cruncher stress test as well as tm5 extreme and y-cruncher errors within a minute or so whereas tm5 needs a few minutes to spit out its first errors.
I have dram voltage set at 1.6V with a 140mm fan blowing air straight at them (temps max out at approx. 38C).
From my many attempts, I have made these assumptions:
SA voltage doesn't seem to affect stability that much for some reason, if at all, since I can boot with a wide range of values (from 1.24v all the way up to 1.42) and the time it takes for errors to appear won't change at all with different sa values. That must mean that it has to be something else causing these errors.
Finally, VDDQ voltage does slightly help with stability at higher values (1.5-1.55).
Does anyone have any ideas as to what else I can try? Is there a setting I'm missing that I should also be tinkering with?


----------



## truehighroller1

VGeorge said:


> I've been trying to stabilize 4133c15 with 4x8 using the strix d4 on the latest bios (1003).
> In one word, it's been a nightmare.
> I have no idea whether the changes I make increase stability or not.
> I'm using y-cruncher stress test as well as tm5 extreme and y-cruncher errors within a minute or so whereas tm5 needs a few minutes to spit out its first errors.
> I have dram voltage set at 1.6V with a 140mm fan blowing air straight at them (temps max out at approx. 38C).
> From my many attempts, I have made these assumptions:
> SA voltage doesn't seem to affect stability that much for some reason, if at all, since I can boot with a wide range of values (from 1.24v all the way up to 1.42) and the time it takes for errors to appear won't change at all with different sa values. That must mean that it has to be something else causing these errors.
> Finally, VDDQ voltage does slightly help with stability at higher values (1.5-1.55).
> Does anyone have any ideas as to what else I can try? Is there a setting I'm missing that I should also be tinkering with?



Enable extreme under the vrm controls both of them, where the llc control is and see if that helps.


----------



## VGeorge

truehighroller1 said:


> Enable extreme under the vrm controls both of them, where the llc control is and see if that helps.


Thanks for your suggestion!
Unfortunately, that didn't help my case.
Guess I'm gonna have to wait for another BIOS release to see if it improves 4x8 stability.
I still think 1003 is a bit better than 901 however.


----------



## bscool

VGeorge said:


> Thanks for your suggestion!
> Unfortunately, that didn't help my case.
> Guess I'm gonna have to wait for another BIOS release to see if it improves 4x8 stability.
> I still think 1003 is a bit better than 901 however.


Are you gear 2? 

I have tested 4x8 a little bit and going lower frequency with tight sub timings will out perform higher frequency with looser subs.

Example with [email protected] with tight subs gear 1 will out perform 4000 with loose subtimings in gear 1 or gear 2


----------



## VGeorge

bscool said:


> Are you gear 2?
> 
> I have tested 4x8 a little bit and going lower frequency with tight sub timings will out perform higher frequency with looser subs.
> 
> Example with [email protected] with tight subs gear 1 will out perform 4000 with loose subtimings in gear 1 or gear 2


I'm testing in gear 1.
With 901 I was stable at 4000C15, but with 1003 I thought that it might allow me to go for 4133C15, that's why I tried it.
I guess I could also try 4000C14 and see if that works. Thank you for the response!


----------



## 2500k_2

Taraquin said:


> What is the highest you got in gear 1 stable? Got you same MB but struggle to stabilize above 3600 i G1. You on the newest bios?
> 
> EDIT SA voltage is stuck at 0.9-0.96V in locked CPUs: MSI's Latest Z690 & B660 Motherboard BIOS Improves Intel Alder Lake Non-K Memory Compatibility (wccftech.com)
> *From MSI internal test, so far the result is as below,*
> _All result is done by MP CPU, QS CPU might have inconsistent result as MP CPU_
> 
> 
> Non-K + B chipset = cannot increase VCCSA (it sits around 0.91x to 0.92xV depending on IMC quality)
> Non-K + Z chipset = cannot increase VCCSA (it sits around 0.91x to 0.92xV depending on IMC quality)
> K + B chipset = can increase VCCSA (This scenario was not confirmed by Intel, but so far it worked)
> K + Z chipset = can increase VCCSA
> Damn Intel, this is an unexpected nerf.


Intel limited SA voltage on locked processors - 12100, 12400 (F), 12700 (F), 12900 (F), etc. This is a blow below the belt for Memory Overclocking in Gear 1. For most, there will be a ceiling of 3600 gear 1. but this is just a memory test. If you heat the processor in LinX to 90 degrees, you may experience errors even at a frequency of 3600. Therefore, you need to test very carefully.
Now I don't understand why b660 motherboards are needed. But you can have fun in Gear 2


----------



## bscool

Something I forgot to mention on new Srtix d4 1003 bios is check RTLs in Memtweakit or in bios as they usually do not train correctly. 

Here is what you can play with to get them to tighten/line up.

Not sure if the MCH FULL check disable or Fastboot needed still testing.

You will have to find the correct RTL for your timings.

Offset of 0 should work for everyone though. Tip from @cstkl1

You want RTLs all the same on same channel. As in when trained "off" the will be something like 

MC0 71,73,71

MC1 75, 77, 73


----------



## Screenfacer

My Asrock Z690 Extreme Wifi 6E doesn't have a visible VCCSA or system agent voltage modifier. Only able to boot in 3600 Gear 1 on my 4000CL15 kit. Am I just SOL?

Edit: I was wrong, System Agent voltage is in the FIVR settings. Now the wall is at 3800MHz G1 T2, and going above 1.25V SA is useless. Should've done my research...


----------



## Nerval

Screenfacer said:


> My Asrock Z690 Extreme Wifi 6E doesn't have a visible VCCSA or system agent voltage modifier. Only able to boot in 3600 Gear 1 on my 4000CL15 kit. Am I just SOL?


having same issue, just assembled my z690 edge and 4x8gb 4000mhz cl15 ram today (they did work at that speed on my old 8700k), it seems like I cant boot above 3600mhz gear 1.. still trying to tinker with stuff hope to go higher..


----------



## geriatricpollywog

4133c15 would be outstanding for 4x8 on Z690 DDR4. RAM binning is important and I would be surprised if you could achieve that overclock on anything less than Gskills top bins.


----------



## Nerval

geriatricpollywog said:


> 4133c15 would be outstanding for 4x8 on Z690 DDR4. RAM binning is important and I would be surprised if you could achieve that overclock on anything less than Gskills top bins.


aight so I managed to get this running: went abit down on mhz but tightened the timings abit more (this is 4000mhz cl15 xmp ram)


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Nerval said:


> aight so I managed to get this running: went abit down on mhz but tightened the timings abit more (this is 4000mhz cl15 xmp ram)
> View attachment 2545671


I think you are hitting the limits of 4-dimm. That’s a baller ram kit though.


----------



## bscool

Nerval said:


> aight so I managed to get this running: went abit down on mhz but tightened the timings abit more (this is 4000mhz cl15 xmp ram)
> View attachment 2545671


RTLs could be tighter. Ideally should be more like 71/71 and 73/73. Cant remember what it is called. Someone on MSI will be able to tell you. 2 spots to tighten one is in advanced, round trip latency and the other Latency Timing Mode, dynamic?


----------



## Nerval

bscool said:


> RTLs could be tighter. Ideally should be more like 71/71 and 73/73. Cant remember what it is called. Someone on MSI will be able to tell you. 2 spots to tighten one is in advanced, round trip latency and the other Latency Timing Mode, dynamic?


I'll try later today (as this is really time consuming) to tweak some more, if you may be able to find what other tweaks should I make to my ram kit in terms of timings or in bios settings
literally assembled it yesterday so I still gonna play with bios settings for some time
might settle for this: **changed to CR1 aswell and it seems to work meanwhile


----------



## datspike

Some single rank 16Gbit Rev.B at 4000C16-19


Spoiler: screenshot














I can boot 4000 at 1.35v or so VSA, but it would crash games frequently, even tho TM5 showed no errors. TM5 + Furmark in background stabilized at 1.43v VSA
Also a bit sceptical about tWR, tWTR_S and tWTR_L timings


----------



## shrimpmaster

bscool said:


> Something I forgot to mention on new Srtix d4 1003 bios is check RTLs in Memtweakit or in bios as they usually do not train correctly.
> 
> Here is what you can play with to get them to tighten/line up.
> 
> Not sure if the MCH FULL check disable or Fastboot needed still testing.
> 
> You will have to find the correct RTL for your timings.
> 
> Offset of 0 should work for everyone though. Tip from @cstkl1
> 
> You want RTLs all the same on same channel. As in when trained "off" the will be something like
> 
> MC0 71,73,71
> 
> MC1 75, 77, 73


I noticed the same on bios 1001 and up. But only running command rate of 1 and things were not stable, probably why rtls were getting misaligned sometimes
What helped was disabling Turn around optimizations, setting vddq tx to 1.35v completely fixed it.
Also tried setting it to 1.45v and thing were even worse than at 1.2v


----------



## VGeorge

bscool said:


> Something I forgot to mention on new Srtix d4 1003 bios is check RTLs in Memtweakit or in bios as they usually do not train correctly.
> 
> Here is what you can play with to get them to tighten/line up.
> 
> Not sure if the MCH FULL check disable or Fastboot needed still testing.
> 
> You will have to find the correct RTL for your timings.
> 
> Offset of 0 should work for everyone though. Tip from @cstkl1
> 
> You want RTLs all the same on same channel. As in when trained "off" the will be something like
> 
> MC0 71,73,71
> 
> MC1 75, 77, 73


It seems that I can't actually change my RTLs.
I set everything correctly (69, 69, 0 & 71, 71, 0), but they won't change to those values.
Btw, I was testing if the issue was with 4x8 and I was running 2x8 when I took those screenshots.
Could something be wrong with my mb? Or is there a setting I'm missing?


----------



## bscool

VGeorge said:


> It seems that I can't actually change my RTLs.
> I set everything correctly (69, 69, 0 & 71, 71, 0), but they won't change to those values.
> Btw, I was testing if the issue was with 4x8 and I was running 2x8 when I took those screenshots.
> Could something be wrong with my mb? Or is there a setting I'm missing?
> 
> View attachment 2545766
> View attachment 2545767
> View attachment 2545768


No it is the bios 1003, as far as I can tell is hit miss for training the RTLs. I am back on 707 now to play with an older bios.

Before I stopped using 1003 I also was able to set rtls by entering them manually. It worked but I doubt it is consistent. I had enough playing with it so back to older bios for me.

This screenshot was 4000c14 and it had trained rtls all over like 71, 73, 69 etc. So I entered all 69 and it worked(as in set them all to 69 after rebooting and was stable in Windows). But I never tried more manual setting of them to see if it was more consistent.

That SP99  What the P and E core scores?


----------



## VGeorge

bscool said:


> No it is the bios 1003, as far as I can tell is hit miss for training the RTLs. I am back on 707 now to play with an older bios.
> 
> Before I stopped using 1003 I also was able to set rtls by entering them manually. It worked but I doubt it is consistent. I had enough playing with it so back to older bios for me.
> 
> This screenshot was 4000c14 and it had trained rtls all over like 71, 73, 69 etc. So I entered all 69 and it worked(as in set them all to 69 after rebooting and was stable in Windows). But I never tried more manual setting of them to see if it was more consistent.


I think I'm going to be torturing myself a bit more with bios 1003 before giving up lol
I have no idea why, but with older versions I had a really weird issue where my system would outright refuse to boot with VDDQ set over 1.29V and DRAM over 1.5375 for some strange reason.
This at least is solved for me on 1003, so I might as well try a bit more, since I want to go for 4133c15 or 4000c14 using all 4 sticks cause I don't want to be running 2x8.
I just hope I can work out what's wrong and I can't set RTLs to save my life.



bscool said:


> That SP99  What the P and E core scores?


Haha... thanks! Yours isn't too bad either.
The SP scores have been all over the place depending on the bios version and whether I have reverted back to an older version.
From what I can recall they've been:
99 Overall, 108 P-core and 81 E-core on 901 and older
99 Overall, 109 P-core and 81 E-core on 1003 and 1001 &
98 Overall, 111 P-core and 74 E-core when reverting from 1001 or 1003 to older versions.


----------



## Nerval

After couple more tests managed to run 4x8GB sticks @4000Mhz CR1 Gear1 14-15-15-28, might push timings even more later, any tips/recommendations to change welcome~


----------



## VGeorge

Nerval said:


> After couple more tests managed to run 4x8GB sticks @4000Mhz CR1 Gear1 14-15-15-28, might push timings even more later, any tips/recommendations to change welcome~
> View attachment 2545872


Nice results!
Is this y-cruncher or tm5 stable?
Also, what are your voltages?


----------



## Nerval

VGeorge said:


> Nice results!
> Is this y-cruncher or tm5 stable?
> Also, what are your voltages?


I do run a-bit high atm, but I didn't go through tests of taking voltages down bit by bit yet for fine tuning,
SA/VDDQ both on 1.38V atm and DRAM on 1.55

I ran tm5 for like 30mins, and played warzone for couple hours and had no crash/issues/error meanwhile.
ram temps go max 45C, which is safe but I might throw small fan on it for extra stability & try lower voltages by bit


----------



## maxver0

@Nerval How come you have 48ns in AIDA64? Are you running it in safe mode or W11? I'm getting always over 54ns when running 4000CL14 dram 1.5v on Windows 10 on pretty much idle. I configured RTL 71/73 but it doesn't change. Can't go lower with tFAW, tRCD, tRP, TRAS.

I've run TM5 for 2-3 hours and memflattr stress test for 10 hours +


----------



## Taraquin

maxver0 said:


> @Nerval How come you have 48ns in AIDA64? Are you running it in safe mode or W11? I'm getting always over 54ns when running 4000CL14 dram 1.5v on Windows 10 on pretty much idle. I configured RTL 71/73 but it doesn't change. Can't go lower with tFAW, tRCD, tRP, TRAS.
> 
> I've run TM5 for 2-3 hours and memflattr stress test for 10 hours +
> 
> 
> View attachment 2546011
> 
> View attachment 2546010


You have worse latency than me running 3600cl15 micron. Your timings are very relaxed. Try ras 32, rrds 4, rrdl 6, faw 16, wr 14, rtp 7, refi 65280, your rtls are off, but that takes a bit of work.


----------



## maxver0

Taraquin said:


> You have worse latency than me running 3600cl15 micron. Your timings are very relaxed. Try ras 32, rrds 4, rrdl 6, faw 16, wr 14, rtp 7, refi 65280, your rtls are off, but that takes a bit of work.


Doesnt really help much. I'm running B-die SR 4x8GB.


----------



## Taraquin

maxver0 said:


> Doesnt really help much. I'm running B-die SR 4x8GB.
> 
> View attachment 2546025
> 
> 
> View attachment 2546026
> 
> 
> View attachment 2546030


You lowered dram frequency from 4000 to 3866? Aida scales with frequency. try my above usggestions with 4000. You should do something about the tertieries, they are off, look at wtrl\s, they should be 8\4, but are 5\12 due to tertieries. Try WRRD_sg 30 and WRRD_dg 24 first, if it works try 28\24, this might fix wtrl atleast. And you still didn`t follow my suggestion of lowering WR. WR should be equal or lower than CL, not above CL, that can cause issues  RTP should be half WR, WR works best as even number.


----------



## VGeorge

maxver0 said:


> Doesnt really help much. I'm running B-die SR 4x8GB.
> 
> View attachment 2546025
> 
> 
> View attachment 2546026
> 
> 
> View attachment 2546030


Yeah, your latency really is significantly higher than it should be.
When I was on 4000 15-15-15-28 with 4x8 and all timings tightened, I would get around 44-46ns in AIDA.
Maybe there is something running in the background causing an increase in latency.


----------



## maxver0

Taraquin said:


> You lowered dram frequency from 4000 to 3866? Aida scales with frequency. try my above usggestions with 4000. You should do something about the tertieries, they are off, look at wtrl\s, they should be 8\4, but are 5\12 due to tertieries. Try WRRD_sg 30 and WRRD_dg 24 first, if it works try 28\24, this might fix wtrl atleast. And you still didn`t follow my suggestion of lowering WR. WR should be equal or lower than CL, not above CL, that can cause issues  RTP should be half WR, WR works best as even number.


Yes, I did to see if the latency gets more stable any how. I did these changes via msi config app as it was much faster to try couple different settings, couldn't change tWR using it.




VGeorge said:


> Yeah, your latency really is significantly higher than it should be.
> When I was on 4000 15-15-15-28 with 4x8 and all timings tightened, I would get around 44-46ns in AIDA.
> Maybe there is something running in the background causing an increase in latency.


I had all background apps closed and the windows CPU usage is usually below 1% when I run the tests. Are you guys running it in safe mode or something? lol What's your intel mlc? Maybe AIDA somehow buggy?


----------



## Taraquin

maxver0 said:


> Yes, I did to see if the latency gets more stable any how. I did these changes via msi config app as it was much faster to try couple different settings, couldn't change tWR using it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I had all background apps closed and the windows CPU usage is usually below 1% when I run the tests. Are you guys running it in safe mode or something? lol What's your intel mlc? Maybe AIDA somehow buggy?


Try bios and my suggestions.


----------



## maxver0

Taraquin said:


> You have worse latency than me running 3600cl15 micron. Your timings are very relaxed. Try ras 32, rrds 4, rrdl 6, faw 16, wr 14, rtp 7, refi 65280, your rtls are off, but that takes a bit of work.


I know the 4000CL14 or even 4000CL15 with tFAW 16 or won't be stable as I tested it in the past but I guess I can try running a bench if it posts.


----------



## Taraquin

maxver0 said:


> I know the 4000CL14 or even 4000CL15 with tFAW 16 or won't be stable as I tested it in the past but I guess I can try running a bench if it posts.


Try rrds 5, rrdl 8, faw 20 then


----------



## VGeorge

maxver0 said:


> I had all background apps closed and the windows CPU usage is usually below 1% when I run the tests. Are you guys running it in safe mode or something? lol What's your intel mlc? Maybe AIDA somehow buggy?


It might also be the fact that you have the E-cores enabled and your ring ratio is much lower than mine.
Do you mean the below value? These were my timings btw.


----------



## Nerval

Another tweaks this ram works crazy:


----------



## maxver0

VGeorge said:


> It might also be the fact that you have the E-cores enabled and your ring ratio is much lower than mine.
> Do you mean the below value? These were my timings btw.
> 
> View attachment 2546057
> View attachment 2546058


I have updated my BIOS and disabled the ecores but no significant difference. I had my ring at 39 with ecores, whats yours without ecores?


@Taraquin did some changes, I am closer to your 54ns latency but I still dont quite get how others are running <50ns.

Might be worth to add rest of the configuration:

CPU SA 1.27v
CPU VDDQ 1.27v
DRAM Voltage 1.5v (B-die)
DRAM VTT Voltage 0.750v
RTL is set to 71 but doesnt really change in OS.
4000 G1 (133MHz)
Command rate 2N
CPU OC 3 cores at 5.3GHz, 6 cores 5,1GHz, 8 cores 5.0 GHz

Here's run with ecores disabled










Another run with ecores enabled


----------



## VGeorge

maxver0 said:


> I have updated my BIOS and disabled the ecores but no significant difference. I had my ring at 39 with ecores, whats yours without ecores?
> 
> 
> @Taraquin did some changes, I am closer to your 54ns latency but I still dont quite get how others are running <50ns.
> 
> Might be worth to add rest of the configuration:
> 
> CPU SA 1.27v
> CPU VDDQ 1.27v
> DRAM Voltage 1.5v (B-die)
> DRAM VTT Voltage 0.750v
> RTL is set to 71 but doesnt really change in OS.
> 4000 G1 (133MHz)
> Command rate 2N
> CPU OC 3 cores at 5.3GHz, 6 cores 5,1GHz, 8 cores 5.0 GHz
> 
> View attachment 2546080


Mine's at 50 with 53x multiplier. The ring clock and the higher RTLs are the only significant differences I can point out between our configurations.
Unfortunately, I have an Asus mb so hopefully someone else can help you with how to tighten them.


----------



## Nerval

maxver0 said:


> @Nerval How come you have 48ns in AIDA64? Are you running it in safe mode or W11? I'm getting always over 54ns when running 4000CL14 dram 1.5v on Windows 10 on pretty much idle. I configured RTL 71/73 but it doesn't change. Can't go lower with tFAW, tRCD, tRP, TRAS.
> 
> I've run TM5 for 2-3 hours and memflattr stress test for 10 hours +


[email protected] Pro 21H2 (19044.1503) non safemode to be specific (idk if matters too much)

I do make my ram test right after boot with nothing open in background (only ISLC, Voicemeeter, PX1, FanControl apps [email protected])

[email protected] timings/north bridge clock/cpu clock, you might be able to push more (maybe go abit higher on voltage aswell)

My current settings: gonna check how to lower those RTLS aswell to match 71 or lower.


----------



## davids40

Nerval said:


> After couple more tests managed to run 4x8GB sticks @4000Mhz CR1 Gear1 14-15-15-28, might push timings even more later, any tips/recommendations to change welcome~
> View attachment 2545872


Hi Nerval 👋

i am on MSI Edge , could you give me other settings ?
vdimm, cpu core voltage, cpu sa voltage, cpu vddq voltage .... ?

thanks


----------



## Taraquin

maxver0 said:


> I have updated my BIOS and disabled the ecores but no significant difference. I had my ring at 39 with ecores, whats yours without ecores?
> 
> 
> @Taraquin did some changes, I am closer to your 54ns latency but I still dont quite get how others are running <50ns.
> 
> Might be worth to add rest of the configuration:
> 
> CPU SA 1.27v
> CPU VDDQ 1.27v
> DRAM Voltage 1.5v (B-die)
> DRAM VTT Voltage 0.750v
> RTL is set to 71 but doesnt really change in OS.
> 4000 G1 (133MHz)
> Command rate 2N
> CPU OC 3 cores at 5.3GHz, 6 cores 5,1GHz, 8 cores 5.0 GHz
> 
> Here's run with ecores disabled
> 
> View attachment 2546080
> 
> 
> Another run with ecores enabled
> 
> View attachment 2546082


A few things, wtrl is almost good now, try wrrd_sg 29 or 28 and see if it works. Wr=rtp x 2 so either set wr to 12 or rtp to 7. Ras can be lower, and it will lower rc, try 28. Rfc may do 272. You may also try running cache GHz a bit higher.


----------



## maxver0

Taraquin said:


> A few things, wtrl is almost good now, try wrrd_sg 29 or 28 and see if it works. Wr=rtp x 2 so either set wr to 12 or rtp to 7. Ras can be lower, and it will lower rc, try 28. Rfc may do 272. You may also try running cache GHz a bit higher.


With my previously shared config, it's not exactly stable. I will try adjusting some settings to get it stable.


----------



## Taraquin

maxver0 said:


> With my previously shared config, it's not exactly stable. I will try adjusting some settings to get it stable.
> 
> View attachment 2546262


Try cl15 instead and maybe rause voltage 0.02-0.03v.


----------



## maxver0

Still on 1.5v


----------



## Taraquin

maxver0 said:


> View attachment 2546276
> 
> 
> Still on 1.5v


Much better, try 1.51 or 1.52v, also change rtp to 7 or wr to 12, wr=rtp x 2. Ras can probably go lower, 30 is probably fine.


----------



## maxver0

Taraquin said:


> Much better, try 1.51 or 1.52v, also change rtp to 7 or wr to 12, wr=rtp x 2. Ras can probably go lower, 30 is probably fine.


I mean the test was running much shorter time, 20% coverage vs 700%


----------



## VGeorge

Apologies for the off-topic question.
Just had a brain fart and changed fan and pump profiles to silent operation and left my PC running y-cruncher stress test.
Came back to it after 10 mins and saw that the CPU had reached 100C and I immediately shut it down. Do you think I managed to damage it?


----------



## LionAlonso

VGeorge said:


> Apologies for the off-topic question.
> Just had a brain fart and changed fan and pump profiles to silent operation and left my PC running y-cruncher stress test.
> Came back to it after 10 mins and saw that the CPU had reached 100C and I immediately shut it down. Do you think I managed to damage it?


Hope this is not a serious question.
Cpus in 2022 (and since a long time) auto-shutdown when there is a possibility of an instant damage.
Very Long term at 100 degrees could damage it, but as if you buy a car and go all the way up at rpms all the days.
Its acceptable and Intel only prevents "instant damage" on their CPU as car makers doesnt let u go up in RPM in a way it can blow up the engine instant.


----------



## VGeorge

LionAlonso said:


> Hope this is not a serious question.
> Cpus in 2022 (and since a long time) auto-shutdown when there is a possibility of an instant damage.
> Very Long term at 100 degrees could damage it, but as if you buy a car and go all the way up at rpms all the days.
> Its acceptable and Intel only prevents "instant damage" on their CPU as car makers doesnt let u go up in RPM in a way it can blow up the engine instant.


Welp, apologies again for the stupidity of my question.
I was just a bit worried and thought that I'd ask.


----------



## shrimpmaster

Holy ****, these new 100x BIOS are trash for dual rank memory.
I bought a 2x16gb b-die kit, but I was having a lot of issues with memory training between 3800 and 3900mhz, RTLs getting misaligned, sometimes failed to train, but passes testmem5?!. It was fine at 4000mhz and 3733mhz.

Flashed 0707 3866mhz/3900mhz gear 1 no problem, RTLs always aligning perfect, training takes like 2 seconds.
Bios 1003 was best for me for single rank b-die, but for dual rank things don't work good at all.


----------



## Taraquin

maxver0 said:


> I mean the test was running much shorter time, 20% coverage vs 700%


Try a bit higher voltage if cooling is good enough, or maybe you need to try 16-16-16 and 16 cwl.


----------



## truehighroller1

So, I did a thing and changed over to disabling ecores and got this as a result.


----------



## Nerval

davids40 said:


> Hi Nerval 👋
> 
> i am on MSI Edge , could you give me other settings ?
> vdimm, cpu core voltage, cpu sa voltage, cpu vddq voltage .... ?
> 
> thanks


Quite high atm, gonna tune some voltages down but would take some time and tests to find lower stable voltages
vcore: 1.35
cpu sa: 1.37
DRAM: 1.55
VDDQ: 1.38




truehighroller1 said:


> So, I did a thing and changed over to disabling ecores and got this as a result.
> 
> View attachment 2546469
> 
> 
> View attachment 2546470


Noicee, tho ain't really worth it disabling e-cores according to benchmarks (FPS wise)

Btw is your ring (north bridge clock) is safe to go/stable on 4900? I was wondering how far this can go (on 4500 atm) and would it make some impact


----------



## truehighroller1

Nerval said:


> Quite high atm, gonna tune some voltages down but would take some time and tests to find lower stable voltages
> vcore: 1.35
> cpu sa: 1.37
> DRAM: 1.55
> VDDQ: 1.38
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Noicee, tho ain't really worth it disabling e-cores according to benchmarks (FPS wise)
> 
> Btw is your ring (north bridge clock) is safe to go/stable on 4900? I was wondering how far this can go (on 4500 atm) and would it make some impact



Seemed stable. Was playing warzone for awhile. I'll go higher once I get a chance to play with it some more. I've been recertifying at my work all week. Doing five certs at once isn't easy.. I'll probably be busy into next week honestly. Just turned the ecores off and turned the ring up to 4.9 tonight. Ran those couple little test, and started paying warzone.


----------



## Tradition

maxver0 said:


> I have updated my BIOS and disabled the ecores but no significant difference. I had my ring at 39 with ecores, whats yours without ecores?
> 
> 
> @Taraquin did some changes, I am closer to your 54ns latency but I still dont quite get how others are running <50ns.
> 
> Might be worth to add rest of the configuration:
> 
> CPU SA 1.27v
> CPU VDDQ 1.27v
> DRAM Voltage 1.5v (B-die)
> DRAM VTT Voltage 0.750v
> RTL is set to 71 but doesnt really change in OS.
> 4000 G1 (133MHz)
> Command rate 2N
> CPU OC 3 cores at 5.3GHz, 6 cores 5,1GHz, 8 cores 5.0 GHz
> 
> Here's run with ecores disabled
> 
> View attachment 2546080
> 
> 
> Another run with ecores enabled
> 
> View attachment 2546082


where can i get this INTel MCL GUi


----------



## truehighroller1

maxver0 said:


> I have updated my BIOS and disabled the ecores but no significant difference. I had my ring at 39 with ecores, whats yours without ecores?
> 
> 
> @Taraquin did some changes, I am closer to your 54ns latency but I still dont quite get how others are running <50ns.
> 
> Might be worth to add rest of the configuration:
> 
> CPU SA 1.27v
> CPU VDDQ 1.27v
> DRAM Voltage 1.5v (B-die)
> DRAM VTT Voltage 0.750v
> RTL is set to 71 but doesnt really change in OS.
> 4000 G1 (133MHz)
> Command rate 2N
> CPU OC 3 cores at 5.3GHz, 6 cores 5,1GHz, 8 cores 5.0 GHz
> 
> Here's run with ecores disabled
> 
> View attachment 2546080
> 
> 
> Another run with ecores enabled
> 
> View attachment 2546082


Why're your rtls so out of whack? That's not a good thing by the way.


----------



## shrimpmaster

I went back to 1003.
With DR, it posts and trains fine up to 3733mhz and at 4000mhz. Like always aligned RTLs and trains fast.
For some reason 3900mhz doesn't even post. 3866mhz and 3800mhz sometimes fail.

Something really strange with this bios, or maybe it's my kit, my SR kit is fine. Performance and actual ram stability is actually better than 0707 even with DR, soo I'm just running 3866mhz(my imc can't do 4000mhz 1:1 fully stable), not going back to 0707 again.

Can anyone with DR b-die replicate this on 1003? Is it my kit or just bios issue?


----------



## bscool

shrimpmaster said:


> I went back to 1003.
> With DR, it posts and trains fine up to 3733mhz and at 4000mhz. Like always aligned RTLs and trains fast.
> For some reason 3900mhz doesn't even post. 3866mhz and 3800mhz sometimes fail.
> 
> Something really strange with this bios, or maybe it's my kit, my SR kit is fine. Performance and actual ram stability is actually better than 0707 even with DR, soo I'm just running 3866mhz(my imc can't do 4000mhz 1:1 fully stable), not going back to 0707 again.
> 
> Can anyone with DR b-die replicate this on 1003? Is it my kit or just bios issue?


Pretty much everyone has said this with DR on 1003 that i have seen.

Maybe they optimized it more for SR? I know in the past I tested SR and some bioses where really bad with SR but worked good with DR.


----------



## VGeorge

bscool said:


> Pretty much everyone has said this with DR on 1003 that i have seen.
> 
> Maybe they optimized it more for SR? I know in the past I tested SR and some bioses where really bad with SR but worked good with DR.


It's definitely better for me with 4x8 ram.
However, it's still not worth it to daily run either 4000 14-14-14 or 4133 15-15-15. The voltages needed are way too high for an insignificant improvement.
I need 1.6 vddq and dram and 1.45 sa for the above whereas on 4000 15-15-15, I only need 1.5 dram, 1.29 vddq and 1.38 sa (possibly even lower).


----------



## Antsu

Nerval said:


> Noicee, tho ain't really worth it disabling e-cores according to benchmarks (FPS wise)


I've found E-cores to be useless for gaming, as pretty much nothing I've tried scales beyond 8 threads. Geniuinely curious if you've found a (gaming) situation where they do something.


----------



## Cam1

shrimpmaster said:


> I went back to 1003.
> With DR, it posts and trains fine up to 3733mhz and at 4000mhz. Like always aligned RTLs and trains fast.
> For some reason 3900mhz doesn't even post. 3866mhz and 3800mhz sometimes fail.
> 
> Something really strange with this bios, or maybe it's my kit, my SR kit is fine. Performance and actual ram stability is actually better than 0707 even with DR, soo I'm just running 3866mhz(my imc can't do 4000mhz 1:1 fully stable), not going back to 0707 again.
> 
> Can anyone with DR b-die replicate this on 1003? Is it my kit or just bios issue?


I have the same results as previous Bios just manually set VDDQ to 1.35 with 1003 Bios version.
Can start 4000 but still unstable, 4000+ doesn't even post.

Just waiting for future Bios to use full hardware potential.


----------



## wkamil

bscool said:


> z690 Strix d4 bios 1003 testing.
> 
> Didn't run long any term memtest but from intial testing I don't see any big differences other than vddq needs to be raised from 901.
> 
> Did not set a static vcore(which I usually do) just left vcore and llc on auto for intial testing.
> 
> 52/42 cache auto c states enabled so cache can clock up to 47.


What is CPU Voltage settings on yours setup?


----------



## Taraquin

After running 3600 gear 1 with the stupid SA volt locked to 0.93-0.95v I got a few random bluescreens and restarts :/ Seems I must use 3500 max in gear 1. Damn you Intel! If you care for your customers unlock SA voltage on locked alder lakes!


----------



## maxver0

Taraquin said:


> Try a bit higher voltage if cooling is good enough, or maybe you need to try 16-16-16 and 16 cwl.


It's just not stable with other subs tightened. I can run benchmark with it but bluescreens eventually. Even after tightening the subs, ecores off, why does my AIDA latency is 10ns higher than others at same FREQ/CL?


----------



## maxver0

truehighroller1 said:


> Why're your rtls so out of whack? That's not a good thing by the way.


Not sure, I've set it to 71 in bios but doesn't have effect, maybe I need to select some manual override. What values I should be aiming for?


----------



## edkieferlp

Since you are talking RTL/IO, I ran into this guide to modify on older Intel Platforms, I don't know if this still works in ADL.
Would be good to know, maybe guys with more memory experience will comment, as I have little in this area.






Advanced Skylake Overclocking: Tune DDR4 Memory RTL/IO on Maximus VIII with [email protected]'s Guide


Read the full article @ HWBOT




hwbot.org


----------



## truehighroller1

maxver0 said:


> Not sure, I've set it to 71 in bios but doesn't have effect, maybe I need to select some manual override. What values I should be aiming for?



Alderlake doesn't let you adjust them at all, yet. Maybe in future updates? I noticed that it you have to low of vcssa voltage they will train out of whack. Bump up the voltage a little and force retraining by turning off fast boot in bios and windows first then adjust your voltage up a little. You want within 2 of each other at most. So 71-71-73-73 would be okay. Mine train at 73-73-73-73.


----------



## bscool

wkamil said:


> What is CPU Voltage settings on yours setup?


I say it right in that post it is on auto.

"Did not set a static vcore(which I usually do) just left vcore and llc on auto for intial testing"

If you mean what I do i normally run 1.35 vcore llc6 in bios, under load arond 1.32v in Windows 52/40.44 to 46 cache depending on if I set L2 volage 1.28v(in bios) to run higher cache than 44.

Here is what i am currently running on bios 901. Not suggesting anyone run this.


----------



## bscool

truehighroller1 said:


> Alderlake doesn't let you adjust them at all, yet. Maybe in future updates? I noticed that it you have to low of vcssa voltage they will train out of whack. Bump up the voltage a little and force retraining by turning off fast boot in bios and windows first then adjust your voltage up a little. You want within 2 of each other at most. So 71-71-73-73 would be okay. Mine train at 73-73-73-73.


I have been messing with RTLs a bit and even in 901 I had them trained at 73-73-73-73 and went in and set like I have posted before about offset 0 and just max 71 MCO and 73 max MC1 and then it trained 71-71-73-73.

There is actually 6 total rtls but you know what I mean. 71-71-71-73-73-73 if you view them in bios or in memtweakit.

Not saying this RTL thing works everytime but for people that want to experiement it does work sometimes. Takes trial and error. It doesnt let you set them per say but can help ti tighthen them up a bit.


Edit in the pic Init value is set but I have found you dont need to set that.


----------



## postem

Antsu said:


> I've found E-cores to be useless for gaming, as pretty much nothing I've tried scales beyond 8 threads. Geniuinely curious if you've found a (gaming) situation where they do something.


Pretty much gaming and doing parallel I always let YouTube audio or some pod cast. I know should he minimal load but still


----------



## Antsu

postem said:


> Pretty much gaming and doing parallel I always let YouTube audio or some pod cast. I know should he minimal load but still


Fair enough, I always overlook how much stuff people are running in the background while gaming because my old habits die hard. Only TeamSpeak 3 and the game running for me.


----------



## wkamil

bscool said:


> I have been messing with RTLs a bit and even in 901 I had them trained at 73-73-73-73 and went in and set like I have posted before about offset 0 and just max 71 MCO and 73 max MC1 and then it trained 71-71-73-73.
> 
> There is actually 6 total rtls but you know what I mean. 71-71-71-73-73-73 if you view them in bios or in memtweakit.
> 
> Not saying this RTL thing works everytime but for people that want to experiement it does work sometimes. Takes trial and error. It doesnt let you set them per say but can help ti tighthen them up a bit.
> 
> 
> Edit in the pic Init value is set but I have found you dont need to set that.


6 rtls? Then why I have only 2?


----------



## truehighroller1

bscool said:


> I have been messing with RTLs a bit and even in 901 I had them trained at 73-73-73-73 and went in and set like I have posted before about offset 0 and just max 71 MCO and 73 max MC1 and then it trained 71-71-73-73.
> 
> There is actually 6 total rtls but you know what I mean. 71-71-71-73-73-73 if you view them in bios or in memtweakit.
> 
> Not saying this RTL thing works everytime but for people that want to experiement it does work sometimes. Takes trial and error. It doesnt let you set them per say but can help ti tighthen them up a bit.
> 
> 
> Edit in the pic Init value is set but I have found you dont need to set that.



I flashed back from the first BIOS 0223 through to 0901 and my pcore score is 96 / ecore 68 again. Just now read your whole post sorry. That's interesting about the max value. Yes, you're right I see six values.










Single rank maybe?



wkamil said:


> 6 rtls? Then why I have only 2?
> 
> View attachment 2546866


----------



## wkamil

truehighroller1 said:


> I flashed back from the first BIOS 0223 through to 0901 and my pcore score is 96 / ecore 68 again. Just now read your whole post sorry. That's interesting about the max value. Yes, you're right I see six values.
> View attachment 2546905
> 
> 
> 
> Single rank maybe?


Indeed, SR. That's the reason?


----------



## edkieferlp

wkamil said:


> 6 rtls? Then why I have only 2?
> 
> View attachment 2546866


Your RTL are really low for 4000, 67/67, did you manually set RTL like Bscool or that just how it trained.
I noticed something with SA, I originally had them auto (1.350) and lowered to 1.28(SA= 73/73) just to lower them but now I looked at RTL and noticed if I lower SA to 1.220 for example the RTL go to 73/75.
So voltage on SA seems to affect RTL values.
PS Not sure if this is test error but I got the best Y cruncher results with lower voltage, very small decrease in time.


----------



## truehighroller1

wkamil said:


> Indeed, SR. That's the reason?


Yep.



edkieferlp said:


> Your RTL are really low for 4000, 67/67, did you manually set RTL like Bscool or that just how it trained.
> I noticed something with SA, I originally had them auto (1.350) and lowered to 1.28 just to lower them but now I looked at RTL and noticed if I lower SA to 1.220 for example the RTL go to 73/75.
> So voltage on SA seems to affect RTL values.
> PS Not sure if this is test error but I got the best Y cruncher results with lower voltage, very small decrease in time.


Yep, I've pointed this out a few times now. Go to low on sa, it throws them off.


----------



## wkamil

edkieferlp said:


> Your RTL are really low for 4000, 67/67, did you manually set RTL like Bscool or that just how it trained.
> I noticed something with SA, I originally had them auto (1.350) and lowered to 1.28 just to lower them but now I looked at RTL and noticed if I lower SA to 1.220 for example the RTL go to 73/75.
> So voltage on SA seems to affect RTL values.
> PS Not sure if this is test error but I got the best Y cruncher results with lower voltage, very small decrease in time.


I have RTL and all tertiaries (except WRRD_sg and WRRD_dg) on auto. MB trained it for 67/67 sometimes 67/69. My SA is pretty low, I manualy set it to 1.2V in BIOS (HWiNFO shows 1.184V)


----------



## shrimpmaster

1T command rate will lower RTLs similar to -1 CL.


----------



## bscool

wkamil said:


> 6 rtls? Then why I have only 2?
> 
> View attachment 2546866


SR vs DR


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

Hi guys,

Just a quick update on my RAM situation:

*Setup*

Strix Z690-A D4 BIOS 1003
G.SKILL 2 x 16 GB DR 4000 C16 B-Die
12700K @ 4.7 P 3.6 E Uncore 3.6

*4000 C16 @ XMP I 1.40 V Gear 1 CR 2T*

VDDQ Auto (1.20)
VCCSA 1.15

*Unstable. Tried increasing VCCSA but to no avail.

3800 C16 @ XMP I 1.40 V Gear 1 CR 2T*

VDDQ Auto (1.20)
VCCSA 1.15

*Stable*

Not sure what else I can do to get 4000 C16 stable.


----------



## edkieferlp

Anyone know if VCCSA and VDDQ TX need to be close voltage values like ib older platforms (VCCSA and VCCIO)?


----------



## edkieferlp

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Just a quick update on my RAM situation:
> 
> *Setup*
> 
> Strix Z690-A D4 BIOS 1003
> G.SKILL 2 x 16 GB DR 4000 C16 B-Die
> 12700K @ 4.7 P 3.6 E Uncore 3.6
> 
> *4000 C16 @ XMP I 1.40 V Gear 1 CR 2T*
> 
> VDDQ Auto (1.20)
> VCCSA 1.15
> 
> *Unstable. Tried increasing VCCSA but to no avail.
> 
> 3800 C16 @ XMP I 1.40 V Gear 1 CR 2T*
> 
> VDDQ Auto (1.20)
> VCCSA 1.15
> 
> *Stable*
> 
> Not sure what else I can do to get 4000 C16 stable.


Did you try not using XMP and just enter primary timings manually?
Maybe raise Vdimm a bit, 1.42 etc


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

edkieferlp said:


> Did you try not using XMP and just enter primary timings manually?
> Maybe raise Vdimm a bit, 1.42 etc


Only the primary timings are set with XMP I. Yes, I think it's the IMC that's the limiting factor not the DRAM voltage.


----------



## postem

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Only the primary timings are set with XMP I. Yes, I think it's the IMC that's the limiting factor not the DRAM voltage.


Much probably. I managed to get my kit on bios 1003 tuf to lower cl to 15 but bizarrely I must keep it 15-18-18-38 else I get errors. Maximum i can get with is 3900, probably due to 12700k Imc. I got a deal to get a 12900kf, probably will get it, lower vcore plus better Imc, probably. My 12700k also is unstable on cb23 on 1.3v.


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

postem said:


> Much probably. I managed to get my kit on bios 1003 tuf to lower cl to 15 but bizarrely I must keep it 15-18-18-38 else I get errors. Maximum i can get with is 3900, probably due to 12700k Imc. I got a deal to get a 12900kf, probably will get it, lower vcore plus better Imc, probably. My 12700k also is unstable on cb23 on 1.3v.


Let us know how you get on. Could tempt me to get a 12900K(F) myself.


----------



## acoustic

I would wait. Not much point in upgrading from a 12700K to a 12900K considering the extra E-cores in real-world gaming performance don't contribute much, and the additional mem OC from a _potentially_ better IMC may add an extra 5%.

13th gen will be much more refined, I think.


----------



## postem

acoustic said:


> I would wait. Not much point in upgrading from a 12700K to a 12900K considering the extra E-cores in real-world gaming performance don't contribute much, and the additional mem OC from a _potentially_ better IMC may add an extra 5%.
> 
> 13th gen will be much more refined, I think.


Yeah I know, to be fair I'm not gaming much, probably even not intensive games like civ, it's much more about the tuning, testing itch. I'm waiting for a 420 aio, at this point I'm doing more time testing hardware than playing.

So far I think the 12900 is much more binned vcore wise


----------



## Cam1

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Just a quick update on my RAM situation:
> 
> *Setup*
> 
> Strix Z690-A D4 BIOS 1003
> G.SKILL 2 x 16 GB DR 4000 C16 B-Die
> 12700K @ 4.7 P 3.6 E Uncore 3.6
> 
> *4000 C16 @ XMP I 1.40 V Gear 1 CR 2T*
> 
> VDDQ Auto (1.20)
> VCCSA 1.15
> 
> *Unstable. Tried increasing VCCSA but to no avail.
> 
> 3800 C16 @ XMP I 1.40 V Gear 1 CR 2T*
> 
> VDDQ Auto (1.20)
> VCCSA 1.15
> 
> *Stable*
> 
> Not sure what else I can do to get 4000 C16 stable.


 IMC limitation 

Or maybe actual Bios(es) is not optimized for 12700K, that most of 12700K owners experiencing, 4000 is not stable...


----------



## MacTavishPapa6

Cam1 said:


> IMC limitation
> 
> Or maybe actual Bios(es) is not optimized for 12700K, that most of 12700K owners experiencing, 4000 is not stable...


 well there is that too!


----------



## postem

Cam1 said:


> IMC limitation
> 
> Or maybe actual Bios(es) is not optimized for 12700K, that most of 12700K owners experiencing, 4000 is not stable...


Cam I was considering to get a memory kit like the one on your sig. How max frequency and timings you got?


----------



## shrimpmaster

MacTavishPapa6 said:


> Hi guys,
> 
> Just a quick update on my RAM situation:
> 
> *Setup*
> 
> Strix Z690-A D4 BIOS 1003
> G.SKILL 2 x 16 GB DR 4000 C16 B-Die
> 12700K @ 4.7 P 3.6 E Uncore 3.6
> 
> *4000 C16 @ XMP I 1.40 V Gear 1 CR 2T*
> 
> VDDQ Auto (1.20)
> VCCSA 1.15
> 
> *Unstable. Tried increasing VCCSA but to no avail.
> 
> 3800 C16 @ XMP I 1.40 V Gear 1 CR 2T*
> 
> VDDQ Auto (1.20)
> VCCSA 1.15
> 
> *Stable*
> 
> Not sure what else I can do to get 4000 C16 stable.


Try 3866mhz or 3900mhz.
For me 3866mhz actually has a bit better perf in games, I guess 133:100 ratios are better.
I don't even need more than 1.2v vccsa for IMC to be stable, but 4000mhz is not stable no matter what.


----------



## Cam1

postem said:


> Cam I was considering to get a memory kit like the one on your sig. How max frequency and timings you got?


Bscool is using this Kit, look at his posts.
For now i did a safe tuning in a few minutes.. and it's stable.


----------



## postem

Cam1 said:


> Bscool is using this Kit, look at his posts.
> For now i did a safe tuning in a few minutes.. and it's stable.


Hum not so far from mine 50-52ns and it's a much better kit than my ballistix.


----------



## Tradition

shrimpmaster said:


> Try 3866mhz or 3900mhz.
> For me 3866mhz actually has a bit better perf in games, I guess 133:100 ratios are better.
> I don't even need more than 1.2v vccsa for IMC to be stable, but 4000mhz is not stable no matter what.


my 12700k is exactly the same
3866 Tm5 1:20 hours pass 
3900 TM5 fails at 40m
4000 TM5 fails imedialy


----------



## shrimpmaster

Tradition said:


> my 12700k is exactly the same
> 3866 Tm5 1:20 hours pass
> 3900 TM5 fails at 40m
> 4000 TM5 fails imedialy
> View attachment 2547302


Mine is not the same. 3900 easy pass, even with only 1.2v sa.

4000 fails with 1.45v sa takes like 20min to error. With 1.3v or below errors fast


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

Antsu said:


> I've found E-cores to be useless for gaming, as pretty much nothing I've tried scales beyond 8 threads. Geniuinely curious if you've found a (gaming) situation where they do something.





truehighroller1 said:


> Seemed stable. Was playing warzone for awhile. I'll go higher once I get a chance to play with it some more. I've been recertifying at my work all week. Doing five certs at once isn't easy.. I'll probably be busy into next week honestly. Just turned the ecores off and turned the ring up to 4.9 tonight. Ran those couple little test, and started paying warzone.


on warzone if I deactivate the ecores I lose many fps, almost 30%


----------



## truehighroller1

IIISLIDEIII said:


> on warzone if I deactivate the ecores I lose many fps, almost 30%


Yep. Same here. I think games optimized do worse. Makes sense. I even went up to 5ghz cache same thing.


----------



## IIISLIDEIII

truehighroller1 said:


> Yep. Same here. I think games optimized do worse. Makes sense. I even went up to 5ghz cache same thing.


maybe because it uses all cores, I haven't tried yet but maybe by changing the value of "renderworkercount" you can tell it how many cores to use, maybe reducing it to 8 can help, maybe .....


----------



## Man4cl

I'll try CL14 tomorrow.


----------



## truehighroller1

IIISLIDEIII said:


> maybe because it uses all cores, I haven't tried yet but maybe by changing the value of "renderworkercount" you can tell it how many cores to use, maybe reducing it to 8 can help, maybe .....


Might try that sometime soon. Still certifying at work. I've been at it for three days so far because of the winter storm that swept through this area. I had two days off last week. One more cert to get through then comes the hands on parts of those five certs 😂.


----------



## Agent-A01

shrimpmaster said:


> Mine is not the same. 3900 easy pass, even with only 1.2v sa.
> 
> 4000 fails with 1.45v sa takes like 20min to error. With 1.3v or below errors fast


That's just how it goes.

This 12900K i have requires 1.435v set for 4133.
Just dropping it to 4100 makes the SA voltage required to 1.36~


----------



## maxver0

Finally, I was able to get RTL's under control, thanks to the attached settings (gifs). I keep the RTL themselves on Auto and they just tighten themselves just fine, although now I am unable to run my 4000CL14-16-16 settings. I am running 3600CL13-13-13 instead. I am able to tighten rest of the subs as well, the performance appears to be almost the same - 59GB/s and ~53.7ns latency in AIDA. Hopefully stability will improve as well as I started getting bluescreens and errors in stress tests on 4000cl14 and even 4000cl16's.


----------



## postem

Agent-A01 said:


> That's just how it goes.
> 
> This 12900K i have requires 1.435v set for 4133.
> Just dropping it to 4100 makes the SA voltage required to 1.36~


Nice, got a 12900k for almost MSRP and it a wonder in Brazil with super taxes. Curious to find what frequency I can get with my current ballistix kit but I believe it will go above 4000, 12700k can't get stable 4000 no matter what I do.


----------



## Jabai

Hello, im new at OCing and decided to go with RAM first. Ive got 12700k prime z690-p d4 (bios 0605) F4-3200C16D-32GTZN. Managed to past testmem5 extreme 1h20m 3800Mhz 1.328 VCCAO, 1.426 DRAM. Default XMPII vs what ive got below. Is it worth it? Can it go better or nah and stick with default 0.98 VCCAO? Lowering 3200 timings even -1 : errors at 5 sec.


----------



## storm-chaser

ssgwright said:


> View attachment 2538137
> 
> 
> no issues here on my MSI pro getting 4000 on CR 1


What's the latency difference (if any) between ADL chips running DDR4 vs DDR5? 
Looks like we are seeing a substantial increase in latency, not that it matters, but still Im curious why this would be. Is this a typical result for ADL in terms of latency?


----------



## bscool

storm-chaser said:


> What's the latency difference (if any) between ADL chips running DDR4 vs DDR5?
> Looks like we are seeing a substantial increase in latency, not that it matters, but still Im curious why this would be. Is this a typical result for ADL in terms of latency?


Best i have seen for daily/memtest on 12th gen DDR4 low 40 to 42ns range and ddr5 upper 47 to 49ns. I have multiple systems from last few gens and 12th gen is a huge leap especially in benches.

The main game I play is csgo and i cannot tell any difference in using 12th gen ddr4 42ns vs z370//z390/z490 with latency in the 33 to 35ns range.


----------



## Jabai

Jabai said:


> Hello, im new at OCing and decided to go with RAM first. Ive got 12700k prime z690-p d4 (bios 0605) F4-3200C16D-32GTZN. Managed to past testmem5 extreme 1h20m 3800Mhz 1.328 VCCAO, 1.426 DRAM. Default XMPII vs what ive got below. Is it worth it? Can it go better or nah and stick with default 0.98 VCCAO? Lowering 3200 timings even -1 : errors at 5 sec.


Updated bios to 1008 results here (now its possible to operate with lower VCCSA). What can i improve without breaking anything


----------



## Taraquin

Even 3600 wasn`t stable gear 1 with the stupid locked SA-voltage, 3500cl14 for the win  I will get a better CPU-cooler to bring down temps, seems that can allow for better ram OC in gear 1 since SA reacts negatively to heat.


----------



## storm-chaser

bscool said:


> Best i have seen for daily/memtest on 12th gen DDR4 low 40 to 42ns range and ddr5 upper 47 to 49ns. I have multiple systems from last few gens and 12th gen is a huge leap especially in benches.


Got it. And yeah, people are already scoring over 900 in the single core CPUz benchmark. Really some hardcore muscle there. This is obviously why even with the die shrink the had to put more voltage to it. Or at least that's my guess anyway.


----------



## 51dueller

Longtime overclocker, first time poster. Previous systems include:
AMD Athlon XP-M 2000+ "Thoroughbred"
AMD Athlon 64 3200+ "Venice"
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 "Conroe"
Intel Core I5 2550K "Sandy Bridge"
Intel Core I5 6600K "Skylake"

And now I currently have a 12600K in an Asus Prime Z690-P WIFI D4 with GSKILL Ripjaws V 2x16gb F4-4000C18D-32GVK. Although I've always overclocked my systems, I usually just left my memory alone at normal rated speeds. I figured this time I'd give it a try and the 4000 c18 memory was cheaper than the 3600 c16 stuff locally. The latest 1008 bios is much improved over 605. Core voltage came down to 1.175v from 1.296v (stock settings) but system agent voltage left alone in auto still pushes 1.44v at 4000 speeds. E cores and ring ratio will run at 4.0 GHZ but will cause errors with any benchmark that uses AVX. My Noctua NH-D9L with two fans at 150w run it at 75'C and starts to throttle at 200w if you believe the figures from HWINFO64 (has hit 220w max). Kind of curious about the 120mm dual tower Noctua has coming out soon. The NH-D15 is a little too big for my liking. No interest in water cooling even though my Fractal Define 7 readily supports it.

Current Setup:
P cores - all - 5.0 GHZ AVX offset 1
E cores - all - 3.8 GHZ
Core V - 1.31 (adaptive mode, additional turbo mode voltage - auto, + 0.050)
Ring Ratio - Auto
TVB Voltage Optimizations - Enabled

DDR4 - 4000 XMP I
C18-22-22-42 2T
Gear 1
V - 1.4
System agent V - 1.2


----------



## dracktw

12900k 5.2 40 E RING - RING RATIO 42
z690 edge 
32gb DDR4 Oloy 
CPU CORE1.36v 
CPU SA VOLTAGE 1.27
DRAM 1.57
LLC 5


----------



## postem

51dueller said:


> Longtime overclocker, first time poster. Previous systems include:
> AMD Athlon XP-M 2000+ "Thoroughbred"
> AMD Athlon 64 3200+ "Venice"
> Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 "Conroe"
> Intel Core I5 2550K "Sandy Bridge"
> Intel Core I5 6600K "Skylake"
> 
> And now I currently have a 12600K in an Asus Prime Z690-P WIFI D4 with GSKILL Ripjaws V 2x16gb F4-4000C18D-32GVK. Although I've always overclocked my systems, I usually just left my memory alone at normal rated speeds. I figured this time I'd give it a try and the 4000 c18 memory was cheaper than the 3600 c16 stuff locally. The latest 1008 bios is much improved over 605. Core voltage came down to 1.175v from 1.296v (stock settings) but system agent voltage left alone in auto still pushes 1.44v at 4000 speeds. E cores and ring ratio will run at 4.0 GHZ but will cause errors with any benchmark that uses AVX. My Noctua NH-D9L with two fans at 150w run it at 75'C and starts to throttle at 200w if you believe the figures from HWINFO64 (has hit 220w max). Kind of curious about the 120mm dual tower Noctua has coming out soon. The NH-D15 is a little too big for my liking. No interest in water cooling even though my Fractal Define 7 readily supports it.
> 
> Current Setup:
> P cores - all - 5.0 GHZ AVX offset 1
> E cores - all - 3.8 GHZ
> Core V - 1.31 (adaptive mode, additional turbo mode voltage - auto, + 0.050)
> Ring Ratio - Auto
> TVB Voltage Optimizations - Enabled
> 
> DDR4 - 4000 XMP I
> C18-22-22-42 2T
> Gear 1
> V - 1.4
> System agent V - 1.2
> 
> View attachment 2548015


Default xmp no errors @ 4000?


----------



## MikeS3000

dracktw said:


> 12900k 5.2 40 E RING - RING RATIO 42
> z690 edge
> 32gb DDR4 Oloy
> CPU CORE1.36v
> CPU SA VOLTAGE 1.27
> DRAM 1.57
> LLC 5


Looks good. Can it pass Y-Cruncher 2.5B test?


----------



## 51dueller

postem said:


> Default xmp no errors @ 4000?


Default xmp profile. Only setting I changed was setting gear 1 instead of auto. The Trident Z Royal series is on the QVL list so I imagine the Ripjaws V version is essentially the same minus RGB. This memory doesn't really have tight timings. It might be a different story if it was Samsung instead of Hynix.









Here's a Y-Cruncher pass with HWINFO64 open.


----------



## bass junkie xl

bought this high end kit of 
F4-4000C16D-32GTRSA

4000 MHz cl 16-16-16-36 1.40v 
16gb x 2 

on my Strix d4 bios 903 I can run 
14-15-15-35 @ 1.55v / 1.32vccio / 1.35vddq.
gear 1 no issues , xmp worked to. 

my other kit of 8gb x 4 team group extreme can only do 4000 cl 15-15-15-32 1.55v 

did t play to much had to go to work 

RTL /iol is 71/71 were my 4000 c15 was 69/71 

weird


----------



## truehighroller1

bass junkie xl said:


> bought this high end kit of
> F4-4000C16D-32GTRSA
> 
> 4000 MHz cl 16-16-16-36 1.40v
> 16gb x 2
> 
> on my Strix d4 bios 903 I can run
> 14-15-15-35 @ 1.55v / 1.32vccio / 1.35vddq.
> gear 1 no issues , xmp worked to.
> 
> my other kit of 8gb x 4 team group extreme can only do 4000 cl 15-15-15-32 1.55v
> 
> did t play to much had to go to work
> 
> RTL /iol is 71/71 were my 4000 c15 was 69/71
> 
> weird


You can force it to retrain. Turn off fast boot and up the vscca a little.


----------



## bass junkie xl

well the new g.skill royal 32gb 16gb x2 4000 MHz cl 16-16-16-36 1.40v xmp passed 9 hrs of tm5 in the pics sorry for the bad quality no idea what happend. there pretty good so far 🙂 gear 1 38c max temp


----------



## bass junkie xl

update after a 12 hr shift at work came home and it passed a full 9 cycles of tm5 low temps to how does the aida scores look ?


----------



## edkieferlp

I noticed something with XMP II timings with Crucial Ballistix 3600- C16 mem, there two added values enabling XMP II, there the normal tRFC but now I also have t"RFC 2" and "tRFC 4" fields and they seem to be set to the XMP profile, meaning if I alter tRFC say from default of 631 to 585 the other ones don't change, they also don't change with ram speed.
So now I wonder if those should be altered when lowering the main tRFC
Here what the values looked like @XMP II
tRFC=631
tRFC 2=469
tRFC 4=289

Edit: I found this
tRFC 2 = tRFC / 1.346
tRFC 4 = tRFC 2 / 1.625


__
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/9o43j0

While the above link is about AMD MB when I plug in the values I have they do match up so I guess lowering them to match the new tRPC is ok?
tRFC=585
tRFC 2=435
tRFC 4=268


----------



## ghoula

bass junkie xl said:


> update after a 12 hr shift at work came home and it passed a full 9 cycles of tm5 low temps to how does the aida scores look ?
> View attachment 2548333
> View attachment 2548334


For me it would be acceptable for my notroyal 3200C14 kit. 
Can you please share a full bios settings dump? 
I'm not planning to disable Ecores, but going through it would be informative.
Thanks in advance.


----------



## bass junkie xl

ghoula said:


> For me it would be acceptable for my notroyal 3200C14 kit.
> Can you please share a full bios settings dump?
> I'm not planning to disable Ecores, but going through it would be informative.
> Thanks in advance.


you bet you want a Asus .CMO bios file or a FL bios profile .TXT ? or ss


----------



## ghoula

bass junkie xl said:


> you bet you want a Asus .CMO bios file or a FL bios profile .TXT ? or ss


a txt file would be perfect


----------



## bass junkie xl

ghoula said:


> a txt file would be perfect


Roger 
at work for 1.5 more hrs .... 12 hr night shifts


----------



## ghoula

bass junkie xl said:


> Roger
> at work for 1.5 more hrs .... 12 hr night shifts


no need for rush, i have to work as well for a few hours


----------



## bass junkie xl

ghoula said:


> no need for rush, i have to work as well for a few hours


here is the bios profile .txt im on Bios 901 Asus Strix D4 f
12900k @ 5.2 Pcores / 4.8 ring /Adaptive Voltage no offset / HT on/ E cores off / 32 gb 16 x 2 of G.skill royal 4000 c -16-16-16-36 1.4v @ 4000 cl-14-15-15-35 @ 1.55v 9 cycles tm5 stable in the above pictures


----------



## Ripper.e

Sorry of i write this as a reply, but i really need help...

I ve an i9 12900k and ddr4 4000 16 16 16 36..i can get it stable with 1.45 sa voltage...Will this voltage be dangerous? I mean Will it degrade fast the IMC ? I really like to know since i d like to keep my build few years...


----------



## ghoula

bass junkie xl said:


> here is the bios profile .txt im on Bios 901 Asus Strix D4 f
> 12900k @ 5.2 Pcores / 4.8 ring /Adaptive Voltage no offset / HT on/ E cores off / 32 gb 16 x 2 of G.skill royal 4000 c -16-16-16-36 1.4v @ 4000 cl-14-15-15-35 @ 1.55v 9 cycles tm5 stable in the above pictures


Thanks


----------



## ghoula

Ripper.e said:


> Sorry of i write this as a reply, but i really need help...
> 
> I ve an i9 12900k and ddr4 4000 16 16 16 36..i can get it stable with 1.45 sa voltage...Will this voltage be dangerous? I mean Will it degrade fast the IMC ? I really like to know since i d like to keep my build few years...


Don't write private message, I put together this system like a day ago, and i don't think that considers to be a long term experience  Mine does 4000C15 at 1.35V (under testing), so yours is higher, that's for sure.


----------



## Ripper.e

Ok..i ask sorry for that...if i set 1.35 as yours could it be considered safe?


----------



## BroadPwns

Hey, I'm on the verge of jumping into a 12700k, I've only got a single question. Did anyone happen to compare A-Pro and Strix (both DDR4) in terms of overclockability? Mostly RAM, I know from Buildzoid that MSIs CPU voltage regulation is top-notch. I'm planning on making a test for myself once I got some spare cash on the Asus prime example of overpriced e-waste, but right now I can only afford one of them and I intend to return one of them anyway. I don't need half of what Strix offers in terms of unnecessary extras, including wifi and I can't be bothered to deal with cancerous Aorus' bios. I'd make an exception for Aorus Pro DDR4, but it simply vanished into a void, it's unobtainable.


----------



## rahimdamji29

does anyone have experience on the aorus z690i ddr4 ultra itx? im running a 16gb 4400 19 19 19 39 kit with manual timings, ive been running 3733 14 14 14 34, also been trying to stabilize 4000 15 15 15 28.... i know gigabyte boards are very bad on mem right now. dont tell me... i know.... but want to know if anyone has been able to get 4000 14 14 14 34, thats ultimately my goal.


----------



## Kryuger

Is my motherboard the limiting factor to my memory OC?
Z690 Aorus Elite D4

Using Samsung B Die that was able to achieve 4133 CL16 on my older Z490.

Right now on my 12900K, I'm able to run 4000 CL16-18-18-CR2 with
VCCSA 1.121v
DRAM 1.416v
VDDQ 1.270v

I can post at 4100 CL16, but no matter the IMC voltage, DRAM voltage or looser timings, I get errors in OCCT and TM5 within 15-30 minutes. I'm unable to post at 4133 and higher, even on Gear 2 and high or low voltages.. tight or loose timings.

I'm guessing it's the motherboard, as from the looks of it, VCCSA 1.121v is pretty good stable for 4000 Gear 1.


----------



## MikeS3000

Kryuger said:


> Is my motherboard the limiting factor to my memory OC?
> Z690 Aorus Elite D4
> 
> Using Samsung B Die that was able to achieve 4133 CL16 on my older Z490.
> 
> Right now on my 12900K, I'm able to run 4000 CL16-18-18-CR2 with
> VCCSA 1.121v
> DRAM 1.416v
> VDDQ 1.270v
> 
> I can post at 4100 CL16, but no matter the IMC voltage, DRAM voltage or looser timings, I get errors in OCCT and TM5 within 15-30 minutes. I'm unable to post at 4133 and higher, even on Gear 2 and high or low voltages.. tight or loose timings.
> 
> I'm guessing it's the motherboard, as from the looks of it, VCCSA 1.121v is pretty good stable for 4000 Gear 1.


It's not necessarily the motherboard. I can't speak for Gigabyte since I run the Asus Strix-A but my guess is the IMC is the culprit. I am DDR 4000 stable on my 12900k. I can boot 4100 and 4133 however I fail y-cruncher nearly instantly at any VCCSA voltage. I'm currently running 1.35v (board auto settings) at 4000 and it's stable. If I played with BCLK I would say that my maximum stable is somewhere between DDR 4000 and 4100 but it's not worth the effort for me.


----------



## postem

MikeS3000 said:


> It's not necessarily the motherboard. I can't speak for Gigabyte since I run the Asus Strix-A but my guess is the IMC is the culprit. I am DDR 4000 stable on my 12900k. I can boot 4100 and 4133 however I fail y-cruncher nearly instantly at any VCCSA voltage. I'm currently running 1.35v (board auto settings) at 4000 and it's stable. If I played with BCLK I would say that my maximum stable is somewhere between DDR 4000 and 4100 but it's not worth the effort for me.


Memory support from IMC got a lot worse from coffee lake to 11/12 gen


----------



## truehighroller1

postem said:


> Memory support from IMC got a lot worse from coffee lake to 11/12 gen





MikeS3000 said:


> It's not necessarily the motherboard. I can't speak for Gigabyte since I run the Asus Strix-A but my guess is the IMC is the culprit. I am DDR 4000 stable on my 12900k. I can boot 4100 and 4133 however I fail y-cruncher nearly instantly at any VCCSA voltage. I'm currently running 1.35v (board auto settings) at 4000 and it's stable. If I played with BCLK I would say that my maximum stable is somewhere between DDR 4000 and 4100 but it's not worth the effort for me.


I can load up 4133 and pass all test on my rog strix d4 wifi but my apex can't load over 6400 mhz with ease anyway on the apex with ddr5 same cpu. I think it's the MB's


----------



## postem

truehighroller1 said:


> I can load up 4133 and pass all test on my rog strix d4 wifi but my apex can't load over 6400 mhz with ease anyway on the apex with ddr5 same cpu. I think it's the MB's


You do know the the same chip have separated memory controllers? Actually 12 gen have 1 Imc for each channel for DDR4 and ddr5. Also it's possible to have differences from motherboard I'm not ruling it out, as we saw on release that anyone not on Asus was having a bad time with ddr4


----------



## truehighroller1

postem said:


> You do know the the same chip have separated memory controllers? Actually 12 gen have 1 Imc for each channel for DDR4 and ddr5. Also it's possible to have differences from motherboard I'm not ruling it out, as we saw on release that anyone not on Asus was having a bad time with ddr4


I bought two more cpu's and a gskill set of 6400 memory and, no difference. I also aplied different mounting pressure today " backed it off a 1/4 turn each screw " with the brand new ek block made for 1700, no difference. I've tried everything to no avail but the mb.

Other people are pointing out that their second apex works way better then their first one that they bought.


----------



## solon

i risked buying another kit flare x 3200c14.now with 4 dimms i lost 100Mhz on imc.
before 2x8Gb 4000C16 1t sa1.23
now 4x8Gb 3800C15 2t sa1.18


----------



## mickyc357

I'm absolutely struggling with an aorus pro ddr4 with all the problems buildzoid experienced in his video even on their newest f7 bios. I can get gskill 4266c17 stable at 3733 on a 12900k and that's it. Everything up to 4000 won't even post but then 4000 is randomly fine with bad RTLs. The board has terrible training issues and really random behaviour. It won't even run xmp in gear 2 without errors straight away. 

Out of the Asus strix a and MSI edge which one is the better combo for memory and cpu overclocking ?


----------



## Kryuger

mickyc357 said:


> I'm absolutely struggling with an aorus pro ddr4 with all the problems buildzoid experienced in his video even on their newest f7 bios. I can get gskill 4266c17 stable at 3733 on a 12900k and that's it. Everything up to 4000 won't even post but then 4000 is randomly fine with bad RTLs. The board has terrible training issues and really random behaviour. It won't even run xmp in gear 2 without errors straight away.
> 
> Out of the Asus strix a and MSI edge which one is the better combo for memory and cpu overclocking ?


I've got the Z690 Aorus Elite D4. I had the exact same issues for memory frequency and booting. Setting these settings under Advanced Memory Settings allowed me to post properly without all the issues. Haven't confirmed if it helps anyone else on Gigabyte as of yet. (Ignoring my Memory Boot Mode setting). My RTLs are 75 CH/A and 83 CH/B and I know on my Z490 they were around 69/71.


----------



## mbaskett95

Hello everyone. 

This is my first intel build so I am new to intel overclocking.

I have gone as pretty much the best I could get following the old ddr4 mem overclocking guide.

However, I am dissatisfied by my results as I have seen people get sub 50ns latency.

Any input would be appreciated thanks,


----------



## postem

mbaskett95 said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> This is my first intel build so I am new to intel overclocking.
> 
> I have gone as pretty much the best I could get following the old ddr4 mem overclocking guide.
> 
> However, I am dissatisfied by my results as I have seen people get sub 50ns latency.
> 
> Any input would be appreciated thanks,


Hi what kit are you using? Your timings are much better than mine and you are getting same results did you run Aida straight after boot? If you do several things or have open processes latency will naturally increase


----------



## Mobama

postem said:


> Hi what kit are you using? Your timings are much better than mine and you are getting same results did you run Aida straight after boot? If you do several things or have open processes latency will naturally increase


Aida 64 is not accurate at all on ADL, would recommend the usage of intel memory latency checker as it is much more accurate in this sense for both bandwidth and latency.


----------



## mbaskett95

postem said:


> Hi what kit are you using? Your timings are much better than mine and you are getting same results did you run Aida straight after boot? If you do several things or have open processes latency will naturally increase


Heya, im using these Team Group Xtreem "8Pack Edition" 32GB (4x8GB) DDR4 PC4-28800C16 3600MHz Quad Channel Kit - Black | OcUK (overclockers.co.uk) . 

This is a fresh install of Windows 11 and I've disabled all start up programs and ended all processes that I don't need


----------



## mbaskett95

Mobama said:


> Aida 64 is not accurate at all on ADL, would recommend the usage of intel memory latency checker as it is much more accurate in this sense for both bandwidth and latency.


I cant seem to find the MLC.exe download mentioned on intel's website to run this


----------



## Kryuger

mbaskett95 said:


> I cant seem to find the MLC.exe download mentioned on intel's website to run this


Scroll down to the very bottom









Intel® Memory Latency Checker v3.9a


Intel® Memory Latency Checker (Intel® MLC) is a tool used to measure memory latencies and b/w, and how they change with increasing load on the system.




www.intel.com


----------



## sneida

anyone tried the new beta bios yet? (not too keen on testing it after 1003 gave me massive problems with ram stable clocks)






TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 | Motherboards | ASUS Gloabl


ASUS TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 is an Intel® Z690 (LGA 1700) ATX gaming motherboard with 16 DrMOS power stages, PCIe 5.0, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type-C®, and Aura Sync RGB lighting.




www.asus.com





TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BIOS 1201

Improve system performance and stability.
Improve system compatibility for non-K CPU.


----------



## X909

Yes, see the Strix D4 Thread. It works like a charm on my TUF.


----------



## shrimpmaster

sneida said:


> anyone tried the new beta bios yet? (not too keen on testing it after 1003 gave me massive problems with ram stable clocks)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 | Motherboards | ASUS Gloabl
> 
> 
> ASUS TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 is an Intel® Z690 (LGA 1700) ATX gaming motherboard with 16 DrMOS power stages, PCIe 5.0, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type-C®, and Aura Sync RGB lighting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BIOS 1201
> 
> Improve system performance and stability.
> Improve system compatibility for non-K CPU.


I did. Didn't bother to test stability since I has having problems getting rtls to align properly, even with auto subs on DR ram.

For me 1003 started having problems aligning rtls. 1201 just made it worse.


----------



## pauldgroot

I'm wondering which of these two kits is the better bin? I think they should be the same but I'm not sure.
3600C14-15-15-35 @ 1.45V








F4-3600C14D-32GVK - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 CL14-15-15-35 1.45V 32GB (2x16GB) Ripjaws V series DDR4 DRAM memory is designed for sleek aesthetics and performance, making it an ideal choice for building a new PC system or for upgrading your system memory.




www.gskill.com




3600C16-16-16-36 1.35V @








F4-3600C16D-32GTZN - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.


Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 CL16-16-16-36 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB) Engineered and optimized for full compatibility on the latest AMD Ryzen platforms, Trident Z Neo brings unparalleled DRAM memory performance and vibrant RGB lighting to any gaming PC or workstation with latest AMD Ryzen CPUs and AMD DDR4...




www.gskill.com


----------



## bscool

pauldgroot said:


> I'm wondering which of these two kits is the better bin? I think they should be the same but I'm not sure.
> 3600C14-15-15-35 @ 1.45V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-3600C14D-32GVK - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 CL14-15-15-35 1.45V 32GB (2x16GB) Ripjaws V series DDR4 DRAM memory is designed for sleek aesthetics and performance, making it an ideal choice for building a new PC system or for upgrading your system memory.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 3600C16-16-16-36 1.35V @
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> F4-3600C16D-32GTZN - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> 
> 
> Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600 CL16-16-16-36 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB) Engineered and optimized for full compatibility on the latest AMD Ryzen platforms, Trident Z Neo brings unparalleled DRAM memory performance and vibrant RGB lighting to any gaming PC or workstation with latest AMD Ryzen CPUs and AMD DDR4...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.gskill.com


3600c14 "should" be better but still up to luck, 3600c16 could be better. 

I would go for 3600c14 or 40000c16-16-16 if those are available for a decent price.

Unless you want simplicity of XMP then either 3600 will work.


----------



## pauldgroot

bscool said:


> 3600c14 "should" be better but still up to luck, 3600c16 could be better.
> 
> I would go for 3600c14 or 40000c16-16-16 if those are available for a decent price.
> 
> Unless you want simplicity of XMP then either 3600 will work.


Are you sure, since the C14 kit doesn't have straight 14's (14-15-15) and needs 0.1V more. Can't the C16 kit with 0.1V added do the same? I plan to OC either kit.


----------



## Asus11

im back after a lil while, currently jumped to 12th gen, 12700k + edge ddr4 msi, the m.2 standoff only solder tacked into place, it came out the mobo when tightening the m.2, then it kept giving me random crashes, now i have a msi tomhawk ddr4 and it was having alot of problems, can only run xmp 3600 with 1.4v, and im not sure if its still stable, also got random crashes everything freshly installed etc , still don't rate the build quality on these mobos this gen seem cheap with alot of metal on the boards to make them feel heavy, im on latest bios 

given this I went and ordered the strix z690-a as it seems like it was a solid reliable board? still deciding whether to install it and keep it

just wondered if anyone here has msi tomahawk or edge and encountered alot of problems? and is the strix d4 the most solid versatile overclockable mobo?

ty in advance


----------



## bscool

pauldgroot said:


> Are you sure, since the C14 kit doesn't have straight 14's (14-15-15) and needs 0.1V more. Can't the C16 kit with 0.1V added do the same? I plan to OC either kit.


I have had all those kits and for me 4000c16-16-16 kit was the best bin. I know a few people who also used them recently on z690 strix d4 and they did [email protected] with tight subs gear 1 and memtest/Karhu stable. 

The 36000c14-15-15 also could do [email protected] on Strix d4 and memtest stable. Dont have 3600c16-16-16 kit anymore to test. It will still be lotto/luck with any of them, some are better than others.


----------



## bscool

Asus11 said:


> im back after a lil while, currently jumped to 12th gen, 12700k + edge ddr4 msi, the m.2 standoff only solder tacked into place, it came out the mobo when tightening the m.2, then it kept giving me random crashes, now i have a msi tomhawk ddr4 and it was having alot of problems, can only run xmp 3600 with 1.4v, and im not sure if its still stable, also got random crashes everything freshly installed etc , still don't rate the build quality on these mobos this gen seem cheap with alot of metal on the boards to make them feel heavy, im on latest bios
> 
> given this I went and ordered the strix z690-a as it seems like it was a solid reliable board? still deciding whether to install it and keep it
> 
> just wondered if anyone here has msi tomahawk or edge and encountered alot of problems? and is the strix d4 the most solid versatile overclockable mobo?
> 
> ty in advance


A few people have had both msi and strix and strix did better for DR b die oc if you care about that.


----------



## pauldgroot

bscool said:


> I have had all those kits and for me 4000c16-16-16 kit was the best bin. I know a few people who also used them recently on z690 strix d4 and they did [email protected] with tight subs gear 1 and memtest/Karhu stable.
> 
> The 36000c14-15-15 also could do [email protected] on Strix d4 and memtest stable. Dont have 3600c16-16-16 kit anymore to test. It will still be lotto/luck with any of them, some are better than others.


You're talking about this kit for example?


----------



## bscool

pauldgroot said:


> You're talking about this kit for example?


I have had all 3 kits. Not sure what you mean. It is a lotto buying any kit. Just because it is a better bin does not mean in actual testing it will be better. Buying higher bin kit increases you chances but some of the best bins come from 3200c14 kits also.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> some of the best bins come from 3200c14 kits also.


Not wrong there. Bought a flare-x kit(16gb) for a cheap z490-v board, the cheapest ASUS board they made, for a 10900K setup.
Achieved 4000 C16-16-16-32 stable first try with only 1.4v


----------



## geriatricpollywog

pauldgroot said:


> Are you sure, since the C14 kit doesn't have straight 14's (14-15-15) and needs 0.1V more. Can't the C16 kit with 0.1V added do the same? I plan to OC either kit.


The c14 kit has higher voltage tolerance, which is a good thing.


----------



## NDS322

I need some advice about sub timing. Does anyone want to recommend it ?
I set primary timing to CL17-17-17-37, DRAM 1.5V, SA 1.25V, VDDQ 1.25V only. Others are Auto
My memory is SS B-Die and OC Bus 4400MH and CL17 is max for 1.5 Voltage, I don't want to use a higher voltage of more than 1.5V

Thank 😚


----------



## postem

sneida said:


> anyone tried the new beta bios yet? (not too keen on testing it after 1003 gave me massive problems with ram stable clocks)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 | Motherboards | ASUS Gloabl
> 
> 
> ASUS TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 is an Intel® Z690 (LGA 1700) ATX gaming motherboard with 16 DrMOS power stages, PCIe 5.0, four M.2 slots, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type-C®, and Aura Sync RGB lighting.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS D4 BIOS 1201
> 
> Improve system performance and stability.
> Improve system compatibility for non-K CPU.


1003 didnt improved anything for me i guess im being held by the micron chip and/or the cpu. Still, waiting for people test it 1201, not confident to upgrade.


----------



## postem

Did anyone tried Agard memory? Im considering to get 2x kits either 4000 or 3600, at least advertised timings are good, but its so obscure they dont even have an website. Due to customs (almost always chinese goods arent taxed here) its came as almost half a top kit from gskill at 3600-14-14-14 or 4000-16-16-16









111.68US $ 30% OFF|Asgard Ddr4 Ram Bragi V3 Memoria Ram Ddr4 8gbx2 3600mhz 4000mhz Specially Selected B-die Cl14 Cl16 Desktop Memory Mirror Design - Rams - AliExpress


Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com




www.aliexpress.com


----------



## giggidy

bass junkie xl said:


> bought this high end kit of
> F4-4000C16D-32GTRSA
> 
> 4000 MHz cl 16-16-16-36 1.40v
> 16gb x 2
> 
> on my Strix d4 bios 903 I can run
> 14-15-15-35 @ 1.55v / 1.32vccio / 1.35vddq.
> gear 1 no issues , xmp worked to.
> 
> my other kit of 8gb x 4 team group extreme can only do 4000 cl 15-15-15-32 1.55v
> 
> did t play to much had to go to work
> 
> RTL /iol is 71/71 were my 4000 c15 was 69/71
> 
> weird


What CPU are you running with that kit? I have the F4-4000C16D-32GTZRA and 12700kf and can't boot in stock xmp (4000mhz 16-16-16-36 @ 1.4V) in Gear 1, it always defaults to Gear 2.

Thanks!


----------



## bscool

giggidy said:


> What CPU are you running with that kit? I have the F4-4000C16D-32GTZRA and 12700kf and can't boot in stock xmp (4000mhz 16-16-16-36 @ 1.4V) in Gear 1, it always defaults to Gear 2.
> 
> Thanks!


You have to manually select gear 1 for anything over 3600 on most MB as far as I know. Are you saying it wont boot even when you select gear 1?


----------



## rahimdamji29

giggidy said:


> What CPU are you running with that kit? I have the F4-4000C16D-32GTZRA and 12700kf and can't boot in stock xmp (4000mhz 16-16-16-36 @ 1.4V) in Gear 1, it always defaults to Gear 2.
> 
> Thanks!


Honestly my max with my aorus z690i was 3733 14 14 14 28. That’s with a lot of tweaking. On dual rank 32gb I can go 4200 15 15 15 28 max with single rank bdie


----------



## bass junkie xl

giggidy said:


> What CPU are you running with that kit? I have the F4-4000C16D-32GTZRA and 12700kf and can't boot in stock xmp (4000mhz 16-16-16-36 @ 1.4V) in Gear 1, it always defaults to Gear 2.
> 
> Thanks!


12900k


----------



## Taraquin

giggidy said:


> What CPU are you running with that kit? I have the F4-4000C16D-32GTZRA and 12700kf and can't boot in stock xmp (4000mhz 16-16-16-36 @ 1.4V) in Gear 1, it always defaults to Gear 2.
> 
> Thanks!


Have you raised SA and VDDQ voltage? For 4000 gear 1 I think you need atleast 1.1V SA, probably more.


----------



## rent0n

Now that I RMA'd my Apex, it was time for the Strix D4 to make some troubles.

I started with 0707 a few months back, when I first tested this board and memory performance was alright. Here is the AIDA screenshot from the beginning, where I had only tightened the primaries.








The board has been sitting in the box ever since, because I have been tweaking some DDR5 modules, but I decided to give it another shot yesterday and started experiencing some weird performance issues straight away, similiar to those found in the Z690 0901 thread on the ROG forums. Post.








I know these are XMP settings with [email protected], only Ring Down bin disabled, but you get my point. Could also do some 4200C15 testing, that gives me low 60s for the latency, which is absurd.

What I have tried so far:

clear CMOS button and battery removal
BIOS 0707, 0812, 0901, 1003, 1201
3 different CPUS - 12900K SP88, 12900K SP89, 12700KF
3 different b-die kits*
less tension on the AIO pump-block and retention bracket
inspecting the CPU socket for damaged pins
inspecting the motherboard standoffs and the whole build basically

_*Another thing I noticed, when working with 0812 is that my PC would only boot with 2x16GB DR b-die. Installing either of the two 2x8GB SR kits I used would give me an orange DRAM LED and the system would not post - only GPU fans running. This was after I cleared CMOS multiple times. First thing that came to my mind was re-seating the CPU and checking if I had overtightened something, but nothing helped._

!) 1003 would give me BSODs on XMP directly after posting - no Windows, nothing


----------



## edkieferlp

rent0n said:


> Now that I RMA'd my Apex, it was time for the Strix D4 to make some troubles.
> 
> I started with 0707 a few months back, when I first tested this board and memory performance was alright. Here is the AIDA screenshot from the beginning, where I had only tightened the primaries.
> View attachment 2550556
> 
> 
> The board has been sitting in the box ever since, because I have been tweaking some DDR5 modules, but I decided to give it another shot yesterday and started experiencing some weird performance issues straight away, similiar to those found in the Z690 0901 thread on the ROG forums. Post.
> View attachment 2550558
> 
> 
> I know these are XMP settings with [email protected], only Ring Down bin disabled, but you get my point. Could also do some 4200C15 testing, that gives me low 60s for the latency, which is absurd.
> 
> What I have tried so far:
> 
> clear CMOS button and battery removal
> BIOS 0707, 0812, 0901, 1003, 1201
> 3 different CPUS - 12900K SP88, 12900K SP89, 12700KF
> 3 different b-die kits*
> less tension on the AIO pump-block and retention bracket
> inspecting the CPU socket for damaged pins
> inspecting the motherboard standoffs and the whole build basically
> 
> _*Another thing I noticed, when working with 0812 is that my PC would only boot with 2x16GB DR b-die. Installing either of the two 2x8GB SR kits I used would give me an orange DRAM LED and the system would not post - only GPU fans running. This was after I cleared CMOS multiple times. First thing that came to my mind was re-seating the CPU and checking if I had overtightened something, but nothing helped._
> 
> !) When I took the board out yesterday and got into the BIOS I noticed another weird thing, I could not anymore select 4133MHz as the memory speed, when in 1:2 (Gear 1) mode. When I set everything to manual, I can choose 4133MHz, but the 1:2 mode gets changed to Auto. This was NOT the case, when I tested the board a few months back, because I had been benching 4133C14 in Gear 1.
> 
> !) 1003 would give me BSODs on XMP directly after posting - no Windows, nothing


For me gear mode 1 = 1:1 on memory speed.

In other words memory frequency = memory controller frequency, for me running 3866 = 1933 for both.

Memory Controller : DRAM Frequency Ratio [1:1]
DRAM Frequency [DDR4-3867MHz]


----------



## rent0n

edkieferlp said:


> For me gear mode 1 = 1:1 on memory speed.
> 
> In other words memory frequency = memory controller frequency, for me running 3866 = 1933 for both.
> 
> Memory Controller : DRAM Frequency Ratio [1:1]
> DRAM Frequency [DDR4-3867MHz]


My bad, 1:1 for Gear 1, but the above screenshots are in Gear 1 anyways.


----------



## bscool

rent0n said:


> Now that I RMA'd my Apex, it was time for the Strix D4 to make some troubles.
> 
> I started with 0707 a few months back, when I first tested this board and memory performance was alright. Here is the AIDA screenshot from the beginning, where I had only tightened the primaries.
> View attachment 2550556
> 
> 
> The board has been sitting in the box ever since, because I have been tweaking some DDR5 modules, but I decided to give it another shot yesterday and started experiencing some weird performance issues straight away, similiar to those found in the Z690 0901 thread on the ROG forums. Post.
> View attachment 2550558
> 
> 
> I know these are XMP settings with [email protected], only Ring Down bin disabled, but you get my point. Could also do some 4200C15 testing, that gives me low 60s for the latency, which is absurd.
> 
> What I have tried so far:
> 
> clear CMOS button and battery removal
> BIOS 0707, 0812, 0901, 1003, 1201
> 3 different CPUS - 12900K SP88, 12900K SP89, 12700KF
> 3 different b-die kits*
> less tension on the AIO pump-block and retention bracket
> inspecting the CPU socket for damaged pins
> inspecting the motherboard standoffs and the whole build basically
> 
> _*Another thing I noticed, when working with 0812 is that my PC would only boot with 2x16GB DR b-die. Installing either of the two 2x8GB SR kits I used would give me an orange DRAM LED and the system would not post - only GPU fans running. This was after I cleared CMOS multiple times. First thing that came to my mind was re-seating the CPU and checking if I had overtightened something, but nothing helped._
> 
> !) 1003 would give me BSODs on XMP directly after posting - no Windows, nothing


You 2nd screenshot is gear 2. CR1 so that is a hint. Unlikely you can run cr1/1t gear 1 on DR b die at those speeds and be stable. Hence the much higher latency.

Post or look at Asrock timing with the same Aida64 and you can see gear mode 1 or 2.

When you set XMP it will automatically set gear 2 if you go over 3600mhz. You need to set it to gear 1 after setting XMP and then manually set frequency as each change will set other setting to auto. Been like this for years.

Screen example


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> You 2nd screenshot is gear 2. CR1 so that is a hint. Unlikely you can run cr1/1t gear 1 on DR b die at those speeds and be stable. Hence the much higher latency.
> 
> Post or look at Asrock timing with the same Aida64 and you can see gear mode 1 or 2.
> 
> When you set XMP it will automatically set gear 2 if you go over 3600mhz. You need to set it to gear 1 after setting XMP and then manually set frequency as each change will set other setting to auto. Been like this for years.
> 
> Screen example


yup, I noticed that too, when I went from XMP to manual higher freq's the bios defaulted to gear2, I had to manually set it to gear 1 (!:1).


----------



## SuperCloud

Hey guys, I've been following this thread and seeing everyone's amazing results. I need help.

I have recently bought 12600K and MSI Pro z690-A ddr4.
Mobo bios came with 1.1

Ram: Team Force 3200 CL14: 14-14-14-31 16GB (2x8GB)

My cpu is at stock settings, all mobo settings are at stock.

Using auto for all timings except

Primary: 16-20-20-40 and tcwl at 16.

I was able to OC memory to 4000 on gear 1 and 1T.
No errors on TM5 Extreme and y cruncher and prime95 large FFT and occt.

Dram volt: 1.50, vccsa 1.23, vddq auto

I tried higher like 4100 or 4133, it would boot, but so many errors on TM5 Extreme antaa profile.

I updated to 1.28 beta bios now I can do 4100 and kept every setting same in 1.1 bios. No errors.

Now at 4100mhz using 1.28 bios:

Dram volt: 1.60, vccsa 1.34, vddq auto

I tightened trrds 4, trrdl 6, tfaw 16, no errors did all same tests
Then tried trfc 349 no errors except in prime95 large FFT it kept crashing one worker.

Then I tried tRTP 10, y cruncher 2.5b failed at redundant memory.

I didn't do any tests.
Is this a problem with my memory kit?? 

The dram volt is high for daily use and vccsa as well. And it's been a struggle to get stable daily at 4100mhz

Should I order any other better memory kit that is b die such as 3600 cl14 14-14-14-34 or 4000 14-15-15-35 single rank 16GB?? Would I be able to do tight timings at 4100 or 4133 on such kits?

F4-4000C14D-16GTZN or 

F4-3600C14D-16GVKA

I'm still within return period window.
I want to do 4000 or 4100 or 41333 lowest possible timings for daily use stability.

Please help.


----------



## jayfkay

SuperCloud said:


> Using auto for all timings except
> 
> Primary: 16-20-20-40 and tcwl at 16.
> 
> I was able to OC memory to 4000 on gear 1 and 1T.
> No errors on TM5 Extreme and y cruncher and prime95 large FFT and occt.
> 
> Dram volt: 1.50, vccsa 1.23, vddq auto
> 
> I tried higher like 4100 or 4133, it would boot, but so many errors on TM5 Extreme antaa profile.
> 
> I updated to 1.28 beta bios now I can do 4100 and kept every setting same in 1.1 bios. No errors.
> 
> Now at 4100mhz using 1.28 bios:


if your 12600k does 4000 no issues, you are lucky already. just go from there.


----------



## bscool

I like to mess with mem oc and have bought most of the top bin SR and DR b die in the last couple of years. I would buy [email protected] kit DR. A few friends have bought them also and all have been able to run 4000 to [email protected] with tight subs on z690. Limit is usually IMC.

To me the cost to go DR is not much more and the DR b die are so good. Even weak bins will do 4000c16-16-16.

If money is not object for you just get the best bin which is 4000c14. But in the US the DR kit is hard to find. I would take a DR kit over SR 4000c14 kit but just personal preference.


----------



## Antsu

SuperCloud said:


> Now at 4100mhz using 1.28 bios:
> 
> Dram volt: 1.60, vccsa 1.34, vddq auto
> 
> I tightened trrds 4, trrdl 6, tfaw 16, no errors did all same tests
> Then tried trfc 349 no errors except in prime95 large FFT it kept crashing one worker.
> 
> Then I tried tRTP 10, y cruncher 2.5b failed at redundant memory.
> 
> I didn't do any tests.
> Is this a problem with my memory?
> Please help.


I'd blame the IMC on this one. It took me a lot of fiddling with the ratio of VDDQ/VCCSA to actually stabilize my current daily settings. Cranking the VCCSA or VDDQ did nothing, it was the combination of both, and even so I ended up needing something like 1.475V VCCSA and 1.445V VDDQ.


----------



## Taraquin

SuperCloud said:


> Hey guys, I've been following this thread and seeing everyone's amazing results. I need help.
> 
> I have recently bought 12600K and MSI Pro z690-A ddr4.
> Mobo bios came with 1.1
> 
> Ram: Team Force 3200 CL14: 14-14-14-31 16GB (2x8GB)
> 
> My cpu is at stock settings, all mobo settings are at stock.
> 
> Using auto for all timings except
> 
> Primary: 16-20-20-40 and tcwl at 16.
> 
> I was able to OC memory to 4000 on gear 1 and 1T.
> No errors on TM5 Extreme and y cruncher and prime95 large FFT and occt.
> 
> Dram volt: 1.50, vccsa 1.23, vddq auto
> 
> I tried higher like 4100 or 4133, it would boot, but so many errors on TM5 Extreme antaa profile.
> 
> I updated to 1.28 beta bios now I can do 4100 and kept every setting same in 1.1 bios. No errors.
> 
> Now at 4100mhz using 1.28 bios:
> 
> Dram volt: 1.60, vccsa 1.34, vddq auto
> 
> I tightened trrds 4, trrdl 6, tfaw 16, no errors did all same tests
> Then tried trfc 349 no errors except in prime95 large FFT it kept crashing one worker.
> 
> Then I tried tRTP 10, y cruncher 2.5b failed at redundant memory.
> 
> I didn't do any tests.
> Is this a problem with my memory kit??
> 
> The dram volt is high for daily use and vccsa as well. And it's been a struggle to get stable daily at 4100mhz
> 
> Should I order any other better memory kit that is b die such as 3600 cl14 14-14-14-34 or 4000 14-15-15-35 single rank 16GB?? Would I be able to do tight timings at 4100 or 4133 on such kits?
> 
> F4-4000C14D-16GTZN or
> 
> F4-3600C14D-16GVKA
> 
> I'm still within return period window.
> I want to do 4000 or 4100 or 41333 lowest possible timings for daily use stability.
> 
> Please help.


Try the following at 4000:
17 18 18 
Ras 30
Keep faw as is
Wr 16/rtp 8
Cwl 16
Rfc 320
Refi 32768

If this works try cl 16, you can lower rfc by 16 till it doesn't work. 304, 288 or 272 might work. if it doesnt work try rrds/l 5/7 ffaw 20

You will get lower with a better kit, but price is probably not worth it. Change the timings one by one.


----------



## SAVIAR

I’m pretty happy with my results on 12700K Rog Stix 690-A couple. Almost nothing changed than my previous golden 10900kf except the performance due to FSB ratio.


----------



## edkieferlp

SAVIAR said:


> I’m pretty happy with my results on 12700K Rog Stix 690-A couple. Almost nothing changed than my previous golden 10900kf except the performance due to FSB ratio.
> View attachment 2550759


That is impressive memory scores for DDR4 and latency but how does performance compare to running 5300 on 100mhz bus (53x).
I always thought FSB OC doesn't perform as well.


----------



## SAVIAR

edkieferlp said:


> That is impressive memory scores for DDR4 and latency but how does performance compare to running 5300 on 100mhz bus (53x).
> I always thought FSB OC doesn't perform as well.


Actually FSB overclock depends on your IMC. So it may cause an unstable performance if you push it to the limits. But it directly favors your latency and performance. Traditional OC on the other hand which is made with clock speed doesn't make such a difference. So it is better to find correct FSB with enough clock speed.


----------



## shrimpmaster

edkieferlp said:


> That is impressive memory scores for DDR4 and latency but how does performance compare to running 5300 on 100mhz bus (53x).
> I always thought FSB OC doesn't perform as well.


It doesn't... Only good to show inflated scores on aida64.


----------



## SAVIAR

shrimpmaster said:


> It doesn't... Only good to show inflated scores on aida64.


 How did you answer this question as it doesn't? Did you try it with Cinebench, 3D Mark or any other bench which you have used? Because I have tried and yes it is indeed.


----------



## edkieferlp

SAVIAR said:


> How did you answer this question as it doesn't? Did you try it with Cinebench, 3D Mark or any other bench which you have used? Because I have tried and yes it is indeed.


do you happen to have any pics or Benchmark numbers from past tests to compare, I be curious to see the diff.

I am not asking to retest, just if you happen to have the data handy.


----------



## SAVIAR

edkieferlp said:


> do you happen to have any pics or Benchmark numbers from past tests to compare, I be curious to see the diff.
> 
> I am not asking to retest, just if you happen to have the data handy.


Ofcourse, left one 41x130, right one 53x100.


----------



## Cam1

@SAVIAR Could you share you Bios settings ? Like voltages and some other stuff please


----------



## SAVIAR

Cam1 said:


> @SAVIAR Could you share you Bios settings ? Like voltages and some other stuff please


Sure; Vcore 1.37V (manual), SA 1.35V, VDDQ 1.35V, Load 1.9V, DRAM 1,55V.

Asus ME: Enabled

All Core: 41
Min/Max CR: 34
Blck AAV: Disabled

Cstate: Disabled
Ecores: Disabled
HT: Disabled
LLC: 6


----------



## shrimpmaster

SAVIAR said:


> How did you answer this question as it doesn't? Did you try it with Cinebench, 3D Mark or any other bench which you have used? Because I have tried and yes it is indeed.


Test actual games. For memory bandwidth use Intel MLC.


----------



## SAVIAR

shrimpmaster said:


> Test actual games. For memory bandwidth use Intel MLC.


I did, but did you?


----------



## SuperCloud

Taraquin said:


> Try the following at 4000:
> 17 18 18
> Ras 30
> Keep faw as is
> Wr 16/rtp 8
> Cwl 16
> Rfc 320
> Refi 32768
> 
> If this works try cl 16, you can lower rfc by 16 till it doesn't work. 304, 288 or 272 might work. if it doesnt work try rrds/l 5/7 ffaw 20
> 
> You will get lower with a better kit, but price is probably not worth it. Change the timings one by one.


I can actually tighten timings for 4000 but I wanted for 4100, that's why I asked to buy new memory kit or not


----------



## SuperCloud

Taraquin said:


> Try the following at 4000:
> 17 18 18
> Ras 30
> Keep faw as is
> Wr 16/rtp 8
> Cwl 16
> Rfc 320
> Refi 32768
> 
> If this works try cl 16, you can lower rfc by 16 till it doesn't work. 304, 288 or 272 might work. if it doesnt work try rrds/l 5/7 ffaw 20
> 
> You will get lower with a better kit, but price is probably not worth it. Change the timings one by one.


Hey thank you for the help!

Actually I'm having issues running at 4100mhz 

At 4000mhz, I can tighten timings. 

I need dram volt at 1.60 and high trfc to run at 4100mhz. 

So is it my memory kit or imc? 

If I get 4000 cl14 memory kit, can I easily do 4100 or 4133mhz easily?

With my current kit , I can do 4000mhz at lowest timings


----------



## bscool

SAVIAR said:


> I did, but did you?


It is a known bug with Adia64 when oc bclk it gives flash results. Not saying you do not get an improvement in performance in other applications just not accurate results in Adia64.

Guys on ddr5 have shown results in 25ns range to demo it. Accurate ddr5 latency is more in the upper 45 to 50ns range for good ddr5 mem OC.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> Hey thank you for the help!
> 
> Actually I'm having issues running at 4100mhz
> 
> At 4000mhz, I can tighten timings.
> 
> I need dram volt at 1.60 and high trfc to run at 4100mhz.
> 
> So is it my memory kit or imc?
> 
> If I get 4000 cl14 memory kit, can I easily do 4100 or 4133mhz easily?
> 
> With my current kit , I can do 4000mhz at lowest timings


No one can tell you for sure. the only way to know if to buy another kit of memory(or CPU) and try it.

But I have helped a few people with mem oc on z690 ddr4 from 12700k to 12900k and they have all done 4000 to 4133 with DR b die. Some could boot 4133c15-15-15 with tight subs and bench it but couldnt get it Karhu or y cruncher stable and it was IMC. Getting another CPU with same mem and MB they could run 4133c15 stable.


----------



## SAVIAR

bscool said:


> It is a known bug with Adia64 when oc bclk it gives flash results. Not saying you do not get an improvement in performance in other applications just not accurate results in Adia64.
> 
> Guys on ddr5 have shown results in 25ns range to demo it. Accurate ddr5 latency is more in the upper 45 to 50ns range for good ddr5 mem OC.


It could be due to DDR5 support of Aida is not completed. With DDR4 when I switch back to 53x100, latency is 40ns. But when I compare my results with R23, Blender, Adobe AE there is a significant improvement with 41x130. Also in the games %0,1 FPS is slightly better. I guess DDR4 and 12th gen is a better combination than DDR5, especially for games.


----------



## bscool

SAVIAR said:


> It could be due to DDR5 support of Aida is not completed. With DDR4 when I switch back to 53x100, latency is 40ns. But when I compare my results with R23, Blender, Adobe AE there is a significant improvement with 41x130. Also in the games %0,1 FPS is slightly better. I guess DDR4 and 12th gen is a better combination than DDR5, especially for games.


The aida64 bug is the same with ddr4. it is not accurate with bclk overclock. This has been a known bug for months.

If bclk OC was the trick everyone would be doing it. It is no secret.


----------



## SAVIAR

bscool said:


> The aida64 bug is the same with ddr4. it is not accurate with bclk overclock. This has been a known bug for months.
> 
> If bclk OC was the trick everyone would be doing it. It is no secret.


Why are you focusing on Aida64? If there is a bug it is OK. But it won't change that FSB OC improves the performance more than Core OC. You may try and check your %0,01 and %0,1 results yourself. FSB OC more complex than Core OC. Because it is also dependent on your IMC-Ram-Core ratios. If one of them is not stable enough you can't get the performance you are looking for as easy as Core OC. Just change 53 to 52 if not, 52 to 51 if not, 51 to 50. Easy, fast but the gain is very minimal than FSB. Also you have to increase your voltages more than FSB to stabilize your Core which means more heat and less efficient. If a method is used by everyone it doesn't mean that it is the correct one but the easy one.


----------



## Taraquin

SuperCloud said:


> Hey thank you for the help!
> 
> Actually I'm having issues running at 4100mhz
> 
> At 4000mhz, I can tighten timings.
> 
> I need dram volt at 1.60 and high trfc to run at 4100mhz.
> 
> So is it my memory kit or imc?
> 
> If I get 4000 cl14 memory kit, can I easily do 4100 or 4133mhz easily?
> 
> With my current kit , I can do 4000mhz at lowest timings


Could be IMC. I would run 4000 with tight timings then.


----------



## SuperCloud

On my 12600K and MSI Pro z690-A 
Can't push my 3200 single rank cl14 to 4000 cl14 @ 1.56v dram and vccsa 1.25v. it looks like a memory kit issue than imc.

I'm gonna return this and buy a better bin kit.

Should I get 3600 cl14 16GB single rank, 3600 cl14 32GB dual rank , or 4000 cl14 16GB single rank?

How much performance gain is there with dual rank vs single rank for gaming, software development, and general purpose use?

Can't decide between dual rank and single rank...

I want to do 4100 or 4133 ok gear 1 and hopefully 1T


----------



## carlox97

I'm new to RAM OC, I have few questions:

VCCSA on Auto in the BIOS --> 1.440 V, should I lower it?
ASRock says Channels # Single, but my 4 sticks should run Dual, as AIDA shows, right?
1st RTL is 71/73, but sometimes it's 71/71, is that normal, should i make it 73/73?
Do you think there is something wrong with this config that would be strongly advised to be changed/fixed?
I'd really appreciate if someone could help me figure these out, thanks in advance!


----------



## edkieferlp

carlox97 said:


> I'm new to RAM OC, I have few questions:
> 
> VCCSA on Auto in the BIOS --> 1.440 V, should I lower it?
> ASRock says Channels # Single, but my 4 sticks should run Dual, as AIDA shows, right?
> 1st RTL is 71/73, but sometimes it's 71/71, is that normal, should i make it 73/73?
> Do you think there is something wrong with this config that would be strongly advised to be changed/fixed?
> I'd really appreciate if someone could help me figure these out, thanks in advance!


Are these Micron E memory?
First that channel should be dual, something not right there. The odd thing is your AIDA performance numbers look good and AIDA lists memory as dual channel so not sure what's going on there.
Does HWinfo64 summary say it's a dual channel? (memory section)
"Memory Channels Active: 2"
Edit: Just noticed the FSB : Dram ratio is wrong to in Asrock timing configurator.


For SA voltage with that freq you should be able to run 1.20-1.25 w/o issue (try 1.25v), you may find going lower toward 1.2 that RTL increases so just leave it for 73 value.
Try running only 2 sticks and see if MB sees them as dual, make sure you remove the closest memory stick to the socket and then skip one, check MB manual for more info on that.


----------



## carlox97

edkieferlp said:


> Are these Micron E memory?
> First that channel should be dual, something not right there. The odd thing is your AIDA performance numbers look good and AIDA lists memory as dual channel so not sure what's going on there.
> Does HWinfo64 summary say it's a dual channel? (memory section)
> "Memory Channels Active: 2"
> Edit: Just noticed the FSB : Dram ratio is wrong to in Asrock timing configurator.
> 
> 
> For SA voltage with that freq you should be able to run 1.20-1.25 w/o issue (try 1.25v), you may find going lower toward 1.2 that RTL increases so just leave it for 73 value.
> Try running only 2 sticks and see if MB sees them as dual, make sure you remove the closest memory stick to the socket and then skip one, check MB manual for more info on that.


Yes, Micron E.
HWInfo says "Memory Channels Active: 2" (same for "Memory Channels Supported"), AIDA states Dual Channel too. 

I'll try to lower SA voltage. I've read online that Z690 mobos tend to have higher SA voltage, but looking at other's HWInfo mine is definitely on the high side, and I haven't changed it.

Thank you!


----------



## edkieferlp

carlox97 said:


> Yes, Micron E.
> HWInfo says "Memory Channels Active: 2" (same for "Memory Channels Supported"), AIDA states Dual Channel too.
> 
> I'll try to lower SA voltage. I've read online that Z690 mobos tend to have higher SA voltage, but looking at other's HWInfo mine is definitely on the high side, and I haven't changed it.
> 
> Thank you!


FWIW, my 16gig Micron E when XMP enabled ran 1.35v for SA, Vdimm and Vddq tx. I run them at 3867, same primary timings as you with slight tightening on a few secondary's.
Voltages are Vdimm= 1.360, SA VID= 1.235 and Vddq tx= 1.35 but you "may need more for four stcks but I don't think much if any for that speed.

If your try 4000 an up start with 1.35 and you will probably need more on Vdimm and SA like 1.4+


----------



## MusTriesOCing

What should vddq voltage be set to? I was doing some searching about ram oc on Gigabyte z690 boards since I can't get 4133mhz to post and apparently the vddq doesn't act accordingly with vdimm or vccsa so it needs to be set manually

4000mhz posts with tight timings but 4133mhz won't even post with auto timings + higher vccsa. Is it just gigabytes bad ddr4 support right now?


----------



## bscool

MusTriesOCing said:


> What should vddq voltage be set to? I was doing some searching about ram oc on GB z690 boards since I can't get 4133mhz to post and apparently the vddq doesn't act accordingly with vdimm or vccsa so it needs to be set manually


Set to whatever you need to be stable for you system. From what I have seen 1.35 to 1.55 range works for most. Depends on MB and clocks and gear 1 or 2 etc.


----------



## LionAlonso

MusTriesOCing said:


> What should vddq voltage be set to? I was doing some searching about ram oc on GB z690 boards since I can't get 4133mhz to post and apparently the vddq doesn't act accordingly with vdimm or vccsa so it needs to be set manually


I have it at 1.25 at 4133 but u need to fine tune accordingly with ur system.


----------



## pauldgroot

I bought a Corsair 2x16GB DR 3600MHz CL14 kit (CMT32GX4M2Z3600C14) to try some b-die overclocking. My 4x8GB SR Crucial rev E kit can run at 3900MHz CL14 and I was able to get my girlfriend's G.Skill 2x8GB SR b-die kit to run at 4100 CL15. So I was hoping to at least get 3900C14 out of the Corsair kit but for some reason, I can't get it to run over XMP.

As soon as I go to 3700 or over my system won't post anymore. I've tried loosening timings down to 18-18-18-40 from XMP 14-16-16-34 and have tried to raise VDDQ up to 1.5V and VCCSA up to 1.4V. My E-cores are disabled and I've tried lowering ring and P-core frequency down to 4000Mhz and 4500MHz respectively. Turning on XMP and, leaving everything on auto and raising dram freq to 3700 didn't work and neither did leaving XMP off and setting primaries only with 3700.

Did I just get a bad b-die kit that is already at the limit at XMP or am I missing something? The ICs say K4A8G085WB-BCPB so they're definitely b-die and I did notice XMP sets tRFC to 630 which seems high for b-die.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> I’m pretty happy with my results on 12700K Rog Stix 690-A couple. Almost nothing changed than my previous golden 10900kf except the performance due to FSB ratio.
> View attachment 2550759


Can you please post your RAM timings?


----------



## SuperCloud

Hi for 12600k and MSI Pro z690-A
Is vccsa 1.36v safe for daily use?


----------



## SuperCloud

pauldgroot said:


> I bought a Corsair 2x16GB DR 3600MHz CL14 kit (CMT32GX4M2Z3600C14) to try some b-die overclocking. My 4x8GB SR Crucial rev E kit can run at 3900MHz CL14 and I was able to get my girlfriend's G.Skill 2x8GB SR b-die kit to run at 4100 CL15. So I was hoping to at least get 3900C14 out of the Corsair kit but for some reason, I can't get it to run over XMP.
> 
> As soon as I go to 3700 or over my system won't post anymore. I've tried loosening timings down to 18-18-18-40 from XMP 14-16-16-34 and have tried to raise VDDQ up to 1.5V and VCCSA up to 1.4V. My E-cores are disabled and I've tried lowering ring and P-core frequency down to 4000Mhz and 4500MHz respectively. Turning on XMP and, leaving everything on auto and raising dram freq to 3700 didn't work and neither did leaving XMP off and setting primaries only with 3700.
> 
> Did I just get a bad b-die kit that is already at the limit at XMP or am I missing something? The ICs say K4A8G085WB-BCPB so they're definitely b-die and I did notice XMP sets tRFC to 630 which seems high for b-die.


What motherboard are you using?

Two factors remain, it's your CPU's imc that's weak or motherboard and bios.

I bought older revision of 12600k that can do 4100 at lowest and tightest timings if I push vccsa to 1.36v

Anything higher it's not stable and 4200 won't even boot.

I am using two B die memory kits

Team T-Force 3200 cl14 @ 1.35v
Patriot Viper Steels 4400 cl19 @ 1.45v - this kit is recommended by buildzoid as being best #2 B die kit for manual overclock and tuning the timings

The second 12600k I got can barely do 3800mhz without any tightening. It can do 3700/3733 only.

I know it's not memory kit nor motherboard, it's the cpu imc

So I'm keeping the original 12600k I bought.

Also, try it with two sticks instead of four.

But, based on what I did, it's mostly the cpu imc.


----------



## pauldgroot

SuperCloud said:


> What motherboard are you using?
> 
> Two factors remain, it's your CPU's imc that's weak or motherboard and bios.
> 
> I bought older revision of 12600k that can do 4100 at lowest and tightest timings if I push vccsa to 1.36v
> 
> Anything higher it's not stable and 4200 won't even boot.
> 
> I am using two B die memory kits
> 
> Team T-Force 3200 cl14 @ 1.35v
> Patriot Viper Steels 4400 cl19 @ 1.45v - this kit is recommended by buildzoid as being best #2 B die kit for manual overclock and tuning the timings
> 
> The second 12600k I got can barely do 3800mhz without any tightening. It can do 3700/3733 only.
> 
> I know it's not memory kit nor motherboard, it's the cpu imc
> 
> So I'm keeping the original 12600k I bought.
> 
> Also, try it with two sticks instead of four.
> 
> But, based on what I did, it's mostly the cpu imc.


I'm using an MSI Tomahawk Wifi with a 12700KF bought in early November. It can do 3900MHz CL14 on 4x8GB Crucial DIMMs and 4100MHz on 2x8GB b-die, both in gear 1. It's just this Corsair 2x16GB b-die kit that is giving me issues. 3700MHz gear 2 doesn't work either with this kit, even with just 1 stick installed, so I don't think it's the IMC Maybe the motherboard doesn't like this kit. I think I'll return it and wait until MSI gets better DR b-die support unless you have another suggestion?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

SuperCloud said:


> What motherboard are you using?
> 
> Two factors remain, it's your CPU's imc that's weak or motherboard and bios.
> 
> I bought older revision of 12600k that can do 4100 at lowest and tightest timings if I push vccsa to 1.36v
> 
> Anything higher it's not stable and 4200 won't even boot.
> 
> I am using two B die memory kits
> 
> Team T-Force 3200 cl14 @ 1.35v
> Patriot Viper Steels 4400 cl19 @ 1.45v - this kit is recommended by buildzoid as being best #2 B die kit for manual overclock and tuning the timings
> 
> The second 12600k I got can barely do 3800mhz without any tightening. It can do 3700/3733 only.
> 
> I know it's not memory kit nor motherboard, it's the cpu imc
> 
> So I'm keeping the original 12600k I bought.
> 
> Also, try it with two sticks instead of four.
> 
> But, based on what I did, it's mostly the cpu imc.


Ugh

Memory kit matters. My Corsair 3733c17 kit doesn’t come close to my Patriot 4400c19 kit which doesn’t come close to my DR Gskill 4000c14 kit. All Samsung b-die, completely different capabilities.


----------



## pauldgroot

I've just ordered two Patriot 4400C19 2x8GB kits, they are on MSI's QVL for two DIMMs. I'm hoping for 4000MHz CL16 or CL15 but I'll have to see.


----------



## shrimpmaster

1304 beta same behaviour as 1201. I get same stability, at 3900c15 G1 with Dr b-die. Can pass every test, but memory training is wonky af. Rtls misalign, training taking long time, etc

Back to 0807 and restored .cmo


----------



## pauldgroot

shrimpmaster said:


> 1304 beta same behaviour as 1201. I get same stability, at 3900c15 G1 with Dr b-die. Can pass every test, but memory training is wonky af. Rtls misalign, training taking long time, etc
> 
> Back to 0807 and restored .cmo


There's still some work to be done on most BIOSes I think, I was messing around on my MSI board yesterday and got 3800 CL13 to work perfectly with y cruncher passes and a couple of hours of gaming. This morning, it didn't want to post with the same settings.


----------



## pauldgroot

Ok, this is so weird. MSI release some new BIOSes for the Tomahawk today. Version 1.20 which is a lower number than the last beta (1.23 but had adaptive voltage issues) and a new beta version 1.25. I've installed 1.25 and started testing with no luck. 3600 CL12 would boot and 3600CL13 was stable in ycruncher. When going up to 3700 with loose timings I had the same problem as before, no POST. Then I *lowered *my timings and wdyk, it posts! I'm currently at 3900CL14 on the Patriot kit and will continue to explore.

3800CL15 didn't post but 3800CL14 did , then I decided for ****s and giggles to try 3900CL14 and it booted with no issues. I've only touched the primaries, tRFC, tREFI, and TRW so far.


----------



## solon

msi bios last number 1-9 is beta and 0 is official stable


----------



## ZukoX

Hi everyone, I am fairly new to overclocking, was wondering what would safe voltage for VCCSA and VDDQ would be for alder lake? I am able to get 4000cl16 using 1.31 SA and 1.21 VDDQ.


----------



## MikeS3000

ZukoX said:


> Hi everyone, I am fairly new to overclocking, was wondering what would safe voltage for VCCSA and VDDQ would be for alder lake? I am able to get 4000cl16 using 1.31 SA and 1.21 VDDQ.


You're at very safe voltages. I think Buildzoid said he'd be comfortable up to 1.4v SA. Nobody really knows about VDDQ. My Asus Strix D4 defaults to 1.35v SA and 1.35V VDDQ when I leave it on auto and set DDR 4000.


----------



## edkieferlp

MikeS3000 said:


> You're at very safe voltages. I think Buildzoid said he'd be comfortable up to 1.4v SA. Nobody really knows about VDDQ. My Asus Strix D4 defaults to 1.35v SA and 1.35V VDDQ when I leave it on auto and set DDR 4000.


yup, on My TUF the defaults set by XMP for DDR4 3600 were 1.35 across the three voltages. I was able to lower SA to 1.23, I only stopped there cause the RTL was getting loose at a random 73-75.
I was able to keep them at 73 (not sure it matters, didn't have any issues). So that is for 3867, I have not tried to push higher, I just don't think it is worth it.

So if XMP is setting 1.35 that should be very safe.


----------



## MikeS3000

I've tried a 12700k and now a 12900k and noticed for each CPU there was a pretty hard wall for the memory controller in gear 1 where adding more SA voltage didn't help stability. The 12700k could do DDR 3900 at 1.35v and the 12900k DDR 4000 at 1.35v. On some BIOS versions I could boot DDR 4100 or 4133 but it would fail almost instantly in y-cruncher unless I pushed 1.45v SA or higher and even then I don't think I could make a full y-cruncher run.


----------



## Luggage

MikeS3000 said:


> I've tried a 12700k and now a 12900k and noticed for each CPU there was a pretty hard wall for the memory controller in gear 1 where adding more SA voltage didn't help stability. The 12700k could do DDR 3900 at 1.35v and the 12900k DDR 4000 at 1.35v. On some BIOS versions I could boot DDR 4100 or 4133 but it would fail almost instantly in y-cruncher unless I pushed 1.45v SA or higher and even then I don't think I could make a full y-cruncher run.


When you talk about y-cruncher here, do you talk about the benchmark or the stress test in stand alone software? Because I can run 2.5b benchmarks all day with settings that are really unstable in the stress test.



http://imgur.com/Cg60QUy


----------



## MikeS3000

Luggage said:


> When you talk about y-cruncher here, do you talk about the benchmark or the stress test in stand alone software? Because I can run 2.5b benchmarks all day with settings that are really unstable in the stress test.
> 
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/Cg60QUy


Kind of talking about both. I use the 2.5B benchmark to get a quick idea of initial stability and maybe run it 3 or 4 times back to back to see if it passes, errors or blue-screens. The stress test is good also but I know one of the tests is just about as hard as prime95 small fft on the cpu so maybe it's best not to run all of the stress tests. The benchmark seems to be a good all-around tool to stress the CPU, DRAM and memory controller.


----------



## _sane_

How does my OC looks like? Any tips/improvements?
Dram voltage: 1.54v
SA voltage 1.42v
VDDQ 1.5v


----------



## postem

Hi just for information what kind of latency it would be with a gear 2 5000 DDR4 20-30-40


----------



## edkieferlp

postem said:


> Hi just for information what kind of latency it would be with a gear 2 5000 DDR4 20-30-40


----------



## Werolol

Help with MSI? i'm stuck. This is Hynix. KF560C40BBK2-32


----------



## pauldgroot

Werolol said:


> Help with MSI? i'm stuck. This is Hynix. KF560C40BBK2-32
> View attachment 2552026


Wrong thread, this is a DDR4 topic.


----------



## RayJr

Hey everyone,

does anyone know why my Gskill 4000 cl16 kit on my MSI Edge (Xmp did not work) did manually 4000cl17 gear 1 ct2 for like two weeks 24/7 at first.
I then wanted to try tighter timings with a lower clock but it didnt worked out, so i wanted to go back to the 4000 cl7, but it just doesnt do it anymore.
Cleared cmos, tried the new official Bios (which is bugged, it freezes while exiting bios even on everything stock for me) went back to bios 1.10 but now im stuck at 3600cl16...its really strange


----------



## edkieferlp

I have a question for those in the know. Regarding the tWR value which is not shown in bios and you set it from tWRPRE and tWRPDEN, when I set it according to this formula rule tWR = tWRPRE - tCWL - 4. (reference MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper )
ASROCK configurator shows the correct value to the rule but ASUS Memtweakit shows one lower value. not that it matters much as if its stable it should be ok but I like to know how to figure the right value.

If we plug in my values we get tWR= 35 - 15 - 4, = 16. Maybe Memtweakit is using tCL for value because I am at tCWL= tCL -1.

Here are








examples of my timings


----------



## HyperC

Just fired up my new build finally. Don't pay attention to my dram voltage just testing and 90% auto few questions do i want to use LLC 4 with this motherboard? Also I noticed the SVID voltage on a 3 p cores had more vdroop are those my better cores? how are you guys getting so much bandwidth


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Can you please post your RAM timings?


I'm sorry I was on a vacation and didn't notice your message. Here you may find my timings:


----------



## Spartan F8

Kind of curious for some thoughts on a new set of RAM i'm pondering on buying. My current set is a bit older and was migrated from my old system to my new 12700k/MSI z690 Pro.

This would possibly be my second choice but i wonder how it compares to the next set. I'd like to hit 4000c14 hopefully CR1.








G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTRSA - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 3600 (PC4 28800) Desktop Memory Model F4-3600C14D-32GTRSA with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com





This is the highest frequency at a still seemingly tighter timings that i found and could possibly be lowered and tightened to match the third choice below, but its hard to know/tell for me if this is the same, better, or worse bin.








G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4400 (PC4 35200) Desktop Memory Model F4-4400C17D-32GTRS - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4400 (PC4 35200) Desktop Memory Model F4-4400C17D-32GTRS with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com





This would be my first choice but its been out of stock a while and might not be back for a while. It's what i want basically at stock and any overclock/tightening i get is bonus.








G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C14D-32GTRS - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C14D-32GTRS with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com





I know its always a bit of a lottery and they may all be otherwise equal but i was interested any others thoughts. I'm sitting at 3600c14-14-14-28-270 CR1 with a overclock and tightened timings prime/sub/tet. I can also run 3800c14-15-15-30-315 CR2, but i like CR1 for this board and the RTLs it trains to with it. And in case anyone's interested this is where i'm at with 3800c14 with 2x16gb.


----------



## bscool

@Spartan F8 cr1 with dr is going to limit clocks quite a bit.

I have the 4000c14 DR kit and I ran 4133c15 2t vs lower clocked 1t. I dont think I have seen anyone running higher clocked DR memtest/Karhu. y crucnher etc stable using 1t.

The little I tested 1t I was in the 3600c14 range with DR. SR could do 4133 to 4266..


----------



## Spartan F8

bscool said:


> @Spartan F8 cr1 with dr is going to limit clocks quite a bit.
> 
> I have the 4000c14 DR kit and I ran 4133c15 2t vs lower clocked 1t. I dont think I have seen anyone running higher clocked DR memtest/Karhu. y crucnher etc stable using 1t.
> 
> The little I tested 1t I was in the 3600c14 range with DR. SR could do 4133 to 4266..


With that in mind I should give up on 1t for DR. Which makes me consider still the 4000c14 first but maybe the 4400c17 second vice the 3600c14 kit.


----------



## bscool

Spartan F8 said:


> With that in mind I should give up on 1t for DR. Which makes me consider still the 4000c14 first still but maybe the 4400c17 second vice the 3600c14 kit.


I am not saying give it up. Just telling you what i know. Try it out for yourself and find out.

As for which kit. I have the 4400c17 kit also and it is ok. I would take 4000c16-16-16 kit or the 3600c14 kit over it but still lotto/luck with any kit.

I have had most of the high bin DR kits. Not th 3600c14-14-14 but the 3600c14-15-15, 4000c16-16-16 and 4266c17 and they are all very close.


----------



## DarkEmpire

Spoiler












dram voltage 1.48
sa and vddq tx - auto











at the moment i have this overclocked memory on my 4x8 ballistix, and i am wondering if it will be possible to take 4000-4200 mhz on gear 1? if so at what timings and voltages? may be someone has experience


----------



## Antsu

edkieferlp said:


> ASROCK configurator shows the correct value to the rule but ASUS Memtweakit shows one lower value.


MemTweakIt bug. MSI Dragonball etc will read it correctly (same as ASRock)


----------



## DarkEmpire

overclocked up to 4000mhz all ok, but at 4100 and 4200 freezes when entering the bios, it turns out only 1 out of 5 or so enter, at the same time in windows runs without problems, and the test TestMem5 does not freezes

what could be the problem?


----------



## Taraquin

Tip for those of you using a locked CPU and want to overclock ram in Gear 1: Get a better cooler. I got 100MHz higher going from stock to a basic tower cooler (Silentiumpc fera 5) which dropped temps in gaming by over 10C and stresstest by over 15C. 3600 G1 was a bit unstable with stock cooler, now it is rock solid. i2hard had trouble running 12100F at 3700 stock G1, but AIO made 3800 stable.


----------



## edkieferlp

Antsu said:


> MemTweakIt bug. MSI Dragonball etc will read it correctly (same as ASRock)


Thank you for your confirmation.


----------



## pauldgroot

DarkEmpire said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2552226
> 
> dram voltage 1.48
> sa and vddq tx - auto
> View attachment 2552227
> 
> 
> 
> 
> at the moment i have this overclocked memory on my 4x8 ballistix, and i am wondering if it will be possible to take 4000-4200 mhz on gear 1? if so at what timings and voltages? may be someone has experience


Increase the voltage and see if you can tighten things up a bit. These are my Ballistix 3600C16 at 1.55V, I just dropped freq to 3800. Same timings are 95% stable with 3900 (errors in VST ycruncher) but I don't have time to tweak atm. 3800 is 100% stable and does also seem to work at TCL 13.


----------



## edkieferlp

DarkEmpire said:


> overclocked up to 4000mhz all ok, but at 4100 and 4200 freezes when entering the bios, it turns out only 1 out of 5 or so enter, at the same time in windows runs without problems, and the test TestMem5 does not freezes
> 
> what could be the problem?


Are your timings the same as your previous post but at 4000+?
If so try 631 for tRFC and see if that improves lockups, then you can lower in small steps.

The tRFC is one setting that must scale with frequency, higher freq is generally needing a higher tRFC for any given memory chip type.


----------



## postem

pauldgroot said:


> Increase the voltage and see if you can tighten things up a bit. These are my Ballistix 3600C16 at 1.55V, I just dropped freq to 3800. Same timings are 95% stable with 3900 (errors in VST ycruncher) but I don't have time to tweak atm. 3800 is 100% stable and does also seem to work at TCL 13.
> View attachment 2552256


Same with 16x2 here, funny how low these memory chips allow low tcl but it absolutely refuse to tight tcrd / trp / tras


----------



## edkieferlp

postem said:


> Same with 16x2 here, funny how low these memory chips allow low tcl but it absolutely refuse to tight tcrd / trp / tras


Looks like he was able to lower tRAS a bit 38>34.


----------



## Rei23

Hey guys, do you think its worth switching to a 12900k/ks (from 12700k) or wait for the 13900k?

I want to switch cpu because i can't even hit my xmp speed at gear 1 (4000mhz dual rank) no matter what the vccsa is set

Actually,i can boot with a vccsa of 1.5V but its too much unstable

(the motherboard is z690 msi tomahawk)


----------



## bscool

Rei23 said:


> Hey guys, do you think its worth switching to a 12900k/ks (from 12700k) or wait for the 13900k?
> 
> I want to switch cpu because i can't even hit my xmp speed at gear 1 (4000mhz dual rank) no matter what the vccsa is set
> 
> Actually,i can boot with a vccsa of 1.5V but its too much unstable


What MB and memory do you have?


----------



## Rei23

bscool said:


> What MB and memory do you have?


Z690 msi tomahawk wifi DDR4 and 4 stick of 8gb (32GB), xmp is 4000mhz c19


----------



## bscool

Rei23 said:


> Z690 msi tomahawk wifi DDR4 and 4 stick of 8gb (32GB)


That is one issues if 4x8. Most struggle with 4x8. z690 MB are daisy chain and do better with 2x8 or 2x16.

Probably limited to 3600 to 3800 range with 4x8.

I have only seen a coupld people run 4x8 higher than that.

Just my guess but I think even a new CPU you still wont see much more than that. 4000 with 4x8 is rare.

You might be able to run higher clocks in gear 2 but the latency penalty makes it not worth it most of the time.


----------



## Rei23

bscool said:


> That is one issues if 4x8. Most struggle with 4x8. Most have issues with 4 sticks as MB are daisy chain and do better with 2x8 or 2x16.
> 
> Probably limited to 3600 to 3800 range with 4x8.
> 
> I have only seen a coupld people run 4x8 higher than that.
> 
> Just my guess but I think even a new CPU you still wont see much more than that. 4000 with 4x8 is rare.
> 
> You might be able to run higher clocks in gear 2 but the latency penalty makes it not worth it most of the time.


Oh okay, i understand more now... wish i knew this information before i purchased my rams
i'll simply won't take the risk with a 12900k and wait for the 13900k, perhaps it'll have a better imc to handle this


----------



## Groove2013

Have bought myself a 12900K + 2×16 GB 3600 MHz 14-14-14-34 + Z690 Strix.

Was lucky to be able to buy one of the last available (in Germany) 3600 CL14 kits.

3600 MHz 14-14-14-34 1.4 V XMP should, normally, allow for lower timings than my 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP, since it has latest/best PCB revision, same as 4000 14-15-15-35 1.55 V XMP kits and should, normally, better tolerate higher voltages.


----------



## SAVIAR

For gaming or professional wise?


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> For gaming or professional wise?


gaming only.


----------



## Groove2013

@SAVIAR what is the max stable frequency your CPU cache can do?


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> gaming only.


For gaming you don’t have to push CL14, 15-15-15 will be stutter free. You may focus on XP, FAW and RFC (direct gain for %0,1). Also try PPD as 0.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> @SAVIAR what is the max stable frequency you CPU cache can do?


I can go 4200 without any issues. You may find my 4180 results in previous page. If I switch FSB to 100 and have a solid 5300 then 4200 with the same timings. But unfortunately there isn't an utilty which can test layency and FSB in the same time correctly. If you increase your FSB to 200 Aida 64 turns in to crazy as 25ns latency. 😅


----------



## bscool

IML shows accurate latency with FSB OC.









Release IMLCGui v1.0.1 · FarisR99/IMLCGui


Force dark theme Make the quick bandwidth text box read-only Only create config file on save




github.com





I showed results here






BCLK overclock on ADL


Can anything be done to get accurate results on Alderlake when OCing BCLK? It give inaccurate results on both DDR4 and DDR5 Video showing result. Not my system. But latency is actually in the 48 to 50ns range RWC are also about double what they actually are.



forums.aida64.com


----------



## Groove2013

@SAVIAR well, of course your Aida64 ns latency for RAM has nothing to do with reality, because of BCLK 130 MHz.

In 3DMark your score is slightly higher only because your cores are at 5330, instead of 5300 MHz, cache 4160 instead of 4100 MHz and RAM beyond 4133 MHz.

So it's normal that 5330+4160+>4133 MHz give slighly better results than 5300+4100+4133 MHz.


----------



## SAVIAR

bscool said:


> IML shows accurate latency with FSB OC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Release IMLCGui v1.0.1 · FarisR99/IMLCGui
> 
> 
> Force dark theme Make the quick bandwidth text box read-only Only create config file on save
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I showed results here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BCLK overclock on ADL
> 
> 
> Can anything be done to get accurate results on Alderlake when OCing BCLK? It give inaccurate results on both DDR4 and DDR5 Video showing result. Not my system. But latency is actually in the 48 to 50ns range RWC are also about double what they actually are.
> 
> 
> 
> forums.aida64.com


Thx, I will give it a try.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Well, of course your Aida64 ns latency for RAM has nothing to do with reality, because of BCLK 130 MHz and in 3DMark your score is slightly higher only because your cores are at 5330, instead of 5300 MHz, cache 4160 instead of 4100 MHz and RAM beyond 4133 MHz.
> 
> So it's normal that 5330+4160+>4133 MHz give slighly better results than 5300+4100+4133 MHz.


Not exactly. Increasing the FSB isn't give you the same amount of performance boost. Keeping the FSB without messing the comm between RAM is the point, otherwise there will be horrible stuttering issues. For example you may increase your FSB 130 to 150 and achieve 5400 with 36 but your SCS will be reduced dramatically. So there is a balance.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> For gaming you don’t have to push CL14, 15-15-15 will be stutter free. You may focus on XP, FAW and RFC (direct gain for %0,1). Also try PPL as 0.


I'm currently running PPD 0 and tXP 4 on my 11900K for 4000 MHz 14-15-15.

Here are all the other 100% stable timings.

I can't do 14-14-14 for 4000 MHz or higher than 4000 MHz, because of the memory controller tha isn't so good, but my current 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP RAM itself can do 4000 MHz 14-14-14.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> your SCS will be reduced dramatically.


What's SCS?


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> What's SCS?


Single Core Score.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> you may increase your FSB 130 to 150 and achieve 5400 with 36 but your SCS will be reduced dramatically. So there is a balance.


how can 5.4 GHz be worse than a lower frequency than this?


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> I'm currently running PPD 0 and tXP 4 on my 11900K for 4000 MHz 14-15-15.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Here are all the ot or higher than 4000her 100% stable timings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4000
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I can't do 14-14-14 for , because of the memory controller tha isn't so good, but my current 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP RAM itself can do 4000 MHz 14-14-14.


12th gen totaly has a different behavior than 10 and 11th gens. Even if you have the same kit, your results will be different. 14-14-14 4000 was not a problem with my 11900KF but I have to change it as 15-15-15 with my 12700K.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> 12th gen totaly has a different behavior than 10 and 11th gens. Even if you have the same kit, your results will be different. 14-14-14 4000 was not a problem with my 11900KF but I have to change it as 15-15-15 with my 12700K.


since you're doing 15-15-15, what's RAM frequency now?


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> how can 5.4 GHz be worse than a lower frequency than this?


Beacuse you are pushing your IMC to the limits and it isn’t stable anymore. You won't get any error codes or WHEA errors but when you checked your SPS you will notice that drop.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> since you're doing 15-15-15, what's RAM frequency now?


4200.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> Beacuse you are pushing your IMC to the limits and it isn’t stable anymore. You won't get any error codes or WHEA errors but when you checked your SPS you will notice that drop.


it's like when I do 4000 MHz 14-14-14 and it results in worse nanoseconds in Aida64 than 14-15-15. Must be the IMC as well.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> it's like when I do 4000 MHz 14-14-14 and it results in worse nanoseconds in Aida64 than 14-15-15. Must be the IMC as well.


Exactly.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> 4200.
> 
> View attachment 2552746


can you please post your timings using ASRock Timing Configurator 4.0.13 from the first post of this thread?

and also what are your SA, IO, VDIMM (RAM) and VDDQ voltages now (in the BIOS)?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

SAVIAR said:


> 4200.
> 
> View attachment 2552746


What are all your voltages? I am doing 4200 14-15-15-28-240 on the Strix D4 and can share my settings when I get home later.


----------



## Groove2013

Will have to see whether 12900K IMC will hit its limit before RAM sticks hit their timings limits.

If the IMC will be good, then maybe 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45 V sticks will be able to show better timings than my older 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 V sticks.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> can you please post your timings using ASRock Timing Configurator 4.0.13 from the first post of this thread?
> 
> and also what are your SA, IO, VDIMM (RAM) and VDDQ voltages now (in the BIOS)?


Sure thing.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> Will have to see whether 12900K IMC will hit its limit before RAM sticks hit their timings limits.
> 
> If the IMC will be good, then maybe 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45 V sticks will be able to show better timings than my older 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 V sticks.


Because it's annoying to have sticks that can do 4000 14-14-14 and the IMC of the 11900K that can't handle more than 4000 14-15-15 + no higher than 4000 MHz at those 14-15-15.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Will have to see whether 12900K IMC will hit its limit before RAM sticks hit their timings limits.
> 
> If the IMC will be good, then maybe 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45 V sticks will be able to show better timings than my older 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 V sticks.


That is possible. But KS will be a better option.


----------



## SAVIAR

geriatricpollywog said:


> What are all your voltages? I am doing 4200 14-15-15-28-240 on the Strix D4 and can share my settings when I get home later.


28-240 is too tight! Great!


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> Sure thing.
> 
> View attachment 2552747


Several timings are a little bit high, like tRAS 36, tRFC 360, tFAW 20, tRTP 10, tWTR_L/S 12/8, tCKE 8, tRDRD_sg 7, tRDRD_dr/dd 7/7, tRDWR_sg/dg 15/15, t_RDWR_dr/dd 12/12, tWRRD_dr/dd 7 and tWRWR_sg 7.

tWRWR_dr/dd 7/7 is normal, because of 4200 MHz.

*tRFC directly depends on RAM voltage - the higher the RAM voltage, the lower tRFC*, as long as you stay under or not more than 40°C under load (fan(s) to actively cool RAM).
I normally find the 4 first timings, with all the others at auto and then see how high I can go with RAM voltage so it doesn't give me errors with only 4 first timings tested manually set.
After I find the highest (still reasonable) RAM voltage that doesn't give me errors, I then proceed with all the other timings.
This allows to have lowest possible tRFC.

*tRAS* ideally 28
*tFAW* should normally be 16
*tRTP* ideally 6
*tRRD_L* 4, if you can do tWR 8 (otherwise tRRD_L 6 is better for tWR 12)
*tCKE* ideally 4
*tRDRD_sg* ideally 5-6
*tRDRD_dr/dd* ideally 5-6

tRDWR_sg/dg and t_RDWR_dr/dd should be not higher than 11 and sometimes 10 is possible.
because to get possible min value for tRDWR_sg/dg and t_RDWR_dr/dd, you substracte tCWL value from tCL + 10, so tCL 15 minus tCWL 14 = 1 + 10 = 11.
So 11 should be possible for all 4 and maybe even 10 (1 value lower than theoretical), with very good RAM.

*tWRRD_dr/dd* ideally 5-6
*tWRWR_sg* ideally 5-6


----------



## Groove2013

geriatricpollywog said:


> I am doing 4200 14-15-15-28-240 on the Strix D4 and can share my settings when I get home later.


Yes, please, post here your timings, using ASRock Timing Configurator 4.0.13 from the first post of this thread and also DRAM, SA and VDDQ voltage.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Several timings are a little bit high, like tRAS 36, tRFC 360, tFAW 20, tRTP 10, tWTR_L/S 12/8, tCKE 8, tRDRD_sg 7, tRDRD_dr/dd 7/7, tRDWR_sg/dg 15/15, t_RDWR_dr/dd 12/12, tWRRD_dr/dd 7 and tWRWR_sg 7.
> 
> tWRWR_dr/dd 7/7 is normal, because of 4200 MHz.
> 
> *tRFC directly depends on RAM voltage - the higher the RAM voltage, the lower tRFC*, as long as you stay under or not more than 40°C under load (fan(s) to actively cool RAM).
> I normally find the 4 first timings, with all the others at auto and then see how high I can go with RAM voltage so it doesn't give me errors with only 4 first timings tested manually set.
> After I find the highest (still reasonable) RAM voltage that doesn't give me errors, I then proceed with all the other timings.
> This allows to have lowest possible tRFC.
> 
> *tRAS* ideally 28
> *tFAW* should normally be 16
> *tRTP* ideally 6
> *tRRD_L* 4, if you can do tWR 8 (otherwise tRRD_L 6 is better for tWR 12)
> *tCKE* ideally 4
> *tRDRD_sg* ideally 5-6
> *tRDRD_dr/dd* ideally 5-6
> 
> tRDWR_sg/dg and t_RDWR_dr/dd should be not higher than 11 and sometimes 10 is possible.
> because to get possible min value for tRDWR_sg/dg and t_RDWR_dr/dd, you substracte tCWL value from tCL + 10, so tCL 15 minus tCWL 14 = 1 + 10 = 11.
> So 11 should be possible for all 4 and maybe even 10 (1 value lower than theoretical), with very good RAM.
> 
> *tWRRD_dr/dd* ideally 5-6
> *tWRWR_sg* ideally 5-6


I’m about 33C under load. I haven't tighten them up yet. Lets squeeze them a little bit more then.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> Several timings are a little bit high, like tRAS 36, tRFC 360, tFAW 20, tRTP 10, tWTR_L/S 12/8, tCKE 8, tRDRD_sg 7, tRDRD_dr/dd 7/7, tRDWR_sg/dg 15/15, t_RDWR_dr/dd 12/12, tWRRD_dr/dd 7 and tWRWR_sg 7.
> 
> tWRWR_dr/dd 7/7 is normal, because of 4200 MHz.
> 
> *tRFC directly depends on RAM voltage - the higher the RAM voltage, the lower tRFC*, as long as you stay under or not more than 40°C under load (fan(s) to actively cool RAM).
> I normally find the 4 first timings, with all the others at auto and then see how high I can go with RAM voltage so it doesn't give me errors with only 4 first timings tested manually set.
> After I find the highest (still reasonable) RAM voltage that doesn't give me errors, I then proceed with all the other timings.
> This allows to have lowest possible tRFC.
> 
> *tRAS* ideally 28
> *tFAW* should normally be 16
> *tRTP* ideally 6
> *tRRD_L* 4, if you can do tWR 8 (otherwise tRRD_L 6 is better for tWR 12)
> *tCKE* ideally 4
> *tRDRD_sg* ideally 5-6
> *tRDRD_dr/dd* ideally 5-6
> 
> tRDWR_sg/dg and t_RDWR_dr/dd should be not higher than 11 and sometimes 10 is possible.
> because to get possible min value for tRDWR_sg/dg and t_RDWR_dr/dd, you substracte tCWL value from tCL + 10, so tCL 15 minus tCWL 14 = 1 + 10 = 11.
> So 11 should be possible for all 4 and maybe even 10 (1 value lower than theoretical), with very good RAM.
> 
> *tWRRD_dr/dd* ideally 5-6
> *tWRWR_sg* ideally 5-6


@SAVIAR tWTR_L/S 12/8 is also a little bit high.
See if you can further lower both.
L should always be at least 4 higher than S.

What is your exact RAM model also?


----------



## geriatricpollywog

Groove2013 said:


> Yes, please, post here your timings, using ASRock Timing Configurator 4.0.13 from the first post of this thread and also DRAM, SA and VDDQ voltage.


I can’t get ASRock timing configurator to work on Z690.


----------



## Groove2013

My RAM is now working at 1.611 V DRAM voltage and I can't lower it even a little bit, because it gives me errors, since I have tRFC 234.
But also anything higher than 1.611 V isn't working, because it's then too high to be stable (without errors) and RAM modules temp isn't the problem at all.
My specific samples of RAM modules don't like more than 1.611 V DRAM voltage.


----------



## Groove2013

geriatricpollywog said:


> I can’t get ASRock timing configurator to work on Z690.


As long as it's version 4.0.*12* or better version 4.0.*13*, it should work, like for everybody else here.
It's brands' agnostic. Mobo only needs to be Z690 and that's it.

It's normal that something like version 4.0.*9* isn't working, because it doesn't have to, with Z690.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> @SAVIAR tWTR_L/S 12/8 is also a little bit high.
> See if you can further lower both.
> L should always be at least 4 higher than S.
> 
> What is your exact RAM model also?


It is Gskill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-32GTZR


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> @SAVIAR tWTR_L/S 12/8 is also a little bit high.
> See if you can further lower both.
> L should always be at least 4 higher than S.
> 
> What is your exact RAM model also?


I can boot and bench with lower timings but 2 hours after in GOW or DL2 could cause an soft crash/error. So I loosen them a little bit and no issues so far.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> I can boot and bench with lower timings but 2 hours after in GOW or DL2 could cause an soft crash/error. So I loosen them a little bit and no issues so far.


What is the exact model of your RAM (CPU-Z SPD tab)?

One shouldn't change several timings at once.

There is a specific order of timings one should work on first, before doing the others and there groups of timings that should be changed together and not separately or one by one.

When one changes specific (group(s) of) timings in a specific order and by specific values, one always knows which timing(s) cause(s) problem(s) and how low is too low.

It's very time consuming for sure, but that's the difference between good results/timings and mediocre ones.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> What is the exact model of your RAM?
> 
> One shouldn't change several timings at once.
> 
> There is a specific order of timings one should work on first, before doing the others and there groups of timings that should be changed together and not separately or one by one.
> 
> When one changes specific (group(s) of) timings in a specific order and by specific values, one always knows which timing(s) cause(s) problem(s) and how low is too low.


It is Gskill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-32GTZR.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> It is Gskill Trident Z F4-3600C16D-32GTZR.


Relatively "old" sticks PCB version/revision, so understandable it might not allow to tighten timings as much.
It's 1 year older than my 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 (F4-3800C14D-32GTZN ).


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Relatively "old" sticks PCB version/revision, so understandable it might not allow to tighten timings as much.
> It's 1 year older than my 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 (F4-3800C14D-32GTZN ).


15-15-15 4200 is tight enough, no compliants to be honest. 😁


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> 15-15-15 4200 is tight enough, no compliants to be honest. 😁


primary timings aren't as important as tertiary and especially secondary timings.

One can say having timings like 4000 MHz 14-14-14-28, but then dozens of other timings on auto, which doesn't make much sense.

It's all the timings combined vs. frequency that makes sense, not just few primary timings, just for looks/numbers.
Not saying you haven't tightened the other timings.


----------



## Groove2013

At least you know which timings and by how much you potentially can tighten, if your sticks/CPU IMC allow it or if/when you have more time.


----------



## Groove2013

4400 17-18-18-38, 4000 14-15-15-35 and 3600 14-14-14-34 should have the latest/best version/revision of the PCB, and most probably 4000 16-16-16-36.

It can, potentially, allow for lower timings, tolerance of higher DRAM voltage or better results at DRAM voltage, comparable to previous B-DIE RAM models.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> primary timings aren't as important as tertiary and especially secondary timings.
> 
> One can say having timings like 4000 MHz 14-14-14-28, but then dozens of other timings on auto, which doesn't make much sense.
> 
> It's all the timings combined that makes sense, not just few primary timings, just for looks/numbers.
> Not saying you haven't tightened the other timings.


Not exactly. You have to be able to achieve primary timings with a prime freq at first, then you can try your chance with secs. But secs will make fine tuning only and won't matter as much as primes and you have to spend lots of time to find correct value for each one. We may say:

1. Find the highest freq with the lowest primaries possible
2. Tighten your primaries with the lowest voltage possible 
3. Tighten your secs as much as you have enough time


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> 2. Tighten your primaries with the lowest voltage possible
> 3. Tighten your secs as much as you have enough time


It doesn't work like this and you're a good example of this.
Sure, you have "only" 1.545 V DRAM voltage, but because of this, your tRFC and some other timings are higher than they could have been, if you wouldn't lowered DRAM voltage as much.
And you can spend as much time as you want, but with such "low" DRAM voltage, you won't achieve much.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> 4400 17-18-18-38, 4000 14-15-15-35 and 3600 14-14-14-34 should have the latest/best version/revision of the PCB, and most probably 4000 16-16-16-36.
> 
> It can, potentially, allow for lower timings, tolerance of higher DRAM voltage or better results at DRAM voltage, comparable to previous B-DIE RAM models.


Again 12th gen behavior is totaly different. You have to adjust G1/G2 and T1/T2 accordingly. You may find my 10900kf results below:


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> Again 12th gen behavior is totaly different. You have to adjust G1/G2 and T1/T2 accordingly. You may find my 10900kf results below:
> 
> View attachment 2552753


I'm talking about RAM sticks only, no taking into account different CPU gens.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> View attachment 2552754


Well, 4400 16-16-16-36 is not exceptional at all, but good, for sure.
4600 or 4700 16-16-16-36 is very good. Or even 4800 16-17-17 or 17-17-17.
And that for 2x16 GB.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> It doesn't work like this and you're a good example of this.
> Sure, you have "only" 1.545 V DRAM voltage, but because of this, your tRFC and some other timings are higher than they could have been, if you wouldn't lowered DRAM voltage as much.
> And you can spend as much time as you want, but with such "low" DRAM voltage, you won't achieve much.


Correct, I have to increase Dram voltage for better secs, but how much performance will I get after I spend maybe days for correct values? %0,01?


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> Correct, I have to increase Dram voltage for better secs, but how much performance will I get after I spend maybe days for correct values? %0,01?


Depends on specific games/usage, of course.
Maybe it's only me, but I never leave free performance unused.
Since we pay so much for hardware we have, it should work as fast as it's possible.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Well, 4400 16-16-16-36 is not exceptional at all, but good, for sure.
> 4600 or 4700 16-16-16-36 is very good. Or even 4800 16-17-17 or 17-17-17.
> And that for 2x16 GB.


36 is a lazy/safe point I guess. Further than that need more time.


Groove2013 said:


> Depends on specific games/usage.
> Maybe it's only me, but I never leave free performance unused.
> Since we pay so much for hardware we have, it should work as hard as it's possible.


It is definitely not only you and you are right. It is free of charge indeed but requires time. If you are on boss fight and get an error because of a sec. especially on Elden Ring, it may cause a broken keyboard or an angry girlfriend. 😅


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> It is definitely not only you and you are right. It is free of charge indeed but requires time.


If you do only few timings per week and that only few days per week and not full day, but just few hours, after like 1 month you will finish.
And it's 1 month from the day you start to the day you finish, not like 30 real days of testing every day.
So no stress and stable/good timings/performance.


----------



## Groove2013

Once I find really all the timings, I then try to lower all RAM/IMC related voltages to the minimum possible/stable )))


----------



## Groove2013

Btw, what's the max acceptable/safe voltage for VDDQ TX for 24/7, 1.6 V?


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Btw, what's the max acceptable/safe voltage for VDDQ TX for 24/7, 1.6 V?


For B Die 1,6V will be the highest point without degredation.


----------



## Groove2013

SAVIAR said:


> For B Die 1,6V will be the highest point without degredation.


Not RAM sticks voltage, but VDDQ TX voltage


----------



## geriatricpollywog

@Groove2013 here is my bios profile for the Strix D4 if you want to try it. You must load bios 0901







bios 901 4200cl14.CMO







drive.google.com


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Not RAM sticks voltage, but VDDQ TX voltage


1,45V will be fine, but it has to be last resort. 1,35-1,4 will be the safest bet.


----------



## SAVIAR

bscool said:


> IML shows accurate latency with FSB OC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Release IMLCGui v1.0.1 · FarisR99/IMLCGui
> 
> 
> Force dark theme Make the quick bandwidth text box read-only Only create config file on save
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I showed results here
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BCLK overclock on ADL
> 
> 
> Can anything be done to get accurate results on Alderlake when OCing BCLK? It give inaccurate results on both DDR4 and DDR5 Video showing result. Not my system. But latency is actually in the 48 to 50ns range RWC are also about double what they actually are.
> 
> 
> 
> forums.aida64.com


This SW is pretty solid. Thanks again for your suggestion.


----------



## warbucks

geriatricpollywog said:


> @Groove2013 here is my bios profile for the Strix D4 if you want to try it. You must load bios 0901
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bios 901 4200cl14.CMO
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2552774


What's your DRAM, VDDQ TX and VCCSA voltages? I'm running 4100Mhz and almost identical timings (15-15-15-32 for my primaries).


----------



## notearlyadoptr

zhrooms said:


> 2x8GB Single Rank ran like a dream for me (and many others in this thread), I ran 4133 16-16-16 1.45V without an issue on the Strix with 0707, before I returned it, the exact kit was the 2x8GB Trident Z RGB 3600 16-16-16 1.35V from 2017. From my personal experience, using both 2x8GB Single Rank and 2x16GB Dual Rank, on TUF/Strix with 0707 on both, there is no difference between the boards or the sticks in terms of compatibility, the boards also overclock the same, which isn't a surprise as they're the same board more or less, and very similar sticks (both hits a wall at 4133 15-15-15 unless you push voltage), the only issue I've had on either board/kit is my IMC, but I think I've proven that the board itself (TUF) is already overkill from my 42.4ns overclock, by that I mean that it should run just the same on the cheaper ASUS Z690-P D4, really wish I could test a MSI Z690-A Pro, after having heard so many people have issues with it, but at the same time there are just as many that show screenshots of it being great, so it's still unclear to me if it's user error or something else, now that I know my exact IMC and RAM limit, would be very apparent if a new board I tried was better or worse, sadly I don't feel like putting any more time or effort into testing more boards, after the whole fiasco of purchasing a defective 12900K and having to return two Gigabyte boards because of trash BIOSes on launch, and I have everything working perfectly right now so would be nice to keep that going.


Hi, I'm considering yanking the Z690 Gigabyte Gaming X, and purchasing the TUF. Would that be advisable? The Gaming X is running fine, but the TUF is starting to have a really good reputation. Too bad you got burned out on testing boards, I was thinking about sending you my Gaming X board, with all the new bios updates, to give us a look at what the gigabyte is really capable of, MEM OC'ing and or CPU OC'ing as well. Currently running 8gb X 4 g.skill 3600 16-16-16 B-die. I've fiddled around a little without much luck. The extra 2X8GB were added to maintain the tight timings of the 8GB sticks and also have the added advantage of dual rank enjoyed by having 32GB total across the 4 slots.


----------



## hawkslayr

Currently stable while running 15-16-16-28 on primaries, but I'm struggeling to get 15-15-15-28 stable.

If anyone got any tips on how to get flat 15s stable I would really appreciate it!


----------



## Groove2013

Tested 2 BIOSes after BIOS 0901 for Strix D4 and both crap, concerning RAM.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> Tested 2 BIOSes after BIOS 0901 for Strix D4 and both crap, concerning RAM.


Still on 0707 and couldn’t see a reason to change.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> Tested 2 BIOSes after BIOS 0901 for Strix D4 and both crap, concerning RAM.


Not for me, they are very good. 4133 to 4266 DR b die.

I have tested them all and 901 is the best for DR b die.

If you cant do 4000c15 you have weak IMC or timings not set right. you cant set them like you did on older platforms they need to be a little looser and voltages set correctly like sa/vddq.


----------



## bscool

@Groove2013 I posted some setting that should give you an idea of what you need for DR on 901

Bios version past 901 are not good for DR b die beyond around 4000 and will have issues with RTLs training.









ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


Also noticed if flashing back from bios 1304 to 901 SP is messed up. To get it back to original flash 0023, then 707 and then 901. Also removing and replacing CPU with a different CPU kepts old CPU SP for me. I had to reflash bios to get the correct SP. Even turning off psu and aolding clear...




www.overclock.net


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool Strix D4 @ BIOS 0901 able to enter the BIOS @ 4133 14-14-14-*14* gear 1 (XMP 2x16 GB 3600 MHz 14-14-14-34 1.45 V).


----------



## Groove2013

4200 MHz not possible, be it 16-16-16-36 or 17-18-18-38.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> 4200 MHz not possible, be it 16-16-16-36 or 17-18-18-38.


Probably IMC or memory. Or might need sa in the 1.4 to 1.45 range and vddq 1.5 to 1.55 are what I would try.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool SA 1.52 V VDDQ TX 1.545 V.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool SA 1.52 V VDDQ TX 1.545 V.


z690 is very picky with sa/vddq as too high or too low wont boot or be stable. I think that sa is too high. But you just have to test. For me 1.35 or auto are fine for sa and vddq on bios 901 with 4133c15-15-15.

From what I have seen helping quite a few people OC mem on z690 ddr4 if you can get 4133c15 stable you are doing very good. Top percentage. Some can only get 4000c15 stable with DR and that is still a really good result.

The limiting factor is usually IMC.


----------



## bscool

@Groove2013 Also sometimes weird thing like 4200c16 wont boot but c15 will. Just an that I saw that on some bios certain cas wont boot at different frequencies.

Also check rtls. use memtweak it. you want them all the same on MC0 like 71/71/71. not 71/71/73.

It most likely wont be stable if they are off.

MC1 will usually be 2 tick higher like 73/73/73 if chA is 71/71/71 depends on how they train.


----------



## SAVIAR

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool SA 1.52 V VDDQ TX 1.545 V.


1.52 SA is way too high.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool 17-18-18-38 I tried, to be sure timings aren't too low, didn't work, for 4133, but 14-14-14-*14* works..


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool 17-18-18-38 I tried, to be sure timings aren't too low, didn't work, for 4133, but 14-14-14-*14* works..


I havent really pushed mine 4133c15-15-15 works so I just use that. New CPU I got can do 4266c15-16-16 but it is in z690 Apex right now for testing.

Have you used y cruncher to test yet.






BenchMate







benchmate.org





I like it as a quick way to test 2.5b. Not that it is end all test just a quick way to see if mem oc is stable. Doesnt mean it will pass longer memtest. But it only takes a minute or so to run.


----------



## hawkslayr

@bscool These settings are currently stable for me, but I would like to achieve 15-15-15 stable.

What would I have to tweak in order to do that? 

Im guessing I have to increase some voltages in order to do that?

Is it an increase in VDIMM voltage that allows me to push for 15-15-15 or is it SA, or both?


----------



## bscool

hawkslayr said:


> @bscool These settings are currently stable for me, but I would like to achieve 15-15-15 stable.
> 
> What would I have to tweak in order to do that?
> 
> Im guessing I have to increase some voltages in order to do that?
> 
> Is it an increase in VDIMM voltage that allows me to push for 15-15-15 or is it SA, or both?


Probably just vdimn.

On Strix d4 4000c15-15-15 usually 1.55v dram and 1.35 sa/vddq work for DR b die.

What are you at now for voltages? From what I have seen MSI can run with a little lower sa than Asus.


----------



## hawkslayr

bscool said:


> Probably just vdimn.
> 
> On Strix d4 4000c15-15-15 usually 1.55v dram and 1.35 sa/vddq work for DR b die.
> 
> What are you at now for voltages? From what I have seen MSI can run with a little lower sa than Asus.


Currently in bios I have set 1.54v dram which reads 1.556v in hwinfo, 1.35 sa and vddq at auto which is 1.2v in hwinfo.


----------



## bscool

hawkslayr said:


> Currently in bios I have set 1.54v dram which reads 1.556v in hwinfo, 1.35 sa and vddq at auto which is 1.2v in hwinfo.


Hmm I would think 1.55v dim would be plenty for 4000c15. If messing with voltages wont work it could be the memory.

What kit is it? I have had quite a few different DR b die and it a decent kit to do 4000c15.

The only one I had that couldnt was an older 3200c14 gskill kit. Could only get [email protected] Karhu and y cruncher stable on z690.

One if the weaker/lower binned kits I had recently was 3600c14-15-15 kit and it did [email protected]

Cant find the screenshot but it was Karhu stable also at 4133c15.


----------



## hawkslayr

bscool said:


> Hmm I would think 1.55v dim would be plenty for 4000c15. If messing with voltages wont work it could be the memory.
> 
> What kit is it? I have had quite a few different DR b die and it a decent kit to do 4000c15.
> 
> The only one I had that couldnt was an older 3200c14 gskill kit. Could only get [email protected] Karhu and y cruncher stable on z690.
> 
> One if the weaker/lower binned kits I had recently was 3600c14-15-15 kit and it did [email protected]
> 
> Cant find the screenshot but it was Karhu stable also at 4133c15.


I got a 3200c14 kit that is from team group, the sku is TTCED432G3200HC14BDC01.


----------



## bscool

hawkslayr said:


> I got a 3200c14 kit that is from team group, the sku is TTCED432G3200HC14BDC01.


Oh yeah then I would bet it is probably memory limit. That would be my guess anyway.


----------



## caffeinatedlgc

I probably need to read a full guide, as the last time I played with OC'ing RAM was a decade ago and most of that is lost or probably irrelevant now. I was just wondering what I might hope to achieve with this set without risk of damage:

G.Skill Trident Z RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4-4000 PC4-32000 CL18 Dual Channel Desktop Memory Kit F4-4000C18D-32GTZR - Black

I naively upped the voltage to achieve 4200mhz with trial and error without touching the timings (1.44v from 1.4v XMP), but couldn't get any higher nor could I go lower than CL18 at 4000mhz and I don't want to go crazy with the voltage. Goal is best overall performance not just higher memory clocks. Any advice?

Board is ASUS TUF Wifi D4, using 12700k.


----------



## bscool

caffeinatedlgc said:


> I probably need to read a full guide, as the last time I played with OC'ing RAM was a decade ago and most of that is lost or probably irrelevant now. I was just wondering what I might hope to achieve with this set without risk of damage:
> 
> G.Skill Trident Z RGB 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4-4000 PC4-32000 CL18 Dual Channel Desktop Memory Kit F4-4000C18D-32GTZR - Black
> 
> I naively upped the voltage to achieve 4200mhz with trial and error without touching the timings (1.44v from 1.4v XMP), but couldn't get any higher nor could I go lower than CL18 at 4000mhz and I don't want to go crazy with the voltage. Goal is best overall performance not just higher memory clocks. Any advice?
> 
> Board is ASUS TUF Wifi D4, using 12700k.


It is probably in gear 2 so you are getting worse performance than going with something like 4000 with tighter timings.

Did you select 1:1 in bios? if not it will auto to 1:2 or gear 2. I have no idea about OC that as it is not b die so cant help you there.

The basics will be here.









MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com





You need to run some test to verify your performance is increasing as leaving things on auto may loosen subtimings making performance worse even though frequency is higher.


----------



## hawkslayr

bscool said:


> Oh yeah then I would bet it is probably memory limit. That would be my guess anyway.


So an increase in sa wouldn't help, is increasing dram be the only thing I could tweak that would help me get lower primaries?


----------



## bscool

hawkslayr said:


> So an increase in sa wouldn't help, is increasing dram be the only thing I could tweak that would help me get lower primaries?


Try it, I am just saying if increasing voltages doesnt help then I would bet it is the memory over the IMC. Just basing it off of what I have seen, I could be wrong.


----------



## Groove2013

So annoying it can boot with 14-14-14-34 4133, but impossible to run without errors, while 4133 14-15-15-35 doesn't boot at all. It needs to be 3x15 in order to boot, which I can't understand, since 3x14 boots...


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> So annoying it can boot with 14-14-14-34 4133, but impossible to run without errors, while 4133 14-15-15-35 doesn't boot at all. It needs to be 3x15 in order to boot, which I can't understand, since 3x14 boots...


Have you tried swapping memory in slots to see if that makes any difference?

I can boot 4133c14-15-15 but it errors quickly in Karhu.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool Not swapped, since no need. If it couldn't do 14-15-15 unless I swap, ok. But it can do even 14-14-14 no problem. Just not 14-15-15, for some reason.


----------



## Groove2013

It's so beta for so much money, our money. I would even say it all feels even like alpha...


----------



## caffeinatedlgc

bscool said:


> It is probably in gear 2 so you are getting worse performance than going with something like 4000 with tighter timings.
> 
> Did you select 1:1 in bios? if not it will auto to 1:2 or gear 2. I have no idea about OC that as it is not b die so cant help you there.
> 
> The basics will be here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper
> 
> 
> C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You need to run some test to verify your performance is increasing as leaving things on auto may loosen subtimings making performance worse even though frequency is higher.


Thanks. It was on 1T, verified with CPU-Z. I'll check out the guide.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> It's so beta for so much money, our money. I would even say it all feels even like alpha...











Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion


As a very rough general rule of thumb it's pretty much tied, and you can compare the upper/lower end of DDR5 OC to upper/lower end of DDR4. Pleace post more game benchmarks with d4! Then we can make this forum better :)




www.overclock.net


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> Overclocking ADL - 12900k etc results, bins and discussion
> 
> 
> As a very rough general rule of thumb it's pretty much tied, and you can compare the upper/lower end of DDR5 OC to upper/lower end of DDR4. Pleace post more game benchmarks with d4! Then we can make this forum better :)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


If it can boot 14-14-14, why can't it boot 14-15-15 that is clearly worse than 14-14-14 and also less difficult for IMC?
Only at 4000 14-15-15 boots.
Never said anything about stability.
Would like just to understand.


----------



## Groove2013

Only for 4000 MHz 14-15-15 works.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> Only for 4000 MHz 14-15-15 works.


4133c14-15-15 boots right up for me


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> 4133c14-15-15 boots right up for me


Good, but not for me. Strange... since 14-14-14 boots.


----------



## warbucks

This is where I'm at with the DDR4 z690 rig.


----------



## Lothriel

I have 2x 16gb kit from gskill (F4-4000C18D-32GVK) and am having some issues even getting to the XMP settings, I seem to be at a wall at 3600mhz. I've tried bumping my dram volt to 1.50, SA to 1.35 and nothing. Should I return this kit and try something else or is there still hope? Motherboard is MSI PRO Z690-A WiFi DDR4 and im using the latest bios with an i7-12700k

Thanks!


----------



## Groove2013

Is there a way to make RAM and CPU frequency like flat numbers?
Because it shows me weird numbers in HWiNFO.

BCLK is 100 MHz in the BIOS of Strix D4 and I couldn't find anything called Spreadspectrum...


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> Is there a way to make RAM and CPU frequency like flat numbers?
> Because it shows me weird numbers in HWiNFO.
> 
> BCLK is 100 MHz in the BIOS of Strix D4 and I couldn't find anything called Spreadspectrum...


I leave bclk on auto and mine show 100 as you can see in my screenshot above.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool have you tried 2 new BIOSes by applying the profile you saved from 0901 or any other previous BIOSes o4 you also have tried entering the necessary stuff 8n new versions manually, in a clean way, with using profiles from previous versions?


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool have you tried 2 new BIOSes by applying the profile you saved from 0901 or any other previous BIOSes o4 you also have tried entering the necessary stuff 8n new versions manually, in a clean way, with using profiles from previous versions?


Yep they are not good for DR b die. At around 4000 and up they have issues booting good rtls. Even setting rtls manually they are not worth it in my opinion.

If you test them when you go back to 901 flash 0023, 707 and 901 if you want your SP p and e core to be what they are now. They will be off if you just flash from say 1304 to 901.


----------



## Groove2013

For me, SP reading is fine when switching between BIOSes.


----------



## Groove2013

Ok, I think I will get rid of all of this crap and stay on my 11900K.


----------



## Chaxx

bass junkie xl said:


> here is the bios profile .txt im on Bios 901 Asus Strix D4 f
> 12900k @ 5.2 Pcores / 4.8 ring /Adaptive Voltage no offset / HT on/ E cores off / 32 gb 16 x 2 of G.skill royal 4000 c -16-16-16-36 1.4v @ 4000 cl-14-15-15-35 @ 1.55v 9 cycles tm5 stable in the above pictures


Can u help me do this please


----------



## hawkslayr

bscool said:


> Try it, I am just saying if increasing voltages doesnt help then I would bet it is the memory over the IMC. Just basing it off of what I have seen, I could be wrong.


So seems like trcd just don't want to go below 16 no matter what I do.

I have however been able do to 3 cycles of anta absolut and 5 ycruncher pi25b runs in a row with 14-16-14-28 and the rest of the secondaries and tertiaries unchanged at 1.616v dram in hwinfo (1.6v in bios). 

I'm gonna try to get the dram voltage down a bit. When I set 1.58v dram in bios absolut errored after about 5 minutes so hopefully 1.59v in bios will be able to run these timings.

I was also able to run 5 runs of pi25b in a row with 14-16-13-28 but I consistently got worse scores than with 14-16-14-28. I couldn't break 75s with trp at 13, the lowest score I got was like 75.2s but with trp at 14 I could get below 75 often. So after I noticed this I didn't even bother to try out the stability with absolut.

I guess this is the best this kit can do and all there is left to do is try and lower voltages. The dram voltage I have pretty much locked in now, but do you have any recommendations for how to determine what the lowest stable sa voltage is?


----------



## bscool

hawkslayr said:


> So seems like trcd just don't want to go below 16 no matter what I do.
> 
> I have however been able do to 3 cycles of anta absolut and 5 ycruncher pi25b runs in a row with 14-16-14-28 and the rest of the secondaries and tertiaries unchanged at 1.616v dram in hwinfo (1.6v in bios).
> 
> I'm gonna try to get the dram voltage down a bit. When I set 1.58v dram in bios absolut errored after about 5 minutes so hopefully 1.59v in bios will be able to run these timings.
> 
> I was also able to run 5 runs of pi25b in a row with 14-16-13-28 but I consistently got worse scores than with 14-16-14-28. I couldn't break 75s with trp at 13, the lowest score I got was like 75.2s but with trp at 14 I could get below 75 often. So after I noticed this I didn't even bother to try out the stability with absolut.
> 
> I guess this is the best this kit can do and all there is left to do is try and lower voltages. The dram voltage I have pretty much locked in now, but do you have any recommendations for how to determine what the lowest stable sa voltage is?


Trial and error like anything. Lower it until it is unstable/gives errors. I dont know any other way.


----------



## Groove2013

...


----------



## edkieferlp

I always thought on Intel it is best to keep RCD and RP the same values.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool DDR4 boards for 12th gen are "cheap", since they can't even do 100 MHz BCLK. MSI and other boards have same 99.8 MHz BCLK problem. + no separate BCLK from USB, SATA and PCI-E, which is crap. No post codes screen, no safe boot or retry buttons, several useful settings missing in the BIOS and DDR4, despite better responsiveness (vs. DDR5) makes 12th gen cores starve for bandwidth, due to their big power and with DDR4, in several games one can observe lower GPU load in %, which indicates clearly that DDR4 is holding back 12th gen. But Even with DDR5, CPUs memory controllers aren't that great, same goes for motherboards and XMP profiles of most expensive RAM kits. Need to wait for 13th gen and buy and Asus Apex with separate from the rest BCLK + post codes screen, safe boot and retry buttons + more options in the BIOS and 2 RAM slots only. Currently, I see no reason to go for "cheap" DDR4 boards with a lot of limitations and DDR4 itsrlf being a limitation for 12th gen. Something like a 12900K, Apex mobo and G.Skill 6400 CL32 aren't worth their price, since 12900K IMC isn't that good, Apex can't go that high with DDR5 and same for current DDR5 kits.


----------



## Groove2013

I will happily pay for a 13900K with more cache, better cores and IMC and for an Apex and XMP DDR5 kits that can do a lot better than currently.


----------



## Groove2013

Can't stand the downgrade from Apex Z590 to a Strix Z690.


----------



## Damage Inc

Groove2013 said:


> Can't stand the downgrade from Apex Z590 to a Strix Z690.


Got any more cool stories to share?


----------



## gerardfraser

Comedy hour in the 
*Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock*


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> No one can tell you for sure. the only way to know if to buy another kit of memory(or CPU) and try it.
> 
> But I have helped a few people with mem oc on z690 ddr4 from 12700k to 12900k and they have all done 4000 to 4133 with DR b die. Some could boot 4133c15-15-15 with tight subs and bench it but couldnt get it Karhu or y cruncher stable and it was IMC. Getting another CPU with same mem and MB they could run 4133c15 stable.


I bought the g.skill 32GB DR B die 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v

I've tried MSI Pro z690-A and edge wifi ddr4
I'm struggling to get 4000 on gear 1 at 15-15-15.
I have dram v = 1.47, vccsa = 1.30v

Should I try Asus Strix D4 to reach 4000 cl14 or 4133 cl15?


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> I bought the g.skill 32GB DR B die 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v
> 
> I've tried MSI Pro z690-A and edge wifi ddr4
> I'm struggling to get 4000 on gear 1 at 15-15-15.
> I have dram v = 1.47, vccsa = 1.30v
> 
> Should I try Asus Strix D4 to reach 4000 cl14 or 4133 cl15?


It is up to you. Could be IMC the only way to know is try a Strix d4. 

Also you might need a little more dram like 1.5 to 1.55 for 4000c15-15-15, you need to test it.

I dont have an MSI MB to help you. @Ichirou has an MSI board so he might be able to tell you more about what to set.

I know for me Strix works great. Just messed with new 1290kf some more with SR and it works good for me.

DR can do similar # but this cpu and memory are probably going to someone else so testing for them.

Still need to tune for Y cruncher stability with CPU oc. But from what I have seen this is an excellent ddr4 IMC.

sp 86 to 87 and 99/61 to 101/61 depending on bios version


----------



## bscool

@SuperCloud Are you using IGPU or anyone using IGPU and OCing memory on z690?

I saw someone post about it effecting memory OC and dont remember where I saw it. @Ichirou and I were talking about it since he has been using IGPU and couldnt get past 4000 stable on Strix or MSI.

He has a GPU coming so he can test if it effect memory OC.


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> I bought the g.skill 32GB DR B die 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v
> 
> I've tried MSI Pro z690-A and edge wifi ddr4
> I'm struggling to get 4000 on gear 1 at 15-15-15.
> I have dram v = 1.47, vccsa = 1.30v
> 
> Should I try Asus Strix D4 to reach 4000 cl14 or 4133 cl15?


Have you tested XMP itself at Gear 1 yet? Or raising VDIMM? Try testing up to 1.60V.
Contrary to what you might think, I've personally noticed that more VDIMM may be necessary depending on IMC quality.
On two different 12900Ks, the one with the weaker IMC needed 0.05V more VCCSA and 0.01V more VDIMM to pass TM5 stable.

You shouldn't need to touch anything besides VCCSA on the MSI Edge. Test up to 1.35V to rule it out, since that's more than enough for 4,000 MHz.
VDDQ shouldn't matter, so just leave that on Auto. Or slap on 1.50-1.60V just to rule it out.

I managed 4,000 14-15-15-XX-1T with a Trident Z Neo 3,600 CL14 kit on Gear 1 just fine, but I needed 1.58V VDIMM to do so.
IIRC, I think VCCSA was at 1.30V, but that was on a slightly higher binned 12900K.
For SR, I only needed 1.25V VCCSA and 1.55V VDIMM for the same clocks. VDDQ was Auto on both.

I wouldn't swap from the MSI Edge to the ASUS Strix, IMHO. I actually did the reverse and found that the MSI Edge was a bit better.
The only thing I kind of miss from the Strix is that I can't set tRRS_S to 3 and tFAW to 12. Lost a good amount of bandwidth from that.
The Edge is hard locked to the standard 4/16.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> @SuperCloud Are you using IGPU or anyone using IGPU and OCing memory on z690?
> 
> I saw someone post about it effecting memory OC and dont remember where I saw it. @Ichirou and I were talking about it since he has been using IGPU and couldnt get past 4000 stable on Strix or MSI.
> 
> He has a GPU coming so he can test if it effect memory OC.


I "think" it was in the OC v/f guide thread, I will see if I can dig it up.








ASUS MAXIMUS Z690 EXTREME & i9-12900K GUIDE - Load...


....Just want to chime in here to give you my .02. I also have EKWB Velocity 2 (great cpu block) and also tried liquid metal (grizzly conductonaut). It lowered temps about 2-3C and my god I will never use that crap again on my IHS. Just not worth it. Stuff can get in places you don't want it...




www.overclock.net





Ok not the above link, this is one I was thinking of, not sure its the same as what your saying.








ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


rise L2 voltage around 1.4V for 5GHz ring with ecores ring not exceed 4ghz




www.overclock.net


----------



## bscool

@edkieferlp 

That might have been it, I dont know I read so dang much stuff all over the net hard to remember


----------



## bscool

Just tried swapping memory sticks in slots to see if any difference and it trained rtls 71 73. Resulted in errors quickly in tm5 1usmus. Setting rtls so they train 73/73 resolve errors. So something to check.

I know on my DR i could run MC0 channel lower and passed stability test. Probably related to being at the IMC and memory limit but something to look at if having issues.

Posted this in another thread but here is where you set them in Strix d4. Pic is from DR but for my SR I am testing now set them all to 73/73/73/73.

Also no need to mess with these unless having stability issues.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> Just tried swapping memory sticks in slots to see if any difference and it trained rtls 71 73. Resulted in errors quickly in tm5 1usmus. Setting rtls so they train 73/73 resolve errors. So something to check.
> 
> I know on my DR i could run MC0 channel lower and passed stability test. Probably related to being at the IMC and memory limit but something to look at if having issues.
> 
> Posted this in another thread but here is where you set them in Strix d4. Pic is from DR but for my SR I am testing now set them all to 73/73/73/73.
> 
> Also no need to mess with these unless having stability issues.


With my micron E memory I used same settings on RTL offset=0 and the RTL max =73 for both, I still have the RTL init values set to auto.

Anyway this seems to keep both RTL at 73. I was getting 75/73 tightening some timings and lowering SA voltage, so I did this "lock" and bumped SA back up tiny bit (1.240) and all good with every boot.

No issues so far with stability.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> Have you tested XMP itself at Gear 1 yet? Or raising VDIMM? Try testing up to 1.60V.
> Contrary to what you might think, I've personally noticed that more VDIMM may be necessary depending on IMC quality.
> On two different 12900Ks, the one with the weaker IMC needed 0.05V more VCCSA and 0.01V more VDIMM to pass TM5 stable.
> 
> You shouldn't need to touch anything besides VCCSA on the MSI Edge. Test up to 1.35V to rule it out, since that's more than enough for 4,000 MHz.
> VDDQ shouldn't matter, so just leave that on Auto. Or slap on 1.50-1.60V just to rule it out.
> 
> I managed 4,000 14-15-15-XX-1T with a Trident Z Neo 3,600 CL14 kit on Gear 1 just fine, but I needed 1.58V VDIMM to do so.
> IIRC, I think VCCSA was at 1.30V, but that was on a slightly higher binned 12900K.
> For SR, I only needed 1.25V VCCSA and 1.55V VDIMM for the same clocks. VDDQ was Auto on both.
> 
> I wouldn't swap from the MSI Edge to the ASUS Strix, IMHO. I actually did the reverse and found that the MSI Edge was a bit better.
> The only thing I kind of miss from the Strix is that I can't set tRRS_S to 3 and tFAW to 12. Lost a good amount of bandwidth from that.
> The Edge is hard locked to the standard 4/16.


Here is my setup:
MSI z690 Edge DDR4 Wifi
bios: A.12

cpu: 12600K, gpu: 3080 Ti FE

I am not using igpu

G.skill Trident Neo 32GB 4000mhz 16-16-16-36 1.4v, Dual Rank.

I have latest Windows 11 installed.

dram volt: 1.4, vccsa: 1.25v
everything else auto.

Gear 1, command rate 2
TRFC 280 or 140ns

I have tighten secondary and tertiary timings to extreme values using github ddr4 guide. I tested it using TM5, y-cruncher 2.5b several times. So all the maximum possible tightening of timings for secondary and tertiary is completed.

Now, I tried to lower TCL from 16 to 15, at same dram 1.55volt, vccsa 1.35v, It failed y-cruncher 2.5b.

Basically, I am struggling to tune primary to 15, the system boots, its just errors (instantly).


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> Here is my setup:
> MSI z690 Edge DDR4 Wifi
> bios: A.12
> 
> cpu: 12600K, gpu: 3080 Ti FE
> 
> I am not using igpu
> 
> G.skill Trident Neo 32GB 4000mhz 16-16-16-36 1.4v, Dual Rank.
> 
> I have latest Windows 11 installed.
> 
> dram volt: 1.4, vccsa: 1.25v
> everything else auto.
> 
> Gear 1, command rate 2
> TRFC 280 or 140ns
> 
> I have tighten secondary and tertiary timings to extreme values using github ddr4 guide. I tested it using TM5, y-cruncher 2.5b several times. So all the maximum possible tightening of timings for secondary and tertiary is completed.
> 
> Now, I tried to lower TCL from 16 to 15, at same dram 1.55volt, vccsa 1.35v, It failed y-cruncher 2.5b.
> 
> Basically, I am struggling to tune primary to 15, the system boots, its just errors (instantly).


So in essence, everything was stable until you tried to lower tCL from 16 to 15 and increase VDIMM accordingly?
Sounds like bad luck if anything. Kit probably just can't do it. What are the errors you get in TM5? Try using the 1usmus config so I can diagnose them.


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> With my micron E memory I used same settings on RTL offset=0 and the RTL max =73 for both, I still have the RTL init values set to auto.
> 
> Anyway this seems to keep both RTL at 73. I was getting 75/73 tightening some timings and lowering SA voltage, so I did this "lock" and bumped SA back up tiny bit (1.240) and all good with every boot.
> 
> No issues so far with stability.


Well just when I think I have something figured out I tried a couple more kits of SR b die I have and they will not let me set rtls. I have a gskill 4800c18 and Team 4500c18 kit. Both will not let me set 73/73 rtls.

But they are stable with 71/73 so I have no idea. 

It comes down to each person has to test everything for themselves.

Here is from testing last night. Both kits can use a little less sa/vddq than previous but the gskill 4800c18 kit is a pain in the [email protected]$ to get stable while Team is a dream


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool my 2x16 GB 3600 14-14-14-34 kit can't do 4100 or 4133 14-15-15, but can do 14-14-14 or can't do 4200 15-16-16-36 or 17-18-18-38, but can do 16-16-16-36. But my old 2x16 GB 3800 14-16-16-36 can do 14-15-15, 15-16-16 or 17-18-18 no problem...


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> So in essence, everything was stable until you tried to lower tCL from 16 to 15 and increase VDIMM accordingly?
> Sounds like bad luck if anything. Kit probably just can't do it. What are the errors you get in TM5? Try using the 1usmus config so I can diagnose them.


Is it really the memory kit or the cpu imc or motherboard? I can exchange this kit for another or get 3600 CL14-14-14-34 kit that is G.skill ? Would this kit be able to do 4000 CL15-15-15?

And yes, every timming is tighten , when I changed TCL 16 to 15, y-cruncher 2.5b failed. I will check TM5 extreme anata 777 errors and tell you.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> Is it really the memory kit or the cpu imc or motherboard? I can exchange this kit for another or get 3600 CL14-14-14-34 kit that is G.skill ? Would this kit be able to do 4000 CL15-15-15?
> 
> And yes, every timming is tighten , when I changed TCL 16 to 15, y-cruncher 2.5b failed. I will check TM5 extreme anata 777 errors and tell you.


Which MSI MB do you have currently?

I havent seen anyone post higher clocks than 4000 with DR b die on MSI Edge. I know a few people who had bother MSI Edge and Strix and Strix did another 133 with DR b die. Plus they could run tighter timings on Strix.

Maybe someone has posted results running 4133c15 + on MSI Edge memtest/Karhu/y cruncher stable with DR but I havent seen it.

Edit and getting y cruncher stable take a lot more vcore depending on CPU clocks.

@newls1 was on the users who had both MSI Edge and Strix message him


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool my 2x16 GB 3600 14-14-14-34 kit can't do 4100 or 4133 14-15-15, but can do 14-14-14 or can't do 4200 15-16-16-36 or 17-18-18-38, but can do 16-16-16-36. But my old 2x16 GB 3800 14-16-16-36 can do 14-15-15, 15-16-16 or 17-18-18 no problem...


I saw the same thing on z590 Apex certain kits worked better or easier. Especially in gear 2.


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> Is it really the memory kit or the cpu imc or motherboard? I can exchange this kit for another or get 3600 CL14-14-14-34 kit that is G.skill ? Would this kit be able to do 4000 CL15-15-15?
> 
> And yes, every timming is tighten , when I changed TCL 16 to 15, y-cruncher 2.5b failed. I will check TM5 extreme anata 777 errors and tell you.


Doubt it is the IMC/motherboard.

I actually bought and tested a 3,600 flat-14 2x16 GB DR G.Skill kit myself. Did 4,000 14-15-15-XX just fine, albeit needed more VCCSA and VDIMM compared to SR at the same settings. 1.58V instead of 1.55V. Couldn't do flat-14 without errors though; probably needs even more VDIMM to do so. But flat-15 will definitely work.

anta777 config errors aren't good to diagnose. They were never really intended to be, according to the maker himself. Use 1usmus instead.


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> It is up to you. Could be IMC the only way to know is try a Strix d4.
> 
> Also you might need a little more dram like 1.5 to 1.55 for 4000c15-15-15, you need to test it.
> 
> I dont have an MSI MB to help you. @Ichirou has an MSI board so he might be able to tell you more about what to set.
> 
> I know for me Strix works great. Just messed with new 1290kf some more with SR and it works good for me.
> 
> DR can do similar # but this cpu and memory are probably going to someone else so testing for them.
> 
> Still need to tune for Y cruncher stability with CPU oc. But from what I have seen this is an excellent ddr4 IMC.
> 
> sp 86 to 87 and 99/61 to 101/61 depending on bios version


So


bscool said:


> It is up to you. Could be IMC the only way to know is try a Strix d4.
> 
> Also you might need a little more dram like 1.5 to 1.55 for 4000c15-15-15, you need to test it.
> 
> I dont have an MSI MB to help you. @Ichirou has an MSI board so he might be able to tell you more about what to set.
> 
> I know for me Strix works great. Just messed with new 1290kf some more with SR and it works good for me.
> 
> DR can do similar # but this cpu and memory are probably going to someone else so testing for them.
> 
> Still need to tune for Y cruncher stability with CPU oc. But from what I have seen this is an excellent ddr4 IMC.
> 
> sp 86 to 87 and 99/61 to 101/61 depending on bios version


I tried dram v1.55 and vccsa 1.35

Tighten extremely secondary and tertiary timings for max.

When I tried to do 4000 tcl 15 and others 16-16-36

I fail y-cruncher 2.5b and TM5 Extreme antaa

Is my g.skills 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v kit not good?

Should I exchange for another one or get g.skills 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v?

Or try changing motherboard to Strix D4?

What's the best memory timing I can do on Strix?
4000 15-15-15-35 or 4100 CL15 possible on gear 1 2T?


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> So
> 
> 
> I tried dram v1.55 and vccsa 1.35
> 
> Tighten extremely secondary and tertiary timings for max.
> 
> When I tried to do 4000 tcl 15 and others 16-16-36
> 
> I fail y-cruncher 2.5b and TM5 Extreme antaa
> 
> Is my g.skills 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v kit not good?
> 
> Should I exchange for another one or get g.skills 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v?
> 
> Or try changing motherboard to Strix D4?
> 
> What's the best memory timing I can do on Strix?
> 4000 15-15-15-35 or 4100 CL15 possible on gear 1 2T?


What was your best OC so far, if you could repeat?

Have you tried blowing a fan at the RAM sticks yet?
Have you tried up to 1.60V VDIMM?

G.Skill 3,600 CL14 will work, but is it worth paying so much extra just for a little performance?
Don't swap the motherboard, it won't change a thing. Would only result in a loss.

You can run pretty much anything on 4,000 MHz on both boards at Gear 1.
4,100+ stable will depend on CPU IMC quality; motherboard is not really relevant.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> Doubt it is the IMC/motherboard.
> 
> I actually bought and tested a 3,600 flat-14 2x16 GB DR G.Skill kit myself. Did 4,000 14-15-15-XX just fine, albeit needed more VCCSA and VDIMM compared to SR at the same settings. 1.58V instead of 1.55V. Couldn't do flat-14 without errors though; probably needs even more VDIMM to do so. But flat-15 will definitely work.
> anta777 config errors aren't good to diagnose. They were never really intended to be, according to the maker himself. Use 1usmus instead.


For 4000 14-15-15 
What vcca did you use ?

So which memory kit should I order? Can you tell me specific model?

I'm still within return date..

I'm going to try 4000 tcl 15 keeping 16-16-36 and super tight secondary and tertiary.

This time I'll use dram volt 1.59 and vccsa 1.35
And vddq 1.30

I'll use TM5 1usmus_v3 

I'll report back!

Just curious, would I be able to hit 4000 cl15-15-15 at lower voltage on Asus Strix D4?


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> For 4000 14-15-15
> What vcca did you use ?
> 
> So which memory kit should I order? Can you tell me specific model?
> 
> I'm still within return date..
> 
> I'm going to try 4000 tcl 15 keeping 16-16-36 and super tight secondary and tertiary.
> 
> This time I'll use dram volt 1.59 and vccsa 1.35
> And vddq 1.30
> 
> I'll use TM5 1usmus_v3
> 
> I'll report back!
> 
> Just curious, would I be able to hit 4000 cl15-15-15 at lower voltage on Asus Strix D4?


4,000 MHz 14-15-15-XX-1T only needs 1.25V-1.30V VCCSA. If it needs more, you have a poorly binned CPU IMC.
VDIMM was 1.55V on SR, 1.58V on DR (both average binned RAM). Will need more VDIMM if you have a weaker CPU IMC (from my personal findings).
VDDQ didn't matter from my experience, so I just left it on Auto.

Yes, raising tCL will reduce the VDIMM necessary in general. That's regardless of motherboard.
I needed the same amount of VDIMM on both the ASUS Strix and MSI Edge for that particular RAM config.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> So
> 
> 
> I tried dram v1.55 and vccsa 1.35
> 
> Tighten extremely secondary and tertiary timings for max.
> 
> When I tried to do 4000 tcl 15 and others 16-16-36
> 
> I fail y-cruncher 2.5b and TM5 Extreme antaa
> 
> Is my g.skills 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v kit not good?
> 
> Should I exchange for another one or get g.skills 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v?
> 
> Or try changing motherboard to Strix D4?
> 
> What's the best memory timing I can do on Strix?
> 4000 15-15-15-35 or 4100 CL15 possible on gear 1 2T?


Y cruncher failing could also be cpu or vcore is cpu at default stock?

The 4000c16-16-16 kit is a good kit. I know a few people that used it on Strix and could do 4000 to 4133 c15-15-15 Karhu and y cruncher stable, 12700k and 12900k.

I would guess it is either MB or IMC.

You seem intent on trying Strix d4. get and see what it can do. I can help you more with Strix as that is what I run so I can send you CMO or guide you better.

Can you pass 1usmus v3 or Karhu?

To get better help you should post screenshot like I do with all your voltages and timings.

Also do you still have 12600k? Could be IMC I would guess overall being the lowest bin they probably have weaker IMC in general but I dont know.


----------



## Groove2013

I've done 4133 14-15-15 2x16 on Strix with my old 3800 14-16-16 kit and 4200 16-16-16.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Y cruncher failing could also be cpu or vcore is cpu at default stock?


Good point. I forgot about this.

I personally found that y-cruncher was harder to pass if either/both the P-cores or cache were clocked too high.
That's why I would lock them to something modest like 48/0/40 P/E/cache to rule it out.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> Good point. I forgot about this.
> 
> I personally found that y-cruncher was harder to pass if either/both the P-cores or cache were clocked too high.
> That's why I would lock them to something modest like 48/0/40 P/E/cache to rule it out.


Yeah I was spoiled with me first cpu with high SP on e core. This new CPU is bit harder to get to pass y crunher with e cores on.


----------



## VGeorge

bscool said:


> Well just when I think I have something figured out I tried a couple more kits of SR b die I have and they will not let me set rtls. I have a gskill 4800c18 and Team 4500c18 kit. Both will not let me set 73/73 rtls.
> 
> But they are stable with 71/73 so I have no idea.
> 
> It comes down to each person has to test everything for themselves.
> 
> Here is from testing last night. Both kits can use a little less sa/vddq than previous but the gskill 4800c18 kit is a pain in the [email protected]$ to get stable while Team is a dream


Yep, SR is a pita to try to get the RTLs to equilize. I still haven't figured out a consistent way of doing it.
Currently, I'm on 69/69, 71/71 and I am scared to touch anything ram related in case I break the RTLs once again.


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> Which MSI MB do you have currently?
> 
> I havent seen anyone post higher clocks than 4000 with DR b die on MSI Edge. I know a few people who had bother MSI Edge and Strix and Strix did another 133 with DR b die. Plus they could run tighter timings on Strix.
> 
> Maybe someone has posted results running 4133c15 + on MSI Edge memtest/Karhu/y cruncher stable with DR but I havent seen it.
> 
> Edit and getting y cruncher stable take a lot more vcore depending on CPU clocks.
> 
> @newls1 was on the users who had both MSI Edge and Strix message him


I have the MSI z690 Edge ddr4 wifi 
Latest stable bio A.12

Cpu: 12600k on stock speeds and auto voltage

I am outside right now otherwise I'd share screen shot.

All secondary and primary are tighten to extreme values on dram 1.4v, vccsa 1.25v, vddq auto

When I try to change tcl from 16 to 15, it errors on y-cruncher 2.5b and TM5 Extreme antaa

I tried vcca 1.35v and dram 1.55v same thing

I just changed dram to 1.59v and vddq to 1.30v

I'll post both extreme TM5 and Usama TM5 results

Do you think I can get lower voltages on Strix or higher clock? 

I'd rather keep MSI Edge ddr4 since I got it off Amazon and was able to use gift cards and coupons

Strix is only at local reatiler but if I can do higher memory clock and better timing at lower voltages I can grab it


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> I have the MSI z690 Edge ddr4 wifi
> Latest stable bio A.12
> 
> Cpu: 12600k on stock speeds and auto voltage
> 
> I am outside right now otherwise I'd share screen shot.
> 
> All secondary and primary are tighten to extreme values on dram 1.4v, vccsa 1.25v, vddq auto
> 
> When I try to change tcl from 16 to 15, it errors on y-cruncher 2.5b and TM5 Extreme antaa
> 
> I tried vcca 1.35v and dram 1.55v same thing
> 
> I just changed dram to 1.59v and vddq to 1.30v
> 
> I'll post both extreme TM5 and Usama TM5 results
> 
> Do you think I can get lower voltages on Strix or higher clock?
> 
> I'd rather keep MSI Edge ddr4 since I got it off Amazon and was able to use gift cards and coupons
> 
> Strix is only at local reatiler but if I can do higher memory clock and better timing at lower voltages I can grab it


I have no idea what would change for you with the Strix.

As for voltages it takes a lot of time trying different sa/vddq and dram. Because if one of them is too high or too low it will error or not boot.

Maybe you are already at the max of what your system can do or maybe you just dont have a setting right. No idea only you can figure it out by testing.

Something I noticed in testing all these different SR kits in the last few days having tCWL set correctly lets me use less sa/vddqq. Setting tCWL lower than tCL worked best dropping from 1.45v to 1.4v(sa/vddq) for 4266c15. But again it could vary for different MB or different ram etc.

And you say timings are tightened to extreme values, if I tighten some timings I cant boot or be stable at 4266 so you have to find a balance.


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> I have the MSI z690 Edge ddr4 wifi
> Latest stable bio A.12
> 
> Cpu: 12600k on stock speeds and auto voltage
> 
> I am outside right now otherwise I'd share screen shot.
> 
> All secondary and primary are tighten to extreme values on dram 1.4v, vccsa 1.25v, vddq auto
> 
> When I try to change tcl from 16 to 15, it errors on y-cruncher 2.5b and TM5 Extreme antaa
> 
> I tried vcca 1.35v and dram 1.55v same thing
> 
> I just changed dram to 1.59v and vddq to 1.30v
> 
> I'll post both extreme TM5 and Usama TM5 results
> 
> Do you think I can get lower voltages on Strix or higher clock?
> 
> I'd rather keep MSI Edge ddr4 since I got it off Amazon and was able to use gift cards and coupons
> 
> Strix is only at local reatiler but if I can do higher memory clock and better timing at lower voltages I can grab it


Have you monitored the DIMM temperatures in HWInfo?

Higher frequency might be a stretch since you're only on a 12600K, which has a weaker IMC than 12700K and 12900K.
Hell, the weaker IMC might also be a reason why you can't run tCL at 15. It does work the IMC harder, and VCCSA doesn't always automatically fix that.

Again, there is no point for you to swap to the Strix. You're most likely going to be disappointed.
I swapped FROM the Strix TO the Edge, and chose to keep the Edge in the end, even though the Strix had some pros I'd love to have kept.

I wouldn't hesitate to test the RAM up to 1.65V even. But blow a fan at it. It's not going to cause any significant damage if you're just testing it out for a bit.
My Galax kit is perfectly stable up to 1.68V VDIMM with a case fan blowing at it. Beyond that would need more extreme cooling that I can't provide right now.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> What was your best OC so far, if you could repeat?
> 
> Have you tried blowing a fan at the RAM sticks yet?
> Have you tried up to 1.60V VDIMM?
> 
> G.Skill 3,600 CL14 will work, but is it worth paying so much extra just for a little performance?
> Don't swap the motherboard, it won't change a thing. Would only result in a loss.
> 
> You can run pretty much anything on 4,000 MHz on both boards at Gear 1.
> 4,100+ stable will depend on CPU IMC quality; motherboard is not really relevant.


I tried 4000 M/T: 15-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.59v, vccsa 1.35v, vddq 1.30v, and same other sub tight timings.

I am running into many errors for 4100 MT even at 16-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.40 - 1.55, vccsa 1.35v. So that might be IMC?


My Best OC is 4000 M/T: 
primary: 16-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.40v , vccsa 1.25v, vddq auto
Gear 1, 2T

Secondary and tertiaries are in this pic:


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> 4,000 MHz 14-15-15-XX-1T only needs 1.25V-1.30V VCCSA. If it needs more, you have a poorly binned CPU IMC.
> VDIMM was 1.55V on SR, 1.58V on DR (both average binned RAM). Will need more VDIMM if you have a weaker CPU IMC (from my personal findings).
> VDDQ didn't matter from my experience, so I just left it on Auto.
> 
> Yes, raising tCL will reduce the VDIMM necessary in general. That's regardless of motherboard.
> I needed the same amount of VDIMM on both the ASUS Strix and MSI Edge for that particular RAM config.


Yeah, I probably got a weak / poorly binned CPU IMC (12600k). I need to test vccsa 1.30 for 4000 15-15-15-XX.

Is my memory kit good bin or bad bin? It's G.Skills Trident Neo 4000mhz 32GB (2x16GB) 16-16-16-36 1.4v dual rank. I read reviews this is the best/top bin B-die memory module
Is the G.skills Trident Neo 3600 32GB (2x16GB) 14-14-14-34 1.45v better bin? Both were same price..

Ahh okay, I would rather not change motherboards. I like MSI z690 edge ddr4, but if there is possible to achieve 15-15-15 at 4000 and lower vdimm or 4100 15-15-15 
I would change lol.


----------



## bscool

@SuperCloud It depends on the memory but even with my 4000c14 kit I cant run trfc that low at 4133+.

tWR and trrd l I also dont run that low.

Have you tried rasing them to see if you are stable with them higher to run 4100 or 4133?


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> Y cruncher failing could also be cpu or vcore is cpu at default stock?
> 
> The 4000c16-16-16 kit is a good kit. I know a few people that used it on Strix and could do 4000 to 4133 c15-15-15 Karhu and y cruncher stable, 12700k and 12900k.
> 
> I would guess it is either MB or IMC.
> 
> You seem intent on trying Strix d4. get and see what it can do. I can help you more with Strix as that is what I run so I can send you CMO or guide you better.
> 
> Can you pass 1usmus v3 or Karhu?
> 
> To get better help you should post screenshot like I do with all your voltages and timings.
> 
> Also do you still have 12600k? Could be IMC I would guess overall being the lowest bin they probably have weaker IMC in general but I dont know.


Yes, I have a i5 12600K cpu. It could be a weak IMC.

Well, I am within return date of motherboard, so I can swap it out and try Strix. Would I be able to achieve 4000 cl15-15-15 at lower voltages, or 4100 cl15-15-15 or at 16-16-16?

What cpu cooler are you using on Strix D4? I can't use Noctua D15 on it.

Is there another DDR4 B die kit that is better than 4000 c16-16-16-36 1.4v?

my cpu is on stock settings, and voltages is mobo default. I never touched it. y-cruncher never failed on 16-16-16-36, soon as its 15-16-16-36, changing TCL to 15, it crashes.

I did a test following settings:
4000, 15-16-16-36, vdimm 1.59v, vccsa 1.35v, vddq 1.30v,

it passed 1usmus v3 and extreme1 anta as well.


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> @SuperCloud It depends on the memory but even with my 4000c14 kit I cant run trfc that low at 4133+.
> 
> tWR and trrd l I also dont run that low.
> 
> Have you tried rasing them to see if you are stable with them higher to run 4100 or 4133?


Honestly, I never raised any of that for 4100. What should I change , to try 4100?


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> Yes, I have a i5 12600K cpu. It could be a weak IMC.
> 
> Well, I am within return date of motherboard, so I can swap it out and try Strix. Would I be able to achieve 4000 cl15-15-15 at lower voltages, or 4100 cl15-15-15 or at 16-16-16?
> 
> What cpu cooler are you using on Strix D4? I can't use Noctua D15 on it.
> 
> Is there another DDR4 B die kit that is better than 4000 c16-16-16-36 1.4v?
> 
> my cpu is on stock settings, and voltages is mobo default. I never touched it. y-cruncher never failed on 16-16-16-36, soon as its 15-16-16-36, changing TCL to 15, it crashes.
> 
> I did a test following settings:
> 4000, 15-16-16-36, vdimm 1.59v, vccsa 1.35v, vddq 1.30v,
> 
> it passed 1usmus v3 and extreme1 anta as well.
> View attachment 2553754
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2553755


I use Arctic LF 420 AIO.

No one can tell you if the Strix will work better or not. You have to try it. I know it wont be worse with DR b die.

But you might be at the IMC limit and be about the same on Strix or you might be able to run 4133. Only way to know is to try it.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> Honestly, I never raised any of that for 4100. What should I change , to try 4100?


try tRFC 320

tWR 12

tRRD L 6

Dont set tWRPRE or tWRPDEN if you were.

See if that helps any for 4100 or 4133.


----------



## bscool

@SuperCloud Are setting txP in bios? If so try leaving that on (7-8)default also.

And MSI might be different than Asus but I need sa and vddq to be equal or vddq to be slightly higher.


----------



## bscool

@SuperCloud also use memtweakit to display all rtls on last page.

If they train differently on one channel that can cause issues. like

MC0 71/73/71.

MC1 73/75/73

that is off

They should all be the same on each channel like in the pic.


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> I tried 4000 M/T: 15-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.59v, vccsa 1.35v, vddq 1.30v, and same other sub tight timings.
> 
> I am running into many errors for 4100 MT even at 16-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.40 - 1.55, vccsa 1.35v. So that might be IMC?
> 
> 
> My Best OC is 4000 M/T:
> primary: 16-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.40v , vccsa 1.25v, vddq auto
> Gear 1, 2T
> 
> Secondary and tertiaries are in this pic:
> 
> View attachment 2553753


Try tWR at 16, and tCWL on Auto. But, I still don't think it'll solve the issue of failing to pull tCL down to 15.
You can try setting tCCD_L to 7 and tCCL_S to 4, but I don't think that'll do much.
Try manually setting the RTTs to 80-34-48, in that top-down order, for MSI. That should be safe for most Samsung B-die kits.

I'm leaning towards an IMC weakness which isn't something you can magically fix with more VCCSA.
Still waiting for you to list TM5 1usmus errors though. That'll shine some light on what the cause may be.


SuperCloud said:


> Yeah, I probably got a weak / poorly binned CPU IMC (12600k). I need to test vccsa 1.30 for 4000 15-15-15-XX.
> 
> Is my memory kit good bin or bad bin? It's G.Skills Trident Neo 4000mhz 32GB (2x16GB) 16-16-16-36 1.4v dual rank. I read reviews this is the best/top bin B-die memory module
> Is the G.skills Trident Neo 3600 32GB (2x16GB) 14-14-14-34 1.45v better bin? Both were same price..
> 
> Ahh okay, I would rather not change motherboards. I like MSI z690 edge ddr4, but if there is possible to achieve 15-15-15 at 4000 and lower vdimm or 4100 15-15-15
> I would change lol.


The RAM is fine. The second kit that you mentioned is the same one I bought to test. I got 4,000 14-15-15-XX-1T G1 at 1.58V.
Could not do tRCD 14 at that voltage.

Don't change the motherboard. I'm like 99% confident it is not the problem here.
I wouldn't bother with trying for 4,100 MHz right now since you can't even do tCL of 15 at 4,000 MHz.
IMC is hit even harder with higher frequency.

One thing I'd like you to test is to set it to Gear 2 instead of Gear 1, and test 4,000 MHz 14-15-15-XX-1T at 1.60V. VCCSA/VDDQ on Auto.
Gear 2 will rule out the IMC issue. Check to see whether or not this is stable. If it is, then the IMC is just bad. If even that fails, it might really be the RAM.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> Have you monitored the DIMM temperatures in HWInfo?
> 
> Higher frequency might be a stretch since you're only on a 12600K, which has a weaker IMC than 12700K and 12900K.
> Hell, the weaker IMC might also be a reason why you can't run tCL at 15. It does work the IMC harder, and VCCSA doesn't always automatically fix that.
> 
> Again, there is no point for you to swap to the Strix. You're most likely going to be disappointed.
> I swapped FROM the Strix TO the Edge, and chose to keep the Edge in the end, even though the Strix had some pros I'd love to have kept.
> 
> I wouldn't hesitate to test the RAM up to 1.65V even. But blow a fan at it. It's not going to cause any significant damage if you're just testing it out for a bit.
> My Galax kit is perfectly stable up to 1.68V VDIMM with a case fan blowing at it. Beyond that would need more extreme cooling that I can't provide right now.


Yeah, at vdimm 1.59v, im at 33-35C , check my screen shots I've posted.

Honestly, I want to keep MSI z690 Edge DDR4, its really nice and cheap for me since I can use amazon gift cards + coupons lol. Strix D4, is gonna cost me $500+ CAD.

I think it might be a weak IMC to hit 4000 15 for dual rank.

I was able to do 4000 M/T at 15-15-15-23 at very tight timings on single rank 16GB at vdimm 1.53v.

It's just a bit of a struggle on Dual rank. If my kit is bad, I can replace it easily. Cause 4000 c16-16-16-36 1.4v and 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v are same price for me, both dual rank 32GB.

Why did you swap from Strix D4 to Edge DDR4?


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> my cpu is on stock settings, and voltages is mobo default. I never touched it. y-cruncher never failed on 16-16-16-36, soon as its 15-16-16-36, changing TCL to 15, it crashes.
> 
> I did a test following settings:
> 4000, 15-16-16-36, vdimm 1.59v, vccsa 1.35v, vddq 1.30v,
> 
> it passed 1usmus v3 and extreme1 anta as well.


It can pass TM5 but fail y-cruncher?

Set P-core to 47x, E-core off, Cache to 40x. Adaptive Voltage on Auto.
Try ruling out the CPU from the equation that way, since y-cruncher runs the CPU hard as well, even if it's with the RAM-only test.


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> @SuperCloud also use memtweakit to display all rtls on last page.
> 
> If they train differently on one channel that can cause issues. like
> 
> MC0 71/73/71.
> 
> MC1 73/75/73
> 
> that is off
> 
> They should all be the same on each channel like in the pic.


They all are same just likt the picture you posted

Here is mine


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> Why did you swap from Strix D4 to Edge DDR4?


BIOS is so much easier, clearer, and smoother to work with, and it trains the RAM so much easier and faster than the Strix can.
Plus, it reveals a lot of timings and values that are basically hidden on the Strix.
I could also boot much higher frequencies on Gear 2, while it was basically impossible to do the same on the Strix, all else held equal.
I had to play around with so many BIOSes on the Strix just to find one that was the strongest for my kit, while the Edge worked at the best settings I could find on the Strix right out of the box.
There's probably some more stuff to mention, but overall, the MSI feels so much more intuitive to use.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> They all are same just likt the picture you posted
> 
> Here is mine
> View attachment 2553762


Are they like that when you boot 4100 or 4133. That is something to check but like @Ichirou said could be IMC limit

I should buy z690 Edge and return if wont run DR 4133 to 4266 like Strix can. Amazon return is easy.

I just have a feeling it is a waste of time. I know 2 people that had them and they both went to Strix and ran 4133 where they struggled at 4000 on Edge. Plus I already have too many MBs.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> It can pass TM5 but fail y-cruncher?
> 
> Set P-core to 47x, E-core off, Cache to 40x. Adaptive Voltage on Auto.
> Try ruling out the CPU from the equation that way, since y-cruncher runs the CPU hard as well, even if it's with the RAM-only test.


it failed the y-cruncher 2.5b when vdimm was at 1.55v, vccsa 1.35v, and vddq auto.

I just tested y-cruncher 2.5b at vdimm 1.59v, vccsa 1.35v, and vddq 1.30v, ran it back-to-back 6x, it didn't crash, no errors.


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> Are they like that when you boot 4100 or 4133. That is something to check but like @Ichirou said could be IMC limit
> 
> I should buy z690 Edge and return if wont run DR 4133 to 4266 like Strix can. Amazon return is easy.
> 
> I just have a feeling it is a waste of time. I know 2 people that had them and they both went to Strix and ran 4133 where they struggled at 4000 on Edge. Plus I already have too many MBs.


Actually I never checked for 4100 and 4133.

So, basically it could be my IMC weak or MSI Edge ddr4?

Would I be able to run 4000 M/T CL15-15-15 at lower voltages than what I am doing on MSI Edge?


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> Actually I never checked for 4100 and 4133.
> 
> So, basically it could be my IMC weak or MSI Edge ddr4?
> 
> Would I be able to run 4000 M/T CL15-15-15 at lower voltages than what I am doing on MSI Edge?


Motherboard is really only responsible for making sure the PC can boot. CPU and RAM stability is entirely up to you afterwards.
I know the Edge can boot up to 4,133 MHz just fine, but the IMCs on my CPU samples were all too weak to stabilize.

I highly doubt that the voltages would change by much between ASUS and MSI. If anything, I think MSI could run VCCSA lower.

Test out Gear 2 and you will be able to isolate the RAM out of the equation.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> Actually I never checked for 4100 and 4133.
> 
> So, basically it could be my IMC weak or MSI Edge ddr4?
> 
> Would I be able to run 4000 M/T CL15-15-15 at lower voltages than what I am doing on MSI Edge?


How many times do i have to tell you the same answer when you ask me the same quesiton 

Your mem OC is not going to be worse on the Strix. Probably be a little better. But up to IMC if it will do 4133 on Strix.

I have no doubt the Strix is better for DR b die OC. But if your IMC can do better is the question.


----------



## edkieferlp

You guys talking about weak 12600k IMC's, last night I figured bumping freq 3867 to 3900 would be easy with all settings the same. I did bump Vram tiny bit to 1.375.
Anyway it passed 2hr memtest86 in bios but y cruncher errored at 72% mark, something abut something to large.

I should of tested TM5 but it was 3:00Am so I went back to 3867 and bumped ring 38>39 instead.

FWIW, the voltages I had last Vdim=1.400, SA= 1.240, VDDQ tx =1.35.
next would be test with CPU clock 100mhz lower and see if that helps if TM5 passes.
I also forgot to reset RTL to auto to see where they land.

Here timings I used at 3900.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> Try tWR at 16, and tCWL on Auto. But, I still don't think it'll solve the issue of failing to pull tCL down to 15.
> You can try setting tCCD_L to 7 and tCCL_S to 4, but I don't think that'll do much.
> Try manually setting the RTTs to 80-34-48, in that top-down order, for MSI. That should be safe for most Samsung B-die kits.
> 
> I'm leaning towards an IMC weakness which isn't something you can magically fix with more VCCSA.
> Still waiting for you to list TM5 1usmus errors though. That'll shine some light on what the cause may be.
> 
> The RAM is fine. The second kit that you mentioned is the same one I bought to test. I got 4,000 14-15-15-XX-1T G1 at 1.58V.
> Could not do tRCD 14 at that voltage.
> 
> Don't change the motherboard. I'm like 99% confident it is not the problem here.
> I wouldn't bother with trying for 4,100 MHz right now since you can't even do tCL of 15 at 4,000 MHz.
> IMC is hit even harder with higher frequency.
> 
> One thing I'd like you to test is to set it to Gear 2 instead of Gear 1, and test 4,000 MHz 14-15-15-XX-1T at 1.60V. VCCSA/VDDQ on Auto.
> Gear 2 will rule out the IMC issue. Check to see whether or not this is stable. If it is, then the IMC is just bad. If even that fails, it might really be the RAM.


I did the following
4000 15-15-15-36 at vdimm 1.6v
Gear 2, 2T
Vccsa and vddq on auto
I can't boot at all. Basically, it goes into black screen. I can't even get out of it. It keeps looping into the black screen. It won't even load the bios ..

What does that mean? Is it my my motherboard, imc, or memory kit?


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> I did the following
> 4000 15-15-15-36 at vdimm 1.6v
> Gear 2, 2T
> Vccsa and vddq on auto
> I can't boot at all. Basically, it goes into black screen. I can't even get out of it. It keeps looping into the black screen. It won't even load the bios ..
> 
> What does that mean? Is it my my motherboard, imc, or memory kit?


Gotta reset CMOS, or keep cycling the power like 3-4 times right after it starts to boot to force the board to fail to boot and give the "Memory Overclock Failed" message.

If even Gear 2 won't work, it might be a RAM issue. Try 16-15-15-36-2T instead of tCL 15.
If you can exchange the kit, then it doesn't hurt to do so.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> Gotta reset CMOS, or keep cycling the power like 3-4 times right after it starts to boot to force the board to fail to boot and give the "Memory Overclock Failed" message.
> 
> If even Gear 2 won't work, it might be a RAM issue. Try 16-15-15-36-2T instead of tCL 15.
> If you can exchange the kit, then it doesn't hurt to do so.


I just switched the power supply off from back lol
I will.pull the CMOS battery out now.

Yeah gear 2 isn't working. It won't even post to bios.
Is this most likely memory kit problem?

Yeah I can exchange it or get a different kit, I got it from Newegg so still within the period.

Exchange for same kit again or get 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v?


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> I just switched the power supply off from back lol
> I will.pull the CMOS battery out now.
> 
> Yeah gear 2 isn't working. It won't even post to bios.
> Is this most likely memory kit problem?
> 
> Yeah I can exchange it or get a different kit, I got it from Newegg so still within the period.
> 
> Exchange for same kit again or get 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v?


Didn't you say that 15-16-16-36 worked, though? It could just be that you don't have enough VDIMM for tRCD to run at 15, or the kit isn't binned well enough for it.
You already got the tCL 15 that you wanted. Not all kits can run a tight tRCD at 4,000+, as that involves completely different binning from tCL altogether.

Why don't you try 14-16-16-XX instead? (With enough VDIMM, naturally.)

One way you can bin your tRCD is to install Intel XTU, boot it up as your working stable 15-16-16-36, and then use XTU to temporarily drop tRCD to 15. Run TM5.
If it starts to throw errors even though tRCD 16 doesn't, that just means your kit can't do tRCD at 15 (at that frequency and/or voltage).

FWIW, my Micron kit can't boot tRCD at 18 at 4,174 MHz; it gets stuck on a black screen as well. Hit the limits of the RAM.
Similarly with Samsung, tRCD scales up with frequency and needs to be loosened accordingly.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> Didn't you say that 15-16-16-36 worked, though? It could just be that you don't have enough VDIMM for tRCD to run at 15, or the kit isn't binned well enough for it.
> You already got the tCL 15 that you wanted. Not all kits can run a tight tRCD at 4,000+, as that involves completely different binning from tCL altogether.
> 
> Why don't you try 14-16-16-XX instead? (With enough VDIMM, naturally.)
> 
> One way you can bin your tRCD is to install Intel XTU, boot it up as your working stable 15-16-16-36, and then use XTU to temporarily drop tRCD to 15. Run TM5.
> If it starts to throw errors even though tRCD 16 doesn't, that just means your kit can't do tRCD at 15 (at that frequency and/or voltage).
> 
> FWIW, my Micron kit can't boot tRCD at 18 at 4,174 MHz; it gets stuck on a black screen as well. Hit the limits of the RAM.
> Similarly with Samsung, tRCD scales up with frequency and needs to be loosened accordingly.


Yesterday, I did 4000 15-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.59v, vccsa 1.35v, vddq 1.30v on gear 1 and 2T

I tried to check if it's imc or memory kit, so followed your guide and did the following

4000 15-15-15-36 at vdimm 1.60v, vccsa auto, vddq auto on gear 2 and 2T

Just getting stuck on black screen. No post and boot into Windows.

So , can't determine if it's the memory kit issue? 

Do I switch back to gear 1 and 2T then try to lower trcd??

Would the 3600 14-14-14-34 kit can do 4000 15-15-15-35? 

I thought 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v is better bin than 3600 14-14-14 one


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> Didn't you say that 15-16-16-36 worked, though? It could just be that you don't have enough VDIMM for tRCD to run at 15, or the kit isn't binned well enough for it.
> You already got the tCL 15 that you wanted. Not all kits can run a tight tRCD at 4,000+, as that involves completely different binning from tCL altogether.
> 
> Why don't you try 14-16-16-XX instead? (With enough VDIMM, naturally.)
> 
> One way you can bin your tRCD is to install Intel XTU, boot it up as your working stable 15-16-16-36, and then use XTU to temporarily drop tRCD to 15. Run TM5.
> If it starts to throw errors even though tRCD 16 doesn't, that just means your kit can't do tRCD at 15 (at that frequency and/or voltage).
> 
> FWIW, my Micron kit can't boot tRCD at 18 at 4,174 MHz; it gets stuck on a black screen as well. Hit the limits of the RAM.
> Similarly with Samsung, tRCD scales up with frequency and needs to be loosened accordingly.


I was able to overclock 3200 14-14-14-31 kit to 4000 15-15-15-23 at 1.53v vdimm easily but that was a single rank kit 16GB.


----------



## Ichirou

@SuperCloud
Again, tRCD is binned separately from tCL, so if you can boot 15-16-16-XX but can't boot 15-15-15-XX, chances are, the RAM's just not up to snuff.
If that kit's tRCD truly is weak, nothing you do will allow you to boot as it just can't. Raising VDIMM further might help, but doubtful.
(And obviously, reducing frequency will allow it to work as well. If you were to test 3,800 MHz instead, it'll probably boot just fine.)

If you are hellbent on getting a lower tRCD, you might need to exchange the kit for one that's been binned at a tighter tRCD (like the 3,600 flat-14 kit).
And as I've mentioned, I already personally tested the DR 2x16GB 3,600 flat-14 kit, and achieved 14-15-15-XX-1T on it at 4,000 MHz Gear 1 stable. Needed 1.58V.
Not as well binned as the unicorn 3,800 or 4,000 CL14 kits which can do the same at less VDIMM, but still very good for what it's worth.


----------



## Groove2013

Managed to achieve flat/correct frequencies by setting BCLK on my Strix D4 to 100.250 MHz.


----------



## Groove2013

Can (only) boot 4200 14-15-15-*15* with my 2x16 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP on my Strix D4 BIOS 0901 SA/VDDQ TX 1.5 V and VDIMM 1.65 V.

4266 a no go, be it 16-16-16-36 or 17-18-18-38.


----------



## Groove2013

I see my Strix D4 so far likes when SA and VDDQ TX are same.


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> You guys talking about weak 12600k IMC's, last night I figured bumping freq 3867 to 3900 would be easy with all settings the same. I did bump Vram tiny bit to 1.375.
> Anyway it passed 2hr memtest86 in bios but y cruncher errored at 72% mark, something abut something to large.
> 
> I should of tested TM5 but it was 3:00Am so I went back to 3867 and bumped ring 38>39 instead.
> 
> FWIW, the voltages I had last Vdim=1.400, SA= 1.240, VDDQ tx =1.35.
> next would be test with CPU clock 100mhz lower and see if that helps if TM5 passes.
> I also forgot to reset RTL to auto to see where they land.
> 
> Here timings I used at 3900.
> 
> View attachment 2553804


I like y cruncher but just because it fails y cruncher doesnt mean it is bad memory oc. It can also be because of too high of clock on one of the CPU be it P, E or cache clocks or not enough voltage.

I was spoiled with my first 12900k that could run y cruncher so easily. Thie new kf is much toucher. Cant clock e core as high and needs more vcore to pass y cruncher.

You could have a mem oc that will game and pass everything else but might fail y cruncher. So it is up to each indivual to decide what they need. Nothing most people do will stress the system like y cruncher.


----------



## Groove2013

With 1.5 V SA/VDDQ TX and 1.65 V VDIMM I can clearly see what boots and what not, but 1.5 V SA/VDDQ TX is definitely too much, since it throws errors. So now looking what's the max SA/VDDQ TX it can do without throwing errors and later will see whether it's possible to have different and not same values for SA and VDDQ TX and whether these values can be different and not same and how far each value can be from each other.


----------



## Groove2013

4200 MHz not stable, even at 16-16-16-36.
Testing 4133 MHz.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> I just switched the power supply off from back lol
> I will.pull the CMOS battery out now.
> 
> Yeah gear 2 isn't working. It won't even post to bios.
> Is this most likely memory kit problem?
> 
> Yeah I can exchange it or get a different kit, I got it from Newegg so still within the period.
> 
> Exchange for same kit again or get 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v?


I would exchange the MB before the ram 

Show me anyone on MSI Edge running DR 4133 to 4266 like people are on Strix with tight subtimings.

This has multiple people on Strix running 4000+ on DR b die if you look back thru it but none I see on MSI Edge.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> Yesterday, I did 4000 15-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.59v, vccsa 1.35v, vddq 1.30v on gear 1 and 2T
> 
> I tried to check if it's imc or memory kit, so followed your guide and did the following
> 
> 4000 15-15-15-36 at vdimm 1.60v, vccsa auto, vddq auto on gear 2 and 2T
> 
> Just getting stuck on black screen. No post and boot into Windows.
> 
> So , can't determine if it's the memory kit issue?
> 
> Do I switch back to gear 1 and 2T then try to lower trcd??
> 
> Would the 3600 14-14-14-34 kit can do 4000 15-15-15-35?
> 
> I thought 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v is better bin than 3600 14-14-14 one


Will MSI let you set sa 1.35 and vddq 1.35? Or doesnt it boot or try 1.4sa 1.4vddq.

I know on older bioses on Asus I needed much more sa and vddq like in the 1.45sa and vddq 1.55v for DR b die.


----------



## Raphie

3900mHz Gear-1, 1T 1,28v 4x 8GB, imho not worth it to bump voltage excessively to squeeze out last 100mHz


----------



## Groove2013

1T, but CL19 )


----------



## Raphie

Yup, 2T doesn't make the CL go any lower, nothing happens until 1.5v+ and then it still needs 19 @ 4K.
haven't tested above 1.5v, RTL goes down to 71 max. I need to go back to 3800 to be able to lower the CL.
Gear-2 gets me at 4133, but increases latency (now 61ns G2 4133 81ns).
So I guess this is the power/performance sweetspot for me. For me TDP is a big thing, I like my fans OFF < 500RPM maximum
keeping temps for processor 3 M2 SSD's and RTX 3070 well below 50c.
not interested in a current sucking hoover to gain the last 100mhz.
most people with 4 sticks don't get beyond 3666, no matter the CL or voltage, so I consider myself lucky


----------



## bscool

Raphie said:


> Yup, 2T doesn't make the CL go any lower, nothing happens until 1.5v+ and then it still needs 19 @ 4K.
> haven't tested above 1.5v, RTL goes down to 71 max. I need to go back to 3800 to be able to lower the CL.
> Gear-2 gets me at 4133, but increases latency (now 61ns G2 4133 81ns).


You would get better performance at 3600c14 2t as an example gear 1.

Or wont it run gear 1? Latency should be in the 45 to 50ns range depending on OS with gear 1.

Here is Strix with 4x16 at 3600c14


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> I like y cruncher but just because it fails y cruncher doesnt mean it is bad memory oc. It can also be because of too high of clock on one of the CPU be it P, E or cache clocks or not enough voltage.
> 
> I was spoiled with my first 12900k that could run y cruncher so easily. Thie new kf is much toucher. Cant clock e core as high and needs more vcore to pass y cruncher.
> 
> You could have a mem oc that will game and pass everything else but might fail y cruncher. So it is up to each indivual to decide what they need. Nothing most people do will stress the system like y cruncher.


I am thinking it might be low SA voltage of 1.24, heading to 4000 territories probably needs more SA closer to 1.35.
It could be Vcore, I just raised my ac_ll cause like an idiot I ran prime95 small ftt with avx2 to see temps and got a blue screen watchdog timer error, so bumped up ac_ll from 0.25 to 0.30 and removed negative voltage offset on v/f #6. against my better judgment i couldn't have it crash within 30 sec.

here my results @3867 and P cores 51,51,50,49,48,48, ring 39. (not trying to win BM, it is a daily system, I just like to get the most out of it w/o high temps/voltages).


----------



## bscool

Strix bios 901
4266c15-16-16 DR b die


----------



## VGeorge

bscool said:


> Strix bios 901
> 4266c15-16-16 DR b die


Insane! How's DDR5 treating you btw?


----------



## bscool

VGeorge said:


> Insane! How's DDR5 treating you btw?


It is good but I only have 1 kit of ddr5 and I dont thinnk my kit is the best bin. I cant run timings as tight as some 7000c32


----------



## acoustic

I like this separate thread. Nice idea!


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> I would exchange the MB before the ram
> 
> Show me anyone on MSI Edge running DR 4133 to 4266 like people are on Strix with tight subtimings.
> 
> This has multiple people on Strix running 4000+ on DR b die if you look back thru it but none I see on MSI Edge.


I bought the Asus z690 Strix D4
I'm going to try out this motherboard before changing memory kit. 
I had to update MSI Edge bios to be able to do 4000 
On A.10 bios I couldn't post on 4000.

Can my kit 4000 16-16-16-36 kit do 4000 cl15 or even 4100? 

Can you help me tune the memory speed?
Also what bios do you recommend for Asus Strix D4?

I paid $440 for the memory kit, so I need to maximize the performance

Honestly I forgot what posts are in this thread haha i read all. I did notice a lot of people are using Asus Strix or TUF then MSI Pro z690-A or Edge.


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> Will MSI let you set sa 1.35 and vddq 1.35? Or doesnt it boot or try 1.4sa 1.4vddq.
> 
> I know on older bioses on Asus I needed much more sa and vddq like in the 1.45sa and vddq 1.55v for DR b die.


I was able to do vccsa 1.35v and vddq 1.35v on gear 1 at 15-16-16-36 at vdimm 1.59v

When I change trcd and RTP to 15 I can't boot
And post.

Before I change memory kit, I got the Strix D4
Might as well try it and see


----------



## bscool

Bumped up e core to 41. I cant believe it ran y cruncher  

Same setting that passed Karhu and TM5

Played some games and stable. Could probably raise P core to 53 but probably wouldnt run y cruncher


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> I bought the Asus z690 Strix D4
> I'm going to try out this motherboard before changing memory kit.
> I had to update MSI Edge bios to be able to do 4000
> On A.10 bios I couldn't post on 4000.
> 
> Can my kit 4000 16-16-16-36 kit do 4000 cl15 or even 4100?
> 
> Can you help me tune the memory speed?
> Also what bios do you recommend for Asus Strix D4?
> 
> I paid $440 for the memory kit, so I need to maximize the performance
> 
> Honestly I forgot what posts are in this thread haha i read all. I did notice a lot of people are using Asus Strix or TUF then MSI Pro z690-A or Edge.


Yeah Ill will help you as much as I can.

Be intresting to see how this goes. I think we can get you at min tighter timings at 4000c15-15-15 and maybe 4133 if your IMC can do it.

When you get it dont update to the latest bios only use 901.

Something else to look at is if your Strix has a new 2022 date. I saw someone post pics that Strix d4 has 2022 release also, like Apex. 

IMG_20220226_130045301.jpg


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool on the box of my Strix D4 it says "Manufacturing date: 2022-1".


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool on the box of my Strix D4 it says "Manufacturing date: 2022-1".


Mine has no date and I purchased it back in November. As far as I know the newer ones have dates.

What country was it made in? Mine says Vietnam.

Maybe I didnt see 2022 Strix d4. I looked thru the discord I thought I saw it on and only saw Hero and Glacial Extreme 2022 made in China pics.

I was just curious because some boards have no dates and some 2021, some 2022. Was trying to see if certain ones were better.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool China.


----------



## SuperCloud

My Asus z690 Strix D4 doesn't have a date and doesn't say where it's made.

The store had several of these and the other stock that has November 2021 manufacturing date. The box art was different as well from the one I got.

I figured this is newer like made in 2022

Could it be 2021 stock before November?? Or 2022?


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> My Asus z690 Strix D4 doesn't have a date and doesn't say where it's made.
> 
> The store had several of these and the other stock that has November 2021 manufacturing date. The box art was different as well from the one I got.
> 
> I figured this is newer like made in 2022
> 
> Could it be 2021 stock before November?? Or 2022?


Hmm weird I dont know why the have so many different versions or revisions. Might be something to do with region also.

I sent you a PM also.


----------



## Groove2013

Managed to do 1,5 hours Karhu RAM Test before error @ 4133 MHz 14-15-15-15 @ 1.5 V (BIOS) SA/VDDQ TX. For that I had to lower VDIMM several steps from 1.65 V (BIOS), because in the beginning even few minutes wasn't possible without error(s), with higher VDIMM.


----------



## Groove2013

Will see if lowering VDIMM further can increase the time in Karhu without errors or not. If lower VDIMM will result in same or shorter time before error(s) in Kahru, it's then either SA/VDDQ TX too high or CPU memory controller unable to do it.


----------



## Groove2013

Past 1.5 V (BIOS) SA/VDDQ TX - no boot.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> Bumped up e core to 41. I cant believe it ran y cruncher
> 
> Same setting that passed Karhu and TM5
> 
> Played some games and stable. Could probably raise P core to 53 but probably wouldnt run y cruncher


Nice, I just noticed something in the Github memory guide, do you think this applys to ASUS Z690 platforms. Having a odd # for tCWL ?

"Some motherboards don't play nice with odd tCWL. For example, I'm stable at 4000 15-19-19 tCWL 14, yet tCWL 15 doesn't even POST. Another user has had similar experiences. Some motherboards may seem fine but have issues with it at higher frequencies (*Asus*). Manually setting tCWL equal to tCL if tCL is even or one below if tCL is uneven should alleviate this (eg. if tCL = 18 try tCWL = 18 or 16, if tCL = 17 try tCWL = 16). "

My XMP are set that way tCL=16, tCWL = 15.


----------



## acoustic

How are you guys setting up Y-Cruncher to look that way? I downloaded Benchmate, but I don't see how you guys are getting that UI menu - also have no idea what the standard options are for stress-testing lol


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> How are you guys setting up Y-Cruncher to look that way? I downloaded Benchmate, but I don't see how you guys are getting that UI menu - also have no idea what the standard options are for stress-testing lol


hit F6 after the test.


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> hit F6 after the test.


For some reason I don't have the Y-Cruncher launcher, and I can't add it to Benchmate. Strange.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> For some reason I don't have the Y-Cruncher launcher, and I can't add it to Benchmate. Strange.


Do you see Y-cruncher listed in Benchmate?
For me, I just double click on it and it brings up y-cruncher and then I pick data test, 1b, 2.5b etc


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> Do you see Y-cruncher listed in Benchmate?
> For me, I just double click on it and it brings up y-cruncher and then I pick data test, 1b, 2.5b etc


For some reason, I don't get Y-Cruncher listed in Benchmate (despite it being installed as part of the package), and if I try to add it manually through the folder it created within the Benchmate/apps/ folder, it tells me it cannot add it due to being a workload executable.

EDIT: Seem to have fixed it by not choosing a custom installation and just using Typical. I'll just delete all the stuff I don't need after, I guess.


----------



## SuperCloud

bscool said:


> Yeah Ill will help you as much as I can.
> 
> Be intresting to see how this goes. I think we can get you at min tighter timings at 4000c15-15-15 and maybe 4133 if your IMC can do it.
> 
> When you get it dont update to the latest bios only use 901.
> 
> Something else to look at is if your Strix has a new 2022 date. I saw someone post pics that Strix d4 has 2022 release also, like Apex.
> 
> IMG_20220226_130045301.jpg



So, Here are couple of test results

*1 - 4000 M/T Gear 2 1T, vccsa auto, vddq 1.35v, vdimm 1.60v, 15-15-15-35:*









So I was able to pass the test. I couldn't do this on MSI Edge, not even post.

Then I changed to Gear 1 and 2T because at 1T, I couldn't post.




*2 - 4000 M/T Gear 1 2T, vccsa auto, vddq 1.35v, vdimm 1.60v, 15-15-15-35:*









The memory temperature is at 52C, so maybe that's why I am getting error? Not sure how to fix them.

Is my memory kit still not good, should I get 3600 CL 14-14-14-34 1.45v??


----------



## acoustic

Memory temp is pretty high and you are pushing a lot of vDIMM for not a lot of speed/timings. I'd dial back the voltage to 1.5-1.55v, and find the limit there. 1.6v will need a fan on the sticks. It would help to know what the temps were during your first test running in Gear2.

Regardless, I would either add a fan for the memory, or dial back the vDIMM voltage. I also find that TM5 is not very effective for finding IMC stability. TestMemPro and Y-Cruncher seem to be much more effective for that. I use TM5 ABSOLUT+Extreme1 for testing frequencies and timings of the memory sticks.

I also found Halo Infinite to be a very quick test of IMC. I have passed Y-Cruncher + TestMemPro, and then Halo Infinite won't last more than 10-15min before it gives me a CTD. Change to Gear2, and it goes away. Some games are really effective stability tests, and also does the benefit of heating up your entire system rather than just your CPU/RAM, so you can see realistic DIMM temps. My loop barely changes temp during stress-tests, but when I'm gaming and the 3080TI is pumping 450watts into the loop, my memory sticks do get warmer.


----------



## Groove2013

That's why my RAM is not part of the loop and a single fan for RAM keeps it below 35°C max with 22°C room temp while at >1.6 V VDIMM.


----------



## acoustic

Groove2013 said:


> That's why my RAM is not part of the loop and a single fan for RAM keeps it below 35°C max with 22°C room temp while at >1.6 V VDIMM.


Even if the RAM isn't part of the loop, most are running their rads as intake. My top rad, once the heat starts pumping and my waterT stablilizes with the load, it's now blowing warm(er) air on the memory sticks. I'd put the RAM sticks under water all day .. but I'll do that once I move to DDR5.

I don't run a dedicated fan for the RAM.


----------



## SuperCloud

acoustic said:


> Memory temp is pretty high and you are pushing a lot of vDIMM for not a lot of speed/timings. I'd dial back the voltage to 1.5-1.55v, and find the limit there. 1.6v will need a fan on the sticks. It would help to know what the temps were during your first test running in Gear2.
> 
> Regardless, I would either add a fan for the memory, or dial back the vDIMM voltage. I also find that TM5 is not very effective for finding IMC stability. TestMemPro and Y-Cruncher seem to be much more effective for that. I use TM5 ABSOLUT+Extreme1 for testing frequencies and timings of the memory sticks.
> 
> I also found Halo Infinite to be a very quick test of IMC. I have passed Y-Cruncher + TestMemPro, and then Halo Infinite won't last more than 10-15min before it gives me a CTD. Change to Gear2, and it goes away. Some games are really effective stability tests, and also does the benefit of heating up your entire system rather than just your CPU/RAM, so you can see realistic DIMM temps. My loop barely changes temp during stress-tests, but when I'm gaming and the 3080TI is pumping 450watts into the loop, my memory sticks do get warmer.


Yeah this memory temperature is causing errors
I'm using Asus z690 Strix D4. I was using Noctua D15 in a 90 degree rotated, basically sucking up heat and pushing it through top.

My idle cpu is 45C . So I figured this orientation is causing memory to heat up 

I tried vdim 1.45v and memory temperature was at 44C, which isn't cause of memory. I used same memory on MSI Edge and it was idling at 25-30C at 1.45v. even at 1.60v I reached 36C.

It's definitely the cooler orientation.

I need to find a cooler that will actually cool and fit the Asus Strix D4. Anyone have recommendations?

Does the deepcool ak620 fit this motherboard?


----------



## Groove2013

I'm looking for the highest (not the lowest) stable VDIMM voltage, to have lowest possible tRFC.


----------



## VGeorge

acoustic said:


> Even if the RAM isn't part of the loop, most are running their rads as intake. My top rad, once the heat starts pumping and my waterT stablilizes with the load, it's now blowing warm(er) air on the memory sticks. I'd put the RAM sticks under water all day .. but I'll do that once I move to DDR5.
> 
> I don't run a dedicated fan for the RAM.


That's how I also run my top rad, as intake. However, it has been shown that the best config for all the components is to run the rads as exhaust and only case fans as intake.


----------



## VGeorge

bscool said:


> It is good but I only have 1 kit of ddr5 and I dont thinnk my kit is the best bin. I cant run timings as tight as some 7000c32


Ah I see. I'm guessing you will be buying another one haha
Do you see any significant improvements in games over DDR4, especially when you run it with these insane speeds (4266C15)?


----------



## Groove2013

With 1 more step lower VDIMM voltage, 4133 MHz 14-15-15-*15* is running already 3 hours and counting without errors in Karhu RAM Test, instead of only 1,5 hours previously, with 1 step higher VDIMM voltage.


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> Nice, I just noticed something in the Github memory guide, do you think this applys to ASUS Z690 platforms. Having a odd # for tCWL ?
> 
> "Some motherboards don't play nice with odd tCWL. For example, I'm stable at 4000 15-19-19 tCWL 14, yet tCWL 15 doesn't even POST. Another user has had similar experiences. Some motherboards may seem fine but have issues with it at higher frequencies (*Asus*). Manually setting tCWL equal to tCL if tCL is even or one below if tCL is uneven should alleviate this (eg. if tCL = 18 try tCWL = 18 or 16, if tCL = 17 try tCWL = 16). "
> 
> My XMP are set that way tCL=16, tCWL = 15.


tCWL is tied to other subtimings so it depends on what will work. I can boot with tCWL at 14, 15 etc if other subtimings are set correctly.


----------



## bscool

SuperCloud said:


> So, Here are couple of test results
> 
> *1 - 4000 M/T Gear 2 1T, vccsa auto, vddq 1.35v, vdimm 1.60v, 15-15-15-35:*
> View attachment 2553964
> 
> 
> So I was able to pass the test. I couldn't do this on MSI Edge, not even post.
> 
> Then I changed to Gear 1 and 2T because at 1T, I couldn't post.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *2 - 4000 M/T Gear 1 2T, vccsa auto, vddq 1.35v, vdimm 1.60v, 15-15-15-35:*
> View attachment 2553965
> 
> 
> The memory temperature is at 52C, so maybe that's why I am getting error? Not sure how to fix them.
> 
> Is my memory kit still not good, should I get 3600 CL 14-14-14-34 1.45v??


The memory is fine. You need to tune it more. I would think you can use less dram voltage.

Temps are too high you need a fan on them for memory tests. Need to keep dim temps below 44c approx. The cooler the better.


----------



## bscool

VGeorge said:


> Ah I see. I'm guessing you will be buying another one haha
> Do you see any significant improvements in games over DDR4, especially when you run it with these insane speeds (4266C15)?


I dont really bench any games as the only game I play is csgo. I have benched CSGO but need to swtich GPU to compare but with ddr5 in the 900fps+ with the built in [email protected] and [email protected] on low settings.


----------



## acoustic

VGeorge said:


> That's how I also run my top rad, as intake. However, it has been shown that the best config for all the components is to run the rads as exhaust and only case fans as intake.


I've yet to see that - where did you find that? It's always been common knowledge, at least as far as I've ever seen, to run all rads as intake so that you can maximize cool air flowing through the rads, with one fan as exhaust. I have never seen an all-exhaust rad config.


----------



## Groove2013

Lol...


----------



## VGeorge

acoustic said:


> I've yet to see that - where did you find that? It's always been common knowledge, at least as far as I've ever seen, to run all rads as intake so that you can maximize cool air flowing through the rads, with one fan as exhaust. I have never seen an all-exhaust rad config.


Is posting youtube links against the rules or anything?
I have also seen several reddit posts with people trying out different configs and the rads as exhaust always came out on top, especially for components passively cooled such as ram.


----------



## VGeorge

bscool said:


> I dont really bench any games as the only game I play is csgo. I have benched CSGO but need to swtich GPU to compare but with ddr5 in the 900fps+ with the built in [email protected] and [email protected] on low settings.


holy frames haha


----------



## Groove2013

4133 MHz 14-15-15-15-2T gear 1 almost 11000% Karhu RAM Test stable. Starting to lower secondaries...


----------



## Groove2013

1.61875 V VDIMM in the BIOS (0901) of my Strix D4 Z690.


----------



## Groove2013

It trains RTL 69 and 71. Most probably due to only 4133 MHz frequency, instead of 4200 or 4266 MHz.


----------



## Groove2013

The timings I'm testing are giving me ~42 ns in Aida64. Lets see if I can keep them all.


----------



## Groove2013

Maybe even sub 42 ns is possible.
But still not happy not being able to do 4200 15-15-15-*15 *or 4266 15-16-16-16.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> Maybe even sub 42 ns is possible.
> But still not happy not being able to do 4200 15-15-15-*15 *or 4266 15-16-16-16.


Is that with e cores off?

I havent tested stability on 49 cache yet.


----------



## Groove2013

E-cores off, yes.


----------



## acoustic

1304 BIOS on TUF D4 is vastly superior to 707 and 803 on my DR B-Die so far. I was struggling for stability on 707/803 @ 3733 15-15-15-32 with much higher voltages.

I am currently, on 1304 BIOS, running:

3800 14-15-15-32-310 2T gear1

SA: 1.325v
vDIMM: 1.51v
VDDQ: 1.4v

currently running it through TM5 Extreme1 for early stability; already passed 3 Y-Cruncher benches. I really like the way the RTL trained - another issue I used to have with the older BIOS'.








EDIT: Continuing to impress - after going 30min just fine in TM5 Extreme1, I decided to send it. 14-14-14-32-310 with same secondary/tertiary timings @ 1.51v. Posted like a champ and 5 minutes into TM5 so far. This is night and day difference to what I experienced with the earlier released BIOS.

30min down at 14-14-14-32. Woah.


----------



## sneida

acoustic said:


> 1304 BIOS on TUF D4 is vastly superior to 707 and 803 on my DR B-Die so far. I was struggling for stability on 707/803 @ 3733 15-15-15-32 with much higher voltages.
> 
> I am currently, on 1304 BIOS, running:
> 
> 3800 14-15-15-32-310 2T gear1
> 
> SA: 1.325v
> vDIMM: 1.51v
> VDDQ: 1.4v
> 
> currently running it through TM5 Extreme1 for early stability; already passed 3 Y-Cruncher benches. I really like the way the RTL trained - another issue I used to have with the older BIOS'.
> View attachment 2554040
> 
> 
> EDIT: Continuing to impress - after going 30min just fine in TM5 Extreme1, I decided to send it. 14-14-14-32-310 with same secondary/tertiary timings @ 1.51v. Posted like a champ and 5 minutes into TM5 so far. This is night and day difference to what I experienced with the earlier released BIOS.
> 
> 30min down at 14-14-14-32. Woah.


I wonder why the behavior is quite different on other systems (including mine) - 0707 to 0808 I can run above 3600mhz, on 1304 instant errors (tm5) >3600mhz and 3600mhz cl14 is also not working (2x16gb dr b-die).


----------



## Raphie

Groove2013 said:


> E-cores off, yes.


New to the whole E core thing, why would you want to turn these of? Don’t multicore apps suffer? Isn’t it like slashing your CPU in half?








Test: Disabling small (E) and big (P) cores of the Core i9-12900K - HWCooling.net


Why (not) disable E/P cores?The big.LITTLE concept in Intel Alder Lake processors encourages various “re-configurations” of the cores. Especially in the context of inferior scaling or priority settings that are not good for some applications. However, user interventions in this direction will...




www.hwcooling.net


----------



## acoustic

sneida said:


> I wonder why the behavior is quite different on other systems (including mine) - 0707 to 0808 I can run above 3600mhz, on 1304 instant errors (tm5) >3600mhz and 3600mhz cl14 is also not working (2x16gb dr b-die).


I can't say for sure. The only other thing that changed, that could make a difference, is that I added the LGA1700 backplate and mounting kit from Heatkiller. Much better mounting pressure = better socket contact? When I say I was disappointed with the 0707/0803, I mean it. Extremely unpredictable training, tons of issues where settings would work for the first boot, and then the board would retrain working settings and cause them to fail every boot after, as well as general instability at lower frequencies/timings than I'm experiencing with 1304. I spent hours upon hours upon hours struggling from release up until the PC was stored in the basement for safe keeping in November.

I was going to jump ship to DDR5 and grab a MSI Unify, but I'll hang around with the TUF until Raptor Lake at this point.

Just for clarification, I'm running a 12700K with GSkill 2x16 DR BDie 32GTRSA - 4000c16 1.4v XMP.



Raphie said:


> New to the whole E core thing, why would you want to turn these of? Don’t multicore apps suffer? Isn’t it like slashing your CPU in half?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Test: Disabling small (E) and big (P) cores of the Core i9-12900K - HWCooling.net
> 
> 
> Why (not) disable E/P cores?The big.LITTLE concept in Intel Alder Lake processors encourages various “re-configurations” of the cores. Especially in the context of inferior scaling or priority settings that are not good for some applications. However, user interventions in this direction will...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hwcooling.net


For AIDA64 memory benching, having the E Cores enables causes more latency, and also causes the Cache to clock down to 3.6Ghz (as it's supposed to with E Cores enabled). With E Cores turned off, Cache clocks to 4.6 automatically, and there's no risk of throughput being put on the slower, less equipped E Cores.


----------



## sneida

acoustic said:


> Just for clarification, I'm running a 12700K with GSkill 2x16 DR BDie 32GTRSA - 4000c16 1.4v XMP.


Very similar here: 12700K + F4-4000C16D-32GVKA (2x16gb dr bdie 4000c16 1.4v)


----------



## Raphie

Ahh that’s why I’m on 61ns latency 
but for me AIDA64 is only an indication whether I’m heading in the right direction. Crippling the system to show bench a faster outcome is not what I’m looking for. But I was wondering how you got below 50ns, now I understand why.
with 8+8 on gear-1 1N, 4 sticks, a read of 57k is about the maximum my IMC can take. I can get there in several ways. But the hard ceiling seems 57k with all of these enabled.


----------



## acoustic

Well, MemTestPro overnight (898%) passed. Here's the current settings:

3800 14-14-14-32-290 2T gear1
SA: 1.325v
vDIMM: 1.5v
VDDQ: 1.4v









Aida done with E Cores enabled. My favorite part is looking at that perfect RTL training! I swear, it never happened with the earlier BIOS. I always had really wonky 71/75 where RTLs were quite a bit different between channels. I lowered TREFI from 65535 max to 65000, just to reduce the thermal sensitivity slightly - hoping that helps for gaming stability. I'm going to stop here and work on the CPU and Cache OC now. I've been running 51x3/50x8 this entire time with E-Cores auto/cache auto.

Turning off E Cores does not cripple the system - in fact, many games actually see a performance increase with E Cores disabled.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> I can't say for sure. The only other thing that changed, that could make a difference, is that I added the LGA1700 backplate and mounting kit from Heatkiller. Much better mounting pressure = better socket contact? When I say I was disappointed with the 0707/0803, I mean it. Extremely unpredictable training, tons of issues where settings would work for the first boot, and then the board would retrain working settings and cause them to fail every boot after, as well as general instability at lower frequencies/timings than I'm experiencing with 1304. I spent hours upon hours upon hours struggling from release up until the PC was stored in the basement for safe keeping in November.
> 
> I was going to jump ship to DDR5 and grab a MSI Unify, but I'll hang around with the TUF until Raptor Lake at this point.
> 
> Just for clarification, I'm running a 12700K with GSkill 2x16 DR BDie 32GTRSA - 4000c16 1.4v XMP.
> 
> 
> 
> For AIDA64 memory benching, having the E Cores enables causes more latency, and also causes the Cache to clock down to 3.6Ghz (as it's supposed to with E Cores enabled). With E Cores turned off, Cache clocks to 4.6 automatically, and there's no risk of throughput being put on the slower, less equipped E Cores.


I am on TUF 0707 bios and run 3867, 3900 also passes mem test but had some issue with y- cruncher (need to look into this if I want higher freq's). Low voltages SA=1.240, Vdim= 1.375 (can run 1.35), VDDQ tx =1.35.
I am on micro E single rank not dual so that makes things a little easier.

On the ring, you can run like 40x w/o issues I think, I am at 39 now all good, I even have dynamic freq working so it down clocks when not needed.

I think AIDA is bad BM for memory, I use Intel MLC, latency wise I am at 44ns range and my timings are not real tight.


----------



## acoustic

I don't like AIDA either. Super unreliable and not a test made to compare different systems. If you haven't tried the 1304 BIOS, I must say from my experience this is the best BIOS I've used the entire time I've had this board.

I have E Cores and Ring at 40x now, and pulled voltage down from 1.315 under load to 1.305. I'm not super happy with my temps, I might remount my block. I'm getting 8-10c difference between some cores. I used the last of an old tube of KPx and it was not spreading as easily as I remember. It's also been sitting in my cold basement the past 2-3 months. I bought a fresh tube, might do a repaste and see. I was hitting 80c in Y-Cruncher @ 1.315v under load which seemed high from what I can remember.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> I don't like AIDA either. Super unreliable and not a test made to compare different systems. If you haven't tried the 1304 BIOS, I must say from my experience this is the best BIOS I've used the entire time I've had this board.
> 
> I have E Cores and Ring at 40x now, and pulled voltage down from 1.315 under load to 1.305. I'm not super happy with my temps, I might remount my block. I'm getting 8-10c difference between some cores. I used the last of an old tube of KPx and it was not spreading as easily as I remember. It's also been sitting in my cold basement the past 2-3 months. I bought a fresh tube, might do a repaste and see. I was hitting 80c in Y-Cruncher @ 1.315v under load which seemed high from what I can remember.


Y-cruncher is hard on CPU, my temps go up in that, close/about to linpack extreme, I hit 74c-76c after a few runs.
But I am on air with mild OC (P 51,51,50,49,48,48/ E 38's) ring 39x..

Linpack extreme I hit about 80c on stress tests.
I am on NH-U14S so not the biggest air cooler.

E cores will raise temps, I noticed them raise with just 36>38x, I did get better performance about 100 points in CB20.


----------



## acoustic

I'm on a custom loop, so definitely not ecstatic about the temps lol


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> I'm on a custom loop, so definitely not ecstatic about the temps lol


don't go by my results, I am only on 12600k so a lot less heat load than 12900k.
I pull around cpu package of 165-170ww in heavy stress tests.


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> don't go by my results, I am only on 12600k so a lot less heat load than 12900k.
> I pull around cpu package of 165-170ww in heavy stress tests.


I'm on a 12700K with about 220-240watt in Y Cruncher. Regardless, my temps seem higher than I remember, which could be due to the old paste.

Ordered the Rockitcool Copper IHS upgrade kit. I'm going to stick with KPx instead of going LM on the IHS since it's copper and not nickel-plated, but we'll see how it performs. I'd expect to have the kit by Tuesday-Wednesday, and should be able to pull the chip apart same day.

Time to bust the heat-gun out of the box in the garage - last time it was used was to de-lid my 10900K and run direct-die.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> @SuperCloud
> Again, tRCD is binned separately from tCL, so if you can boot 15-16-16-XX but can't boot 15-15-15-XX, chances are, the RAM's just not up to snuff.
> If that kit's tRCD truly is weak, nothing you do will allow you to boot as it just can't. Raising VDIMM further might help, but doubtful.
> (And obviously, reducing frequency will allow it to work as well. If you were to test 3,800 MHz instead, it'll probably boot just fine.)
> 
> If you are hellbent on getting a lower tRCD, you might need to exchange the kit for one that's been binned at a tighter tRCD (like the 3,600 flat-14 kit).
> And as I've mentioned, I already personally tested the DR 2x16GB 3,600 flat-14 kit, and achieved 14-15-15-XX-1T on it at 4,000 MHz Gear 1 stable. Needed 1.58V.
> Not as well binned as the unicorn 3,800 or 4,000 CL14 kits which can do the same at less VDIMM, but still very good for what it's worth.


I tried Asus Strix D4, and my IMC is at limit when it comes to frequency. my IMC can do 4000 max on gear 1.

I was able to do 4000 15-15-15-35 gear 1 @ vdimm 1.55v, vccsa 1.35v, and vddq 1.35v using the 4000 16-16-16-36 kit.

Which 3600 14-14-14-34 kit did you buy that was able to do 4000 15-15-15-xx Gear 1 on MSI edge?
Would MSI z690 Tomahawk have better memory OC or the Pro z690-A?

I have to pay significant money on Asus Strix D4 to get 4000 15-15-15-35 gear 1, idk if its worth it?


----------



## Ichirou

SuperCloud said:


> I tried Asus Strix D4, and my IMC is at limit when it comes to frequency. my IMC can do 4000 max on gear 1.
> 
> I was able to do 4000 15-15-15-35 gear 1 @ vdimm 1.55v, vccsa 1.35v, and vddq 1.35v using the 4000 16-16-16-36 kit.
> 
> Which 3600 14-14-14-34 kit did you buy that was able to do 4000 15-15-15-xx Gear 1 on MSI edge?
> Would MSI z690 Tomahawk have better memory OC or the Pro z690-A?
> 
> I have to pay significant money on Asus Strix D4 to get 4000 15-15-15-35 gear 1, idk if its worth it?


The motherboard really doesn't matter all that much...
From what I've heard from some people here, the entire DDR4 Z690 line for MSI had similar results for memory overclocking.
Maybe the real difference between the boards is the CPU overclocking, since they have better/worse VRMs.

I bought the Trident Z Neo 3,600 14-14-14-XX 2x16 GB kit off of Newegg. It did 4000 14-15-15-XX-1T.

I'm really just leaning towards an CPU IMC weakness overall. But you could test the RAM kit out and refund if it doesn't improve things.


----------



## SuperCloud

Ichirou said:


> The motherboard really doesn't matter all that much...
> From what I've heard from some people here, the entire DDR4 Z690 line for MSI had similar results for memory overclocking.
> Maybe the real difference between the boards is the CPU overclocking, since they have better/worse VRMs.
> 
> I bought the Trident Z Neo 3,600 14-14-14-XX 2x16 GB kit off of Newegg. It did 4000 14-15-15-XX-1T.
> 
> I'm really just leaning towards an CPU IMC weakness overall. But you could test the RAM kit out and refund if it doesn't improve things.


Is there a difference between trident z neo vs the Ripjaws in terms of quality of PCB and modules etc.

I don't understand how on Strix D4 I can do 4000 15-15-15-35 but not on MSI Edge :/

Yeah my 12600k has a weak imc, but at least it can do 4000 gear 1 dual rank lol 
So it's not that bad


----------



## acoustic

If you can do 4000 gear1, the IMC is not weak. I don't think it's IMC weakness that's getting you, it's just poor binned memory. The one factor that no one has mentioned, and that I think is important given the significant changes I've seen in my system since I did this - mounting pressure. When I changed from the LGA1200 mounting to LGA1700 kit, I don't know if I had a spectacularly poor mount with horrendous socket contact, but the chip and memory are reacting night-and-day compared to how they were before I put the LGA1700 mounting kit on.

Bad socket contact can cause poor OC ability and/or general system instability. I don't know many people running 4000 Gear1 on 12600/12700K .. seems like most people with IMCs good enough for that are finding them on 12900Ks.

My 12700K cannot do 4000 Gear1 regardless of voltage (I've tried up to 1.475v SA and as low as 1.20v SA), but I'm now cruising at 3800 14-14-14-32-290 Gear1 w/ 1.325v SA.

Before I updated the BIOS and changed the mounting kit, I wasn't able to do 3733 15-15-15 .. only things that changed are the BIOS and the mounting kit. I have a feeling the BIOS was not the main reason in the changes I'm seeing.


----------



## SuperCloud

acoustic said:


> If you can do 4000 gear1, the IMC is not weak. I don't think it's IMC weakness that's getting you, it's just poor binned memory. The one factor that no one has mentioned, and that I think is important given the significant changes I've seen in my system since I did this - mounting pressure. When I changed from the LGA1200 mounting to LGA1700 kit, I don't know if I had a spectacularly poor mount with horrendous socket contact, but the chip and memory are reacting night-and-day compared to how they were before I put the LGA1700 mounting kit on.
> 
> Bad socket contact can cause poor OC ability and/or general system instability. I don't know many people running 4000 Gear1 on 12600/12700K .. seems like most people with IMCs good enough for that are finding them on 12900Ks.
> 
> My 12700K cannot do 4000 Gear1 regardless of voltage (I've tried up to 1.475v SA and as low as 1.20v SA), but I'm now cruising at 3800 14-14-14-32-290 Gear1 w/ 1.325v SA.
> 
> Before I updated the BIOS and changed the mounting kit, I wasn't able to do 3733 15-15-15 .. only things that changed are the BIOS and the mounting kit. I have a feeling the BIOS was not the main reason in the changes I'm seeing.


Oh thank you! Yeah 4000 on gear 1 seems good.

I'm currently using 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v kit

I can buy the 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v kit. Would this be better bin than current one?


What cooler did you use to get better performance?

I've been using Noctua


----------



## acoustic

SuperCloud said:


> Oh thank you! Yeah 4000 on gear 1 seems good.
> 
> What cooler did you use to get better performance?
> 
> I've been using Noctua


I'm on custom water - using a Heatkiller IV Pro. I would just double check your cooler mount and make sure you have even contact across the chip.


----------



## Ichirou

acoustic said:


> If you can do 4000 gear1, the IMC is not weak. I don't think it's IMC weakness that's getting you, it's just poor binned memory. The one factor that no one has mentioned, and that I think is important given the significant changes I've seen in my system since I did this - mounting pressure. When I changed from the LGA1200 mounting to LGA1700 kit, I don't know if I had a spectacularly poor mount with horrendous socket contact, but the chip and memory are reacting night-and-day compared to how they were before I put the LGA1700 mounting kit on.
> 
> Bad socket contact can cause poor OC ability and/or general system instability. I don't know many people running 4000 Gear1 on 12600/12700K .. seems like most people with IMCs good enough for that are finding them on 12900Ks.
> 
> My 12700K cannot do 4000 Gear1 regardless of voltage (I've tried up to 1.475v SA and as low as 1.20v SA), but I'm now cruising at 3800 14-14-14-32-290 Gear1 w/ 1.325v SA.
> 
> Before I updated the BIOS and changed the mounting kit, I wasn't able to do 3733 15-15-15 .. only things that changed are the BIOS and the mounting kit. I have a feeling the BIOS was not the main reason in the changes I'm seeing.


After testing out three different 12900Ks, I can safely say that their IMCs can all run 4,000 CL14 just fine. But lower ones, I can't be sure of.


SuperCloud said:


> Oh thank you! Yeah 4000 on gear 1 seems good.
> 
> I'm currently using 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v kit
> 
> I can buy the 3600 14-14-14-34 1.45v kit. Would this be better bin than current one?
> 
> 
> What cooler did you use to get better performance?
> 
> I've been using Noctua


I can't tell you which kit is the better, but it is not easy to bin kits for flat 14s. Most quality 3,600 kits are 14-15-15-XX at best.
I can only tell you from experience that I could only do 14-15-15-XX at 4,000 MHz, up to 1.58V.


----------



## Shonk

I Have been tweaking my already tweaked ram the last few days
and got a nice gain on read speed

*Base Settings*
Ram 2 x 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3600 @ 3733
Gear Mode = Gear 1
CPU Base Clock = 100.33
Performance Cores = 53,53,52,52,51,51,51,51
Efficiency Cores = 40
Vcore Voltage Mode = Adaptive Vcore (Selection) VF Point 6 to 11 = -0.050V
VCCSA = 1.300V
DRAM Vdd/VddQ = 1.300V
DRAM Voltage = 1.370V
BCLK Adaptive Voltage = Disabled
Realtime Memory Timing = Disabled
Memory Timing Mode = Fixed
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Normal

*Changes from Auto*


Code:


CAS Latency                     15
tRCD                            17
tRP                             17
tRAS                            34

tRC                             51 (tCL + tRAS + 2)
tRRD_S                          4
tRRD_L                          6
tRFC                            540
tFAW                            16 (TRRD_S x 4)
Command Rate                    1

tREFI                           58320
tXPDLL                          32 (New)
tRDRD_dr                        7 (New)
tRDRD_sg                        7 (New)
tRDWR_sg                        11 (New)
tRDWR_dg                        11 (New)
tRDWR_dr                        11 (New)
tRDWR_dd                        11 (New)
tWRWR_dr                        7
tWRWR_dd                        7
tWRRD_sg                        30
tWRRD_dg                        24
tWRRD_dr                        6 (New)
tWRRD_dd                        6 (New)

*Further Tweaking*


Code:


tRTP                            6
tWR                             12
tWRRD_sg                        25
tWRRD_dg                        22
tWTR_L                          Auto (6)
tWTR_S                          Auto (3)

*Notes on Further Tweaking*
tRTP would fail to post if i changed it when i tried using my old Z390 Timings (my old Z390 ran these sticks at 12)
tWR would fail to post if i changed it when i tried using my old Z390 Timings (my old Z390 ran these sticks at 8)
*tRTP should be 1\2 tWR*, (Gigabyte or Z690 have no sanity check so it fails to post if this isnt followed) e.g if you set tWR to 12 tRTP must be 6
I have also noticed this is somewhat true on the latest Z390 Aorus Master F11 bios from November 2021 so it may well be a Gigabyte codebase change
i had to use 15,9 on F11 instead of 12,8

tWRRD_sg 25 (*also sets tWTR_L* = tWRRD_sg - tCWL - 6) so for me 25 - 13 - 6 = 6
tWRRD_dg 22 (*also sets tWTR_S* = tWRRD_dg - tCWL - 6) so for me 22 - 13 - 6 = 3

I am 3100% into a Karhu ram test with Stress FPU with the further Tweaking changes

CPU-Z

Cinebench R23

*Further Tweaking @3733*









*New Tweaked Ram @ 3733









Old Tweaked Ram @ 3733*









*XMP @ 3733







*


----------



## postem

SAVIAR said:


> That is possible. But KS will be a better option.


I expect it too, but it would be very disappointing if a particular ks does all the clocks but have bad Imc. Since it's a higher bin probably it will not however Imc probably isn't part of the binning


----------



## edkieferlp

Shonk said:


> I Have been tweaking my already tweaked ram the last few days
> and got a nice gain on read speed
> 
> *Base Settings*
> Ram 2 x 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3600 @ 3733
> Gear Mode = Gear 1
> CPU Base Clock = 100.33
> Performance Cores = 53,53,52,52,51,51,51,51
> Efficiency Cores = 40
> Vcore Voltage Mode = Adaptive Vcore (Selection) VF Point 6 to 11 = -0.050V
> VCCSA = 1.300V
> DRAM Vdd/VddQ = 1.300V
> DRAM Voltage = 1.370V
> BCLK Adaptive Voltage = Disabled
> Realtime Memory Timing = Disabled
> Memory Timing Mode = Fixed
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Normal
> 
> *Changes from Auto*
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> CAS Latency                     15
> tRCD                            17
> tRP                             17
> tRAS                            34
> 
> tRC                             51 (tCL + tRAS + 2)
> tRRD_S                          4
> tRRD_L                          6
> tRFC                            540
> tFAW                            16 (TRRD_S x 4)
> Command Rate                    1
> 
> tREFI                           58320
> tXPDLL                          32 (New)
> tRDRD_dr                        7 (New)
> tRDRD_sg                        7 (New)
> tRDWR_sg                        11 (New)
> tRDWR_dg                        11 (New)
> tRDWR_dr                        11 (New)
> tRDWR_dd                        11 (New)
> tWRWR_dr                        7
> tWRWR_dd                        7
> tWRRD_sg                        30
> tWRRD_dg                        24
> tWRRD_dr                        6 (New)
> tWRRD_dd                        6 (New)
> 
> *New Tweaked Ram @ 3733
> View attachment 2554238
> 
> 
> 
> Old Tweaked Ram @ 3733*
> View attachment 2554226
> 
> 
> *XMP @ 3733
> View attachment 2554229
> *


Is that the highest freq (3733) that is will clock at reasonable Vdimm with CR 1 and tCL=15, 17, 17, 34?


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> Is that the highest freq (3733) that is will clock at reasonable Vdimm with CR 1 and tCL=15, 17, 17, 34?


He's running CR2. Remember though, he's running 32GB sticks (2x32) so those results are actually quite good given the density of the chips.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> He's running CR2. Remember though, he's running 32GB sticks (2x32) so those results are actually quite good given the density of the chips.


he running CR1 on his tweaked timings, only last one is CR2 which is XMP defaults.
Yes, the results are good, I wasn't questioning that just wonder what happens at slightly higher freq's.
I noticed a few people posted tCL at 15 with just under 4000 results, seems Micron E can do 15 if you don't try push clocks to much.

Also notice his RTL go from 73 to 69, I am thinking the tweaked primaries did this as I don't think you can force lower RTL on these MB.
Same with tCWL, he's running -2 on that one from tCL which is already low.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool rechecking different DRAM voltages, since I could observe Karhu RAM Test giving errors few seconds to like 20 mins after start, just because DRAM voltage is simply different than it was before. Same goes for changing timings. So when there is an error after like up to 20 mins, I simply restart my PC, not changing anything and also make sure RTLs are still same and rerun Karhu. If errors still occur, then I change DRAM voltage/timings.


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> I expect it too, but it would be very disappointing if a particular ks does all the clocks but have bad Imc. Since it's a higher bin probably it will not however Imc probably isn't part of the binning


The IMCs are not binned, so there is no guarantee of its quality.
The KFs seem to be the overall best binned so far, and chances are they'll be able to do single-core 55x anyway, with enough Vcore.


----------



## remerdore

My 24/7 setup memory 
G.SKILL F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX


----------



## Shonk

edkieferlp said:


> Is that the highest freq (3733) that is will clock at reasonable Vdimm with CR 1 and tCL=15, 17, 17, 34?



I can post at 3800 at 1.40V on the ram with the same tweaked timings
Havnt really tried anything else as i prefer tuned over mhz

I needed to bump it from 1.35 to 1.37 to pass karhu 12000% @ 3733


----------



## Shonk

edkieferlp said:


> he running CR1 on his tweaked timings, only last one is CR2 which is XMP defaults.
> Yes, the results are good, I wasn't questioning that just wonder what happens at slightly higher freq's.
> I noticed a few people posted tCL at 15 with just under 4000 results, seems Micron E can do 15 if you don't try push clocks to much.
> 
> Also notice his RTL go from 73 to 69, I am thinking the tweaked primaries did this as I don't think you can force lower RTL on these MB.
> Same with tCWL, he's running -2 on that one from tCL which is already low.


Its micron B die

My 4 x 16 GB Crucial Ballistix Sport 3200 E Die in my 9900KS will do
15-17-17-34 CR1 @ 3200 1.35v
16-18-18-36 CR1 @ 3500 1.35v

Gigabyte boards post at 3200 if you set 3600 with 3200 ram on Z690 + Z390
3700 needed CR2 to pass karhu or more voltage


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> he running CR1 on his tweaked timings, only last one is CR2 which is XMP defaults.
> Yes, the results are good, I wasn't questioning that just wonder what happens at slightly higher freq's.
> I noticed a few people posted tCL at 15 with just under 4000 results, seems Micron E can do 15 if you don't try push clocks to much.
> 
> Also notice his RTL go from 73 to 69, I am thinking the tweaked primaries did this as I don't think you can force lower RTL on these MB.
> Same with tCWL, he's running -2 on that one from tCL which is already low.


Oh! Oops, my bad!

I notice RTL training is *much* better at CL14 than CL15 as well. No, you cannot manually change RTL on Z690, at least from what I've seen. I fail to post no matter what I do, or the board ignores my inputs. Definitely a big change from how it was with Comet Lake.


----------



## Groove2013

Can't keep 4133 14-15-15-15. When run Karhu, forgot I had the room window open and it was like 0°C outside and RAM and CPU were verry cool, like max 25°C on RAM and ut passed 10000%. Now that I have the window closed and the room temp is like 23°C and max RAM temp around 33°C, it gives errors... So CPU's IMC isn't great at all. 4100 14-15-15-*15* will probably work.


----------



## Groove2013

Testing 4100 MHz 14-15-15-15 with Karhu, to find the highest DRAM voltage it can do, for lowest possible tRFC later.


----------



## Raphie

Ram Test 1000%+ seems stable enough to explore further
Does anyone know why my multiplier (12900k) does x49 and not x50 on a load like this?
Also anyone with the same setup (12900K with 4* 8GB Patriot Viper Steel on MSI Pro Z690a DDR-4 BIOS 1.31)
Trying to get ddr4000 if I can. AIDA seq read is now 56700, which is a ceiling I can't seem to break without errors


----------



## Raphie

Everything AUTO, DDR4000 Mem Traning ON > 4260?!?

What's going on here?


----------



## Damage Inc

Did you try fiddling with the RTL settings on the MSI PRO Z690-A? They do work sort of. Like when I force 65 across the board, it boots at some ridiculous 76/79 or something. AUTO sets RTL's proper, fixed doesn't post and the last option posts but like I said, the RTL's are out of whack. Is there any other option in the BIOS that may be related to RTL's working/not working?


----------



## Raphie

Dunno, the RTL's didn't work for me so far, anything else than AUTO and no POST
I need to check if the mem trainer put the GEAR back in AUTO, as Gear-1 should give around 64ns latency, I'm now at 76,2
So latency 20% increased, throughput 7%, not sure if this is the better deal?
Edit ramtest fails within 10secs as well. 

What does this MEM trainer actually do?


----------



## edkieferlp

Your in gear2 mode in above pic's. set it manually to 1:1 mode. and try CR 2 to start off.


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> Everything AUTO, DDR4000 Mem Traning ON > 4260?!?
> 
> What's going on here?
> 
> View attachment 2554477
> View attachment 2554479


You're in Gear2 mode here which is why you're seeing good read/write/copy, but atrocious Latency. The latency is more important for gaming usage. If you're unable to post at 4000 in Gear1, that indicates the CPU IMC is your issue. You can adjust/tweak your SA voltage and sometimes VDDQ can help it seems.

You cannot change RTLs on Z690, at least on ASUS. On MSI, from what I've seen personally, it's the same - you can manually enter things but 99% of the time you won't post, or it will train far worse than Auto.

Go to Gear1, and try 2T command rate with a manual CPU SA voltage of 1.35v to start with. See if that posts and adjust from there. Good baseline for VDDQ voltage seems to be 1.40v.


----------



## Damage Inc

Raphie said:


> Dunno, the RTL's didn't work for me so far, anything else than AUTO and no POST
> I need to check if the mem trainer put the GEAR back in AUTO, as Gear-1 should give around 64ns latency, I'm now at 76,2
> So latency 20% increased, throughput 7%, not sure if this is the better deal?
> Edit ramtest fails within 10secs as well.
> 
> What does this MEM trainer actually do?


AUTO sets RTL's by default obviously, Fixed Mode doesn't post, Dynamic Mode works but like I said, the RTL's get set looser than what I want for some reason.
Training, I noticed that Extreme has the best boot success rate at least for me. 
You may wanna try ODT Fine Tune at 14 or 15, it really helps pushing the frequency up at least for me. If you're patient you could also try playing around with different terminations.


----------



## Raphie

ThnX, will try, it seems the ceiling that Ram Test accepts as stable is really 57K Seq read in AIDA, above there and it craps out even before 10% of coverage.


----------



## Groove2013

4100 MHz isn't stable as well. Testing 4000 MHz. But it really makes me sad...


----------



## Raphie

Yup, for me the only thing that passed 1hour of Ram Test is 3900, Gear-1, 19,19,19,36 1T. Higher boots fine, benches fine, doesn't BSOD, but is not Karhu Ram Test stable and craps out within minutes. Tighter timings, no post....
But assuming having less that 5% left in the tank, is it worth it? comes with higher voltages and it's REALLY finicky. Even the "Memory Try It" settings don't work Karhu stable.
More heat though, higher ambient temps, higher SSD temps. more RPM on the fans.


----------



## xeizo

edkieferlp said:


> Your in gear2 mode in above pic's. set it manually to 1:1 mode. and try CR 2 to start off.


Yes, gear2 should be avoided, nets some terrible latency. Bandwidth isn't all. In example I get much better latency at only 3600:










Compared with his 4260:


----------



## Damage Inc

Raphie said:


> ThnX, will try, it seems the ceiling that Ram Test accepts as stable is really 57K Seq read in AIDA, above there and it craps out even before 10% of coverage.


Hey man, looks like you can adjust the RTL's via tRDWR_sg and tRDWR_dg turnaround settings. I always knew that CAS drives RTL/IOL and that tRDWR's were somewhat tied to CAS but just couldn't make the connection. I'm running CAS16 on my back up sticks and they just refuse to post if I set tRDWR's lower than CAS. Which means I can only get RTL at 69. Try setting the tRDWR_sg/dg to 14 or 12 and see what happens to your RTL's. On BIOS 1.31B, RTL's set to Fixed will boot, Adaptive won't.


----------



## Bloax

Raphie said:


> Yup, for me the only thing that passed 1hour of Ram Test is 3900, Gear-1, 19,19,19,36 1T. Higher boots fine, benches fine, doesn't BSOD, but is not Karhu Ram Test stable and craps out within minutes. Tighter timings, no post....










The Viper 4400 sticks require procODT ""13"" (360 / 13 --> 27.7 ohm?) to run properly, which also requires setting CPU AUX voltage* to around 1.9v for it to run stable.
* (dram input voltage, "VCCIN", CPU 1.8v, many names)

Additionally they seem to really prefer tWR 14, tRTP 7 - though they seem to also run at RTP 6 / tWR 12 and RTP 5 / tWR 10
They require RDWR to always be roughly the same "speed" regardless of memory frequency - which means +/- 1 each 100 MHz of memory clock (200 MT/s)
e.g. 17 at DDR4-4200, 16 at DDR4-4000, 13 at DDR4-3400 ..
RDWR_dd also has to be +1 of the base value (this one is handily revealed by running it at XMP thanks to it being on the supported memory QVL list, even if it doesn't run stable lol)

One additional quirk is that at the very bottom of the memory settings on this (MSI z690-a Pro) board, there's "ODT Write Delay" - which has to be set to 1 (on both channels) for this memory to train stable.

oh and ignore WTRL 8 running stable in that image, it's 10 at higher frequencies now

the tertiary timings go out the window once you try to run them alongside some other sticks (note the lower RDWR, too)







Which you can do if the other DIMMs can run the same RTT Nom/Wr value but can also run with a different RTT Park to let the memory controller differentiate the two signals properly.. Methinks?


p.s. you guys should get onto the BCLK + Ring Ratio 40x cheat codes (e-core L2 cache voltage must be close-ish to vCore for this to not explode, example @ 1.38vCore/1.3vL2)









less silly AIDA boogs:


----------



## acoustic

Isn't that just glitching Aida? I remember there was something going on where AIDA did not report correct scores. Those are extremely impressive read/write/copy scores for 3800.


----------



## Bloax

My memory read/write/copy values are wrong - the absolute maximum DDR4 transfer at 3816 MT/s is 61000 MB/s, and for some reason this cache-bleedover doesn't want to get fixed -
but the increase in L3 cache performance (and subsequent decrease in memory latency) is not fake.

For one reason or another, the CPU takes Ring Ratios above 40 as "a suggestion" and sneakily drops it down under whatever conditions it may find applicable.
If you keep the ratio at 40, and crank up the BCLK - that becomes *an order* rather than a suggestion to run it faster. 💪🤡

Though if you do have an iGPU, I'd suggest raising the iGPU voltage to avoid iGPU uncore clock (not adjustable, but affected by BCLK) crashes.


----------



## acoustic

If you set Ring Down Bin to Disabled, it will run your specified ring ratio. I'm 99% sure that what you're seeing is the AIDA glitch; it's not just the read/write/copy numbers that are affected. It messes with the entire test.

I have bin disabled with min/max at 41x. It never budges from 41x.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> If you set Ring Down Bin to Disabled, it will run your specified ring ratio. I'm 99% sure that what you're seeing is the AIDA glitch; it's not just the read/write/copy numbers that are affected. It messes with the entire test.
> 
> I have bin disabled with min/max at 41x. It never budges from 41x.


I have mine down clock with min= auto and max=39, I have not seen it down clock with any kind of load. Games, benchmark it stays at 39x. there might be some programs for sure that act up, I don't use/have AIDA.


----------



## Shonk

Whilst going back over my memory timings earlier to double check everythingi made a note of some Tertiary timings that have a large effect on speed
which you all might be interested in

tRDRD_ sg Auto (7) Read 7 = 63xxx 6 = 61xxx
tRDRD_dr 7 (14 Auto) Read 14 = *59xxx* 7 = *63xxx* 6 = no post
tRDRD_sg 7 (14 Auto) Read 14 = *59xxx* 7 = *63xxx* 6 = 7 anyway

tRDWR_sg 11 (24 Auto) Copy 24 = *64xxx* 11 = *66xxx*
tRDWR_dg 11 (24 Auto) Copy 24 = *64xxx* 11 = *66xxx*
tRDWR_dr 11 (24 Auto) Copy 24 = *64xxx* 11 = *66xxx*
tRDWR_dd 11 (24 Auto) Copy 24 = *64xxx* 11 = *66xxx*

tWRWR_dr 7 (14 Auto) Write 14 = *584xx* 7 = *591xx* 6 = no post
tWRWR_dd 7 (14 Auto) Write 14 = *584xx* 7 = *591xx *6 = no post

Post with earlier details








[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


Oh thank you! Yeah 4000 on gear 1 seems good. What cooler did you use to get better performance? I've been using Noctua I'm on custom water - using a Heatkiller IV Pro. I would just double check your cooler mount and make sure you have even contact across the chip.




www.overclock.net


----------



## Damage Inc

Great work. The gains you're seeing with lowered tRDWR's are directly related to tightened RTL's. For some reason I can't boot if I set tRDWR's lower than CAS except for tRDWR_dd. Shouldn't have sold my B-Die's. :/
EDIT: Nevermind. tCWL at 9 was preventing me from getting the tRDWR's tighter.


----------



## Shonk

RTL Stayed at 69 with every test

I mainly did it to make sure i had no performance regression after getting a large drop with tRDRD_ sg 6 instead of auto 7
But found it interesting what was giving the gains


----------



## Shonk

I hada a Karhu fail

tREFI 65535
VCCSA 1.200V
Failed 4985% Karhu

I set back my normal tREFI + VCCSA as one of them is what i suspect caused the fail

tREFI 58320
VCCSA 1.300V
12500% Karhu (Still running)

What would you lot goto to make sure its good


----------



## edkieferlp

Shonk said:


> I hada a Karhu fail
> 
> tREFI 65535
> VCCSA 1.200V
> Failed 4985% Karhu
> 
> I set back my normal tREFI + VCCSA as one of them is what i suspect caused the fail
> 
> tREFI 58320
> VCCSA 1.300V
> 7123% Karhu (Still running)
> 
> What would you lot goto to make sure its good


Instead of AIDA, try Intel MLC and see if the same results. I think it's better test, there is a GUI version in the second post here too.








12900K latency w/MLC


Asking people with 12900K DDR4 & DDR5 machines to run MLC and post results. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/developer/articles/tool/intelr-memory-latency-checker.html List your configurations Thanks




www.overclock.net





Other than testing other memory tester like TM5 I always check Linpack extreme and Y-cruncher 2.5b, run a few times in a row. Both push the whole system pretty hard (CPU+Memory).
PS: watch temps when running both and Y-cruncher is AVX2+ app.


----------



## sharkcohen

I am considering getting a 12900KS and a DDR4 board and reusing my current RAM which is Corsair CMT32GX4M2Z3600C14, Dominator Platinum C14 3600. pcpartspicker has the following note regarding this combo: 



> The Corsair Dominator Platinum RGB 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) DDR4-3600 CL14 Memory operating voltage of 1.45 V exceeds the Intel Alder Lake CPU recommended maximum of 1350 mv+5% (1417.5 mv). This memory module may run at a reduced clock rate to meet the 1350 mv voltage recommendation, or may require running at a voltage greater than the Intel recommended maximum.


Is this something I should be concerned about? Should I think about getting different RAM?


----------



## jambazz

remerdore said:


> My 24/7 setup memory
> G.SKILL F4-3200C14D-16GTZRX
> 
> 
> View attachment 2554264


Hey man, long time lurker her... I've been trying to improve my memory benchmarks, (I'd really like to get to ~40ns), and I've only tuned my primary timings (16-17-17-36 CR2 G1) but then I see your score and think this can't be done? You have tuned your secondary and tertiary a lot. Is it because of the different CPUs (12600vs12900?)
Memory kit is
G.SKILL F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW (b-die SR)










Edit: below how it scores with Ring set to 46 max.









BIOS 0807 (settings optimized for low power usage, Windows has balanced power plan chosen)
MCE Enabled
SVID Enabled
SVID Behaviour Best Case Scenario
49x All P-Cores (E-Cores disabled)
46x Cache/Ring/Bus
Vcore: Adaptive Voltage set to minus "-" and Auto Auto (Read vcore is 1.279-1.288 in BIOS)
VDIMM 1.45
VCCSA 1.27
VDDQD TX 1.25
LLC4


----------



## Raphie

Though ram test passed for 3 hours, I had a total freeze last night, just surfing edge, mouse stuck, keyboard stuck, no crtl alt del. So hard reset, no post OC error. Will put the 36 back to 39, see if that helps. My previous x299 / 7940x was rock solid @ 4266. Here even 3900 is finicky appearantly.


----------



## edkieferlp

Raphie said:


> Though ram test passed for 3 hours, I had a total freeze last night, just surfing edge, mouse stuck, keyboard stuck, no crtl alt del. So hard reset, no post OC error. Will put the 36 back to 39, see if that helps. My previous x299 / 7940x was rock solid @ 4266. Here even 3900 is finicky appearantly.


Your talking tRAS?, those kinds of freezes can be a few things from low idle voltage to tight tRFC, and tRDWR but could be others too.

What is your RTP value?

I would downclock your CPU OC while testing new ram timings so they can't complicate the conditions.


----------



## Bloax

Raphie said:


> Though ram test passed for 3 hours, I had a total freeze last night, just surfing edge, mouse stuck, keyboard stuck, no crtl alt del. So hard reset, no post OC error. Will put the 36 back to 39, see if that helps. My previous x299 / 7940x was rock solid @ 4266. Here even 3900 is finicky appearantly.


That sounds more like what happens if I accidentally set my Ring multiplier to 48 instead of 38 :- )
Are you sure it's a memory problem, and not a CPU configuration problem? What are you running? 

For going past 3800 Gear1 on this board outside of a 2x8 config, I've found the 133x29 G1 (3866) multiplier with BCLK>100 to be able to go beyond what setting "sane" multipliers would normally allow;








This is a finnicky 4x8 config, which otherwise spit "Memory OC failed !!" at me if I try to run it above 100x38 G1, though I didn't bother trying to stabilize it - it was merely a test.



jambazz said:


> Hey man, long time lurker her... I've been trying to improve my memory benchmarks, (I'd really like to get to ~40ns), and I've only tuned my primary timings (16-17-17-36 CR2 G1) but then I see your score and think this can't be done? You have tuned your secondary and tertiary a lot. Is it because of the different CPUs (12600vs12900?)











MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread


I suggest stop buying into the Ram hype thing.Cheap Ram can be fine 100% and no difference in PC Gaming. Truth is 3000Mhz Ram can be just as Fast in PC Gaming as 4000Mhz with tuned memory and not even extreme tuned memory. I personally run CL17 Gear 2 4000Mhz Ram on RTX 3080,12900K 5400Mhz at...




www.overclock.net




I actually wrote a little post on secondary and tertiary timings, they're very important, and *The* primary reason you don't see any difference between XMP's for kits between 3200 14-14-14 vs. 3600 14-15-15 vs. 4000 16-16-16 etc

AIDA is a terrible benchmark for memory performance, and doesn't even reveal the fact that poor secondary/tertiary timings nuke performance.
An easily available stress-test utility, and memory performance measuring stick, is y-cruncher:








For the purpose of memory stability during _heavy_ usage, these "component stress tests" do the trick:
though beware - HNT and VST are _very hot_ CPU tests :- )









HNT on its own is also great for seeing if your memory config is stable at all, as it tends to error out within 30-90 seconds if it isn't.


Code:


@echo off
cd /d %~dp0
y-cruncher.exe stress -D:120 HNT

You can use the above batch code in a .bat file in the same folder as y-cruncher.exe, then have a shortcut to it on your desktop to quickly run it and see if your memory explodes, or if you have something for long-term stability testing.

Hey, speaking of long-term stability testing.. There's something for doing that not *completely blind* too!


----------



## ChaosAD

One quick question, is the MSI Z690 Edge+ Gskill 4000c14 (2x8) the best performance combo?


----------



## Shonk

I have never really bothered trying higher frequency's on my ram and have concentrated on getting the timings tight
anyway today i tested out 3900 + 4000 it seems i can still get the timings quite tight but the RTL goes to crap at 4000
*what would you use out of these three

Aida64 @ 3733 15-17-17-34-CR1*
Read 63284
Write 59105
Copy 66737
Latency 45.8 ns
RTL MC0 C0 A1/A2 *69/69*
RTL MC1 C0 B1/B2 *69/69

Aida64 @ 3900* *16-18-18-36-CR1*
Read 65974
Write 61611
Copy 69366
Latency 45.6 ns
RTL MC0 C0 A1/A2 *71/71*
RTL MC1 C0 B1/B2 *73/73

Aida64 @ 4000 16-18-18-36-CR1*
Read 67065
Write 62912
Copy 70570
Latency 46.0 ns
RTL MC0 C0 A1/A2 *75/75*
RTL MC1 C0 B1/B2 *81/81

Detailed settings*
Ram 2 x 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3600 Micron B Die Dual Rank BL2K32G36C16U4B
CPU Base Clock = 100.33
Gear Mode = Gear 1
Performance Cores = 53,53,52,52,51,51,51,51
Efficiency Cores = 40
Vcore Voltage Mode = Adaptive Vcore (Selection) VF Point 6 to 11 = -0.050V
VCCSA = 1.30V
DRAM Vdd/VddQ = 1.30V
BCLK Adaptive Voltage = Disabled
Realtime Memory Timing = Disabled
Memory Timing Mode = Fixed
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Normal

*Detailed Timings*


Code:


3733
CAS Latency                     15
tRCD                            17
tRP                             17
tRAS                            34

tRC                             51
tWR                             12
tRRD_S                          4
tRRD_L                          6
tWTR_S                          Auto (3)
tWTR_L                          Auto (6)
tRFC                            540
tRTP                            6
tFAW                            16
Command Rate                    1

tREFI                           58320
tRDRD_dr                        7
tRDRD_sg                        7
tRDWR_sg                        11
tRDWR_dg                        11
tRDWR_dr                        11
tRDWR_dd                        11
tWRWR_dr                        7
tWRWR_dd                        7
tWRRD_sg                        25
tWRRD_dg                        22
tWRRD_dr                        6
tWRRD_dd                        6

DRAM Voltage 1.370V
Karhu Pass 13150% 0:12:01:50


3900
CAS Latency                     16
tRCD                            18
tRP                             18
tRAS                            36

tRC                             54
tWR                             12
tRRD_S                          4
tRRD_L                          6
tWTR_S                          Auto (3)
tWTR_L                          Auto (6)
tRFC                            570
tRTP                            6
tFAW                            16 (TRRD_S x 4)
Command Rate                    1

tREFI                           58320
tRDRD_dr                        7
tRDRD_sg                        7
tRDWR_sg                        12
tRDWR_dg                        12
tRDWR_dr                        12
tRDWR_dd                        12
tWRWR_dr                        7
tWRWR_dd                        7
tWRRD_sg                        26
tWRRD_dg                        23
tWRRD_dr                        6
tWRRD_dd                        6

DRAM Voltage 1.370V
Karhu Pending


4000
CAS Latency                     16
tRCD                            18
tRP                             18
tRAS                            36

tRC                             54
tWR                             12
tRRD_S                          4
tRRD_L                          6
tWTR_S                          Auto (3)
tWTR_L                          Auto (6)
tRFC                            580
tRTP                            6
tFAW                            16
Command Rate                    1

tREFI                           58320
tRDRD_dr                        7
tRDRD_sg                        7
tRDWR_sg                        12
tRDWR_dg                        12
tRDWR_dr                        12
tRDWR_dd                        12
tWRWR_dr                        7
tWRWR_dd                        7
tWRRD_sg                        26
tWRRD_dg                        23
tWRRD_dr                        6
tWRRD_dd                        6

DRAM Voltage 1.370V 

Karhu Fail 1306% (Suspect tRFC Set 600)
Karhu Running tRFC 600


----------



## bscool

ChaosAD said:


> One quick question, is the MSI Z690 Edge+ Gskill 4000c14 (2x8) the best performance combo?


Different people will give you different opinions. I think for the money the cheaper boards will get you very close to ddr4 mem OC. Limit will be IMC and memory bin.

MSI A and Asus Tuf will get you similar results in my opinion. I have a Strix and for DR I think it is the best MB but that is just my opinion. I can run 4266c15 with DR and same with SR b die.


----------



## bscool

Shonk said:


> I have never really bothered trying higher frequency's on my ram and have concentrated on getting the timings tight
> anyway today i tested out 3900 + 4000 it seems i can still get the timings quite tight but the RTL goes to crap at 4000
> *what would you use out of these three
> 
> Aida64 @ 3733 15-17-17-34-CR1*
> Read 63284
> Write 59105
> Copy 66737
> Latency 45.8 ns
> RTL MC0 C0 A1/A2 *69/69*
> RTL MC1 C0 B1/B2 *69/69
> 
> Aida64 @ 3900* *16-18-18-36-CR1*
> Read 65974
> Write 61611
> Copy 69366
> Latency 45.6 ns
> RTL MC0 C0 A1/A2 *71/71*
> RTL MC1 C0 B1/B2 *73/73
> 
> Aida64 @ 4000 16-18-18-36-CR1*
> Read 67065
> Write 62912
> Copy 70570
> Latency 46.0 ns
> RTL MC0 C0 A1/A2 *75/75*
> RTL MC1 C0 B1/B2 *81/81
> 
> Detailed settings*
> Ram 2 x 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3600 Micron B Die Dual Rank BL2K32G36C16U4B
> CPU Base Clock = 100.33
> Gear Mode = Gear 1
> Performance Cores = 53,53,52,52,51,51,51,51
> Efficiency Cores = 40
> Vcore Voltage Mode = Adaptive Vcore (Selection) VF Point 6 to 11 = -0.050V
> VCCSA = 1.30V
> DRAM Vdd/VddQ = 1.30V
> BCLK Adaptive Voltage = Disabled
> Realtime Memory Timing = Disabled
> Memory Timing Mode = Fixed
> CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Normal
> 
> *Detailed Timings*
> 
> 
> Code:
> 
> 
> 3733
> CAS Latency                     15
> tRCD                            17
> tRP                             17
> tRAS                            34
> 
> tRC                             51
> tWR                             12
> tRRD_S                          4
> tRRD_L                          6
> tWTR_S                          Auto (3)
> tWTR_L                          Auto (6)
> tRFC                            540
> tRTP                            6
> tFAW                            16
> Command Rate                    1
> 
> tREFI                           58320
> tRDRD_dr                        7
> tRDRD_sg                        7
> tRDWR_sg                        11
> tRDWR_dg                        11
> tRDWR_dr                        11
> tRDWR_dd                        11
> tWRWR_dr                        7
> tWRWR_dd                        7
> tWRRD_sg                        25
> tWRRD_dg                        22
> tWRRD_dr                        6
> tWRRD_dd                        6
> 
> DRAM Voltage 1.370V
> Karhu Pass 13150% 0:12:01:50
> 
> 
> 3900
> CAS Latency                     16
> tRCD                            18
> tRP                             18
> tRAS                            36
> 
> tRC                             54
> tWR                             12
> tRRD_S                          4
> tRRD_L                          6
> tWTR_S                          Auto (3)
> tWTR_L                          Auto (6)
> tRFC                            570
> tRTP                            6
> tFAW                            16 (TRRD_S x 4)
> Command Rate                    1
> 
> tREFI                           58320
> tRDRD_dr                        7
> tRDRD_sg                        7
> tRDWR_sg                        12
> tRDWR_dg                        12
> tRDWR_dr                        12
> tRDWR_dd                        12
> tWRWR_dr                        7
> tWRWR_dd                        7
> tWRRD_sg                        26
> tWRRD_dg                        23
> tWRRD_dr                        6
> tWRRD_dd                        6
> 
> DRAM Voltage 1.370V
> Karhu Pending
> 
> 
> 4000
> CAS Latency                     16
> tRCD                            18
> tRP                             18
> tRAS                            36
> 
> tRC                             54
> tWR                             12
> tRRD_S                          4
> tRRD_L                          6
> tWTR_S                          Auto (3)
> tWTR_L                          Auto (6)
> tRFC                            580
> tRTP                            6
> tFAW                            16
> Command Rate                    1
> 
> tREFI                           58320
> tRDRD_dr                        7
> tRDRD_sg                        7
> tRDWR_sg                        12
> tRDWR_dg                        12
> tRDWR_dr                        12
> tRDWR_dd                        12
> tWRWR_dr                        7
> tWRWR_dd                        7
> tWRRD_sg                        26
> tWRRD_dg                        23
> tWRRD_dr                        6
> tWRRD_dd                        6
> 
> DRAM Voltage 1.370V
> 
> Karhu Fail 1306% (Suspect tRFC Set 600)
> Karhu Running tRFC 600


Run Adia64 photoworx and see how much of a difference there is. It is senstive to memory timings and clocks.

Not saying it is be all and end all but more data to look at.


----------



## Shonk

bscool said:


> Run Adia64 photoworx and see how much of a difference there is. It is senstive to memory timings and clocks.
> 
> Not saying it is be all and end all but more data to look at.


Seems more clock sensitive

Aida Photoworxx 4000
41643
41647
41646
41636
41651
41637
41634
41648

Aida Photoworxx 3900
40692
40695
40693
40691


----------



## bscool

Shonk said:


> Seems more clock sensitive
> 
> Aida Photoworxx 4000
> 41643
> 41647
> 41646
> 41636
> 41651
> 41637
> 41634
> 41648
> 
> Aida Photoworxx 3900
> 40692
> 40695
> 40693
> 40691


I have tested it and sub tighting timings will increase score also. Loosen sub timing and test if your score goes down.

I just compared 4266c15 tight sub to auto subs

About 6,0000 MP more from tight subs.


----------



## bigfootnz

@bscool
How did you find this 1304 BIOS? Are you using it now? Either this 12900ks has crap IMC or this 1304 BIOS is not great, as I cannot repeat even 4133C15 settings. But now on top of different CPU I've different MB, so maybe even MB is reason for this? Is anything changed from 0707 regarding SA and Vddq?
Can you please share your current BIOS in txt? Thanks


----------



## bscool

bigfootnz said:


> @bscool
> How did you find this 1304 BIOS? Are you using it now? Either this 12900ks has crap IMC or this 1304 BIOS is not great, as I cannot repeat even 4133C15 settings. But now on top of different CPU I've different MB, so maybe even MB is reason for this? Is anything changed from 0707 regarding SA and Vddq?
> Can you please share your current BIOS in txt? Thanks


I would bet it is 1304 bios and DR b die. After 901 I have trouble getting 4000+ to be stable or train rtls correctly if making changes in the bios. If loading all setting after a clear cmos it is more likely to boot and be stable with newer bioses when running 4000+.

You can set rtls to help keep rtls set so when making changes in the bios it boots again and is stable but it still is no the best.

Also set static sa/vddq 1.35 to 1.4v

Links below.

You need to test as 71/71/71 73/73/73 might not be best for your setup and 73/73/73/ 73/73/73 might be better or easier to get stable.

I am thinking I will try bios 901 with the KS and set voltages manually and clocks so I would think it should work but not sure. I know someone on Discord that tried 901 with KS and they said if you leave voltages on auto they are very high.

Edit you need to use memtweakit to verify RTLs trained correctly on both channels I show pics in one of the links below. 4th tab on memtweakit.









ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


Also noticed if flashing back from bios 1304 to 901 SP is messed up. To get it back to original flash 0023, then 707 and then 901. Also removing and replacing CPU with a different CPU kepts old CPU SP for me. I had to reflash bios to get the correct SP. Even turning off psu and aolding clear...




www.overclock.net













ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


My TUF WiFi ran overnight with 0 karhu errors on my maxed out memory setting (3733C15, very hot subtimings, 1.5VDD, 1.35 VDDQTX, 1.0V SA) with 4 DR DIMMs. Everything else works fine also and I like the possibility to lower cache VID now - gives me 50mV lower VCore in my energy saving profile...




www.overclock.net













ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


Guys I just figured out why windows 11 or windows 10 couldn’t see my drive when trying to instal windows it was becuase I had Intel rst enabled. This YouTube video is super helpful for anyone just starting up. You know I should have said something about that. I screwed around with that and...




www.overclock.net





4266c15 profile. I use these same setting for DR also on bios 901.









ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


Also noticed if flashing back from bios 1304 to 901 SP is messed up. To get it back to original flash 0023, then 707 and then 901. Also removing and replacing CPU with a different CPU kepts old CPU SP for me. I had to reflash bios to get the correct SP. Even turning off psu and aolding clear...




www.overclock.net


----------



## bigfootnz

bscool said:


> I would bet it is 1304 bios and DR b die. After 901 I have trouble getting 4000+ to be stable or train rtls correctly if making changes in the bios. If loading all setting after a clear cmos it is more likely to boot and be stable with newer bioses when running 4000+.
> 
> You can set rtls to help keep rtls set so when making changes in the bios it boots again and is stable but it still is no the best.
> 
> Also set static sa/vddq 1.35 to 1.4v
> 
> Links below.
> 
> You need to test as 71/71/71 73/73/73 might not be best for your setup and 73/73/73/ 73/73/73 might be better or easier to get stable.
> 
> I am thinking I will try bios 901 with the KS and set voltages manually and clocks so I would think it should work but not sure. I know someone on Discord that tried 901 with KS and they said if you leave voltages on auto they are very high.
> 
> Edit you need to use memtweakit to verify RTLs trained correctly on both channels I show pics in one of the links below. 4th tab on memtweakit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> Also noticed if flashing back from bios 1304 to 901 SP is messed up. To get it back to original flash 0023, then 707 and then 901. Also removing and replacing CPU with a different CPU kepts old CPU SP for me. I had to reflash bios to get the correct SP. Even turning off psu and aolding clear...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> My TUF WiFi ran overnight with 0 karhu errors on my maxed out memory setting (3733C15, very hot subtimings, 1.5VDD, 1.35 VDDQTX, 1.0V SA) with 4 DR DIMMs. Everything else works fine also and I like the possibility to lower cache VID now - gives me 50mV lower VCore in my energy saving profile...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> Guys I just figured out why windows 11 or windows 10 couldn’t see my drive when trying to instal windows it was becuase I had Intel rst enabled. This YouTube video is super helpful for anyone just starting up. You know I should have said something about that. I screwed around with that and...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 4266c15 profile. I use these same setting for DR also on bios 901.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread
> 
> 
> Also noticed if flashing back from bios 1304 to 901 SP is messed up. To get it back to original flash 0023, then 707 and then 901. Also removing and replacing CPU with a different CPU kepts old CPU SP for me. I had to reflash bios to get the correct SP. Even turning off psu and aolding clear...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net


Man this is so helpful, thank you. If I’m not able to make this 1304 working I’ll give a try to 901. Thanks for the tip regarding voltages.

If I remember correctly, at time of 0707, it was recommendation to have vddq just like 0.05v less than ram voltage. This is not the case anymore?

When you will get your ks?


----------



## bscool

bigfootnz said:


> Man this is so helpful, thank you. If I’m not able to make this 1304 working I’ll give a try to 901. Thanks for the tip regarding voltages.
> 
> If I remember correctly, at time of 0707, it was recommendation to have vddq just like 0.05v less than ram voltage. This is not the case anymore?
> 
> When you will get your ks?


For me having sa/vddq equal has worked well on bios 901. But try them however as it might better for you and it might differ on different bioses. I know some older bioses I ran vddq at like 1.5 to 1.55v and sa at 1.4v.

I am suppose to get the KS in the next couple days.


----------



## bscool

4266c15-16-16 DR b die 

air cooled dims Phantek T30 fan on dims

Strix d4 bios 901

12900kf 53-49 e core off

Karhu 11,000%


----------



## edkieferlp

Here is where I am at, tried lowering tRDWR from 15 to 13, while it passed memtest86 it blue screened on y cruncher.

Vdim= 1.375v (hwinfo=1.392), SA= 1.26v, VDDQ tx= 1.35v.
RTL are all 73

I am leaning more on CPU OC, not enough Vcore as I got the same thing with 3900 with old timings. It probably just pushing CPU over what my settings are. Could be low SA or Vdimm only way would be to raise Vcore/lower clock and retest.
Anyway, these results seem to be better than prior so will leave them as is for now.
They pass y cruncher and linpack extreme tests.


----------



## Bloax

bscool said:


> For me having sa/vddq equal has worked well on bios 901. But try them however as it might better for you and it might differ on different bioses. I know some older bioses I ran vddq at like 1.5 to 1.55v and sa at 1.4v.


On my 12700k (and MSI Z690-A Pro DDR4 board), SA has thus far topped out at 1.3v before it has generally been useless to raise.
not without weirdness, though: Mirror, mirror on the wall - what's the ADL SA...
where SA requirements to run the memory seem to be much lower than for passing memory training

VDDQ on the other hand, has been closely tied with memory frequency (which also means memory controller clockspeed) - very similar to VDDP on Vermeer (Zen3) AM4, which too is an important IMC voltage whose requirements go up as memory frequency goes up.

"Good" VDDQ values also happen to be much lower on DDR5, which makes sense - as you always run in Gear2.
Even DDR5-6800 is still 6800 / 4 -> 1700, which is equal in IMC-clock to DDR4-3400 Gear1 💪🤡 

Next-generation DDR5 IC's produced on EUV nodes should be rather exciting, if GDDR6 getting a casual +50% throughput/"frequency" increase is anything to go by.
ddr5-9600 yummy yum's


----------



## RobertoSampaio

I'd like to post a warning!
Be care when proceeding a critical update! Especially firmware / BIOS updates...

Keep in mind your Overclock could not be 100% stable, and it can fail during a critical update process, especially firmware updates. 

It doesn't matter if your CPU, Memory, under voltage or any other setting looks like stable for long time... 

If you are going to proceed a critical update, there is a chance of failure... and a failure at this point will be catastrophic and a possibility of a brick event is real.

I extremely recommend every time you are going to do a BIOS update or firmware update, save your settings, load a BIOS default and use standard CPU frequencies, voltages and memory clocks during the update process.

A fault at this time can brick your MB and CPU.

Adopt a good practice of saving your BIOS settings in a free slot and load Bios default before all hardware update.

If you have a dual BIOS MB, always load BIOS defaults before and after switching from one BIOs TO the other.
I know it's no a pleasure process, and take time... but The time you will spend to umbrick your MB or RMA is much long and painful...

I hope I'm helping you with this simple advice !

You are not a beta tester, and you're supposed to have fun overclocking...

Keep safe and alive....

High voltages ad high frequencies will not burn your hardware... High power and High temps will... and a overclock failure at a critical moment will brick your MB/CPU. 

Hope I can help with these simple advice.


----------



## bigfootnz

@bscool 
Are you able to mod bios 0901 with latest microcode? With this 1304 I cannot even boot anything 4000+. Now I'm testing 4000C14. But I would like to try 0901 with latest microcode if it is possible.

Or if you can send me link when I can find instruction how do add latest microcode to 0901? Thanks


----------



## bscool

bigfootnz said:


> @bscool
> Are you able to mod bios 0901 with latest microcode? With this 1304 I cannot even boot anything 4000+. Now I'm testing 4000C14. But I would like to try 0901 with latest microcode if it is possible.
> 
> Or if you can send me link when I can find instruction how do add latest microcode to 0901? Thanks


I just tried 1304 again tonight and I can get 4133c15-15-15 working. I didnt do any long term testing as it trains RTLs off and it is annoying so I went back to 901. Also cannot boot 4266c15 on 1304 like I can on 901.

As for moding 901 I havent but here is a thread on how to mod them. (12900k) Patching older ucode to restore AVX512

I think this is a list of of latest microcode. But I am not sure if they are meant for bios injection or thru the OS. I have only done it a few times using the thread I links and used microcode listed there.









CPUMicrocodes/Intel at master · platomav/CPUMicrocodes


Intel, AMD, VIA & Freescale CPU Microcode Repositories - CPUMicrocodes/Intel at master · platomav/CPUMicrocodes




github.com


----------



## acoustic

@bscool

I'm noticing some oddities in terms of latency with E-Cores disabled. It's a common theme to disable E-Cores to crank up the Ring/Cache, but I'm just not seeing performance gains here. What are you running to verify the lower latency benefits of disabling E-Cores? Even at 5.0/4.6 (e-core off), I'm just not seeing gains compared to my 5.0/4.0/4.0 (4Ghz E / 4Ghz Ring). The latency drop in AIDA just doesn't seem accurate given I'm going up 600-800Mhz on the Ring. I get 50-51ns latency with E-Cores enabled, and had a 48ns run with E-Cores disabled @ 4.8 Ring.

What magic/voodoo are you guys doing? Based off of what I've seen thus far, I'm losing points in every bench lol


----------



## bscool

acoustic said:


> @bscool
> 
> I'm noticing some oddities in terms of latency with E-Cores disabled. It's a common theme to disable E-Cores to crank up the Ring/Cache, but I'm just not seeing performance gains here. What are you running to verify the lower latency benefits of disabling E-Cores? Even at 5.0/4.6 (e-core off), I'm just not seeing gains compared to my 5.0/4.0/4.0 (4Ghz E / 4Ghz Ring). The latency drop in AIDA just doesn't seem accurate given I'm going up 600-800Mhz on the Ring. I get 50-51ns latency with E-Cores enabled, and had a 48ns run with E-Cores disabled @ 4.8 Ring.
> 
> What magic/voodoo are you guys doing? Based off of what I've seen thus far, I'm losing points in every bench lol


I normally run e cores enabled. I just disabled them sometimes to run memory test or some benches that benefit from avx512 like y cruncher. But even on y cruncher I only see gains from avx512 on Apex I dont see them on Strix d4.


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> I normally run e cores enabled. I just disabled them sometimes to run memory test or some benches that benefit from avx512 like y cruncher. But even on y cruncher I only see gains from avx512 on Apex I dont see them on Strix d4.


Interesting!

Thanks for the heads up


----------



## Bloax

acoustic said:


> @bscool
> 
> I'm noticing some oddities in terms of latency with E-Cores disabled. It's a common theme to disable E-Cores to crank up the Ring/Cache, but I'm just not seeing performance gains here. What are you running to verify the lower latency benefits of disabling E-Cores? Even at 5.0/4.6 (e-core off), I'm just not seeing gains compared to my 5.0/4.0/4.0 (4Ghz E / 4Ghz Ring).
> 
> What magic/voodoo are you guys doing? Based off of what I've seen thus far, I'm losing points in every bench lol


I believe I've already said things on this topic 🤡 ;



Bloax said:


> For one reason or another, the CPU takes Ring Ratios above 40 as "a suggestion" and sneakily drops it down under whatever conditions it may find applicable.
> If you keep the ratio at 40, and crank up the BCLK - that becomes *an order* rather than a suggestion to run it faster. 💪🤡
> 
> Though if you do have an iGPU, I'd suggest raising the iGPU voltage to avoid iGPU uncore clock (not adjustable, but affected by BCLK) crashes.


and if you have e-cores enabled, then increasing the e-core L2 cache voltage is also important for keeping high ring ratios stable.


----------



## edkieferlp

Bloax said:


> I believe I've already said things on this topic 🤡 ;
> 
> 
> and if you have e-cores enabled, then increasing the e-core L2 cache voltage is also important for keeping high ring ratios stable.


do you know what stock L2 cache voltage is?
Or is this a off-set type voltage (I haven't tried it just know no voltage is listed in bios like cpu, and others).


----------



## acoustic

Bloax said:


> I believe I've already said things on this topic 🤡 ;
> 
> 
> and if you have e-cores enabled, then increasing the e-core L2 cache voltage is also important for keeping high ring ratios stable.


The ring is running at what I specified, unless you think the ring is changing clocks and not reporting properly to software.. which I can't say I agree. If I set the ring to 50x, I crash almost immediately. If I set the ring to 48x, things run fine and there is a small latency decrease (in the most unreliable bench ever, AIDA), but it's not enough to justify disabling E-Cores.

I'll try dropping the core multiplier and raising the bclk and if there are any gains, but I don't suspect there will be.

edit: I went to 114 BCLK @ 3800 100:133 Gear1 .. put ring to ~4.3 with a ratio below 40x (believe it was 37 or 38) .. no perceivable performance difference rather than AIDA reading extremely high due to the BCLK bug. The one test that seems to scale with memory decently, and the test I've been using to verify tighter timings are improving performance, has been 32M SuperPi. I've gotten down to 5M 43.611s now at 5.3 ST / 4.0 E / 4.1 Ring @ 100 BCLK. SuperPi did not show improvements at 4.3Ghz Ring @ 114 BCLK with L2 Cache voltage set to ADAPTIVE AUTO w/ +0.250mv offset.

Large part of the confusion with BCLK OC, I think, is that the most prominent benchmark people use (mistakenly, I might add, because AIDA is a really garbage benchmark with far too much run variance) is even more unreliable than normal because of that BCLK bug.

As far as I can tell, setting Ring Down Bus to DISABLE is correctly stopping the Ring from downclocking at any point, even above 40x ratio. I've been running 41x for a full day now with zero problems or software reported clock decrease. The ring sits at 4100 even at idle. Min/Max/Average all read 4100. I cannot read my CPU L2 Cache voltage in BIOS or software, but I'm going to test setting that to Adapative


----------



## Raphie

I’m seeing the same thing. Tightening up gives worse throughput than default, also AIDA has a 1% random difference every bench iteration. For me the bottom line is on Gear-1 my IMC craps out above 1945Mhz. Don’t matter how I get there, 1945 is the stability brickwall. When moving to Gear-2 I can do 4400XMP where the IMC then is at 1300Mhz.
So the memory does what it’s rated for. My IMC is just brickwalled at 1945Mhz.

in G1 3900 the latency is lower, (around 63) the AIDA throughput is around 56.500
in G2 the 4400 latency is 78, the throughput 61000
both are 12h ram test stable.


----------



## Raphie

Is there anyone who can share MSI Pro Z690 DDR-4 settings that support ddr4000 gear-1, <1.4v mem, being Karhu ram test 12h stable?
This on standard 12900K settings, no CPU OC. 
There are to many settings: TRWC.. TfrWC, WRfTC1/2/3/4/5/6/7.... and they are all called differently in every BIOS, slowly getting dyslectic reading them. And then some screenshots just provide bootable settings, but not stable. 
I'm sick of reading screenshots, making notes, trying to find the same fields in MSI BIOS only to find out a BSOD in Win or "Overclocking failed"
Sorry for being a bit grumpy, but I would just like some real world 12h stable evidence of settings BEYOND 3900 G1 1T that actually hold up in this config. without configuring an OVEN @ 1.5v+


----------



## acoustic

My 24/7 settings:

12700K // ASUS TUF D4 1304 BIOS // GSKILL 2x16 DR b-die 32GTRSA

53x3/51x5/50x8 // 40x E-Core // 41x Cache -- fully stable overnight tested
1.33v SA // 1.5v DRAM // 1.45v VDDQ

Big notes is that I saw a large performance increase getting tWR down to 7 in SuperPI and Y-Cruncher 2.5b. Overall, I think I'm done tweaking for a long time. I'm at the limit of the IMC. I have some really good sticks, I think. I haven't tried tWR @ 6, but that might work too. As of right now I'm pretty satisfied with the mem performance. Latency on the AIDA run pictured is truthfully on the slower spectrum of 8 runs. I was averaging 50.8-51.4 on most runs, that one just happened to be higher -- reason #9999 why I think AIDA is a garbage benchmark to verify performance. Y-Cruncher 2.5b and SuperPi 32M were both far more accurate run-to-run.


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> Is there anyone who can share MSI Pro Z690 DDR-4 settings that support ddr4000 gear-1, <1.4v mem, being Karhu ram test 12h stable?
> This on standard 12900K settings, no CPU OC.
> There are to many settings: TRWC.. TfrWC, WRfTC1/2/3/4/5/6/7.... and they are all called differently in every BIOS, slowly getting dyslectic reading them. And then some screenshots just provide bootable settings, but not stable.
> I'm sick of reading screenshots, making notes, trying to find the same fields in MSI BIOS only to find out a BSOD in Win or "Overclocking failed"
> Sorry for being a bit grumpy, but I would just like some real world 12h stable evidence of settings BEYOND 3900 G1 1T that actually hold up in this config. without configuring an OVEN @ 1.5v+


No amount of timings is going to fix a poor IMC. It doesn't matter how much voltage I throw at my 12700K -- it will not take 4000 GR1. I've seen most 12900Ks doing 4000 Gear1, but there are examples of some *not* taking it. Sometimes you just get unlucky with the silicon lottery.


----------



## Bloax

Raphie said:


> Is there anyone who can share MSI Pro Z690 DDR-4 settings that support ddr4000 gear-1, <1.4v mem, being Karhu ram test 12h stable?
> This on standard 12900K settings, no CPU OC.
> There are to many settings: TRWC.. TfrWC, WRfTC1/2/3/4/5/6/7.... and they are all called differently in every BIOS, slowly getting dyslectic reading them. And then some screenshots just provide bootable settings, but not stable.
> I'm sick of reading screenshots, making notes, trying to find the same fields in MSI BIOS only to find out a BSOD in Win or "Overclocking failed"
> Sorry for being a bit grumpy, but I would just like some real world 12h stable evidence of settings BEYOND 3900 G1 1T that actually hold up in this config. without configuring an OVEN @ 1.5v+


Is this 2x8, or 4x8?

Because the entire first paragraph of this post is about the requirements for your specific sticks (which I happen to have, which is how I know); [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock

at 4000 my 2x8 would look like this;









the procODT/CPU AUX settings are very important


----------



## Raphie

It's 4x 8 in my case. Where can I find Dragon ball? it's not on the MSI website?


----------



## Bloax

Used to be it was available here: Z690 Bios and Tools

now they are, conspicuously, missing again

dragon power:


https://dl.dropbox.com/s/acf39o068c1gm1o/MSI%20Dragon%20Power.7z



dragon ball:


https://dl.dropbox.com/s/67eatppe5qo5ak2/MSI%20Dragon%20Ball.7z



too bad I can just reupload them 🤡


For 4x8 of the viper 4400 sticks, I really have no clue - I'm gonna be trying to run 4x8 with Viper 4400 19-19-19 (A) and Viper 4000 16-16-16 (B) sticks in an ABAB config soon, when those things finally arrive.
With my current junky Ripjaws 3200 14-14-14 sticks as (B), I haven't been able to run anything past 3800 stable - primarily because those sticks don't like going fast, and even have a "MT/s divided by tRCDRD must be lower than about 255" brick wall. :- )

The 4400 sticks like being run at RTT Nom 40 (RZQ [which is 240] / 6), Wr 80 (RZQ / 3), and Park 48 (RZQ / 5) - though they can also run at Park 60 (RZQ / 4)
So the only thing I can suggest in regards to making them go vroom vroom, is to set RTT Park to 60 for A1B1, while keeping it the board's default 48 for A2B2
(though trying the inverse of Park 48 on A1B1, and 60 on A2B2, wouldn't hurt)
I don't know if they exhibit the same "RDRD_sg, WRWR_sg and WRRD_dr/dd can be run at 7 instead of 8" behaviour, alongside a reduction in the required RDWR (-3 compared to 2x8) to run a given frequency. -- as they do, when run in 4x8 with these junky Ripjaws sticks.


----------



## gerardfraser

Raphie said:


> Is there anyone who can share MSI Pro Z690 DDR-4 settings that support ddr4000 gear-1, <1.4v mem, being Karhu ram test 12h stable?
> This on standard 12900K settings, no CPU OC.
> There are to many settings: TRWC.. TfrWC, WRfTC1/2/3/4/5/6/7.... and they are all called differently in every BIOS, slowly getting dyslectic reading them. And then some screenshots just provide bootable settings, but not stable.
> I'm sick of reading screenshots, making notes, trying to find the same fields in MSI BIOS only to find out a BSOD in Win or "Overclocking failed"
> Sorry for being a bit grumpy, but I would just like some real world 12h stable evidence of settings BEYOND 3900 G1 1T that actually hold up in this config. without configuring an OVEN @ 1.5v+


Not what you were exactly asking for but may help others.
G.SKILL (2 x 16GB) F4-4000C17D-32GVKB

Since I do not run default setting,So I just set default settings in BIOS and showing stable default Gear1 DDR4 timings for me.
Older BIOS on this MSI Pro Z690-a DDR4 use to need SA voltage of 1.45v to run but I only ever tested CL14 Gear1 4000Mhz.
With newer BIOS 1.25 SA is all that is needed.

Dragon ball posted in this thread ,search will work


----------



## Bloax

I'm also not sure what about high memory voltage makes things an oven.
The stock Viper Steel heatsinks are absolute poop, and also extremely easy to disassemble - the central plastic inset at the top serves as a great lever for simply pulling off the weakly glued-on sheet of aluminum.







with the heat-traps removed, a fan keeps them cool even at 1.62v



acoustic said:


> My 24/7 settings:
> 
> View attachment 2555451


I would be surprised if tRFC 252 (tRC * 6) wouldn't run just fine.
I'd also be surprised if tCKE wouldn't want to be 9 for some things - but I've never toyed with fancy PCBs that do ridiculous things (WTR 1/6 lol) without problems, and it could just as easily be that its current value is fine for the.. Wacky set of WTR_s/L tWR values.


----------



## acoustic

Bloax said:


> I would be surprised if tRFC 252 (tRC * 6) wouldn't run just fine.
> I'd be surprised if tCKE wouldn't want to be 9 for some things - but I've never toyed with fancy PCBs that do ridiculous things (WTR 1/6 lol) without problems, and it could easily be that its current value is fine for the.. Wacky set of WTR_s/L tWR values.


Yeah, I got that 6/1 on WTR_L/S when I went to 8 on tWR, and it kept it when I dropped it down one further to 7. I set tCKE to 6 a while back with looser settings and it's just continued pumping. I think the combination of tWR dropping and the super tight WTR_L/S really helped with the big improvement in Y-Cruncher 2.5b and SuperPi 32M.

I'll try dropping tRFC at a later point. For now, just want to enjoy some smooth gaming


----------



## bigfootnz

bscool said:


> For me having sa/vddq equal has worked well on bios 901. But try them however as it might better for you and it might differ on different bioses. I know some older bioses I ran vddq at like 1.5 to 1.55v and sa at 1.4v.
> 
> I am suppose to get the KS in the next couple days.


My problem was CPU not seated properly in socket somehow. I've installed old KF SP81 just to check is my problem CPU IMC or motherboard. With that KF I was able to run 4100C15, which I was able to do again. Then I was almost convinced that my KS has crappy IMC, but I decided to try it once more. Suddenly I was able to boot easily to 4266C15, yes it was not stable but I was not able to do it previously, not even 4100C16. Firstly, I had check my old 4100C15 profile which was stable. Next stop was 4200C15 which I managed to get Kahry 2 hours stable and TM5 Usmus stable. I'll see can my RAM be good for 4266 16-16-16, as I know that it will not run 15-16-16.

What SP is your KS?

If anyone have weird stability problems with RAM you can always try to resit your CPU.


----------



## bscool

bigfootnz said:


> My problem was CPU not seated properly in socket somehow. I've installed old KF SP81 just to check is my problem CPU IMC or motherboard. With that KF I was able to run 4100C15, which I was able to do again. Then I was almost convinced that my KS has crappy IMC, but I decided to try it once more. Suddenly I was able to boot easily to 4266C15, yes it was not stable but I was not able to do it previously, not even 4100C16. Firstly, I had check my old 4100C15 profile which was stable. Next stop was 4200C15 which I managed to get Kahry 2 hours stable and TM5 Usmus stable. I'll see can my RAM be good for 4266 16-16-16, as I know that it will not run 15-16-16.
> 
> What SP is your KS?
> 
> If anyone have weird stability problems with RAM you can always try to resit your CPU.


My KS is P 98 E 80. What about yours?

Can you run 4200c15 on bios 1304 with DR b die or are you on 901?


----------



## Raphie

So for ddr4000 I need to go from 1.32 to 1.56?!? That’s A LOT for just 100mhz gain? primary goal is less heat, less rpm noise. 4k not possible at <1.4v? Then I just stop trying. I tend to find the sweetspot of diminishing returns. Not cooking the system squeezing out the final 100mhz. I realize I asked for 4K, but not at all cost.



Bloax said:


> Is this 2x8, or 4x8?
> 
> Because the entire first paragraph of this post is about the requirements for your specific sticks (which I happen to have, which is how I know); [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> at 4000 my 2x8 would look like this;
> View attachment 2555454
> 
> 
> the procODT/CPU AUX settings are very important


----------



## edkieferlp

Raphie said:


> So for ddr4000 I need to go from 1.32 to 1.56?!? That’s A LOT for just 100mhz gain? primary goal is less heat, less rpm noise. 4k not possible at <1.4v? Then I just stop trying. I tend to find the sweetspot of diminishing returns. Not cooking the system squeezing out the final 100mhz. I realize I asked for 4K, but not at all cost.


I am the same, I try to OC so wattage, voltage is raised very minimally, not pushing freq to max with high voltages to me around 3800-3900 seems to be a sweet spot but of course, that depends on memory chips. and CPU IMC.


----------



## bigfootnz

bscool said:


> My KS is P 98 E 80. What about yours?
> 
> Can you run 4200c15 on bios 1304 with DR b die or are you on 901?


My KS is P95 E80. All this testing was done on 901, as I've finally today solved problem with KS. Probably later on this week I'll give a 1304 one more go. Then I'll try it in Hero to see what it can do with DDR5. Did you test your one with DDR4 or also with DDR5?


----------



## bscool

bigfootnz said:


> My KS is P95 E80. All this testing was done on 901, as I've finally today solved problem with KS. Probably later on this week I'll give a 1304 one more go. Then I'll try it in Hero to see what it can do with DDR5. Did you test your one with DDR4 or also with DDR5?


I tested both ddr4 and ddr5. Didn test much on ddr5 since i only have 1 kit of ddr5.

I will try more wtth ddr5 later but KS could run Karhu @ 7000c32 which my other 2 12900kfs could do. Tried one quick high boot of 7600 and it almost made into Windows but crashed so IMC is good for both ddr4 and ddr5 on the KS. KS seems slightly better on ddr5 than my other 2 KFs the little I tested it on Apex.


----------



## Bloax

Raphie said:


> So for ddr4000 I need to go from 1.32 to 1.56?!? That’s A LOT for just 100mhz gain?


With these procODT/RTT settings on my sticks, +/- 100 MCLK costs 0.06v, and +/- 1 tRCDRD costs 0.09v (while keeping all primary timings equal)

So if yours scale similarly, then it's 1.32v to 1.56v if you want to run 4000 15-15-15-tRAS 30 tRFC 270, or 1.47v to run 4000 16-16-16-tRAS 32 tRFC 288, or 1.38v to run 4000 17-17-17-tRAS 34 tRFC 306 ... x-y-z-(x+y) tRAS, ([tRC =] tRAS+z) * 6 tRFC


----------



## tunste

acoustic said:


> My 24/7 settings:
> 
> 12700K // ASUS TUF D4 1304 BIOS // GSKILL 2x16 DR b-die 32GTRSA
> 
> 53x3/51x5/50x8 // 40x E-Core // 41x Cache -- fully stable overnight tested
> 1.33v SA // 1.5v DRAM // 1.45v VDDQ
> 
> Big notes is that I saw a large performance increase getting tWR down to 7 in SuperPI and Y-Cruncher 2.5b. Overall, I think I'm done tweaking for a long time. I'm at the limit of the IMC. I have some really good sticks, I think. I haven't tried tWR @ 6, but that might work too. As of right now I'm pretty satisfied with the mem performance. Latency on the AIDA run pictured is truthfully on the slower spectrum of 8 runs. I was averaging 50.8-51.4 on most runs, that one just happened to be higher -- reason #9999 why I think AIDA is a garbage benchmark to verify performance. Y-Cruncher 2.5b and SuperPi 32M were both far more accurate run-to-run.
> 
> View attachment 2555451


My system: 12700K // ASUS TUF D4 1304 BIOS // GSKILL 2x8 DR b-die F4-3200C14D-16GFX   
Thank you for your hard work with your memory settings. Due to your work I have been able to get my Intel 12700K and GSkill DDR4 3200CL14 ram (2X8) stable: 12700K P cores @ all cores 5.1 GHz, E cores 4.0 all cores and ram @ 3800 MHz, Gear 1 (14,14,14,28,42,280, CR2). I used your settings for my ram, SA, VDDQ. I use my system for work and gaming.

I came from AMD 5900X on ASUS X570S Dark Hero. The 12700K is better at gaming hands down.


----------



## Bloax

tunste said:


> My system: 12700K // ASUS TUF D4 1304 BIOS // GSKILL 2x8 DR b-die F4-3200C14D-16GFX
> Thank you for your hard work with your memory settings. Due to your work I have been able to get my Intel 12700K and GSkill DDR4 3200CL14 ram (2X8) stable: 12700K P cores @ all cores 5.1 GHz, E cores 4.0 all cores and ram @ 3800 MHz, Gear 1 (14,14,14,28,42,280, CR2). I used your settings for my ram, SA, VDDQ. I use my system for work and gaming.
> 
> I came from AMD 5900X on ASUS X570S Dark Hero. The 12700K is better at gaming hands down.


I maintain the same advice of seeing if raising tCKE to 9* is beneficial - alongside keeping tRFC a multiple of tRC (which is set automagically on LGA1700 to tRAS + tRP), so in this case still 252 (42*6).

Incorrect tCKE errors can be _very_ intermittent, and I wouldn't be surprised if your GPU crashes were related to it.

A 12700k isn't actually _that_ much better than a 5800x/5900x - the big "win" is that it is *much easier* to make it perform.








Where getting the processor to not choke on its own drool required bruteforcing a +/- 0.01v precise set of three voltages (SOC / IOD / CCD) that would produce the least amount of fabric errors during load.
A process that required some minutes to test each step, and a Reboot, POST, Enter BIOS, Save & Exit, POST, Boot, every single time you change a voltage.
(you will go through this 50+ times) 💪💪💪🤡

* (+/-2 every hard 100 memory clock breakpoint, i.e. 7 at 1800, 5 at 1700, 11 at 2000, 13 at 2100 ..) -
Humourously, that is *hard* multiples of 100 MCLK, currently I'm at 2083 through BCLK, and it wants 11 instead of 13 despite only being 17 MCLK away from 2100.
I'm also not sure if the tCKE "thing" is the same or different for different memory ICs (i.e. not Samsung 8gbit B, as most of us DDR4 junkies use), but it's certainly true for B-Die across AM4 and LGA1700.

(for the casual passer-by's, then "Memory Frequency" - things like DDR4-3800 - is reported as the double of MCLK, as that's what the "double" in Double Data Rate Memory stands for 👋 )


----------



## acoustic

tunste said:


> My system: 12700K // ASUS TUF D4 1304 BIOS // GSKILL 2x8 DR b-die F4-3200C14D-16GFX
> Thank you for your hard work with your memory settings. Due to your work I have been able to get my Intel 12700K and GSkill DDR4 3200CL14 ram (2X8) stable: 12700K P cores @ all cores 5.1 GHz, E cores 4.0 all cores and ram @ 3800 MHz, Gear 1 (14,14,14,28,42,280, CR2). I used your settings for my ram, SA, VDDQ. I use my system for work and gaming.
> 
> I came from AMD 5900X on ASUS X570S Dark Hero. The 12700K is better at gaming hands down.


Dude! I'm so glad I was able to help someone. Honestly, I was a complete noob at memory OC and took a long time of grinding at it to figure it out. I've got a good grip on it, I think, but there's always more to learn. The settings I posted earlier actually had a strange oddity - I always test my settings for consistent training by booting at least ~6-7 times and checking my RTL training. If I'm getting 67/67, and then next training it's 69/73, I call it bad and adjust. Well the settings I posted were working well all day yesterday, even trained perfectly fine after getting warm, but this morning I checked my training (was going to set MRC Fast Boot to Enabled now that I thought I was done for a bit) and I ended up getting a 73/67 - which is really weird. I decided to hunt that down and after doing some cold boots and other things, these new settings are giving me consistency.

@Bloax I actually messed with tCKE a bit and tWR as I had a TM5 error pop up, likely due to an odd-ball training event (even though RTLs were fine). I altered them slightly, let me know what you think about this instead:








Also, for anyone else, I've included my .CMO file and .txt BIOS file. This is for a Z690 TUF WIFI D4 on BIOS 1304. Feel free to try or pull settings. I haven't seen the man in here in a long time, but it's from his hard work that I've figured out as much as I have. These settings have his training algo that I still use, which was gave out to the public quite some time ago. Maybe it's baked into the newer BIOS already, maybe not.. I still manually set it the way he did. Thanks @cstkl1 !

Link to the .CMO file: 3800g1.CMO - uDrop


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> Dude! I'm so glad I was able to help someone. Honestly, I was a complete noob at memory OC and took a long time of grinding at it to figure it out. I've got a good grip on it, I think, but there's always more to learn. The settings I posted earlier actually had a strange oddity - I always test my settings for consistent training by booting at least ~6-7 times and checking my RTL training. If I'm getting 67/67, and then next training it's 69/73, I call it bad and adjust. Well the settings I posted were working well all day yesterday, even trained perfectly fine after getting warm, but this morning I checked my training (was going to set MRC Fast Boot to Enabled now that I thought I was done for a bit) and I ended up getting a 73/67 - which is really weird. I decided to hunt that down and after doing some cold boots and other things, these new settings are giving me consistency.
> 
> @Bloax I actually messed with tCKE a bit and tWR as I had a TM5 error pop up, likely due to an odd-ball training event (even though RTLs were fine). I altered them slightly, let me know what you think about this instead: *NOTE* tWR is actually 8. Asrock timing cfg reads it wrong. Verified in BIOS + ASUS MemTweakIt
> View attachment 2555574
> 
> 
> Also, for anyone else, I've included my .CMO file and .txt BIOS file. This is for a Z690 TUF WIFI D4 on BIOS 1304. Feel free to try or pull settings. I haven't seen the man in here in a long time, but it's from his hard work that I've figured out as much as I have. These settings have his training algo that I still use, which was gave out to the public quite some time ago. Maybe it's baked into the newer BIOS already, maybe not.. I still manually set it the way he did. Thanks @cstkl1 !
> 
> Link to the .CMO file: 3800g1.CMO - uDrop


I think you might have that backwards, WR is wrong for me in memtweekit and right in Asrock tuning app.
I didn't think bios says tWR, but anyway formula is tWR = tWRPRE - tCWL - 4.

So see which one matches.

Edit: How are you setting tWR?
AFAIK you set it by changing these two tWRPDEN and tWRPRE.

On RTL what you can try is reboot in bios few times untill you see good RTL then edit these.
Below are for 73/73


Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHA [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [0]
Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHA [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [0]

Bscool posted this info and seems to help lock them.
adding a little SA voltage can help too.


----------



## tunste

acoustic said:


> Dude! I'm so glad I was able to help someone. Honestly, I was a complete noob at memory OC and took a long time of grinding at it to figure it out. I've got a good grip on it, I think, but there's always more to learn. The settings I posted earlier actually had a strange oddity - I always test my settings for consistent training by booting at least ~6-7 times and checking my RTL training. If I'm getting 67/67, and then next training it's 69/73, I call it bad and adjust. Well the settings I posted were working well all day yesterday, even trained perfectly fine after getting warm, but this morning I checked my training (was going to set MRC Fast Boot to Enabled now that I thought I was done for a bit) and I ended up getting a 73/67 - which is really weird. I decided to hunt that down and after doing some cold boots and other things, these new settings are giving me consistency.
> 
> @Bloax I actually messed with tCKE a bit and tWR as I had a TM5 error pop up, likely due to an odd-ball training event (even though RTLs were fine). I altered them slightly, let me know what you think about this instead: *NOTE* tWR is actually 8. Asrock timing cfg reads it wrong. Verified in BIOS + ASUS MemTweakIt
> View attachment 2555574
> 
> 
> Also, for anyone else, I've included my .CMO file and .txt BIOS file. This is for a Z690 TUF WIFI D4 on BIOS 1304. Feel free to try or pull settings. I haven't seen the man in here in a long time, but it's from his hard work that I've figured out as much as I have. These settings have his training algo that I still use, which was gave out to the public quite some time ago. Maybe it's baked into the newer BIOS already, maybe not.. I still manually set it the way he did. Thanks @cstkl1 !
> 
> Link to the .CMO file: 3800g1.CMO - uDrop


Dude, you saved me a lot of hours getting this DDR4 Samsung b-die 3200CL14 to fast 1900 MHz timings. I did use tRFC equalling (tRAS + tRP) multiplied by the tCKE. I used 9 for tCKE so I have the tRFC as 378, a multiple of (tRAS + tRP) {42}. This was recommended by Bloat. I was having GPU failures from time to time on my builds and could not figure it out. Having the tRFC as a multiple of (tRAS + tRP) times the tCKE appears to have solved that issue.

I will look intothe tCKE and tWR issue.

I am always learning about hardware and software. I am thankful to have this forum to expand my knowledge base.

Thanks again, I have been building personal computers for over 30 year in the days of the 286 and I am just now getting into the basics of the bios and bios settings.

Thank you much again


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> I think you might have that backwards, WR is wrong for me in memtweekit and right in Asrock tuning app.
> I didn't think bios says tWR, but anyway formula is tWR = tWRPRE - tCWL - 4.
> 
> So see which one matches.
> 
> Edit: How are you setting tWR?
> AFAIK you set it by changing these two tWRPDEN and tWRPRE.
> 
> On RTL what you can try is reboot in bios few times untill you see good RTL then edit these.
> 
> 
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHA [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [0]
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHA [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [0]
> 
> Bscool posted this info and seems to help lock them.
> adding a little SA voltage can help too.


Hmm. tWR seems to adjust based off what I input in the BIOS. I've verified that, but I'll double check after I finish running these settings through the paces.

I'm not sure how the RTL inputs you're doing work. I haven't tried it since very early in life of Z690, but with earlier BIOS, if you set anything in the RTL page, it wouldn't post, or straight up ignored any input. Are you setting it to 73 because that's what your RTL are set to? As far as I know, there is no way to make any changes to RTL on ASUS Z690. I'm not sure if that is applicable to MSI, Asrock, Gigabyte, etc though..

Based off the tWR formula, then my tWR is set to 9. I'll have to triple check what I have in the BIOS. I've been testing quite a few different things past 2-3 days and may have gotten them mixed up.

EDIT: Yep, BIOS is set to 9. Thanks for that! I was running 8 for a bit and forgot I had changed it. When you alter tWR directly in BIOS, it will affect tWRPDEN and tWRPRE automatically, as long as they're auto. If I remember correctly, if I set tWR to 10, I actually get 9 on Asrock Timing Cfg, and it looks as though if I set 9, I actually get 9.


----------



## Bloax

tunste said:


> Dude, you saved me a lot of hours getting this DDR4 Samsung b-die 3200CL14 to fast 1900 MHz timings. I did use tRFC equalling (tRAS + tRP) multiplied by the tCKE. I used 9 for tCKE so I have the tRFC as 378, a multiple of (tRAS + tRP) {42}.


Err, there's no need to multiply tRC by tCKE specifically - tCKE is just an odd little signal-timing setting. (Odd, little, but necessary!)

The multiplier X in (tRFC = X * tRC) is sort of arbitrary, down to whatever the memory feels like running at that voltage (if your memory chip scales tRFC with voltage, which 8 gbit Samsung B does)

"X" as 6-7 tends to be the lower range of what anything but extremely strong bins do (not my image );









If lower tRFCs are unstable - then that's likely caused by insufficient RAM cooling, as raising tRFC is one of the ways to make b-die more temperature-resistant.


----------



## acoustic

tunste said:


> Dude, you saved me a lot of hours getting this DDR4 Samsung b-die 3200CL14 to fast 1900 MHz timings. I did use tRFC equalling (tRAS + tRP) multiplied by the tCKE. I used 9 for tCKE so I have the tRFC as 378, a multiple of (tRAS + tRP) {42}. This was recommended by Bloat. I was having GPU failures from time to time on my builds and could not figure it out. Having the tRFC as a multiple of (tRAS + tRP) times the tCKE appears to have solved that issue.
> 
> I will look intothe tCKE and tWR issue.
> 
> I am always learning about hardware and software. I am thankful to have this forum to expand my knowledge base.
> 
> Thanks again, I have been building personal computers for over 30 year in the days of the 286 and I am just now getting into the basics of the bios and bios settings.
> 
> Thank you much again


You should be able to get tRFC lower. The rules that many follow for DDR4 are guidelines for stability - if you have good chips, you can go beyond and tighten settings much further than what are considered the "rules". As for the tCKE + tWR changes I made, that's down to my system. If you are passing TM5, training is consistent and you aren't having any issues, leave it as is. This could just be a case of my sticks in particular not happy with those settings.

tRFC and tREFI are very temperature reliant. For pure performance, you can set tREFI to 65535. I set it to 60000 for 24/7 use just to give myself a little more thermal headroom. tRFC operates the same way; the higher tRFC is, the less heat-sensitive your sticks will be.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> Hmm. tWR seems to adjust based off what I input in the BIOS. I've verified that, but I'll double check after I finish running these settings through the paces.
> 
> I'm not sure how the RTL inputs you're doing work. I haven't tried it since very early in life of Z690, but with earlier BIOS, if you set anything in the RTL page, it wouldn't post, or straight up ignored any input. Are you setting it to 73 because that's what your RTL are set to? As far as I know, there is no way to make any changes to RTL on ASUS Z690. I'm not sure if that is applicable to MSI, Asrock, Gigabyte, etc though..
> 
> Based off the tWR formula, then my tWR is set to 9. I'll have to triple check what I have in the BIOS. I've been testing quite a few different things past 2-3 days and may have gotten them mixed up.
> 
> EDIT: Yep, BIOS is set to 9. Thanks for that! I was running 8 for a bit and forgot I had changed it. When you alter tWR directly in BIOS, it will affect tWRPDEN and tWRPRE automatically, as long as they're auto. If I remember correctly, if I set tWR to 10, I actually get 9 on Asrock Timing Cfg, and it looks as though if I set 9, I actually get 9.


Ok, I set the tWR with tWRPDEN and tWRPRE, I used the github memory guide.








MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com





On the RTL I wasn't trying to force a value, just keep a steady value repeatable.


----------



## Jayden1397

Bloax said:


> I'm also not sure what about high memory voltage makes things an oven.
> The stock Viper Steel heatsinks are absolute poop, and also extremely easy to disassemble - the central plastic inset at the top serves as a great lever for simply pulling off the weakly glued-on sheet of aluminum.
> View attachment 2555456
> 
> with the heat-traps removed, a fan keeps them cool even at 1.62v
> 
> 
> I would be surprised if tRFC 252 (tRC * 6) wouldn't run just fine.
> I'd also be surprised if tCKE wouldn't want to be 9 for some things - but I've never toyed with fancy PCBs that do ridiculous things (WTR 1/6 lol) without problems, and it could just as easily be that its current value is fine for the.. Wacky set of WTR_s/L tWR values.


How much cooler do they run without the heatsinks? I've got some ripjaws v which also have questionable heatsinks, wondering if its worth the risk


----------



## Bloax

How much cooler? I don't know - they don't have temperature sensors, nor do I have a probe.
But I do know that the heatsink makes poor contact, and that direct, unobstructred airflow performs better than thin, shoddily-applied aluminum sheets which block airflow.

The Ripjaws heatsinks are terrible, but unlike the Patriot ones - those are kept on with G.Skill Superglue™ which requires either some liquid nitrogen spilled on it, full dry ice coverage might work, or you could try pickling them in paint thinner;





As any other method runs a great risk of damaging the things underneath.


----------



## Bloax

Hey look, those ****ing Viper 4000 16-16-16 sticks finally arrived

haven't tested long stability (I've only been toying with them for an hour), but it's looking quite good so far at a _chilly_ 1.42vDIMM and 1.3v VDDQ








(-0.04vDIMM compared to junk ripjaws in A1/B1, possibly better/lower RDWR, probably no 15 RCDRD at 3800 wall either 🤡 )

thus far I'm running them at Nom 40 (nom/6), Wr 80 (wr/3) and Park 48/40 (park/5 on 4400's in dimm slot A0/B0, park/6 on 4000's in dimm slot A1/B1)

let's see what the gear1 frequency wall is on this setup
edit: beyond 3800 is being very temperamental to run (MOAR SA voltage??), but at least it trains ez-pz unlike the previous 4x8 setup which took ages at 3800 and above ...


----------



## acoustic

Bloax said:


> Hey look, those ****ing Viper 4000 16-16-16 sticks finally arrived
> 
> haven't tested long stability (I've only been toying with them for an hour), but it's looking quite good so far at a _chilly_ 1.42vDIMM and 1.3v VDDQ
> View attachment 2555652
> 
> (-0.04vDIMM compared to junk ripjaws in A1/B1, possibly better/lower RDWR, probably no 15 RCDRD at 3800 wall either 🤡 )
> 
> thus far I'm running them at Nom 40 (nom/6), Wr 80 (wr/3) and Park 48/40 (park/5 on 4400's in dimm slot A0/B0, park/6 on 4000's in dimm slot A1/B1)
> 
> let's see what the gear1 frequency wall is on this setup
> edit: beyond 3800 is being very temperamental to run (MOAR SA voltage??), but at least it trains ez-pz unlike the previous 4x8 setup which took ages at 3800 and above ...


I've found 80wr-60-60 to work very well for my sticks.

I'd imagine a 2x kit will be much easier to train than 4x8. Much less stress on the IMC.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> I've found 80wr-60-60 to work very well for my sticks.
> 
> I'd imagine a 2x kit will be much easier to train than 4x8. Much less stress on the IMC.


Could someone explain what these do and advantages of setting them?
also how are you finding values to enter, I Googled them but not really much info on them.

ODT RTT WR (CHA) [Auto]
ODT RTT PARK (CHA) [Auto]
ODT RTT NOM (CHA) [Auto]
ODT RTT WR (CHB) [Auto]
ODT RTT PARK (CHB) [Auto]
ODT RTT NOM (CHB) [Auto]


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> Could someone explain what these do and advantages of setting them?
> also how are you finding values to enter, I Googled them but not really much info on them.
> 
> ODT RTT WR (CHA) [Auto]
> ODT RTT PARK (CHA) [Auto]
> ODT RTT NOM (CHA) [Auto]
> ODT RTT WR (CHB) [Auto]
> ODT RTT PARK (CHB) [Auto]
> ODT RTT NOM (CHB) [Auto]


The problem with ASUS boards is that they don't show us what "AUTO" is setting them to. It's really stupid. MSI boards will tell you what the values are set to. ASUS hides a lot of settings values for some strange reason .. one thing I miss about MSI for sure.

It's basically just playing a guessing game to figure out your ODT settings. The appropriate method that cstkl1 talked about, is setting your vDIMM voltage just slightly lower (so that it's unstable, but not by much), and then changing each value one at a time. If the system gains stability, it's the appropriate setting. If the system loses stability or stays the same, it's wrong. AUTO many times finds "usable" settings but not optimal.

Setting ODT can allow you to stabilize higher frequencies, lower vDIMM, maybe get lower primary .. it's not a magic fix but it can be the difference between borderline stable and fully stable. IMO, it shouldn't be used early on in your memory testing. I use it more as a last resort or last thing to tweak, and then work from there. On Z490, I had cases where different frequencies/settings preferred different ODT values.


----------



## Bloax

acoustic said:


> I've found 80wr-60-60 to work very well for my sticks.
> 
> I'd imagine a 2x kit will be much easier to train than 4x8. Much less stress on the IMC.


That's in regards to the Viper 4400-4000-4400-4000 training much better than the Viper4400-Ripjaws3200-Viper4400-Ripjaws3200 :- )

edit:








(didn't save rdwr 10-11 to the BIOS profile, 11-12 -> 10-11 didn't seem to improve anything in y-cruncher 2.5b digits though)
((edit: btw, each primary drop costed +0.05vDDQ i.e. 1.3v --> 1.4v for 3828 15-15-15 -> 13-13-13))
Besides the -0.04v at 3800 15-15-15, it is also not struggling very much to run 3800 13-13-13 at +0.09v *2 (1.6v) for a -2 primary drop
as opposed to being hardstuck at tRCDRD 15 at 3800 with those old Ripjaws sticks

tCWL 12 is unstable as ****, but apparently we gucci with running tCWL > tCL on LGA1700 lol ecks d???



edkieferlp said:


> Could someone explain what these do and advantages of setting them?
> also how are you finding values to enter, I Googled them but not really much info on them.
> 
> ODT RTT WR (CHA) [Auto]
> ODT RTT PARK (CHA) [Auto]
> ODT RTT NOM (CHA) [Auto]
> ODT RTT WR (CHB) [Auto]
> ODT RTT PARK (CHB) [Auto]
> ODT RTT NOM (CHB) [Auto]


prior ramblings on the topic:








[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


I've managed to get FCLK 2000 stable with the AGESA 1.2.0.5; temperatures are higher and this hurts all long running MT tests like Corona, Linpack and the monero miner. Some others doesn't like CPU-z and CB23, results are inline with the AGESA 1.2.0.1. On others like Geekbench the new memeory...




www.overclock.net












MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread


I suggest stop buying into the Ram hype thing.Cheap Ram can be fine 100% and no difference in PC Gaming. Truth is 3000Mhz Ram can be just as Fast in PC Gaming as 4000Mhz with tuned memory and not even extreme tuned memory. I personally run CL17 Gear 2 4000Mhz Ram on RTX 3080,12900K 5400Mhz at...




www.overclock.net





They, alongside procODT, seem to be about how the memory signal "lives" inside the board.
The valid range of values varies based on the memory DIMM PCB, as well as what values the motherboard can handle.
Usually the cleaner the memory signal on the board is (i.e. the better the board's memory layout is), the higher the Nom impedance can go, and the lower the minimum Park impedance can go.

Whether this is beneficial depends on whether the DIMMs respond positively to this "extra range" of terminations, and whether this range contains _the desired_ terminations for the DIMMs. If it doesn't support the desired terminations - you can't really run the DIMMs proper Max Performance on that board, and so you get stuck at a lower frequency or what-have-you. :- )

Lower procODT impedances* on B-Die kits usually require increasing CPU 1.8v/CPU AUX/VCCIN - which is the DRAM input voltage.
(on this MSI z690 board, the procODT setting seems to be a divisor of the "base" impedance value RZQ, which is seemingly 360 for procODT on Intel)

How exactly procODT and RTT terminations play together, we can't tell without fancy lab equipment - and our gracious corporate overlords seem to think us unworthy of knowing such INDUSTRY SECRET things. 🤡

So at the end of the day, it ends up being a complete "throw **** at the wall until it sticks" game, much like the rest.

a good fren (Veii) talked about RTT Park (maybe?) serving as the memory signal floor, so I decided to apply optic fiber logic to signal mixing (different wavelengths penetrate different depths into the fiber) and tried using different Park terminations for different DIMMs - it seems to work, for either the right or the wrong reason

here's the full set of BIOS options currently set for this 4x8 config, just for ****s and giggles:









Generally then I've found that setting the RTT's properly for the (b-die) DIMMs results in incredibly consistent voltage scaling;
on fairly mediocre 2x16 dual-rank sticks, it was +/- 0.08v per 100 memory frequency, and about +/- 0.095v per tRCD
on these Viper 4400 (and seemingly also 4000) sticks, it's +/- 0.06v per 100 memory frequency, and about +/- 0.09v per tRCD
on a cursed Ripjaws 2x16 4266 17-18-18 kit, it's also +/- 0.06v per 100 memory frequency, can't remember RCD but it might've been +/- 0.08v (crazy good, but cursed)

RTT Wr has some other qualities, such as assisting with temperature resistance (but also making the memory more likely to be damaged from overcurrent/voltage) the higher its impedance (lower divisor) is set. Really high Park impedance (120, 240, RZQ/2 & RZQ/1 respectively) is generally bad, unless you have so much memory capacity (4x32?) that it needs it to function. Really high Park impedance with a high Wr impedance is a recipe for blowing up your DIMMs, should they POST. 🔥🤡🔥

I remember struggling with voltage scaling back when we were in the Nom/7 (34) Wr/3 (80) Park/1 (240) dark ages, no confusion now :- )


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> The problem with ASUS boards is that they don't show us what "AUTO" is setting them to. It's really stupid. MSI boards will tell you what the values are set to. ASUS hides a lot of settings values for some strange reason .. one thing I miss about MSI for sure.
> 
> It's basically just playing a guessing game to figure out your ODT settings. The appropriate method that cstkl1 talked about, is setting your vDIMM voltage just slightly lower (so that it's unstable, but not by much), and then changing each value one at a time. If the system gains stability, it's the appropriate setting. If the system loses stability or stays the same, it's wrong. AUTO many times finds "usable" settings but not optimal.
> 
> Setting ODT can allow you to stabilize higher frequencies, lower vDIMM, maybe get lower primary .. it's not a magic fix but it can be the difference between borderline stable and fully stable. IMO, it shouldn't be used early on in your memory testing. I use it more as a last resort or last thing to tweak, and then work from there. On Z490, I had cases where different frequencies/settings preferred different ODT values.


Ok, thanks, I kind of gathered it more for extreme OC but because as you pointed out we don't see defaults (which I totally agree should be shown) it is hard for newbee to mess with them.

I am not going to, just wanted to know what they are.

These Z690 bios have so many options compared to much older platforms.


----------



## edkieferlp

Bloax said:


> That's in regards to the Viper 4400-4000-4400-4000 training much better than the Viper4400-Ripjaws3200-Viper4400-Ripjaws3200 :- )
> 
> edit:
> View attachment 2555662
> 
> (didn't save rdwr 10-11 to the BIOS profile, 11-12 -> 10-11 didn't seem to improve anything in y-cruncher 2.5b digits though)
> Besides the -0.04v at 3800 15-15-15, it is also not struggling very much to run 3800 13-13-13 at +0.09v *2 (1.6v) for a -2 primary drop
> as opposed to being hardstuck at tRCDRD 15 at 3800 with those old Ripjaws sticks
> 
> tCWL 12 is unstable as ****, but apparently we gucci with running tCWL > tCL on LGA1700 lol ecks d???
> 
> 
> prior ramblings on the topic:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread
> 
> 
> I've managed to get FCLK 2000 stable with the AGESA 1.2.0.5; temperatures are higher and this hurts all long running MT tests like Corona, Linpack and the monero miner. Some others doesn't like CPU-z and CB23, results are inline with the AGESA 1.2.0.1. On others like Geekbench the new memeory...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread
> 
> 
> I suggest stop buying into the Ram hype thing.Cheap Ram can be fine 100% and no difference in PC Gaming. Truth is 3000Mhz Ram can be just as Fast in PC Gaming as 4000Mhz with tuned memory and not even extreme tuned memory. I personally run CL17 Gear 2 4000Mhz Ram on RTX 3080,12900K 5400Mhz at...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They, alongside procODT, seem to be about how the memory signal "lives" inside the board.
> The valid range of values varies based on the memory DIMM PCB, as well as what values the motherboard can handle.
> Usually the cleaner the memory signal on the board is (i.e. the better the board's memory layout is), the higher the Nom impedance can go, and the lower the minimum Park impedance can go.
> 
> Whether this is beneficial depends on whether the DIMMs respond positively to this "extra range" of terminations, and whether this range contains _the desired_ terminations for the DIMMs. If it doesn't support the desired terminations - you can't really run the DIMMs proper Max Performance on that board, and so you get stuck at a lower frequency or what-have-you. :- )
> 
> Lower procODT impedances* on B-Die kits usually require increasing CPU 1.8v/CPU AUX/VCCIN - which is the DRAM input voltage.
> (on this MSI z690 board, the procODT setting seems to be a divisor of the "base" impedance value RZQ, which is seemingly 360 for procODT on Intel)
> 
> How exactly procODT and RTT terminations play together, we can't tell without fancy lab equipment - and our gracious corporate overlords seem to think us unworthy of knowing such INDUSTRY SECRET things. 🤡
> 
> So at the end of the day, it ends up being a complete "throw **** at the wall until it sticks" game, much like the rest.
> 
> a good fren talked about RTT Park (maybe?) serving as the memory signal floor, so I decided to apply optic fiber logic to signal mixing (different wavelengths penetrate different depths into the fiber) and tried using different Park terminations for different DIMMs - it seems to work, for either the right or the wrong reason
> 
> here's the full set of BIOS options currently set for this 4x8 config, just for ****s and giggles:
> View attachment 2555664
> 
> 
> Generally then I've found that setting the RTT's properly for the (b-die) DIMMs results in incredibly consistent voltage scaling;
> on fairly mediocre 2x16 dual-rank sticks, it was +/- 0.08v per 100 memory frequency, and about +/- 0.095v per tRCD
> on these Viper 4400 (and seemingly also 4000) sticks, it's +/- 0.06v per 100 memory frequency, and about +/- 0.09v per tRCD
> on a cursed Ripjaws 2x16 4266 17-18-18 kit, it's also +/- 0.06v per 100 memory frequency, can't remember RCD but it might've been +/- 0.08v (crazy good, but cursed)
> 
> RTT Wr has some other qualities, such as assisting with temperature resistance (but also making the memory more likely to be damaged from overcurrent/voltage) the higher its impedance (lower divisor) is set. Really high Park impedance (120, 240, RZQ/2 & RZQ/1 respectively) is generally bad, unless you have so much memory capacity (4x32?) that it needs it to function. Really high Park impedance with a high Wr impedance is a recipe for blowing up your DIMMs, should they POST. 🔥🤡🔥
> 
> I remember struggling with voltage scaling back when we were in the Nom/7 (34) Wr/3 (80) Park/1 (240) dark ages, no confusion now :- )


Ok, Thanks for the in-depth explanation.


----------



## Bloax

Finding "working" RTT values for your DIMMs can usually be done through running "easy" settings at high (3800-4000 MT/s) frequencies.
e.g. 3800 18-18-18, tRAS 36, tRFC 378, RRD_s/L 6/8, WTR_s/L 6/12, tFAW 24 - which shouldn't be too hard even for poopy b-die sticks around 1.4v-1.45v

The giveaway sign is that "good" (not necessarily The Best) RTT combinations will actually POST a high memory frequency, whereas bad ones will not.
The fairly low voltage also makes it less likely that your memory spontaneously decides to retire from working, though that's mostly a Wr/1 Park/2 kinda thing :- )


These days I prefer to do that first, as a proper RTT/procODT combo will give the best-performing secondary timings (WTR/RRD/tFAW) the DIMMs have to offer (see AM4 examples), as well as the "consistent voltage scaling" thing helping with maneouvering up and down memory frequencies.







(wrong procODT)






(better procODT, required CPU 1.8v raised to around 1.85v)


Unfortunately then I haven't messed around with things other than 8 Gbit Samsung B sticks, so I'm of little help in regards to the quirks (and they exist!) of other memory chips.


----------



## Bloax

Hmm, well that's certainly a development -

Running this Viper 4400-4000-4400-4000 config, I'm suddenly able to not only POST, but actually run ProcODT "[15]" (presumably, 24 ohms)
Its impact is a little conspicuous - thus far it's doing 3800 14-14-14 at 1.45v suspiciously stable. (down from 1.51v at "[13]" / 27.7 ohms)

In a few days I'll know if this happens to be the SECRET SAUCE to making these sticks (actually, without exploding) do >3800 MT/s on 4x8 💪🤡








until then I've got some stability testin to do on this 3828 14-14-14 1.45v config lol

edit:








well that was easy


----------



## HyperC

very odd my asus tuf doesn't seem to like when i change my VDDQ auto's 1.20v with my patriots


----------



## Bloax

HyperC said:


> very odd my asus tuf doesn't seem to like when i change my VDDQ auto's 1.20v with my patriots


VDDQ requirements seem to vary by how low tRCD is, and how high the memory controller frequency is.
If you're in Gear 2, it wouldn't be surprising if going past VDDQ @ 1.2v wasn't beneficial - even at 4800 MT/s, that's the equivalent memory controller frequency as running DDR4-2400 in Gear 1 :- )


----------



## HyperC

Running 3800 4x8 14-14-14-30 cr2 gear 1 trfc 280 faw 18 auto rest. Cpu input @ 1.8v auto vssa 1.3560


----------



## Raphie

@Bloax ThnX for the screenshots. Leaving the CPU BLCK alone, would above settings also work for my Viper 4x 4400 (4x 8GB)? 
You are so more way advanced then I am. I could never figure this out to the level that you are tweaking it.
so with BLCK 100 and just 1:! ratio 4000 would above work?


----------



## Bloax

Raphie said:


> @Bloax ThnX for the screenshots. Leaving the CPU BLCK alone, would above settings also work for my Viper 4x 4400 (4x 8GB)?
> You are so more way advanced then I am. I could never figure this out to the level that you are tweaking it.
> so with BLCK 100 and just 1:! ratio 4000 would above work?


It might work with Rtt Park (CHA/D0) and Rtt Park (CHB/D0) set to 60, only one way to find out









Going past ~3800 4x8 is proving troublesome (at least with nice timings), though I still suspect the memory controller more than I suspect the memory, as the most ""promising"" attempt was 3940 14-14-14 at exactly 1.382 VDDQ that wasn't reproducible

And the fact that it does 3828 13-13-13 "stable enough for videogames" does suggest that there's plenty of juice left in the tank from the sticks themselves.


----------



## Raphie

ThnX, with above settings, does it still clock down when idle to like 600mhz?


----------



## Bloax

I (still!) don't trust boosting algorithms, and the constant switching of frequency and voltage produces an undesireable VRM-hiss, so I don't actually mind the CPU frequency/voltage being static.

To counter-act that, I just crank it up to whatever Frequency/Voltage I want to run, while the default is a decent mix of performance/efficiency and OK idle power :- )
If I'm particularly lazy I just reboot instead of winding it back down, as the whole POST-to-OS process takes about 16 seconds


----------



## Raphie

Ok, my goal is to have the processor behave as stock, so on balanced power scheme just clocking down. And doing all that dynamically while Karhu stable.
If I want default clocking behaviour i need to keep the CPU-SA at AUTO no? but that would mean that it would not get the required 1.3v? hence the clock would not work?
Or would I then need to play with the offset, adding a little bit dynamically so at full speed it delivers the 1.3v?
I also see you're still on 1.24 bios not 1.31?


----------



## Bloax

The stock behaviour of a 12900k is incredibly wasteful, so I wouldn't be that gung-ho about keeping it if I were you.

1.3v SA is more of a placeholder "maximum working and non-detrimental" voltage - after today's failed frequency push, I'm testing this setup again: [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
but with SA at 1.21v, the lowest it POSTs without kernel panic'ing immediately inside a HCI Deluxe USB "OS"


Oh and yes, I prefer to stay on the same BIOS while it still works for what I want it to do.
Less "update program/BIOS/whatever and Everything breaks" that way 🤡👌

technically i even still have avx512 support heh heh


----------



## Raphie

3800 14/14/14 1.45v










And from 36 to 29, no difference?









same settings, now 3866, a little bit faster. RAM Test 7% coverage though 










And my current settings @ SPD 19,19,19,39 only a 4ns penalty, but higher throughput and running @ 1.28v instead of 1.46v AND being 10K% Karhu stable, opposed to 7%  for real world usage my current settings still seem to be the better deal? Tight timings seem taxing on the voltage? only a 4ns! benefit?!? off set by the higher throughput. 1 Seconds = 1000.000.000 Nanoseconds


----------



## grey.clock

Anyone running the latest bios on the z690 ASUS TUF know if it is stable (1404)? I have beel AWOL from the forums for a month or so and am still running a 0707. Last I had read 1003 and the others were performing worse and not stable so I have been avoiding updating. Looks like there are some security issues that might make it worth while. Thank you any input!


----------



## HyperC

Only have tested 1304 thought you did I typo , just downloaded it though do I need to backup my bios settings?


----------



## grey.clock

HyperC said:


> Only have tested 1304 thought you did I typo , just downloaded it though do I need to backup my bios settings?


you will be back at defaults after the bios update.


----------



## Cam1

grey.clock said:


> Anyone running the latest bios on the z690 ASUS TUF know if it is stable (1404)? I have beel AWOL from the forums for a month or so and am still running a 0707. Last I had read 1003 and the others were performing worse and not stable so I have been avoiding updating. Looks like there are some security issues that might make it worth while. Thank you any input!


Running the exact same as 1304 for my ram settings, XMP doesn't boot, XMP with VDDQ at 1.4V is stable ram is set to 3900 Gear1
Had to manually Update Intel ME version 16.0.15.1735 since the Bios flash didn't do it, not sure why.


----------



## Bloax

Raphie said:


> for real world usage


Most of the "relevant" performance gains in most tasks will be achieved through high frequency and low RRD/WTR/tFAW (high, consistent throughput)

Other tasks are sensitive to memeory latency, and demand a mix of consistent throughput and low latency settings.










Most things are perfectly good with a locked 12 ms frametime on variable-refresh displays, which is super easily achievable on Zen3/ADL.
Other things are more low latency focused, which makes them _very stutter-sensitive_. You want a stable, high framerate, without any massive distracting stutters (very low minimum FPS).

6.7% Increase in average FPS? Pretty meaningless.
17.4% Increase in low-FPS scenarios? Very nice.
68.9% Increase in minimum FPS? Incredible! (visible in a much less "pretty" graph)


----------



## Raphie

Just gave this some thought, the impact of 4 nanoseconds to a 140hz refresh video rate, is like trying to pave a 15km long road with human hairs sideways and missing 1! hair. The avg hair thickness being 0,06mm, I take 10% more throughput anytime

Anyway, my IMC craps out above 1945, that's my brick wall. Currently RAM Test @ 3900 17-19-19-38 57 1T G1 @ 1.32v (auto) 1000% and counting


----------



## acoustic

Anyone having IMC issues, so most recently, @Raphie

I'm testing out the new ASUS TUF WIFI D4 1404 BIOS, and started messing around with some different settings. I have never been able to stabilize 4000 Gear1 on any BIOS or configuration with my 12700K - IMC will not take it. I usually get one error pop up anywhere from 10-50% MemTestPro.

I decided to try something new. Same VCCSA that failed at 35% (1.33v), I set CPU SA PLL to 1.050 and CPU Memory Controller PLL to 1.050. I changed nothing else.

I'm currently @ 98% coverage in MemTestPro with zero errors. This has *never* happened before.

This may be worth checking out. The max range is 1.9v, and standard is 0.900v, so I'd imagine 1.050v is not going to harm anything. Of course, I haven't heard of any definitive "safe" voltages for these rails, so at your own risk.

edit:

150% stable! I'm going to try some Y-Cruncher now, do a few reboots, and then MemTestPro again. I wonder if this PLL voltage is the secret sauce I've needed in my life LOL


----------



## acoustic

Update:

Y-Cruncher passes consistently @ 1.36v SA with 1.050v PLL. Halo Infinite still suffers CTD after ~15min.

I upped PLL to 1.10v and VCCSA to 1.38v - still CTD in Halo Infinite.

Back to 3800CL14. You can't fix a ****ty IMC. The PLL voltages seemed promising, though..


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Seems some of you guys are doing a LOT of work to get not much gains out of B-Die. This is 4x8gb of Micron E at bone stock XMP. Can bump to 3800 on stock voltage with just XMP timings and 1.2v vccsa (same I use for stock xmp because it defaults to 1.38v) and get down to 62ns and about 55kMB/s Read. I feel like the MSI boards tighten up background timings on auto more than other boards. Likely why they are usually harder to get stable at higher frequencies. I feel like B-Die should be capable of mid 50s easily but maybe dual rank performs better than single in AIDA slightly?


----------



## bscool

HOODedDutchman said:


> Seems some of you guys are doing a LOT of work to get not much gains out of B-Die. This is 4x8gb of Micron E at bone stock XMP. Can bump to 3800 on stock voltage with just XMP timings and 1.2v vccsa (same I use for stock xmp because it defaults to 1.38v) and get down to 62ns and about 55kMB/s Read. I feel like the MSI boards tighten up background timings on auto more than other boards. Likely why they are usually harder to get stable at higher frequencies. I feel like B-Die should be capable of mid 50s easily but maybe dual rank performs better than single in AIDA slightly?
> View attachment 2556337


MSI runs subtimings looser than Asus. I have bought both MSI and Asus the last 3 gens.

Example MSI runs looser TXPDLL, txp etc. Here is Asus Memtweak TXPDLL, txp on defaults on z690 Strix d4.

I am running 4133 to 4266 gear 1 on DR b die. I havent seen anyone on MSI doing that.

DR is in the 42-43ns range when tweaked. And to me memory OC is not work, I do it for fun/hobby.


----------



## acoustic

It's really not the boards in 90% of cases, it's the chips. 12700K IMC, on average, is hot garbage. Most of what you see where people are struggling to get above 3800 is due to the IMC saying "nope"

The only way to compare boards would be to test the same chip on two different boards. With how the IMC is the lim-factor 90% of the time, it's really difficult to call any board better than the other. MSI seems to always do well with memory though.

If you're running 1.2v SA for 3600, you might have a good IMC on your hands, but AIDA is not a good stress test .. so potential it's not stable. Y-Cruncher is pretty solid, but even then, I'll pass Y-Cruncher but CTD in Halo Infinite after 10-15min. Borderline stability is very finicky.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

acoustic said:


> It's really not the boards in 90% of cases, it's the chips. 12700K IMC, on average, is hot garbage. Most of what you see where people are struggling to get above 3800 is due to the IMC saying "nope"
> 
> The only way to compare boards would be to test the same chip on two different boards. With how the IMC is the lim-factor 90% of the time, it's really difficult to call any board better than the other. MSI seems to always do well with memory though.
> 
> If you're running 1.2v SA for 3600, you might have a good IMC on your hands, but AIDA is not a good stress test .. so potential it's not stable. Y-Cruncher is pretty solid, but even then, I'll pass Y-Cruncher but CTD in Halo Infinite after 10-15min. Borderline stability is very finicky.


It's 100% stable with those settings. I've been running xmp 3600c16 with 1.2v vccsa for like 6 months since 12th gen launched without a single issue. Tons of gaming sessions for 8 hours straight. Rendering dozens of videos. Never even a windows error in hwinfo. 3800 could be unstable tho I haven't stressed it other than aida just threw it on to see if it would post. Worked fine for aida and saw gains but when I tried to run 16-18-16-36 with 580 trfc and everything else auto it wouldn't post so it's likely that 3800 with xmp timing isn't 100% stable either. Hard to judge where I should be at since people just go straight to b-die and there's people running e cores disabled with core and ring overclock. Seems everyone in the 45ns range is running like this with heavily tuned sub timings. I don't expect to get anywhere near that with micron e die but I figure I should be able to get to the mid 50s anyways. Bit odd running E die on 12th gen as well since RCDWR and RCDRD are combined. Micron likes lose RD but tight WR. Maybe that's just an AMD thing and doesn't really matter on intel tho.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Also what settings do you use to stress with y cruncher acoustic?


----------



## Raphie

bscool said:


> MSI runs subtimings looser than Asus. I have bought both MSI and Asus the last 3 gens.
> 
> Example MSI runs looser TXPDLL, txp etc. Here is Asus Memtweak TXPDLL, txp on defaults on z690 Strix d4.
> 
> I am running 4133 to 4266 gear 1 on DR b die. I havent seen anyone on MSI doing that.
> 
> DR is in the 42-43ns range when tweaked. And to me memory OC is not work, I do it for fun/hobby.


This is a crazy good achievement, I can only dream of these.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> Update:
> 
> Y-Cruncher passes consistently @ 1.36v SA with 1.050v PLL. Halo Infinite still suffers CTD after ~15min.
> 
> I upped PLL to 1.10v and VCCSA to 1.38v - still CTD in Halo Infinite.
> 
> Back to 3800CL14. You can't fix a ****ty IMC. The PLL voltages seemed promising, though..


Did you do the ring pll too?


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> Did you do the ring pll too?


I only did SA and Memory Controller. I didn't think Ring was applicable for IMC stability (I know my ring can do 41x, have it set to 40x rn for testing)

Tested ring @ 1.110 w/ SA and MC @ 1.110. No difference, still errors/crashes.

Bad IMC be bad!

can you link whatever video you seen PLL being adjusted in?


----------



## Raphie

these are my current settings, @bscool If I would copy yours, what else would I need to change?
Voltage 1.5? Or which settings should I drop below in order to lower latency 17,19,19,37 won't go lower on auto voltage, tried up to 1.5 manually, but did not improve
Any other settings recommended to lower?


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> I only did SA and Memory Controller. I didn't think Ring was applicable for IMC stability (I know my ring can do 41x, have it set to 40x rn for testing)
> 
> Tested ring @ 1.110 w/ SA and MC @ 1.110. No difference, still errors/crashes.
> 
> Bad IMC be bad!
> 
> can you link whatever video you seen PLL being adjusted in?


here one I was searching this morning, I watch all his stuff and almost every vid is memory OC.




go to 20:23 he talks about PLL ones.

But this one is a MSI/DDR5 but maybe info is good for all Z690. he has set it in most memory OC vids.
Problem is most of his Memory OC are DDR5
ok, here a DDR4 Gigibyte MB





11:50 timeline

Looks like he is running MC PLL at 1020mv and 0.990 on ring PLL.


----------



## Raphie

That's my experience too. can't lower the primaries further, but want latency down, any suggestions for improvement?


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> here one I was searching this morning, I watch all his stuff and almost every vid is memory OC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> go to 20:23 he talks about PLL ones.
> 
> But this one is a MSI/DDR5 but maybe info is good for all Z690. he has set it in most memory OC vids.
> Problem is most of his Memory OC are DDR5
> ok, here a DDR4 Gigibyte MB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 11:50 timeline


Interesting. This may work better for Gear2 ratio where you're pushing much higher mem frequencies. I can't say the PLL helped with my IMC, but sometimes poor silicon is just poor silicon, and there isn't much you can do about it.


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> That's my experience too. can't lower the primaries further, but want latency down, any suggestions for improvement?


Set tWR to 10, tFAW 16, tWRRD_sg to 30, twRRD_dg to 25. I keep a 5 gap between tWRRD_SG and DG. I would take a look at my timings (even though I'm 2x16 DR) I've posted earlier in this thread and work from there.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> Interesting. This may work better for Gear2 ratio where you're pushing much higher mem frequencies. I can't say the PLL helped with my IMC, but sometimes poor silicon is just poor silicon, and there isn't much you can do about it.


he never says it "will" improve, only it can help, at least thats what I got out of his vids on that PLL stuff.


----------



## Raphie

ThnX The problem is they are all called differently in the MSI BIOS, why can't all vendors just use the same damn abbreviations?


----------



## acoustic

edkieferlp said:


> he never says it "will" improve, only it can help, at least thats what I got out of his vids on that PLL stuff.


Indeed. That's what I was getting at with "sometimes poor silicon is just poor silicon". I'm trying 4000 one more time with E-Cores disabled and a mix of PLL voltages just to be sure. I know E-Cores can be an issue sometimes, but I don't think they impact IMC stability; just want to confirm it myself.


----------



## bscool

Raphie said:


> these are my current settings, @bscool If I would copy yours, what else would I need to change?
> Voltage 1.5? Or which settings should I drop below in order to lower latency 17,19,19,37 won't go lower on auto voltage, tried up to 1.5 manually, but did not improve
> Any other settings recommended to lower?
> 
> View attachment 2556353


From your latency it looks like you are in gear 2. By default bios will set gear 2 after 3600. Changing that alone with help with performance. Most of my subtimings should work for you at your clocks. But you will need to keep your tCWL at 16. The rest should work since you are at a much lower clock.

With MSI you cannot change some things or it wont boot or be stable. Sorry I cant help you more since I am not on MSI with z690. I just know from using them on past gens you have to leave some sub timings on default.


----------



## acoustic

bscool said:


> From your latency it looks like you are in gear 2. By default bios will set gear 2 after 3600. Changing that alone with help with performance. Most of my subtimings should work for you at your clocks. But you will need to keep your tCWL at 16. The rest should work since you are at a much lower clock.
> 
> With MSI you cannot change some things or it wont boot or be stable. Sorry I cant help you more since I am not on MSI with z690. I just know from using them on past gens you have to leave some sub timings on default.


His ASROCK cfg shows Gear1, but I don't know if that's actually accurate. I think his wildly high RTLs and subtimings are dragging latency way up if he is Gear1.


----------



## Raphie

Definately in G1, it's hard set in BIOS (not AUTO) in G2 I can go up to 4400, but latency is like 78ns.
Could the latency be because of 4 sticks rather than 2?
@acoustic tried your suggestions above, but no pass changing those.


----------



## bscool

Raphie said:


> Definately in G1, it's hard set in BIOS (not AUTO) in G2 I can go up to 4400, but latency is like 78ns.
> Could the latency be because of 4 sticks rather than 2?
> @acoustic tried your suggestions above, but no pass changing those.
> View attachment 2556366


Plus you are running 1t. I would run 2t with tighter subtimings.

I have ran 4x8 and 4x16 @3600 to 3733 and can still get in the 45ns range for latency.


----------



## bscool

@Raphie Here is a 4x8 I had going before. If you run 2t you should be able to get something close to this with your sticks.

If not 3733c14 try 3733c15

Edit also in RTL section set it to dynamic it will train rtls tighter on MSI.


----------



## Raphie

Still gear-1, now 3866 16,16,16,36 2T, no difference?
it's all the same in AIDA 55k-56k throughput, 63-65ns Latency
both everything, except G1 and 2T, on auto, so training can update to "optimum" timings

Biggest difference being the 3900 17,19,19,37 1T can do this @ 1.28v
The 3866 @ 16,16,16,36 2T needs 1.51v

3900 17,19,19,37 1T still seems to be the sweetspot.
Ridiculous......


















EDIT:
Just added 3900 17,17,17,37 2T G1


----------



## bscool

Raphie said:


> Still gear-1, now 3866 16,16,16,36 2T, no difference?
> it's all the same in AIDA 55k-56k throughput, 63-65ns Latency
> both everything, except G1 and 2T, on auto, so training can update to "optimum" timings
> 
> Biggest difference being the 3900 17,19,19,37 1T can do this @ 1.28v
> The 3866 @ 16,16,16,36 2T needs 1.51v
> 
> 3900 17,19,19,37 1T still seems to be the sweetspot.
> Ridiculous......
> 
> View attachment 2556512
> 
> View attachment 2556511
> 
> 
> EDIT:
> Just added 3900 17,17,17,37 2T G1
> View attachment 2556517


There must be stuff running in the back ground of your OS. I have never seen such high latency # as yours. In actual use it probably doesnt matter. 

Plus if you are not setting all your subtimings just changing the main timings does not do much as it will set looser sub timings most of the time when leaving them on auto.


----------



## Raphie

ThnX, In MSI BIOS terms, what are the sub timings I need to look at and what values would you suggest for 3866 @ 16,16,16,36 2T? or 3900 17,19,19,37 1T?
I'm sort of accepting that G1 throughput is not going to be above 56K, but I would like my latency down toward mid 40'ties as well.
I've tried looking at other people ASrock timing screenshot. but those values are named differently than in the MSI BIOS and there are probably other fields that are not on the ASRock timing tool.

It seems indeed that MSI G1 with everything else AUTO hovers around 65ns and G2 settings, with everything else AUTO aim to land around 78ns
So I need to secondary and tertiary settings help to overcome that.


----------



## Raphie

Indeed there was something running, emptied my tray and look 
Seems to be Sonarworks, MSI Center and Roland Cloud. Below looks a lot better 
At least the latency issue is now solved, now I need to get to mid 40 ties NS


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool my 12900KS has a better IMC than my 12900K, since it can boot 4266 16-16-16-36 whereas my 12900K can boot max 4200 MHz. But it shows SP200 despite clear CMOS and reflashing same 0901...


----------



## Raphie

in G2 my 12900K will boot 4533, but BSOD, it will run 4266 G2 Karhu stable
in G1 it will do above Kahru stable and 4000 not stable (BSOD under load in Win)


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool my 12900KS has a better IMC than my 12900K, since it can boot 4266 16-16-16-36 whereas my 12900K can boot max 4200 MHz. But it shows SP200 despite clear CMOS and reflashing same 0901...


Yeah 901 is busted for SP with KS.


----------



## bscool

Raphie said:


> ThnX, In MSI BIOS terms, what are the sub timings I need to look at and what values would you suggest for 3866 @ 16,16,16,36 2T? or 3900 17,19,19,37 1T?
> I'm sort of accepting that G1 throughput is not going to be above 56K, but I would like my latency down toward mid 40'ties as well.
> I've tried looking at other people ASrock timing screenshot. but those values are named differently than in the MSI BIOS and there are probably other fields that are not on the ASRock timing tool.
> 
> It seems indeed that MSI G1 with everything else AUTO hovers around 65ns and G2 settings, with everything else AUTO aim to land around 78ns
> So I need to secondary and tertiary settings help to overcome that.


I posted my Asrock timings before they are going to be about the same for b die. Those are the subtimings that will effect everything from bandwith to latency. [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock

This guide goes into more detail. MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper

It comes down to trial and error but most people can use the same or very similar subtimings.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool with 1404 it shows SP 99 for P-cores and SP 78 for E-cores. I'm going back to 0901.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool with 1404 it shows SP 99 for P-cores and SP 78 for E-cores. I'm going back to 0901.


Does it let you run cache at 47+ on 901 with e core off? The little I tried it, it would crash. I didnt try raising L2 voltage though.

And with e cores on they are locked to 3400 on 901.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool I'm not using E-cores and haven't touched auto CPU frequencies. It's 4.9 cores and 4.7 cache in the BIOS. Must check your claim.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool I'm not using E-cores and haven't touched auto CPU frequencies. It's 4.9 cores and 4.7 cache in the BIOS. Must check your claim.


I didnt mess with it much but for me on 901 with KS past 47 cache it wasnt stable. I know L2 voltage can help cache but didnt test it.


----------



## Raphie

@bscool Great tutorial, Getting there


----------



## Raphie

60K and counting...


----------



## Cam1

This 6 tRTL value are the same ( 69 )is it good or not ? what is the rule for rtl ?


----------



## bscool

Cam1 said:


> This 6 tRTL value are the same ( 69 )is it good or not ? what is the rule for rtl ?


You need to test if it is stable. Just going by testing I have done on various sticks some will need different rtls to be stable.

There is no these RTLs will work for everyone at a frequency and timing. At least from what i have seen testing SR and DR b die on z690 Strix d4 and dozen of different kits and 3 different CPUs(2 12900kf and 1 12900ks).

Also noticed even different CPU will train different RTLs. KS does tigher RTLs.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Anyone got any tips for me on tuning up this Micron Edie some more? This is basically upped frequency to 3800 and timings 16-18-18-36 from xmp 3600 16-19-19-36. It is a 4x8gb SR kit. Stock 1.35v on dram and SA of 1.25v currently. I know I can probably get trfc down to 580-600 range. From what I've read tFAW can be dropped to about 18-20 as well. Not looking to push this to the absolute limit just more performance on the daily. XMP is about 54k Read and 63.5-64ns latency. CPU default settings.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Dropping tFAW from 40 to 20 essentially did nothing. Doubling tREFI to just 28110 (double default 14055) gave a pretty substantial gain to both Read speed and Latency tho.


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> Indeed there was something running, emptied my tray and look
> Seems to be Sonarworks, MSI Center and Roland Cloud. Below looks a lot better
> At least the latency issue is now solved, now I need to get to mid 40 ties NS
> 
> View attachment 2556524


Hello Raphie,

From the beginning of this year I'm struggling like you to define stable overclock settings for the patriot Viper steel 4400 CL 19 memory stick. 
I have the same configuration like you with the same processor and the same memory stick 4 x 8GB. 
Actually I don't remember how many times I changed BI0S or settings. 
Quit fast I realized it's difficult to OC 4000 with CL14 or 15 and the same time to be stable. 
The last two weeks I end up with this OC settings which to me look like 100% stable.testmem5 anta777 extreme no errors. 

I use the PC mainly for games. 
Below you can find my settings, hopefully this might help you as well.


----------



## Groove2013

Testing 4133 CL14 on my 12900KS (P-cores SP 99) BIOS 1404 (Strix D4).


----------



## Raphie

Very nice! I'm currently in my 1620% coverage in Karhu, for sure I'll test these settings tomorrow
This is what I'm validating now seems a nice sweetspot between bandwidth and latency, only @ 1.35v












KyKo. said:


> Hello Raphie,
> 
> From the beginning of this year I'm struggling like you to define stable overclock settings for the patriot Viper steel 4400 CL 19 memory stick.
> I have the same configuration like you with the same processor and the same memory stick 4 x 8GB.
> Actually I don't remember how many times I changed BI0S or settings.
> Quit fast I realized it's difficult to OC 4000 with CL14 or 15 and the same time to be stable.
> The last two weeks I end up with this OC settings which to me look like 100% stable.testmem5 anta777 extreme no errors.
> 
> I use the PC mainly for games.
> Below you can find my settings, hopefully this might help you as well.
> 
> View attachment 2556603
> View attachment 2556605
> View attachment 2556607
> View attachment 2556608
> View attachment 2556609
> View attachment 2556610
> View attachment 2556611
> View attachment 2556612
> View attachment 2556613
> View attachment 2556614
> View attachment 2556615
> View attachment 2556616
> View attachment 2556617
> View attachment 2556618


----------



## edkieferlp

HOODedDutchman said:


> Dropping tFAW from 40 to 20 essentially did nothing. Doubling tREFI to just 28110 (double default 14055) gave a pretty substantial gain to both Read speed and Latency tho.
> View attachment 2556580


here is where I am with 2 sticks of Micron E.
The tWR is really 14 there not 13.

SA VID = 1.26, Vdimm= 1.375, VDDQ tx =1.35

CPU - P-51, 51, 50, 49, 48, 48/E- 38/ ring 40x

I used this guide plus help from others here.









MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## Groove2013

Also with 12900KS, it's finally 100 MHz BCLK in Windows, when 100 MHz set in the BIOS, be it BIOS 0901 or 1404 of my Strix D4, unlike with my 12900K, that gave me 99.8 MHz in Windows, despite 100 MHz in the BIOS, so I had to increase it slightly to have ~100 MHz in Windows. Very nice.


----------



## edkieferlp

Groove2013 said:


> Also with 12900KS, it's finally 100 MHz BCLK in Windows, when 100 MHz set in BIOS, be it BIOS 0901 or 1404 of my Strix D4, unlike with my 12900K, that gave me 99.8 MHz in Windows, despite 100 MHz in the BIOS, so I had to increase it slightly to have ~100 MHz in Windows. Very nice.


I am on TUF D4 and I get a steady 100mhz in HWinfo and CPU-Z. I have all power management enabled (C states etc) with 0.707 bios.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

edkieferlp said:


> here is where I am with 2 sticks of Micron E.
> The tWR is really 14 there not 13.
> 
> SA VID = 1.26, Vdimm= 1.375, VDDQ tx =1.35
> 
> CPU - P-51, 51, 50, 49, 48, 48/E- 38/ ring 40x
> 
> I used this guide plus help from others here.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper
> 
> 
> C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2556626


That's awesome for e die. I'm getting ctd in warzone but no windows errors in any of my normal use. Could be my trfc is to low at 590 but should be fine at only 3800. Tried bumping SA to 1.3v which didn't help then put DRAM to 1.38v (actual 1.4v) and same behavior so gotta be a timing that doesn't scale with voltage.


----------



## edkieferlp

HOODedDutchman said:


> That's awesome for e die. I'm getting ctd in warzone but no windows errors in any of my normal use. Could be my trfc is to low at 590 but should be fine at only 3800. Tried bumping SA to 1.3v which didn't help then put DRAM to 1.38v (actual 1.4v) and same behavior so gotta be a timing that doesn't scale with voltage.


check the guide again, maybe try only "safe" settings, mine are a combo of safe and tight.
you do have 4 sticks so some things might need loosing.

Post pic of Asrock timing configurator so we can see what you set.

Edit, maybe copy my tRFC and tREFI, thern leave rest auto and test on that game.
Then do one change at a time to see where the problem is.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

edkieferlp said:


> check the guide again, maybe try only "safe" settings, mine are a combo of safe and tight.
> you do have 4 sticks so some things might need loosing.
> 
> Post pic of Asrock timing configurator so we can see what you set.
> 
> Edit, maybe copy my tRFC and tREFI, thern leave rest auto and test on that game.
> Then do one change at a time to see where the problem is.


My tREFI was lower than yours. I'll loosen the tRFC and give it a go. I can't for the life of me find a guide that cover E-die. Kinda wish I just spent the extra on 3600c14 B-die but figured I'd give it a go. Had 2x8gb B-die on my ryzen system at 3600 14-14-14-28 at 1.45v easy. Should of gone 2 sticks of dual rank but it's almost impossible to gaurantee dual rank on 16gb modules anymore. Even crucial has larger ICs and 16gb SR modules now without changing the sku. Total bs.


----------



## acoustic

Groove2013 said:


> Also with 12900KS, it's finally 100 MHz BCLK in Windows, when 100 MHz set in the BIOS, be it BIOS 0901 or 1404 of my Strix D4, unlike with my 12900K, that gave me 99.8 MHz in Windows, despite 100 MHz in the BIOS, so I had to increase it slightly to have ~100 MHz in Windows. Very nice.


That was an issue with older BIOS. It was fixed as early as 0803, if not 0707. I forget.


----------



## Raphie

Karhu Ramtest crapped out after 17K% coverage. (that was a 7h run with 32GB)
loosened tREFI to 32768 and tRFC from 292 to 304, let's see what that will bring.
I know with the failed settings I can run Y Cruncher and Cinebench all day long without any issues. But I've agreed with myself 12h Ram test, no less. I might install an additional front fan (only got 1 Noctua front now, blowing @ 650rpm max, cpu goes to 70c, peaking to 74c, heat accumulation might be a thing)


----------



## Raimond

just testing around with my 12700k
Not daily stable,but at least it will boot everything I throw at it at the moment,will do some stresstesting when I want too,haha

at least my 12700k must have a decent IMC it boots at 4100mhz 15 15 15 15 timings:








MSI z690 ddr4 wifi
G skill f4-3600C16D-32GTZN 32gb
12700k


----------



## Raimond

What is the max 'safe' RAM voltage for the IMC? for daily stable usage?


----------



## Raphie

Just installed my 2nd Noctua D15 Chromax fan as top exhaust above the ram. It couldn't go in line with the first fan on the cooler because of heatsink (backplate) and memory space.
I could only use 1 in the middle of the D15. Now it's repurposed for extracting / vectoring excessive heat when benching. Since all my fans are PWM it'll do nothing most of the time.
Let;s see if this sorts 17.000% fail Karhu RamTest.


----------



## Raphie

Raimond said:


> What is the max 'safe' RAM voltage for the IMC? for daily stable usage?


I leave it on auto, most faqs say 1.2 - 1.25


----------



## Raphie

7654% coverage and counting  Finally! @ only 1.35v!  
This is a good candidate for my daily stable settings.


----------



## acoustic

If you had a fail at 1700%, I'd chalk that up to temperatures more than anything else.



Raimond said:


> What is the max 'safe' RAM voltage for the IMC? for daily stable usage?


DRAM voltage does not affect the IMC. If you have active cooling, 1.6v to the DRAM is fine .. they'll just be temperature sensitive, hence active cooling.

VCCSA (System Agent) voltage .. now that is CPU IMC related. I have always stayed no more than 1.38v for 24/7 use, but usually I dial it back. When you're running that close to the edge, the settings tend to be very chaotic when it comes to stability. Currently I'm running 1.3v for 3800 1:1.


----------



## Raphie

I'm running them auto on 3900 1:1


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> I'm running them auto on 3900 1:1


I would set VCCSA manually. Boards tend to overvolt your SA voltage on Auto. I'd at least double check what it's setting it to - your HWINFO pic for example does not show System Agent on that SS.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Raphie said:


> I'm running them auto on 3900 1:1


Mine defaults to 1.38v on Auto with XMP 3600 16-19-19-36. 4x8gb kit but still I ran xmp for months at 1.2v with no issue. I've heard Alder needs a little more in most cases that previous generations but I think 1.38v was still excessive.


----------



## Raphie

This is what it says. I trust MSI to go in line with these values in System Agent. So I don't feel I need to run 1.35v al the time, if 90% of the time 0.6v suffices. 
It's the same for me with C states, all are on and my system idles to 500Mhz @ 0,76v
All that stuff on auto is good enough for me, don't have the cooling headroom to go to 5gh sustained CB R23 anyway as system will throttle.


----------



## acoustic

Uhh .. you don't see what SA voltage is set to in any of those pictures. The BIOS isn't showing what it's currently running at, nor is it running at 0.6v. That's the minimum value that you can set it to, not what it's running at. VCore and CPU SA Voltage are two different things. It may show up in HWINFO next to your "CORE VID" settings.


----------



## Raphie

HOODedDutchman said:


> Mine defaults to 1.38v on Auto with XMP 3600 16-19-19-36. 4x8gb kit but still I ran xmp for months at 1.2v with no issue. I've heard Alder needs a little more in most cases that previous generations but I think 1.38v was still excessive.


Yes, I think I probably can go lower, but for me passing Karhu 10.000% is non negotiable. I'll see how much I can shave off, before it doesn't pass 10K% anymore. 
This is a 100% rock solid baseline. I can now work from here.


----------



## Raphie

acoustic said:


> Uhh .. you don't see what SA voltage is set to in any of those pictures. The BIOS isn't showing what it's currently running at, nor is it running at 0.6v. That's the minimum value that you can set it to, not what it's running at. VCore and CPU SA Voltage are two different things. It may show up in HWINFO next to your "CORE VID" settings.


I didn't say they were the same. I'm just saying I'm trusting MSI to scale properly, just like with my C states.


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> I didn't say they were the same. I'm just saying I'm trusting MSI to scale properly, just like with my C states.


I wouldn't. Every board has done this since VCCSA became a thing. Auto voltage always overvolts to compensate for bad IMCs.


----------



## Raimond

SA voltage goes to 1.3v on auto with my Edge ddr4 wifi with XMP enabled
I am going to lock it at a much lower value.
Also I dont understand why the MSI does this,because if I set the SA voltage manual @ 1.3 it shows it in red numbers(so to high value)

I have vcore locked at 1.110 v,(undervolted)its running @ stock clock speed.
Auto vcore settings give me much higher value
Auto voltages are to high with my Edge z690

Auto voltages suck,lol


----------



## Raphie

What would you recommend? 1.20 and 1.25?


----------



## HOODedDutchman

edkieferlp said:


> check the guide again, maybe try only "safe" settings, mine are a combo of safe and tight.
> you do have 4 sticks so some things might need loosing.
> 
> Post pic of Asrock timing configurator so we can see what you set.
> 
> Edit, maybe copy my tRFC and tREFI, thern leave rest auto and test on that game.
> Then do one change at a time to see where the problem is.


Tried 3800 16-18-18-36 with 630trfc and 28110trefi 1.25v SA 1.35v dram. May try keeping primary timing at stock. These are corsair vengeance pro modules at 16-19-19-36 timings at 3600 by default so I feel like they may be ICs that didn't make the cut for crucial memory. Tried 1.4v dram and didn't help. I'll have to keep messing with it. Could be the tighter tras compared to the crucial kits with micron e-die. Maybe I'll just slap 1.45v at it and see what happens. They don't seem to be getting too hot 35 degrees in aida stability test memory only. I know aida isn't crazy stressful but easy test to get in a rough range.


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> What would you recommend? 1.20 and 1.25?


You just have to test it yourself. It all depends on your CPU IMC. For 3900, I'd start at 1.30v. Good tests for the IMC are Y-Cruncher 2.5b and HCI MemTest.


----------



## Raphie

Tried offset -/- of -0,05, doesn't even post, I saw VCIO change to 1.2 dynamically, I trust auto, if even taking 0,05v off prevents booting then that's close enough for me, rather than boiling 1.35 all the time.


----------



## Raphie

Can someone epxlain the the Y-cruncher 2.5b test?
I've downloaded Y-Cruncher v0.7.9.9509, start it up, what do I chose next?


----------



## Raphie

Memory wise: 1.28 doesn't post, 1.32 doesn't post, auto selects 1.35, so auto it remains. not worth exploring the <0,05v delta.


----------



## edkieferlp

Raphie said:


> Can someone epxlain the Y-cruncher 2.5b test?
> I've downloaded Y-Cruncher v0.7.9.9509, start it up, what do I chose next?


the easiest thing to do is DL benchmate, which has a bunch of benchmarks installed by default, and there all set up for you, just double click on run.
the Y-cruncher 2.5b is 2.5 billion tests.
that should get you around 70-80 mark my guess on 12900 depending on your clocks. Note it uses AVX so check temps and voltages but it is not a long test so you should need anything special cooler wise.


----------



## Raphie

ok, here we go! is this ok?


----------



## bscool

@Raphie hit f6 at the end if you want to see more info.


----------



## Raphie

ThnX to @gerardfraser


----------



## Raphie

bscool said:


> @Raphie hit f6 at the end if you want to see more info.


couldn't pass Y-cruncher 2.5b @ 3900. 4000 doesn't boot
So I'll experiment further to see what else can improve my settings.

F6 on current settings, into throttling.


----------



## edkieferlp

Raphie said:


> couldn't pass Y-cruncher 2.5b @ 3900. 4000 doesn't boot
> So I'll experiment further to see what else can improve my settings.
> 
> F6 on current settings, into throttling.
> View attachment 2556787


yeh, thats fine.

Your running a bit hot there and I see Vcore is 1.38v do you need it that high, sounds high to me.


----------



## Raimond

@Raphie is the cpu overclockt?

If not,try an undervolt

also try AVX offset @Raphie, 90c is pretty hot..

@ raphie ,also try an undervolt, my 12700k runs this benchmark at 72c @Stock 
with 1.110 vcore

With memory overclock only

Also running 4 dimms is more stress for the IMC


----------



## Raphie

I'm standard clocking Vcore is on auto, what would you suggest as offset settings? I would like to keep Core speed Mhz going up down automatically.
The four sticks have to do for now (4x 8GB Viper Steel 4400 cl19) 
If I want to upgrade any faster 2x 16 pair you would suggest?


----------



## Raimond

Raphie said:


> I'm standard clocking Vcore is on auto, what would you suggest as offset settings? I would like to keep Core speed Mhz going up down automatically.


I would try an override first at least that's what I did, your cpu is now using more power then mine loaded ,whats the usage with Cruncher with a program like HWI info you can see the package power usage.

Its pulling 163 watts out off the socket,my 12700k,with thee the cruncher benchmark
Whats your cooling, the 12900k needs more and will use more power then my 12700k ,I use an Noctua d15


----------



## Raphie

Me too D15 Chromax black, with 1 fan in the middle (no room for the 2nd fan)
My CPU uses 0,72v when idle. (498Mhz)


----------



## Raimond

Raphie said:


> Me too D15 Chromax black, with 1 fan in the middle (no room for the 2nd fan)
> My CPU uses 0,72v when idle. (498Mhz)


an 12900k is alot for the Noctua I think, I would try an undervolt I would at least run it with an offset then under load


----------



## Raphie

I don't care, It clocks back dynamically, throttles if needed and I don't use any AVX apps, so realistically I'll be hitting 60-70degr. max which is fine.
I'm just testing extremes now to make sure it's 100% rock solid. Once configured to my liking I won't touch any benchmarks untill the next upgrade
I might go play with undervolting once 100% settled on the memory. 100% stability is most important for me. 2% more out of Cinebench or Y-Cruncher not so much.


----------



## Raimond

Raphie said:


> I don't care, It clocks back dynamically, throttles if needed and I don't use any AVX apps, so realistically I'll be hitting 60-70degr. max which is fine.
> I'm just testing extremes now to make sure it's 100% rock solid. Once configured to my liking I won't touch any benchmarks untill the next upgrade
> I might go play with undervolting once 100% settled on the memory. 100% stability is most important for me. 2% more out of Cinebench or Y-Cruncher not so much.


less power,less heat so more stabilty overall ,my system is rock stable with the undervolt
Also less cpu stress,heat and especialy stress test at high temps are extremely rough, can cause degragation in some degree


----------



## Raphie

Changed the power limit from Water cooler (4096w) to air (280w)


----------



## Raimond

Raphie said:


> Changed the power limit from Water cooler (4096w) to air (280w)
> faster time only 90Degr.
> 
> View attachment 2556806


Power limit will cause some performance loss,dont know how much really but.
I think your cpu is throttling with powerlimit,because the score now is higher,thats strange

its reaching 100c so,thats not good

1.4 vcore you reaching,thats very highp


----------



## Raphie

I guess it's there for a reason, offset undervolting gives me way to many options to understand, vcore undervolting directly I don't want, as i don't want to run 1 voltage 24/7.

As 90% of the time I'm on lower multipliers running @ 0.72v


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Seems the only thing that scaled for stability for my 4x8gb to get 3800 16-18-18-36 stable was vcore. Micron e die needed 1.45v. 1.35v failed aida64 memory in a couple minutes. 1.4v failed in about 10 and 1.45v has been running 20 minutes now without issue. Peak temp is 45°. Might not be worth a 0.1v bump for such a small improvement. Maybe I'll try for 3600 15-18-18-36 and see if I can do it with less voltage.


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> Memory wise: 1.28 doesn't post, 1.32 doesn't post, auto selects 1.35, so auto it remains. not worth exploring the <0,05v delta.


I would just manually select 1.35 rather than Auto. Letting the board decide things.. eek.


----------



## Raimond

acoustic said:


> I would just manually select 1.35 rather than Auto. Letting the board decide things.. eek.


[


yhea with these MSI board I set them manual,auto is giving way to much voltage


----------



## Raphie

Setup a -0,10v offset for the 48x MP as shown here Intel Core i9-12900K FAQ – Cooler, Overclocking and More (msi.com) 

Shaves off another 0.5sec  (still touching 100degr. though)


----------



## Raphie

And CB no issue.


----------



## Raimond

jep thats a low better 
Temps stilll high,use more offset


----------



## KyKo.

With 4 sticks Patriot Viper Steel 4400 CL19
I personal found the sweet spot and for now I stop here on 3800 CL15 with 1.47 Volt.
Compare and copy some suggestions settings from Bloax 
I success stable overclocking.


----------



## edkieferlp

Raphie said:


> And CB no issue.
> 
> View attachment 2556814
> 
> 
> View attachment 2556815


From your before and after it looks like voltage only dropped 0.020v.
try this, Start two instances of CPU-Z.
Leave one on the main tab for V core reading.
For the second one go to the bench tab and run the stress CPU button, tell us your Vcore and freq while running stress test.

You could also run HWinfo but I find the above faster.

I believe you should be able to run stock all core at a V core of1.25v (not VID).


----------



## Raphie

That doesn't work, I can change the vcore to 1.25 and I can boot windows fine, but the vcore will no longer jump back down as far as 0.68v.
I want my Vcore to stay dynamic. running 1.25v while you can get by 95% of the time at 0.68v, seems like a waste.
so rather than per multiplier, does my MSI board have a global offset setting, where I can set to take -.1v at full speed and it calculates itself what it then needs when dynamically downclocking?


----------



## Raphie

Nice!

Will try


----------



## edkieferlp

Raphie said:


> That doesn't work, I can change the vcore to 1.25 and I can boot windows fine, but the vcore will no longer jump back down as far as 0.68v.
> I want my Vcore to stay dynamic. running 1.25v while you can get by 95% of the time at 0.68v, seems like a waste.
> so rather than per multiplier, does my MSI board have a global offset setting, where I can set to take -.1v at full speed and it calculates itself what it then needs when dynamically downclocking?


I didn't say how to adjust voltage, I just ask what the voltages were at all core load.
That guide shows how to set V/F points offset so it only affects those multipliers.
I would try an offset of 0.070 on 48 and report back.

Also do you have TVB Voltage Optimizations enabled?
I know on ASUS that can lowers voltages.


----------



## Raphie

What do you fill out for the values that have the _L or _RD suffix? The same as the ones without the suffix?
Also why do you leave the other tRTL's on 0?


----------



## Raphie

@KyKo. 

Pasted your settings, but I think I did something wrong with the RTL's? as my latency is not as low.
Also there are tCCD settings, which are not on your screenshot? what do I do with those?
And I've got multiple settings mentioning "RING" which one do I use for setting 47? (and is this important for the clock?)
ThnX for clarifying.


----------



## edkieferlp

Raphie said:


> What do you fill out for the values that have the _L or _RD suffix? The same as the ones without the suffix?
> Also why do you leave the other tRTL's on 0?


ok, be more specific with which one as it depends, there are some timings with xxxx_sg, dg, dr and dd these all depend on how many slots are used for me as example only the xxxx_sg and dg ones are being used.
So those are specific to memory layout and dimms.

Edit: ok your talking to KyKo


----------



## Raphie

I've got 4 slots and all 4 occupied with 4 modules?
@kyko mentioned he uses 4 Viper Steel 4400 modules too, yet only 2 tRTL's are having a value other than zero
Dragonball shows things differently than the current MSI BIOSes


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> @KyKo.
> 
> Pasted your settings, but I think I did something wrong with the RTL's? as my latency is not as low.
> Also there are tCCD settings, which are not on your screenshot? what do I do with those?
> And I've got multiple settings mentioning "RING" which one do I use for setting 47? (and is this important for the clock?)
> ThnX for clarifying.
> 
> View attachment 2556853
> 
> 
> View attachment 2556852
> 
> View attachment 2556851


----------



## KyKo.

force tWR_ΜR 14
[/QUOTE]


----------



## KyKo.

And let / Laency Timing Configuration tRTL/tIOL ON Auto


----------



## KyKo.

KyKo. said:


> And let / Laency Timing Configuration tRTL/tIOL ON Auto


i let all cpu setings default


----------



## Raphie

@KyKo. I changed the _MR to 14, latency still 52ms
So all tRTL fields should be auto? your Dragonball screenshot mentioned 69? confused now
can you share your screenshot for this part?

But ThnX for your help, these settings are awesome. Just want my latency below 50 and I'm done.
Are u on balanced or high power scheme?


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> @KyKo. I changed the _MR to 14, latency still 52ms
> So all tRTL fields should be auto? your Dragonball screenshot mentioned 69? confused now
> can you share your screenshot for this part?
> 
> But ThnX for your help, these settings are awesome. Just want my latency below 50 and I'm done.
> Are u on balanced or high power scheme?
> 
> View attachment 2556856


----------



## KyKo.

high power scheme end All background apps close
TCCD 4 / TCCD L 8 and TCCD L mr 8
I let automatic on my settings because by self just give me the right settings


----------



## KyKo.

KyKo. said:


> high power scheme end All background apps close
> TCCD 4 / TCCD L 8 and TCCD L mr 8
> I let automatic on my settings because by self just give me the right settings


----------



## Raphie

@KyKo. You made my day! my quicklaunch was already empty, but had some MSI center persistent stuff in taskmanager together with some other drivers that could be killed
and we're below <50ns
Today was a loooong tweaking day, but I've made good progress thnx to you guys! really appreciate the patience!
Last shots from today, tomorrow it's vcore day


----------



## Raimond

@Raphie 245 watts of load,lol, tdp is 250 watt Max of the d15 is 250 watt,so no wonder the cpu is hot,lol.


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> @Raphie 245 watts of load,lol, tdp is 250 watt Max of the d15 is 250 watt,so no wonder the cpu is hot,lol.


that's the reason for name it stress test...


----------



## KyKo.

KyKo. said:


> that's the reason for name it stress test...


and yes this generation processor is to make barbecue


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> that's the reason for name it stress test...


indeed,but to its to high for my taste, my 12700k does 70 watts less.
With power limit off. I really think the 12700k is likely the max the d15 can handle with decent temps,at least witgh the Alder Lake cpu's.
Te next gen will be even more an Barbeque?


----------



## Raimond

Look like my 12700k is stable with ,Cruncher benchmark, HCI memtest at @4000mhz 15 15 15 15


----------



## Raphie

Looks like 700k to 900k shaves off another 6secs then.
can you post me some bios screenshots of how you did your undervolting? I want to try the same.
does your system still downclock AND turn down vcore dynamically? Or is your Vcore locked regardless of multiplier? 
I think AUTO and an -/- offset for 48x is the best strategy, as on lower MP’s heat is not an issue.Curious how you did it?


----------



## Raimond

Raphie said:


> Looks like 700k to 900k shaves off another 6secs then.
> can you post me some bios screenshots of how you did your undervolting? I want to try the same.
> does your system still downclock AND turn down vcore dynamically? Or is your Vcore locked regardless of multiplier?
> I think AUTO and an -/- offset for 48x is the best strategy, as on lower MP’s heat is not an issue.Curious how you did it?


I think the 12700k still can do better but there is indeed an diference, I think some is timings related ,especialy the advanced timings I need to look at.Some tweaking needs to be done lol.

I only did only lock the vcore ,everything else is auto, It still using dynamic clockspeed,its using about 5 to10 watts idle,I depends on the load


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> Look like my 12700k is stable with ,Cruncher benchmark, HCI memtest at @4000mhz 15 15 15 15
> 
> View attachment 2556903


good morning
*Raimond * two sticks it's more easy than four sticks


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> good morning
> *Raimond * two sticks it's more easy than four sticks


indeed ,but I think its not bad for an 12700k ,I dont see them that much in this topic,lol,only 12900,lol
I wanted 2x16gb because it was more easy,more likely to reach some higher clocks(IMC limited off course)


----------



## KyKo.

Not bad at all if it is stable !!!


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> Not bad at all if it is stable !!!


thanks  HCI memtest stable it is but,will test with games to see if it stable for normal usage


----------



## Raphie

Am I understanding correctly that the DDR5 boards do quad memory channels? (Like my X299 did?) that alone would be a reason for me to switch. Near same latency, nearly double the throughput. 
I also learned that <50ns latency is predominantly about killing processes (intel integrated video, Realtek sense applet, MSI Center ****e (Mystic light, fans, custom scenario, Nvidia deamon sending telemectrics, w11 widget deamon etc)
killing all of that stuff, together with closing everything in your quicklaunch easily shaves off 5-7ns


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> Am I understanding correctly that the DDR5 boards do quad memory channels? (Like my X299 did?) that alone would be a reason for me to switch. Near same latency, nearly double the throughput.
> I also learned that <50ns latency is predominantly about killing processes (intel integrated video, Realtek sense applet, MSI Center ****e (Mystic light, fans, custom scenario, Nvidia deamon sending telemectrics, w11 widget deamon etc)
> killing all of that stuff, together with closing everything in your quicklaunch easily shaves off 5-7ns


They're doing "Quad Channel" in the sense that each DDR5 stick is Dual Channel, iirc


----------



## Raimond

Also ddr5 is bad with 4 sticks off RAM, supported speed goes way down then 4000mhz i believe.

Best to stick with 2 sticks with ddr5


----------



## Raphie

ahh ok, I thought just like X299 4 dimm slots feeding in parallel rather than 2


----------



## Raphie

I see some guys doing 100k+ throughput at 50ns in AIDA, that looks pretty good to me, compared to our 60k+?


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> Am I understanding correctly that the DDR5 boards do quad memory channels? (Like my X299 did?) that alone would be a reason for me to switch. Near same latency, nearly double the throughput.
> I also learned that <50ns latency is predominantly about killing processes (intel integrated video, Realtek sense applet, MSI Center ****e (Mystic light, fans, custom scenario, Nvidia deamon sending telemectrics, w11 widget deamon etc)
> killing all of that stuff, together with closing everything in your quicklaunch easily shaves off 5-7ns


windows optimization is very important also
I personal I apply windows optimization cube from this guy.


----------



## Raimond

that will be ver


Raphie said:


> I see some guys doing 100k+ throughput at 50ns in AIDA, that looks pretty good to me, compared to our 60k+?


only at high clockspeeds and low latency, 4 sticks will be very though to overclock to like 6600mhz with low CAS



https://www.tomshardware.com/features/intel-alder-lake-ram-guide-ddr4-ddr5



jup support speeds drops to like 4000mhz,with 4 sticks off dual rank it even drops to 3600mhz


----------



## Raphie

Ii'm happy to spend another 1k€ on a board and 32mb ddr5 kit.


----------



## Raimond

really? but for what performance gain?for every day usage I mean

I will wait for the next gen,until ddr5 is better available and also AMD will release cpu's with ddr5 support


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> windows optimization is very important also
> I personal I apply windows optimization cube from this guy.


Thank you for posting,I will check into that.I have not done any off these optimizations


----------



## KyKo.

This guy is very helpful and analytic
I follow him from windows7 optimization and after Windows10 optimization and now windows11 optimization cube
but it's very important when you're finished with the OC set up processor or memory save everything in one BIOS profile and come back to default settings.
Then you start with this optimization with Windows Update and all this.
After this you go back to BIOS and apply your save it OC profile.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool what is the SP for P-cores of your KF and KS?


----------



## Raphie

ladies & gentlemen, we shaved off nearly another 2secs and no more 100c
RAM voltage is now down to 1.43v (started yesterday @ 1.47v)
48 and 53 undervolted with 0.10, the other MP's with 0.05


----------



## Raphie

And 200 points more on CB R23 compared to last night 
This rig is slowly going places


----------



## HOODedDutchman

So my micron e-die just seems like it's not great. Even with 1.45v it eventually fails aida memory stress test at 3800 16-18-18-36. My guess because it's 4 modules it's just struggling with the trcd and trp at 18. Changed to default timings 16-19-19-36 with 3800 and seems to pass fine so far at only 1.4v. I know on ryzen systems with micron people loosen trcd a lot. Doesn't seem to translate to intel that way since most I see on intel are running trcd and trp at +2 or +3 over tcl (basically scaling xmp) but who knows. I don't really want to throw more than 1.45v at them just to get trcd and trp stable at 18 when 19 is stable at 1.4v. 4 sticks will likely get too hot and cause issues that way anyways.


----------



## Raphie

Take a look at what @KyKo. did. He's running 4x8gb as well. I've copied his settings. I was in the same position as you, but it needs a lot of secondary tweaking to get it right.
@KyKo. did all the hard work and I run his settings now @ 1.43v 10.000% Karhu RamTest stable.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Raphie said:


> Take a look at what @KyKo. did. He's running 4x8gb as well. I've copied his settings. I was in the same position as you, but it needs a lot of secondary tweaking to get it right.
> @KyKo. did all the hard work and I run his settings now @ 1.43v 10.000% Karhu RamTest stable.
> 
> View attachment 2557007


That's B-Die. I know B-Die pretty well but I'm on micron e-die. Completely different animal. Probably second best memory out vs b-die but it's harder to tune because it doesn't do low trfc or trcd trp. Does clock like crazy frequency wise usually but that doesn't really matter on 12th gen since you lose performance once you go to gear 2. This kit would probably do like 4500+ with loser timings and some voltage but can't really do that on alder lake. I've actually got some decent settings from a few buildzoid videos. Running 3800 16-19-19-36 trfc 600 trefi 40000 at 1.4v currently with all sub timings tweaked. Mind you super conservative. I'm not getting below mid 50s on alder lake without overclocking CPU and disabling e cores tho.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

This is about as dialed in as I'm getting I think with this kit. Could probably go a little higher on the frequency since SA is only at 1.25v and memory at 1.4v. Could probably get up another 1000-2000 on the Read and maybe 1-2ns on the Latency if I really dialed everything in. Well just upping trefi to around 60k would probably get me a bit better latency. This isn't terrible tho for a stock 12700k. Default was about 54k Read and 62ns. I'm sure overclocking the 12700k p/e cores and upping ring to 4ghz+ probably has the most drastic gains on these chips when it comes to latency. I haven't seen anyone in here below 52-53 without doing that. I am waiting for my lga 1700 mount kit for my x63 cooler before I get into that tho since my nh-d15 just doesn't seem to be doing a great job. My 12700k is quite concave from the socket warping issue to so I'm probably going to end up having to under volt to around 1.25 or less and see what I can get out of it there. Shame I couldn't get trcd and trp at 18 stable tho. I was getting 55ns with that and only trfc and trefi sub timing changed with everything else on default.


----------



## KyKo.

IMLCGui it's more stable and accurate than Aida 64

When you have CPU default without OC settings how much latency you have?

Put high power scheme
Restart and go to BIOS.
Set up all CPU settings on default values let only your memory OC values.
Go to windows. 
Make sure to not run application in background except the latency test
application from the motherboard vendors for example MSI center it is very buggy and increase the latency. Basically I have remove the MSI center
Close all background application who is open in the right side of bar( ^ )
Close Cortana close Microsoft OneDrive
Go to computer management and then device manager.
Disable Wi-Fi Internet controller , disable Bluetooth controller, disable also the Ethernet controller and forced to stop windows updates on Windows Update settings .

Run the test.


----------



## KyKo.

HOODedDutchman said:


> This is about as dialed in as I'm getting I think with this kit. Could probably go a little higher on the frequency since SA is only at 1.25v and memory at 1.4v. Could probably get up another 1000-2000 on the Read and maybe 1-2ns on the Latency if I really dialed everything in. Well just upping trefi to around 60k would probably get me a bit better latency. This isn't terrible tho for a stock 12700k. Default was about 54k Read and 62ns. I'm sure overclocking the 12700k p/e cores and upping ring to 4ghz+ probably has the most drastic gains on these chips when it comes to latency. I haven't seen anyone in here below 52-53 without doing that. I am waiting for my lga 1700 mount kit for my x63 cooler before I get into that tho since my nh-d15 just doesn't seem to be doing a great job. My 12700k is quite concave from the socket warping issue to so I'm probably going to end up having to under volt to around 1.25 or less and see what I can get out of it there. Shame I couldn't get trcd and trp at 18 stable tho. I was getting 55ns with that and only trfc and trefi sub timing changed with everything else on default.
> View attachment 2557035


4 X 1.1 millimeter thickness washers below the Load mechanism off CPU for better contact before you install the new cooler noctua D15 it's very good cooler maybe you have contact problem


----------



## HOODedDutchman

KyKo. said:


> IMLCGui it's more stable and accurate than Aida 64
> 
> When you have CPU default without OC settings how much latency you have?
> 
> Put high power scheme
> Restart and go to BIOS.
> Set up all CPU settings on default values let only your memory OC values.
> Go to windows.
> Make sure to not run application in background except the latency test
> application from the motherboard vendors for example MSI center it is very buggy and increase the latency. Basically I have remove the MSI center
> Close all background application who is open in the right side of bar( ^ )
> Close Cortana close Microsoft OneDrive
> Go to computer management and then device manager.
> Disable Wi-Fi Internet controller , disable Bluetooth controller, disable also the Ethernet controller and forced to stop windows updates on Windows Update settings .
> 
> Run the test.


I tried to get mlcgui but the download is some random Linux file type that you need software to convert for windows or something. Couldn't find a different link unfortunately.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

KyKo. said:


> 4 X 1.1 millimeter thickness washers below the Load mechanism off CPU for better contact before you install the new cooler noctua D15 it's very good cooler maybe you have contact problem


Ya we will see. I heard asetek based coolers are more convex than most coolers so it helps with the bent alder lake chips. I mean at stock my cpu uses over 200 watts in stress tests. The nh-d15 isn't magic lol. Plus the d15 is a brick and I got the x63 on sale for 25% off so why not. Will look good in my 011 dynamic mini.


----------



## Chronic1

I must be doing something wrong. I recently upgraded to the 12900KF on the MSI EDGE Z690 and I am struggling to get past 3200mhz on my Gskill Ripjaws rated at 3200 14-14-14-36 1.35v. I am running 4x8GB sticks. Even getting 3200mhz was a chore. Didnt realize I had to raise VDDQ into the red zone at 1.4v! This ram was doing 3600 15-15-15-36 at 1.5v on my 8086K the day before. I cant get it to run even 3600-16-16-16-36 at 1.5v.. Ive tried raising VDDQ as high as 1.55v and System agent to 1.35v. I tried 3733 and 3800 with super loose timings 19-19-19-59. I tried ~3400 as well and couldn't get it stable. Hoping one of you can shine some light at the end of this long and very dark tunnel.

On the bright side I am running 5.2ghz All cores, E cores disabled.
DDR4-3200mhz 14-14-14-36 @ 1.35 Vdimm,
Ring @ 3200mhz (Haven't tried higher, Worried about increasing CPU temps or needing more vcore. Also not sure what voltage to increase for this one.)
System Agent 1.1v
VDDQ 1.4v
Vcore 1.328v under load
Passes 10 minutes Cinebench R23. MaxTemp ~88c
Passes Several days of gaming.


----------



## Raphie

Yup, that brings 46ns on my system without changing ring


----------



## KyKo.

Chronic1 said:


> I must be doing something wrong. I recently upgraded to the 12900KF on the MSI EDGE Z690 and I am struggling to get past 3200mhz on my Gskill Ripjaws rated at 3200 14-14-14-36 1.35v. I am running 4x8GB sticks. Even getting 3200mhz was a chore. Didnt realize I had to raise VDDQ into the red zone at 1.4v! This ram was doing 3600 15-15-15-36 at 1.5v on my 8086K the day before. I cant get it to run even 3600-16-16-16-36 at 1.5v.. Ive tried raising VDDQ as high as 1.55v and System agent to 1.35v. I tried 3733 and 3800 with super loose timings 19-19-19-59. I tried ~3400 as well and couldn't get it stable. Hoping one of you can shine some light at the end of this long and very dark tunnel.
> 
> On the bright side I am running 5.2ghz All cores, E cores disabled.
> DDR4-3200mhz 14-14-14-36 @ 1.35 Vdimm,
> Ring @ 3200mhz (Haven't tried higher, Worried about increasing CPU temps or needing more vcore. Also not sure what voltage to increase for this one.)
> System Agent 1.1v
> VDDQ 1.4v
> Vcore 1.328v under load
> Passes 10 minutes Cinebench R23. MaxTemp ~88c
> Passes Several days of gaming.


Try 1.25/1.27/1.29/1.31/ SA
Scale by 20 milivolt every time and tested to see.
VDDQ 1.35V
share with us MSI Dragon Ball to see the timing who put


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Chronic1 said:


> I must be doing something wrong. I recently upgraded to the 12900KF on the MSI EDGE Z690 and I am struggling to get past 3200mhz on my Gskill Ripjaws rated at 3200 14-14-14-36 1.35v. I am running 4x8GB sticks. Even getting 3200mhz was a chore. Didnt realize I had to raise VDDQ into the red zone at 1.4v! This ram was doing 3600 15-15-15-36 at 1.5v on my 8086K the day before. I cant get it to run even 3600-16-16-16-36 at 1.5v.. Ive tried raising VDDQ as high as 1.55v and System agent to 1.35v. I tried 3733 and 3800 with super loose timings 19-19-19-59. I tried ~3400 as well and couldn't get it stable. Hoping one of you can shine some light at the end of this long and very dark tunnel.
> 
> On the bright side I am running 5.2ghz All cores, E cores disabled.
> DDR4-3200mhz 14-14-14-36 @ 1.35 Vdimm,
> Ring @ 3200mhz (Haven't tried higher, Worried about increasing CPU temps or needing more vcore. Also not sure what voltage to increase for this one.)
> System Agent 1.1v
> VDDQ 1.4v
> Vcore 1.328v under load
> Passes 10 minutes Cinebench R23. MaxTemp ~88c
> Passes Several days of gaming.


You tried updating bios? Heard there's some flaky bios versions on z690. My 4 sticks of micron e seem quite flaky to over xmp but b die should be easy. I've not had mine on another setup tho so I probably just have a weak kit.


----------



## Raphie

Upped @KyKo. settings to 3866, boots and passed AIDA and Y-cruncher 2.5b, Will ram test later
But these numbers are insane


----------



## Bloax

I like the IMLC stuff, seems informative of latency under various bandwidth loads Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui








(will look at how the numbers scale with higher core/ring frequency than 4.4/4.0 later)

I should test the Viper 4000 16-16-16 sticks on their own in 2x8, but I've been preoccupied with practicing shooty-shooty bang bang (FPS) skills instead


----------



## Raimond

Well did a fi


HOODedDutchman said:


> This is about as dialed in as I'm getting I think with this kit. Could probably go a little higher on the frequency since SA is only at 1.25v and memory at 1.4v. Could probably get up another 1000-2000 on the Read and maybe 1-2ns on the Latency if I really dialed everything in. Well just upping trefi to around 60k would probably get me a bit better latency. This isn't terrible tho for a stock 12700k. Default was about 54k Read and 62ns. I'm sure overclocking the 12700k p/e cores and upping ring to 4ghz+ probably has the most drastic gains on these chips when it comes to latency. I haven't seen anyone in here below 52-53 without doing that. I am waiting for my lga 1700 mount kit for my x63 cooler before I get into that tho since my nh-d15 just doesn't seem to be doing a great job. My 12700k is quite concave from the socket warping issue to so I'm probably going to end up having to under volt to around 1.25 or less and see what I can get out of it there. Shame I couldn't get trcd and trp at 18 stable tho. I was getting 55ns with that and only trfc and trefi sub timing changed with everything else on default.
> View attachment 2557035


I do have an 12700 k with d15,what are your temps with like the chruncher benchmark?
Have you tried undervolt?
Running the 12700 k at stock clockspeed?

latency Will go down with lower timings,timings is key here and from what I read here,also Windows Tweaking


----------



## Raimond

Chronic1 said:


> I must be doing something wrong. I recently upgraded to the 12900KF on the MSI EDGE Z690 and I am struggling to get past 3200mhz on my Gskill Ripjaws rated at 3200 14-14-14-36 1.35v. I am running 4x8GB sticks. Even getting 3200mhz was a chore. Didnt realize I had to raise VDDQ into the red zone at 1.4v! This ram was doing 3600 15-15-15-36 at 1.5v on my 8086K the day before. I cant get it to run even 3600-16-16-16-36 at 1.5v.. Ive tried raising VDDQ as high as 1.55v and System agent to 1.35v. I tried 3733 and 3800 with super loose timings 19-19-19-59. I tried ~3400 as well and couldn't get it stable. Hoping one of you can shine some light at the end of this long and very dark tunnel.
> 
> On the bright side I am running 5.2ghz All cores, E cores disabled.
> DDR4-3200mhz 14-14-14-36 @ 1.35 Vdimm,
> Ring @ 3200mhz (Haven't tried higher, Worried about increasing CPU temps or needing more vcore. Also not sure what voltage to increase for this one.)
> System Agent 1.1v
> VDDQ 1.4v
> Vcore 1.328v under load
> Passes 10 minutes Cinebench R23. MaxTemp ~88c
> Passes Several days of gaming.


I do have an Edge z690 ddr4 WiFi,what bios verstond are you using at the moment. There is slot of diference between the bios versions,related to memory stability and overclock

I am using the 31 beta bios

I am using 2 sticks,not 4 ,4 is harder for the IMC so,

Also have tried too overclock the memory ,without the cpu core overclock?


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Raimond said:


> Well did a fi
> 
> 
> I do have an 12700 k with d15,what are your temps with like the chruncher benchmark?
> Have you tried undervolt?
> Running the 12700 k at stock clockspeed?
> 
> latency Will go down with lower timings,timings is key here and from what I read here,also Windows Tweaking


Running it at stock. Hits 100C on some cores in y cruncher. Low 90s in cinebench after 10 loops or so. Runs at about 1.27v stock tho. I definitely have a bit of the bend issue as when I take the cooler off there's thick paste in the middle and thin on top and bottom of the chip. I think it's partly that and over about 200 watts just oversaturates the cooler. I need to do an undervolt but haven't bothered yet as once I get my new cooler on I want to see if there's any difference and I'll go from there. at 180 watts or so it's around the 70C range which is a huge drop for 20 watts. A lot of people seem to be having issues with the d15 when I asked on reddit too but then there's people running overclocked 12900k on the u12a. They have different mounts for lga 1700 so I'm wondering if it could be that to. Prob just stick with my x63 once I get the mount and see the noctua. The noctua is a hassle in my case anyways (011 dynamic mini) because I have to remove the top fans in the case just to get to the fan clips to remove to the cooler if I need to.


----------



## Raphie

imlc with emptied quicklaunch


----------



## Raimond

HOODedDutchman said:


> Running it at stock. Hits 100C on some cores in y cruncher. Low 90s in cinebench after 10 loops or so. Runs at about 1.27v stock tho. I definitely have a bit of the bend issue as when I take the cooler off there's thick paste in the middle and thin on top and bottom of the chip. I think it's partly that and over about 200 watts just oversaturates the cooler. I need to do an undervolt but haven't bothered yet as once I get my new cooler on I want to see if there's any difference and I'll go from there. at 180 watts or so it's around the 70C range which is a huge drop for 20 watts. A lot of people seem to be having issues with the d15 when I asked on reddit too but then there's people running overclocked 12900k on the u12a. They have different mounts for lga 1700 so I'm wondering if it could be that to. Prob just stick with my x63 once I get the mount and see the noctua. The noctua is a hassle in my case anyways (011 dynamic mini) because I have to remove the top fans in the case just to get to the fan clips to remove to the cooler if I need to.



a you got the bend issue,that sucks.
You have temp diferences between cores?I think its the contact then,because when my 12700 hits about 190 a 200 degrees its hits about to 85c,I will check it.
Y chruncher is crazy heavy on load,even more then prime95


Undervolt is not hard to do just move vcore down,until you reach instability with stresstesing,and up the voltage a bit when it comes unstable with stress testing.

My 12700k is running @ 1.110vcore at the moment with E cores on. Cinebench is now 70c I think,I will test it,so,but it really helps to put the vcore down.
Using an d15 with both fans.

jep 70 c Cinebench:











But that is a bit off an small case,for this monster,your case suits an AIO better,I run it in an 5000D Corsair.


Is higher core clock also important with aida benchmark or?
My score so far will try to tweak the timins a bit:










@KyKo.

Will you help me a bit with the other timings?
I really dont understand what timings are the most important ones

I will post a picture of the timings so far,if needed.


----------



## Raphie

After killing the quicklaunch <78 s


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> a you got the bend issue,that sucks.
> You have temp diferences between cores?I think its the contact then,because when my 12700 hits about 190 a 200 degrees its hits about to 85c,I will check it.
> Y chruncher is crazy heavy on load,even more then prime95
> 
> 
> Undervolt is not hard to do just move vcore down,until you reach instability with stresstesing,and up the voltage a bit when it comes unstable with stress testing.
> 
> My 12700k is running @ 1.110vcore at the moment with E cores on. Cinebench is now 70c I think,I will test it,so,but it really helps to put the vcore down.
> Using an d15 with both fans.
> 
> jep 70 c Cinebench:
> 
> 
> View attachment 2557113
> 
> 
> 
> But that is a bit off an small case,for this monster,your case suits an AIO better,I run it in an 5000D Corsair.
> 
> 
> Is higher core clock also important with aida benchmark or?
> My score so far will try to tweak the timins a bit:
> 
> View attachment 2557108
> 
> 
> @KyKo.
> 
> Will you help me a bit with the other timings?
> I really dont understand what timings are the most important ones
> 
> I will post a picture of the timings so far,if needed.


I'll be glad to help you my friend but I must inform you 
*Bloax*
is there real magician here I believe this guy knows more than me


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> I'll be glad to help you my friend but I must inform you
> *Bloax*
> is there real magician here I believe this guy knows more than me


Thank you


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> After killing the quicklaunch <78 s
> View attachment 2557107


you know 
before I end up with 3800 CL 15 I was with 3866 CL 14 1.5 Volt and 1.385 SA 1.390 VDDQ 
but was better for me to go on 3800 CL 15 with 1.47 Volt 1.3 saw and 1.35 VDDQ


----------



## Raphie

My SA-vid (auto) is on 1451 right now, ram on 1.45v, will try to lower SA to 1350 later
but so far Ram Test 6200% (2h 45min) and counting coverage stable 

I really to want to try to hit AIDA 70k Copy though.


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> My SA-vid (auto) is on 1451 right now, ram on 1.45v, will try to lower SA to 1350 later
> but so far Ram Test 6200% (2h 45min) and counting coverage stable
> 
> I really to want to try to hit AIDA 70k Copy though.


you download the Dragon Ball who sent you?


----------



## Raphie

Yes, but it doesn't start? tried as administrator as well, it starts, but then no window appears? what am I doing wrong?


----------



## Raphie

While running Ram Test for 3h...


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> While running Ram Test for 3h...
> View attachment 2557146


1.45 it's too high


----------



## Raimond

Raphie said:


> My SA-vid (auto) is on 1451 right now, ram on 1.45v, will try to lower SA to 1350 later
> but so far Ram Test 6200% (2h 45min) and counting coverage stable
> 
> I really to want to try to hit AIDA 70k Copy though.


That SA voltage is on the high side mine is at 1.280


----------



## Raphie

Yup, but it's doing 67K copy, 4 sticks!  SA is next on the list to tune down


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> That SA voltage is on the high side mine is at 1.280


you have 2 memory stick or 4 ?


----------



## Raphie

3866 Karhu 100% stable 
with undervolted Vcore too


----------



## Raimond

2 sticks, Raphie will need a bit maybe because he has 4 ,but as an indicator I posted mine.

Its all about the IMC, what it can do with lower voltage

@Raphie you will need to test again,with lower voltage,it can change things up a bit,but I jhope off course its stableI know it is time consuming,all these testing.

Your score is great by the way,

are your temps now better with cruncher benchmark?with the lower vcore ?


----------



## Bloax

and yes there is indeed scaling in the results, most likely from ring frequency







50.5 core/45 ring






44 core/40 ring


----------



## Raphie

Yup. but my ringfreq is still auto, we're crossing over @ 00300


----------



## Raimond

Are you Guys using active ram cooling bv. The way. I dont have it at the moment, I am reaching too high temps,when gaming with my B die memory( 47 C) I have read That keeping b die at around 40c is best?


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> Are you Guys using active ram cooling bv. The way. I dont have it at the moment, I am reaching too high temps,when gaming with my B die memory( 47 C) I have read That keeping b die at around 40c is best?


if you have 2 Bdie memory sticks you can go higher and the training is more easy for you
but you must know more up you going more power you need which mean more temperatures you're gonna have
the best way for you it's to put one fan
with how much voltage you run these sticks ?


----------



## Raimond

1.470 voltage at the moment, my 3080ti ( 400 watts of heat) heats the RAM up. its cooler when Only stresstesing the RAM with TM5 (42c) .

0 error when stresstesting. But I dont like these temps,maybe pushing it to Much,Will look at cooling first.


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> 1.470 voltage at the moment, my 3080ti ( 400 watts of heat) heats the RAM up. its cooler when Only stresstesing the RAM with TM5 (42c) .
> 
> 0 error when stresstesting. But I dont like these temps,maybe pushing it to Much,Will look at cooling first.


it looks like the circulation of air in your chassis is not good with 1.47 Volt B die memory stick he create normal temperatures 
of course other device like graphic card for example add more heat inside of your chassis
so you don't have enough room for memory overclocking
what chassis you have ?


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> it looks like the circulation of air in your chassis is not good with 1.47 Volt B die memory stick he create normal temperatures
> of course other device like graphic card for example add more heat inside of your chassis
> so you don't have enough room for memory overclocking
> what chassis you have ?


5000D airflow Corsair

case should be fine ,Will ramp up fans,to check if the temps go down


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> 5000D airflow Corsair


how many fans do you have input and output?


----------



## Raimond

6 in front all intake 3 at top, exhaust 1 in the back also exhaust


----------



## KyKo.

KyKo. said:


> how many fans do you have input and output?


fan fan fan you have on cpu AIO ?
And in what position you have which mean you have in front you have in the side or in the top ?


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> fan fan fan


Hahaha indeed,I like RGB🤣
And thought it should be enough cooling,lol,but the RAM does not tink so,need to check into That.

I am using an d15 noctua with 2 fans


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> Hahaha indeed,I like RGB🤣
> And thought it should be enough cooling,lol,but the RAM does not tink so,need to check into That.
> 
> I am using an d15 noctua with 2 fans


so you have three fan in front who blowing inside of the case 3 fan in the side who blowing also inside of the case and three fan in the top as exhaust


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> so you have three fan in front who blowing inside of the case 3 fan in the side who blowing also inside of the case and three fan in the top as exhaust


 Yes and also 1 Exhaust fan at the back off the case


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> Yes and also 1 Exhaust fan at the back off the case


send me the code number of your memory


----------



## edkieferlp

Raimond said:


> 6 in front all intake 3 at top, exhaust 1 in the back also exhaust


I would check on the front-top fan, it might be pulling air right from the front intakes out the top.
Meaning the CPU/MB doesn't get full airflow of the front intakes.
try it with only far back one on top running and see if it improves temps.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool what is the SP for P-cores of your KF and KS?


2 12900kf 101/104 and KS 98.


----------



## HyperC

So I was tweaking my ram today and the oddest thing Testmem5 errored every time I opened it.. I even reverted to my stable bios profile and found out my E cores not stable has this happened to anybody else? are my e cores dying?


----------



## Raimond

edkieferlp said:


> I would check on the front-top fan, it might be pulling air right from the front intakes out the top.
> Meaning the CPU/MB doesn't get full airflow of the front intakes.
> try it with only far back one on top running and see if it improves temps.


I Will try That,thank You🙂


----------



## Raphie

What happens @ stock values?


----------



## Raimond

HyperC said:


> So I was tweaking my ram today and the oddest thing Testmem5 errored every time I opened it.. I even reverted to my stable bios profile and found out my E cores not stable has this happened to anybody else? are my e cores dying?


What motherboard do you have?



Raphie said:


> What happens @ stock values?



 I will check this also,thanxs


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> send me the code number of your memory


F4-3600C16D-32GTZN

b die


----------



## acoustic

HyperC said:


> So I was tweaking my ram today and the oddest thing Testmem5 errored every time I opened it.. I even reverted to my stable bios profile and found out my E cores not stable has this happened to anybody else? are my e cores dying?


Clear CMOS, load optimized defaults, try it again. If not, go to Windows Power Management and select a different power-plan, then select the one you use/were using. Revert it to defaults. I've had issues where crashes/errors causes by me OC can make my power-plan change and/or stop my CPU from down clocking, all types of weird ****.


----------



## Raimond

acoustic said:


> Clear CMOS, load optimized defaults, try it again. If not, go to Windows Power Management and select a different power-plan, then select the one you use/were using. Revert it to defaults. I've had issues where crashes/errors causes by me OC can make my power-plan change and/or stop my CPU from down clocking, all types of weird ****.


I've had the same problem with tm5 , and also did the same as you,bios,loaded optimized default and problem was gone,'glad' to see others to have the same issue,I think its a bios,software isue?
What motherboard do you guys have?
MSI z690?


----------



## Raimond

[


HyperC said:


> So I was tweaking my ram today and the oddest thing Testmem5 errored every time I opened it.. I even reverted to my stable bios profile and found out my E cores not stable has this happened to anybody else? are my e cores dying?


I dont think something is wrong with the cpu, I have had the same problem,I think its more bios related, loading optimized defaults and apply the same overclock settings , that solved it for me.


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> F4-3600C16D-32GTZN
> 
> b die


I believe that
the side fans disturb the course of the front fans
causing air to push towards the side glass panel creating a curve
graphics card and memories are not cooled properly










my opinion is that you should aim for something like that


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> I believe that
> the side fans disturb the course of the front fans
> causing air to push towards the side glass panel creating a curve
> graphics card and memories are not cooled properly
> View attachment 2557279
> 
> 
> 
> my opinion is that you should aim for something like that
> 
> View attachment 2557283



Yhea could indeed be the case,thanxs for that I really appreciate it 

I will test with those side fans off,and also with the the first 2 top fans off,

When I put my hand above t the first 2 top case fans,they are only axhausting cool air, look s like it distrubs cool airflow to the back side off the case



edkieferlp said:


> I would check on the front-top fan, it might be pulling air right from the front intakes out the top.
> Meaning the CPU/MB doesn't get full airflow of the front intakes.
> try it with only far back one on top running and see if it improves temps.


I will try this also thanxs, really appreciate it


----------



## HyperC

12600k windows 11 with asus tuf.. Z690 has to be the worst motherboard platform for clearing bios or memory clocks. Think I might wire my PC reset button to the bios jumper CMOS


----------



## Raimond

HyperC said:


> 12600k windows 11 with asus tuf.. Z690 has to be the worst motherboard platform for clearing bios or memory clocks. Think I might wire my PC reset button to the bios jumper CMOS




My z690 edge,does a great job to recover ,from failed MEM OC.I did not need 1 time, to clear CMOS.

Too bad man,that the TUF is not that great.
Maybe also bios verison related,or is there no diference between the bios versions?


I am testing a bit with fan setup,I have found some interesting results until now.

The side fans are actualy lower memory temps, maybe because they produce a lot off intake airflow.
I increased the fan speed of the side fans and temps are better compared too off.

I have also increased the speed off the top fans and back fan to,that takes care off the building up heat from the 3080ti
RAM temps are 3 to 4 degrees lower now,so we are getiing there.
Also overall temps are lower with that fan setup.

1 thing i did not tried yet is to run it with 2 top fans and the back fan.
I still run it with 3 fans in top and 1 back fan,will test that later.
Thanxs for help will test more


----------



## KyKo.

HyperC said:


> 12600k windows 11 with asus tuf.. Z690 has to be the worst motherboard platform for clearing bios or memory clocks. Think I might wire my PC reset button to the bios jumper CMOS



helps a lot


























Just Keep in mind 
if the reset switch is on the front panel it is dangerous at some point to press
it better to Put a stand-alone switch


----------



## HyperC

Not sure if it's the newer bios I mean it was fully stable and then started tweaking ram some more... But yeah as far as the cmos jumper button you are probably correct might be a bad idea using the reset button... The TUF recovers pretty good FYI but when you test a lot of different things and voltages it can hard lock... My PC is pretty much locked inside my closet and in a CORE x9 case so not the easiest to tinker with


----------



## HyperC

LOL , So either I am nuts or bios 1404 randomly glitching I just rebooted about an 1 hr ago settings are loaded back to my stable loaded profile????? I know I haven't drank that much tonight


----------



## edkieferlp

HyperC said:


> 12600k windows 11 with asus tuf.. Z690 has to be the worst motherboard platform for clearing bios or memory clocks. Think I might wire my PC reset button to the bios jumper CMOS


I am on TUF with 12600k, I don't push extreme settings all at once and go in small steps but so far I have got two types of recovery that works.
1) my settings didn't train and I get message back after reboot bios that I can revert changes or modify therm.
2) I get a stop error type thing, CPU fan not running but lights are running, this needs hard shutdown of power > turn off PSU and pull power plug for 30sec. recoonect, turn on and back in bios.

So far I have not had to reset CMOS yet but again I don't make huge changes at one time.

PS: I am on 0.707 bios.


----------



## acoustic

HyperC said:


> 12600k windows 11 with asus tuf.. Z690 has to be the worst motherboard platform for clearing bios or memory clocks. Think I might wire my PC reset button to the bios jumper CMOS


I have never had to use the BIOS jumper. If I get hangs, just switch PSU off, press power button couple times, and turn power back on. Goes to safe mode. Also on a TUF.


----------



## snootaiscool

I showed Buildzoid the current timings of my Ripjaws V kit in Asrock Timing Config and he stated that in his, experience Z690 + ADL's IMC really ****ing hates TRCDs below 15 at high frequencies, especially at Gear 1 DDR4-4000. Currently I settle on setting flat 15's in BIOS, then using MemTweak to tighten my primaries to 14-15-14-28. Should these timings be considered good for a 1.4v DDR4-4000 16-16-16-36 32GB kit running at 1.5v VDIMM and 1.35V System Agent?


----------



## Groove2013

snootaiscool said:


> I showed Buildzoid the current timings of my Ripjaws V kit in Asrock Timing Config and he stated that in his, experience Z690 + ADL's IMC really ****ing hates TRCDs below 15 at high frequencies, especially at Gear 1 DDR4-4000. Currently I settle on setting flat 15's in BIOS, then using MemTweak to tighten my primaries to 14-15-14-28. Should these timings be considered good for a 1.4v DDR4-4000 16-16-16-36 32GB kit running at 1.5v VDIMM and 1.35V System Agent?


yes


----------



## Raphie

It depends. max AIDA throughput you get is around 67k read, 71k copy with 2 sticks
with 4 it's 65k read 69k copy
and this can be any variation of 3600 - 4000mhz with tighter or looser timings.
But those are the absolute DDR4 ceilings I've seen on Z690.
Some reach 4k with 2 sticks, with 4 sticks you can forget 4k full stop. it stops at 3900 then.


----------



## Raimond

4 stick is harder indeed, nice score Raphie


----------



## VGeorge

Raphie said:


> It depends. max AIDA throughput you get is around 67k read, 71k copy with 2 sticks
> with 4 it's 65k read 69k copy
> and this can be any variation of 3600 - 4000mhz with tighter or looser timings.
> But those are the absolute DDR4 ceilings I've seen on Z690.
> Some reach 4k with 2 sticks, with 4 sticks you can forget 4k full stop. it stops at 3900 then.
> 
> View attachment 2557553


That is not really true.
You can run 4000MHz, it's just not that common and depends on the IMC.
I have seen several others on this thread run 4000MHZ with 4x8 and I am also running 4000c15 fully stable.
Maybe it depends on the board too, since I noticed that you are on an MSI. Maybe ASUS is a bit better for 4 sticks.


----------



## Raphie

I stand corrected then, that’s a really nice performance, which modules are those?
BTW, can you run a screen with the latest AIDA, it reports lower throughput, higher latency, curious what that version shows.


----------



## KyKo.

VGeorge said:


> That is not really true.
> You can run 4000MHz, it's just not that common and depends on the IMC.
> I have seen several others on this thread run 4000MHZ with 4x8 and I am also running 4000c15 fully stable.
> Maybe it depends on the board too, since I noticed that you are on an MSI. Maybe ASUS is a bit better for 4 sticks.
> View attachment 2557579
> View attachment 2557581


(βοηθάει όμως και το OC σου Γιώργο)
your overclock on 5300 also helps to decrease latency


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> (βοηθάει όμως και το OC σου Γιώργο)
> your overclock on 5300 also helps to decrease latency


,I thought so that this would matter so,no cpu overclock here,cant reach that speeds with my 12700k I think without an overclock I think.

Been tweaking around with my system cooling, undervolted the gpu with MSI afterburner(about 60 to 70 watt off heat less,lol),also turn the first top fan off in top,cant say jet if it is better,will need to test more,lol

Also backfan removes a lot off heat so,increased speed off that one.

Overall temps including memory temps better now,also powerusage dropped a little bit,lol


----------



## Raphie




----------



## Tikan

Good morning! I've read through the last 20 or so pages and am hoping someone can help me out. I am running a 12700K on the MSI Pro Z690-A DDR4. I'm also running 4x8GB Patriot Viper Steel 4400. I'm trying to troubleshoot some issues with my memory overclock, it's possible it's related to my PSU so I have a replacement on the way so I can validate that. I'm not interested in CPU overclock right now, just want to get my memory running at a decent speed. Any chance one of you could paste screenshots of your settings for both the main page (including voltages) and the advanced DRAM settings? I used to do a lot of overclocking back in the old days but there were a lot less voltage knobs to tweak. Really just hoping to get something stable at 3600 or 3800 with tight timings. *Right now it won't even boot at 3200 with 19 19 19 36 - so I am thinking it's power or a voltage setting missing.*

I saw a previous post last night (not sure if this thread or another one, it was late) indicating the Viper needed other voltage values to be increased or there were tons of stability issues. Hope you can help.

Thanks


----------



## Raimond

there are more then with that kit in this thread here,so it should not be a problem to share settings,but not all CPU imc will run it with thight timings, but the voltage you should focues on are

RAM voltage and als SA CPU voltage
tight timings need more voltage,even more when running it at an higher mhz


----------



## Raphie

try these, they are 100% Ramtest stable with that exact combi. CPU fully stock


----------



## Raphie

tweaking further @3900


----------



## Raphie

when does it stop


----------



## Tikan

Raphie said:


> try these, they are 100% Ramtest stable with that exact combi. CPU fully stock
> 
> 
> View attachment 2557631


What voltage settings? Gear? I'm on latest official bios (1.30 I believe) - does the Beta BIOS matter much? Thanks


----------



## Raphie

I'm on 1.31 haven't bothered to go back
above @ 3800 is 1.38 @ 3866 1.46


----------



## Craftyman

What should I tune next? Samsung b-die @3600 and 1.5v and gear 1. For some reason I'm getting high latency in AIDA64 (~58ish ns) any ideas? Passed TM5 Anta777 absolut. Mobo is MSI Z690 Edge Wifi.

Really liking the boost to smoothness in games I'm getting. RAM overclocking is challenging but fun.


----------



## Raimond

I also got the Edge wifi,what bios version does yours have?

tREFI timing is much higher then mine,mine is 14000 yours is 40000
Also CAS timings need to be lower to get lower latency

1.5 voltage is very high for 3600mhz,you cant lower the voltage?
for example,my b die needs 1..470 for 4000mhz cas15

Also close all programs for running aida,including programs running in the background

here are my systems b die timings:


----------



## snootaiscool

Craftyman said:


> View attachment 2557719
> 
> 
> What should I tune next? Samsung b-die @3600 and 1.5v and gear 1. For some reason I'm getting high latency in AIDA64 (~58ish ns) any ideas? Passed TM5 Anta777 absolut. Mobo is MSI Z690 Edge Wifi.
> 
> Really liking the boost to smoothness in games I'm getting. RAM overclocking is challenging but fun.


Is DDR4-3600 Gear 1 really the limit of what your IMC can achieve? Unless it's a BIOS issue, most unlocked chips seemed to do at least DDR4-3800. Input 1.35v System Agent Voltage and find the highest 1:1 highest frequency you post, then the highest frequency you can get TM5 Absolute/Y-cruncher w/ the Github config/Karhu stable with loose timings. For reference, my 12700K has a decent IMC and only needs 1.35v SA Voltage to stabilize DDR4-4000 Gear 1 with Dual Rank B-Die. Again, you're more than likely to hit a wall at like DDR4-3800 or DDR4-3900 though.
DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36 in of itself is also pretty relaxed for 1.5v VDIMM even for lower end b-die like 3200MHz 14-14-14-34 RAM. With 1.5v I would imagine flat 14's should be a given (but you'll need to relax the TRCD to 15 when pushing higher frequencies).


----------



## Craftyman

SA = 1.3v I only have briefly tested higher frequency, are there any other voltages besides vDIMM and SA that I should look at for pushing past 3600? I'm on the latest BIOS. I'm pretty noob still at tweaking timings and overclocking so I just set 1.5 vDIMM because I wanted to play video games last night  and not have to deal with potentially pulling my graphics card out to clear CMOS if the system didn't POST.


----------



## KyKo.




----------



## Craftyman

UPDATE So it didn't run y-cruncher @ 4000Mhz Gear 1 until I set the strap from 100:100 to 100:133Mhz hell yeah! SA = 1.35 vDIMM = 1.5 still cuz I haven't bothered to test stability yet
Time to tighten up the timings?! Gonna run TM5 Absolut


----------



## Raimond

snootaiscool said:


> Is DDR4-3600 Gear 1 really the limit of what your IMC can achieve? Unless it's a BIOS issue, most unlocked chips seemed to do at least DDR4-3800. Input 1.35v System Agent Voltage and find the highest 1:1 highest frequency you post, then the highest frequency you can get TM5 Absolute/Y-cruncher w/ the Github config/Karhu stable with loose timings. For reference, my 12700K has a decent IMC and only needs 1.35v SA Voltage to stabilize DDR4-4000 Gear 1 with Dual Rank B-Die. Again, you're more than likely to hit a wall at like DDR4-3800 or DDR4-3900 though.
> DDR4-3600 16-16-16-36 in of itself is also pretty relaxed for 1.5v VDIMM even for lower end b-die like 3200MHz 14-14-14-34 RAM. With 1.5v I would imagine flat 14's should be a given (but you'll need to relax the TRCD to 15 when pushing higher frequencies).
> View attachment 2557723


Hi, can I I aks you what Aida score do you have with your 12700 k,thanxs🙂


----------



## Raimond

Craftyman said:


> View attachment 2557750
> View attachment 2557751
> 
> 
> UPDATE So it didn't run y-cruncher @ 4000Mhz Gear 1 until I set the strap from 100:100 to 100:133Mhz hell yeah! SA = 1.35 vDIMM = 1.5 still cuz I haven't bothered to test stability yet
> Time to tighten up the timings?! Gonna run TM5 Absolut


also run memtestpro ( HCI memtest ) for day,Ithink you beter leave it at 100 bv the way.
Also what bios are you using?

you run th 12 official. bios I see, that one is prettiy bad, would try use 1.31 beta.

And I get it that you wanted to play games lol


----------



## Craftyman

Raimond said:


> also run memtestpro ( HCI memtest ) for day,Ithink you beter leave it at 100 bv the way.
> Also what bios are you using?
> 
> you run th 12 official. bios I see, that one is prettiy bad, would try use 1.31 beta.
> 
> And I get it that you wanted to play games lol


OK I will check out the 1.31 Beta BIOS tomorrow, whats better about it? 

and I'll run Memtest tonight after TM5 thanks for the tip  Dying Light 2 and Planetside 2 felt really smooooooth tonight.


----------



## Raphie

Any reason why tWR of 12 benches slower than 14?
I thought lower was better?


----------



## Raphie

I think I'm done, can't get any faster stable


----------



## Craftyman

That looks pretty darn speedy


----------



## Raphie

That's the most I'm getting out of these 4 sticks


----------



## Raphie

This is the Patriot Viper Steel 4400 readout, if there is still anything I can improve, shout!

Manufacturing Description
​

Module Manufacturer:Patriot MemoryModule Part Number:4400 C19 SeriesDRAM Manufacturer:SamsungDRAM Components:K4A8G085WB-BCPBDRAM Die Revision / Process Node:B / 20 nmModule Manufacturing Date:UndefinedModule Manufacturing Location:Taipei, TaiwanModule Serial Number:00000000hModule PCB Revision:01h

Physical & Logical Attributes
​

Fundamental Memory Class:DDR4 SDRAMModule Speed Grade:DDR4-2133P downbinBase Module Type:UDIMM (133,35 mm)Module Capacity:8 GBReference Raw Card:A0 (8 layers)JEDEC Raw Card Designer:SK hynixModule Nominal Height:31 < H <= 32 mmModule Thickness Maximum, Front:1 < T <= 2 mmModule Thickness Maximum, Back:T <= 1 mmNumber of DIMM Ranks:1Address Mapping from Edge Connector to DRAM:StandardDRAM Device Package:Standard MonolithicDRAM Device Package Type:78-ball FBGADRAM Device Die Count:Single dieSignal Loading:Not specifiedNumber of Column Addresses:10 bitsNumber of Row Addresses:16 bitsNumber of Bank Addresses:2 bits (4 banks)Bank Group Addressing:2 bits (4 groups)DRAM Device Width:8 bitsProgrammed DRAM Density:8 GbCalculated DRAM Density:8 GbNumber of DRAM components:8DRAM Page Size:1 KBPrimary Memory Bus Width:64 bitsMemory Bus Width Extension:0 bitsDRAM Post Package Repair:Not supportedSoft Post Package Repair:Not supported

DRAM Timing Parameters
​

Fine Timebase:0,001 nsMedium Timebase:0,125 nsCAS Latencies Supported:10T, 11T, 12T, 13T,
14T, 15T, 16TMinimum Clock Cycle Time (tCK min):0,938 ns (1066,10 MHz)Maximum Clock Cycle Time (tCK max):1,500 ns (666,67 MHz)CAS# Latency Time (tAA min):13,500 nsRAS# to CAS# Delay Time (tRCD min):13,500 nsRow Precharge Delay Time (tRP min):13,500 nsActive to Precharge Delay Time (tRAS min):33,000 nsAct to Act/Refresh Delay Time (tRC min):46,500 nsNormal Refresh Recovery Delay Time (tRFC1 min):350,000 ns2x mode Refresh Recovery Delay Time (tRFC2 min):260,000 ns4x mode Refresh Recovery Delay Time (tRFC4 min):160,000 nsShort Row Active to Row Active Delay (tRRD_S min):3,700 nsLong Row Active to Row Active Delay (tRRD_L min):5,300 nsLong CAS to CAS Delay Time (tCCD_L min):5,625 nsFour Active Windows Delay (tFAW min):21,000 nsMaximum Active Window (tMAW):8192*tREFIMaximum Activate Count (MAC):Unlimited MACDRAM VDD 1,20 V operable/endurant:Yes/YesSupply Voltage (VDD), Min / Typical / Max:1,16V / 1,20V / 1,26VActivation Supply Voltage (VPP), Min / Typical / Max:2,41V / 2,50V / 2,75VTermination Voltage (VTT), Min / Typical / Max:0,565V / 0,605V / 0,640V

Thermal Parameters
​

Module Thermal Sensor:Not Incorporated

SPD Protocol
​

SPD Revision:1.0SPD Bytes Total:512SPD Bytes Used:384SPD Checksum (Bytes 00h-7Dh):6355h (OK)SPD Checksum (Bytes 80h-FDh):B2ADh (OK)

Part number details
​

JEDEC DIMM Label:8GB 1Rx8 PC4-2133P-UA0-10

​

FrequencyCASRCDRPRASRCRRDSRRDLCCDLFAW1067 MHz1615153650466231067 MHz151515365046623933 MHz141313314445620933 MHz131313314445620800 MHz121111273835517800 MHz111111273835517667 MHz1099223134414

Intel Extreme Memory Profiles
​

XMP ParameterProfile 1Profile 2Profiles Revision: 2.0Profile 1 (Certified) Enables: YesProfile 2 (Extreme) Enables: YesProfile 1 Channel Config: 1 DIMM/channelProfile 2 Channel Config: 1 DIMM/channelSpeed Grade:DDR4-4396DDR4-4264DRAM Clock Frequency:2198 MHz2132 MHzModule VDD Voltage Level:1,45 V1,35 VMinimum DRAM Cycle Time (tCK):0,455 ns0,469 nsCAS Latencies Supported:20T,19T,18T,17T,
16T,15T,14T,13T,
12T,11T,9T20T,19T,18T,17T,
16T,15T,14T,13T,
12T,11T,9TCAS Latency Time (tAA):19T19TRAS# to CAS# Delay Time (tRCD):19T19TRow Precharge Delay Time (tRP):19T19TActive to Precharge Delay Time (tRAS):39T39TActive to Active/Refresh Delay Time (tRC):69T68TFour Activate Window Delay Time (tFAW):27T26TShort Activate to Activate Delay Time (tRRD_S):5T5TLong Activate to Activate Delay Time (tRRD_L):4T4TNormal Refresh Recovery Delay Time (tRFC1):770T747T2x mode Refresh Recovery Delay Time (tRFC2):572T555T4x mode Refresh Recovery Delay Time (tRFC4):352T342T


----------



## Raphie

still running, but these settings seem stable 

RAM Test - Karhu Software


----------



## Raimond

Craftyman said:


> View attachment 2557724
> View attachment 2557725
> View attachment 2557726
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SA = 1.3v I only have briefly tested higher frequency, are there any other voltages besides vDIMM and SA that I should look at for pushing past 3600? I'm on the latest BIOS. I'm pretty noob still at tweaking timings and overclocking so I just set 1.5 vDIMM because I wanted to play video games last night  and not have to deal with potentially pulling my graphics card out to clear
> 
> CMOS if the system didn't POST.


with the 1.31 bios, I die not have to clear cmos yet.
If system does not boot, properly,just want until it restarts and you get the message overclock failed.If that does not work ,shut the system off and turn The powerswitch off of,wait a minute and turn it on again.

And try it an restart again until you get the message overclock failed.Hope this helpt.
You tgot an b die kit,so you can have tweak it ,a bit🙂
you can get some decent results.

be patient with the booten up, memory training can be a bit slow .

SA voltage van RAM voltage are the voltage you need to Tweak .I did not use any other.
Also check if the airflow is good. And if your ram kit has temp sensors,watch that closely.

Set SA voltage at 1.350 ,higher up the RAM freq until you get BSOD or unstable RAM,if so up the RAM voltage a bit until in becomes stable and ramp up the ram until it does not boot properly with like 1.5 RAM voltage Max.

Then you have reached the max off the memory and you turn it down a notch ,so you have some headroom left to lower the timings.
Lowering the timings needs more voltage also, max RAM agin 1.5 v

B die can take some voltage so, until 1.5 you can use if you have proper airflow. You want as low temps as you can get,or it could become unstable. Mine is happy between 40 a 45 c.

If you have important files on that windows disk, back it up iyou can get corrupted files,when memory is not stable.

I hope this helps.


----------



## Tikan

Thanks to @KyKo. we worked through the issues I was having. One of my kits is bad, everything works perfectly with his settings on one pair but not the other so I have an RMA in with Patriot to replace them. Thanks so much!


----------



## HOODedDutchman

So roughly 18 degree drop going from NH-D15 to the NZXT Kraken X63. I have no idea why but I heard the Asetek based cooler cater to CPUs with the bend issue because they are convex. With pump set to silent temps were roughly the same (peaking at 95 degrees) after a 10 minute run of cinebench. Installed NZXT software and changed pump to performance and now I peak at 77 degrees. This is with pre applied thermal paste to because I was being lazy lol. Not sure why the D15 struggled so much but I tried everything and the CPU just always ran hot. I can post a pic of the thermal paste to. Maybe I just got a bad unit from Noctua. Now I have overclocking headroom tho . Also all fans in case only peaking at 1225-1250rpm. Sys3 is rad fans.


----------



## Raimond

I am also tweaking up the memory settings a bit.lowered the timings:









better results now,still tweaking timings


----------



## Raphie

Curious if tRFC of 250 will pass Memtest. it’s good for throughput though


----------



## KyKo.

Tikan said:


> Thanks to @KyKo. we worked through the issues I was having. One of my kits is bad, everything works perfectly with his settings on one pair but not the other so I have an RMA in with Patriot to replace them. Thanks so much!


I'm glad to hear good news my friend !!!! 

Stay tuned for more...


----------



## Raphie

@KyKo. is the man!


----------



## KyKo.

HOODedDutchman said:


> So roughly 18 degree drop going from NH-D15 to the NZXT Kraken X63. I have no idea why but I heard the Asetek based cooler cater to CPUs with the bend issue because they are convex. With pump set to silent temps were roughly the same (peaking at 95 degrees) after a 10 minute run of cinebench. Installed NZXT software and changed pump to performance and now I peak at 77 degrees. This is with pre applied thermal paste to because I was being lazy lol. Not sure why the D15 struggled so much but I tried everything and the CPU just always ran hot. I can post a pic of the thermal paste to. Maybe I just got a bad unit from Noctua. Now I have overclocking headroom tho . Also all fans in case only peaking at 1225-1250rpm. Sys3 is rad fans.
> View attachment 2557835



I believe it's bad circulation of the air 
noctua is one of the top brand on air cooling 
With watercooling AIO you have the ability to send the temperatures of CPU far away from the motherboard without to infect memories chipset and vram


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> @KyKo. is the man!


thank you my friend appreciate
everybody here collect information and try to help each other to find solution for their own problems and share the solution with others that's the reason who exist that community I believe
thank you* Raphie*

thank you* Bloax*


----------



## Raimond

HOODedDutchman said:


> So roughly 18 degree drop going from NH-D15 to the NZXT Kraken X63. I have no idea why but I heard the Asetek based cooler cater to CPUs with the bend issue because they are convex. With pump set to silent temps were roughly the same (peaking at 95 degrees) after a 10 minute run of cinebench. Installed NZXT software and changed pump to performance and now I peak at 77 degrees. This is with pre applied thermal paste to because I was being lazy lol. Not sure why the D15 struggled so much but I tried everything and the CPU just always ran hot. I can post a pic of the thermal paste to. Maybe I just got a bad unit from Noctua. Now I have overclocking headroom tho . Also all fans in case only peaking at 1225-1250rpm. Sys3 is rad fans.
> View attachment 2557835


What alderlake cpu do you have an 12900k?

Could be 1700 socket the bending issue, bad contact off the cooler with the ISH.
The d15 is capable off a TDP off 250 watts,but when contact is bad, it will be limited.

also the the temp,is that from stresstesting? What stresstest were you using,thanxs.


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> thank you my friend appreciate
> everybody here collect information and try to help each other to find solution for their own problems and share the solution with others that's the reason who exist that community I believe
> thank you* Raphie*
> 
> thank you* Bloax*



This indeed, thank you all for sharing info,it is very helpfull and will help others off course too


----------



## Raphie

And what's the idle?


----------



## feniks_tm

Is it a good result for 12700KF on Gigabyte B660I Aorus PRO DDR4? RAM - G.Skill Ripjaws V F4-3200C14D-32GVR. 12700KF - Adaptive voltage 1.255V + offset -0.135V, PL1 - 135W, PL2 - 155W. Gigabyte's board doesn't allow to manually edit RTL timings


----------



## Raimond

great score Feniks,way better then mine, very nice,also very high freq too,@ what voltages?


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> great score Feniks,way better then mine, very nice,also very high freq too,@ what voltages?


DRAM 1.5, VCCSA 1.38V


----------



## feniks_tm

Y-Cruncher and other AVX intensive tests sometimes gives error, can't understand why. Doesn't depend on CPU voltage btw.


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> What alderlake cpu do you have an 12900k?
> 
> Could be 1700 socket the bending issue, bad contact off the cooler with the ISH.
> The d15 is capable off a TDP off 250 watts,but when contact is bad, it will be limited.
> 
> also the the temp,is that from stresstesting? What stresstest were you using,thanxs.


if you turn the cooler upside down and touch the mechanical level of Stanley steel on the surface of block , you will see with the help of light that it has a curve that is not flat, in fact this curve creates different 0.2 mm above the natural line.
the reason for the existence of this curve is the best possible contact with the processed
because they know that - the loading mechanism will create a curve on the surface of the processor
at 1700 socket the pressure is much higher
and the curve created in the processor is much larger
resulting not good contact in the center of DIE
THIS IS the reason for use 1.1MM WASHERS
we reduce the pressure of the loading mechanism for better contact


----------



## feniks_tm

feniks_tm said:


> Y-Cruncher and other AVX intensive tests sometimes gives error, can't understand why. Doesn't depend on CPU voltage btw.


Seems like I found the reason. It's probably VCCSA, setting it to 1.4V makes benchs more stable. But is it secure voltage for everyday usage?


----------



## Raimond

I really think that is to high


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> I really think that is to high


yes it is


----------



## feniks_tm

KyKo. said:


> yes it is


Ok, will test lower vccsa. Errors probably occurs randomly, can't find combination when 3 of 3 tests Y-Cruncher passed without error. Maybe you have ideas about that?


----------



## KyKo.

KyKo. said:


> yes it is


yes but this guy used GB motherboard is not MSI and we don't know if in 1.4 getting red actually personal i don't know


----------



## Raphie

go back in Mhz, memtest and Y-crunch until 100% stable then move up, do the same, it will take time, but it's the only way
do this with 1.45v and SA of 1.300, see how high you can get stable. Once there you can start increasing to squeeze out that last 100Mhz.
It's not difficult to boot higher speeds with tight timings, however some will just not get stable and will then be to aggressive for your system.
Find the point of diminishing returns and from there decide what the sacrifices are to remain stable beyond that sweetspot.


----------



## feniks_tm

Raphie said:


> go back in Mhz, memtest and Y-crunch until 100% stable then move up, do the same, it will take time, but it's the only way
> do this with 1.45v and SA of 1.300, see how high you can get stable. Once there you can start increasing to squeeze out that last 100Mhz.
> It's not difficult to boot higher speeds with tight timings, however some will just not get stable and will then be to aggressive for your system.
> Find the point of diminishing returns and from there decide what the sacrifices are to remain stable beyond that sweetspot.


All memtest's is stable now for me, errors occurs only in AVX tests like linpack, p95, ycruncher. So you still think that reason is my ram settings?


----------



## edkieferlp

HOODedDutchman said:


> So roughly 18 degree drop going from NH-D15 to the NZXT Kraken X63. I have no idea why but I heard the Asetek based cooler cater to CPUs with the bend issue because they are convex. With pump set to silent temps were roughly the same (peaking at 95 degrees) after a 10 minute run of cinebench. Installed NZXT software and changed pump to performance and now I peak at 77 degrees. This is with pre applied thermal paste to because I was being lazy lol. Not sure why the D15 struggled so much but I tried everything and the CPU just always ran hot. I can post a pic of the thermal paste to. Maybe I just got a bad unit from Noctua. Now I have overclocking headroom tho . Also all fans in case only peaking at 1225-1250rpm. Sys3 is rad fans.
> View attachment 2557835


That sounds like you had mounting issues with D15, AIO shouldn't be that much better (5-10 max).


----------



## Raphie

yup, or IMC not up to the task, or processor OC not stable.
You need to establish a clear baseline
I don't know if you already OCéd your proc, but I would start with proc default and sort out mem first
3800 - 3866 - 3900 are good targets to explore
@ G1 2T and the correct timings for your sticks
then your SA should not need more than 1.300
and ram somewhere between 1.4 - 1.46
Get that stable first.
AIDA should give you around 60-62k read 60k write 64k copy @ 47-49ns
set your power limit to 240w as well in BIOS (280W is for KS) 4096 for WC
I use Karhu ramtest, it's more critical. where memtest passes Karhu can fail in seconds.
Y-cruncher should ALWAYS complete, if it doesn't complete something is set to ambitious, no discussion.
All tools should pass, there is no other reason for failing than instability. Even when throttling your ycruncher will not fail, it will just be slower.


----------



## Raimond

edkieferlp said:


> That sounds like you had mounting issues with D15, AIO shouldn't be that much better (5-10 max).


I have read it wrong the first,but I agree. My 12700 k with noctua D15 was reaching that kind off temps at stock Vcore (1.305) With prime95( about 95 a 100).with cinebench it was in de 85 or lower. So it must be an mounting issue,or IHS bending problem. Now undervolted at 1110 Vcore , it lot i cooler like 67 degrees with Cinebech,with the D15. D15 is pefectly capable off cooling the 12700k,maybe even with a mild overclock.


----------



## Raimond

Raphie said:


> yup, or IMC not up to the task, or processor OC not stable.
> You need to establish a clear baseline
> I don't know if you already OCéd your proc, but I would start with proc default and sort out mem first
> 3800 - 3866 - 3900 are good targets to explore
> @ G1 2T and the correct timings for your sticks
> then your SA should not need more than 1.300
> and ram somewhere between 1.4 - 1.46
> Get that stable first.
> AIDA should give you around 60-62k read 60k write 64k copy @ 47-49ns
> set your power limit to 240w as well in BIOS (280W is for KS) 4096 for WC
> I use Karhu ramtest, it's more critical. where memtest passes Karhu can fail in seconds.
> Y-cruncher should ALWAYS complete, if it doesn't complete something is set to ambitious, no discussion.
> All tools should pass, there is no other reason for failing than instability. Even when throttling your ycruncher will not fail, it will just be slower.


I agree totally IMC or cpu can’t handle it. It should be without an error with cruncher and prime95 cpu inself is at the stock clock .otherwise it’s not stable at all.

I would really back down the voltages and mem clock also.

Latency off the 12700 k looks like it is a bit slower then an. 12900k is faster in that regard. I think it is because of the higher core speed,but I am not sure.


----------



## Raimond

feniks_tm said:


> All memtest's is stable now for me, errors occurs only in AVX tests like linpack, p95, ycruncher. So you still think that reason is my ram settings?


It should be stable with cruncher. I think you pushing it a bit too far. 
I think you better could ,Back it down a bit to 3900mhz with SA voltage at about 1.3 and CAS timings like 16 and test in again.


----------



## acoustic

There's nothing indicating 1.40v SA is unsafe for 24/7 usage, but more SA voltage does not mean more stability. Different IMCs react to SA voltage differently; mine doesn't scale with more voltage after 1.38v, where 3900 gr1 is stable. If I slam 1.45v to it, that doesn't help stabilize 4000 gr1.

There is a lot of misinformation going on in this thread the last couple of pages. Just because a motherboard BIOS indicates something as "red" does not make it necessarily unsafe.


----------



## Raimond

maybe you are right,but I would not go that high. But that’s my personal opinion

Aida memory benchmark very’s a lot the With the score?
I get really low latency with IML,but aida is a bit off


----------



## KyKo.

acoustic said:


> There's nothing indicating 1.40v SA is unsafe for 24/7 usage, but more SA voltage does not mean more stability. Different IMCs react to SA voltage differently; mine doesn't scale with more voltage after 1.38v, where 3900 gr1 is stable. If I slam 1.45v to it, that doesn't help stabilize 4000 gr1.
> 
> There is a lot of misinformation going on in this thread the last couple of pages. Just because a motherboard BIOS indicates something as "red" does not make it necessarily unsafe.


my first comment it was


> Raimond said:
> I really think that is to high


yes it is

my second comment it was
yes but this guy used GB motherboard is not MSI and we don't know if in 1.4 getting red actually personal i don't know
( personal i don't know )
and if exists misinformation that's the reason of this community to have conversation and to find solutions
because some people also me inside of this conversations on this forum try to find solution...


----------



## feniks_tm

Now I'm at 4100 1.45V VCCSA 1.35V. And it's... full stable. 5 of 5 runs Y-Cruncher passed without any problem. 1.34V and lower VCCSA - unstable.


----------



## feniks_tm

As it turned out, 33MHz decide a lot 😆


----------



## Raimond

feniks_tm said:


> As it turned out, 33MHz decide a lot 😆



haha indeed, thats great news

You cruncher score would improve when you lower timings,especialy the sub timings

1 thing what cpu cooling are you using?
Your cpu is using about 170 watt, it should not reach 96c , the cooler is not suffient or it could be bad contact er something


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> haha indeed, thats great news
> 
> You cruncher score would improve when you lower timings,especialy the sub timings


I don't think there's any more headroom in timings as I've only dropped the frequency by 33 MHz.

RTL will be a big deal for me, gigabyte is crap :/


----------



## Raimond

feniks_tm said:


> I don't think there's any more headroom in timings as I've only dropped the frequency by 33 MHz.
> 
> RTL will be a big deal for me, gigabyte is crap :/


I have heared about how bad the bios is off the 1700 socket Gigabyte motherboards.,to bad man.


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> Your cpu is using about 170 watt, it should not reach 96c , the cooler is not suffient or it could be bad contact er something


I'm on SFF system. Cooler - ID-Cooling SE-226-XT. Now it's with PL2 240W, but for everyday using I use auto PL'S and get 23050 pts in CB R23 and temps maxed out 75C.


----------



## Raimond

cooler is not suffient I think, SFF ,are those very small cases right,,with limited cpu cooler options?

If you dont have done that jet,try to undervolt it.,temps can drop very much,with it


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> cooler is not suffient I think, SFF ,are those very small cases right,,with limited cpu cooler options?
> 
> If you dont have done that jet,try to undervolt it.,temps can drop very much,with it


Don't worry about it. P95 and cruncher isn't a real scenario for everyday  Also I'll take Thermalright PA120 later


----------



## Raimond

I understand it now, you got on p core overclock🙂 it should not boost all cores like that @ stock,or my 12700k does not run on proper speeds,lol


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> I understand it now, you got on p core overclock🙂 it should not boost all cores like that @ stock,or my 12700k does not run on proper speeds,lol


OMG!!! Set my settings... and watch it


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> I understand it now, you got on p core overclock🙂 it should not boost all cores like that @ stock,or my 12700k does not run on proper speeds,lol


It's B660, i can't change multiplier for CPU


----------



## Raimond

haha,but its not running at stock all core clock,lol,but it is performing well so


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> haha,but its not running at stock all core clock,lol,but it is performing well so


Some kind of magic


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> haha,but its not running at stock all core clock,lol,but it is performing well so


I'm using adaptive voltage 1.25V and offset -0.135V, PLL's auto, LLC auto. You can try on your system.


----------



## Bloax

For one reason or another, this CPU/Board are hard-walling at 4200 MT/s, 4194 though? Perfectly fine!

Wacky.


----------



## Raimond

sorrie my bad was not looking good, clockspeed is 4700 mhz,,was looking to the current clockspeeds,lol, I am getting tired I think


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> haha,but its not running at stock all core clock,lol,but it is performing well so


So Gigabyte not bad att all  Especially this B660I


----------



## Raimond

Bloax said:


> View attachment 2557879
> 
> 
> For one reason or another, this CPU/Board are hard-walling at 4200 MT/s, 4194 though? Perfectly fine!
> 
> Wacky.



Damm nice results,crazy speeds,also strange indeed that 4200 does not work and 4194 does,a bios thing or?
you run it at 1.560 RAM voltage, whats the max voltage for b die?


----------



## Bloax

The initial BIOSes of this board were stuck around 4000 single-rank, 3800 dual-rank (barring a few 1.5vSA exceptions) - no clue about 4x8, this version goes up to 4200ish SR, supposedly the same for DR.

I haven't had success running 4x8 stable past ~3848, despite the fact that it boots up 4x8 4200 15-15-15 just fine and does light loads without problems.
Instant, seemingly incurable BSOD upon 100% load though! 🤡

My processor is a little unusual in that it doesn't seem to have SA voltage preferences besides liking to sit at 1.30v, below doesn't really help - above starts crashing hard.


----------



## Raimond

Bloax said:


> The initial BIOSes of this board were stuck around 4000 single-rank, 3800 dual-rank (barring a few 1.5vSA exceptions) - no clue about 4x8, this version goes up to 4200ish SR, supposedly the same for DR.
> 
> I haven't had success running 4x8 stable past ~3848, despite the fact that it boots up 4x8 4200 15-15-15 just fine and does light loads without problems.
> Instant, seemingly incurable BSOD upon 100% load though! 🤡
> 
> My processor is a little unusual in that it doesn't seem to have SA voltage preferences besides liking to sit at 1.30v, below doesn't really help - above starts crashing hard.


ok,so when a timing settings is unstable, it does not help to ramp up the SA voltage?.


Mine does,these things are odd,lol.
Mine does not take cas 14 @ 4000mhz,but all subtimingsI can get really low,maybe need some RAM voltage,but I dont want to have more then 1.5.


----------



## feniks_tm

AIDA64 little worse, but who cares 🤣


----------



## Raimond

feniks_tm said:


> AIDA64 little worse, but who cares 🤣
> View attachment 2557886


lol still great score ,haha

I use IMC at the moment,aida gives some strange results,with my system, IMC looks like more predictable


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> lol still great score ,haha


But I want ****ing 45-46ns  ****ing Gigabyte with ****ing RTL


----------



## _sane_

feniks_tm said:


> Seems like I found the reason. It's probably VCCSA, setting it to 1.4V makes benchs more stable. But is it secure voltage for everyday usage?


Buildzoid said 1.45v is the max he would daily SA voltage


----------



## Raimond

feniks_tm said:


> But I want ****ing 45-46ns  ****ing Gigabyte with ****ing RTL


lol I could not get that with aida,but IML shows it does do 44 ns


----------



## feniks_tm

_sane_ said:


> Buildzoid said 1.45v is the max he would daily SA voltage


Now I'm at DRAM 1.45V and VCCSA 1.35V so no reason to panic anyway


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> lol I could not get that with aida,but IMC shows it does do 44 ns


A little tip for aida. First you need to complete default testmem5 config, press ok when it passed and then run aida and your results should be more objective.


----------



## Raimond

]


feniks_tm said:


> A little tip for aida. First you need to complete default testmem5 config, press ok when it passed and then run aida and your results should be more objective.


lol really, very odd that works,but as long it works  thanxs for the tip by the way


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> ]
> 
> 
> lol really, very odd that works,but as long it works  thanxs for the tip by the way


About 6mins for my 32gigs


----------



## Raimond

feniks_tm said:


> About 6mins for my 32gigs


I got 32gb also,so,it should do the same


----------



## feniks_tm

I misunderstood you) My English is still very broken))


----------



## HOODedDutchman

KyKo. said:


> I believe it's bad circulation of the air
> noctua is one of the top brand on air cooling
> With watercooling AIO you have the ability to send the temperatures of CPU far away from the motherboard without to infect memories chipset and vram


I have an O11 Mini with 9 fans. It's not bad circulation of air it's bad contact from the bent CPU socket. It's a common issue. Asetek pumps are very convex so makes up the gap. This is what the paste looked like from the NH-D15.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Raimond said:


> What alderlake cpu do you have an 12900k?
> 
> Could be 1700 socket the bending issue, bad contact off the cooler with the ISH.
> The d15 is capable off a TDP off 250 watts,but when contact is bad, it will be limited.
> 
> also the the temp,is that from stresstesting? What stresstest were you using,thanxs.


That's cinebench looping. Check the pick of the paste from the d15. Definitely the bending issue. Apparently the asetek pump being convex makes up for the bend.


----------



## Raimond

feniks_tm said:


> I misunderstood you) My English is still very broken))


my english is broken also,no worry,haha


----------



## HOODedDutchman

edkieferlp said:


> That sounds like you had mounting issues with D15, AIO shouldn't be that much better (5-10 max).


AIO should hardly be better at all tbh. Mount was stupid tight on the d15 but the bent socket issue causes a lot of cooler to have bad contact with the middle of the chip. Asetek pumps don't have this issue because of the shape of the contact plate apparently.


----------



## Raimond

HOODedDutchman said:


> That's cinebench looping. Check the pick of the paste from the d15. Definitely the bending issue. Apparently the asetek pump being convex makes up for the bend.


Looks like to bit little paste,but maybe I am mistaken.
but good to know about the mounting pressure off the d15,maybe need to look at other cooling options.

I think my 12700k does not bend to much,because I can run above 200 watts on it and it will still not be at throttle temps


----------



## HOODedDutchman

Raimond said:


> Looks like to bit little paste,but maybe I am mistaken.
> but good to know about the mounting pressure off the d15,maybe need to look at other cooling options.


It's not too little paste. If you look close all the paste is squished into the middle of the chip. The entire chip is covered and a ring of paste all the way around the outside. Paste is pushed into the center because the top and bottom of the chip are sitting higher than the middle because it's bent from the mounting issue on 12th gen. It's honestly stupid that the d15 can't even flatten it out since it's got steel backplate and mounts super tight.


----------



## feniks_tm

Raimond said:


> I think my 12700k does not bend to much,because I can run above 200 watts on it and it will still not be at throttle temps


But for what, if 150W = same perfomance at lower temps


----------



## Raimond

feniks_tm said:


> But for what, if 150W = same perfomance at lower temps


----------



## Raimond

Also what do you guys think off the comment on the MSI forum, about above 1.4 ram voltages, the guy says it cause voltages spikes to the IMC.
Could it damage the IMC?





__





MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com





the guy makes the comment is RemusM,first page in the middle


----------



## HOODedDutchman

feniks_tm said:


> But for what, if 150W = same perfomance at lower temps


True but I'd rather have overclocking headroom than have to undervolt just to have reasonable temps. Seems the noctua coolers are super hit or miss when it comes to 12th gen. Seems a lot of coolers are that have flat contact plates because if you have the bend issue they perform like garbage. Intels fault more than the cooler but all we can do is deal with it lol.


----------



## feniks_tm

HOODedDutchman said:


> True but I'd rather have overclocking headroom than have to undervolt just to have reasonable temps. Seems the noctua coolers are super hit or miss when it comes to 12th gen. Seems a lot of coolers are that have flat contact plates because if you have the bend issue they perform like garbage. Intels fault more than the cooler but all we can do is deal with it lol.


Yep, you right. Thermalright's new ones seems like have more better contact plates. FC140 for example. But in ATX room I prefer AIO like Arctic Liquid Freezer II.


----------



## Craftyman

Where can I get the MSI Z690 Edge Wifi 1.31 BIOS? Only 1.30 shows up on the website and in MSI Center...


----------



## KyKo.

*HOODedDutchman*

It's honestly stupid that the d15 can't even flatten it out since it's got steel backplate and mounts super tight.----

the rear metal plate hold in a straight plane the motherboard helping it not to bend
then we have the socket at this enhanced level
the processor does not sit in the socket but at 1700 pins (LGA1700)
EVERY ONE PIN IS INDEPENDENT
WE DO NOT HAVE TO DO WITH TWO FLAT SURFACES WITH ONE PROCESSOR IN THE CENTER

AND FOUR PAGES BEFORE I REFERRING TO THE 12TH GENERATION PROBLEM

if you turn the cooler upside down and touch the mechanical level of Stanley steel on the surface of block , you will see with the help of light that it has a curve that is not flat, in fact this curve creates different 0.2 mm above the natural line.
the reason for the existence of this curve is the best possible contact with the processed
because they know that - the loading mechanism will create a curve on the surface of the processor
at 1700 socket the pressure is much higher
and the curve created in the processor is much larger
resulting not good contact in the center of DIE
THIS IS the reason for use 1.1MM WASHERS
we reduce the pressure of the loading mechanism for better contact


----------



## Raimond

Craftyman said:


> Where can I get the MSI Z690 Edge Wifi 1.31 BIOS? Only 1.30 shows up on the website and in MSI Center...


I donwloaded it on the msi beta download page on the msi forum site
\I will check if it is still available

not available anymore
I would try the 11 official bios, that one is also stable.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

feniks_tm said:


> Yep, you right. Thermalright's new ones seems like have more better contact plates. FC140 for example. But in ATX room I prefer AIO like Arctic Liquid Freezer II.


As far as AIO I've seen a ton of issues with arctic and 12th gen because their contact plate is completely flat. Asetek based coolers have the most convex plates from the research I've done.


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> *HOODedDutchman*
> 
> It's honestly stupid that the d15 can't even flatten it out since it's got steel backplate and mounts super tight.----
> 
> the rear metal plate hold in a straight plane the motherboard helping it not to bend
> then we have the socket at this enhanced level
> the processor does not sit in the socket but at 1700 pins (LGA1700)
> EVERY ONE PIN IS INDEPENDENT
> WE DO NOT HAVE TO DO WITH TWO FLAT SURFACES WITH ONE PROCESSOR IN THE CENTER
> 
> AND FOUR PAGES BEFORE I REFERRING TO THE 12TH GENERATION PROBLEM
> 
> if you turn the cooler upside down and touch the mechanical level of Stanley steel on the surface of block , you will see with the help of light that it has a curve that is not flat, in fact this curve creates different 0.2 mm above the natural line.
> the reason for the existence of this curve is the best possible contact with the processed
> because they know that - the loading mechanism will create a curve on the surface of the processor
> at 1700 socket the pressure is much higher
> and the curve created in the processor is much larger
> resulting not good contact in the center of DIE
> THIS IS the reason for use 1.1MM WASHERS
> we reduce the pressure of the loading mechanism for better contact


I have read somewhere,that the pressure in the socket secure mechanism itself is causing the bending, so if you mount a cpu cooler on it ,that is totaly flat it would not matter. U=Y ou need alot off paste to even it up a bit

the shims would decrease the pressure,what you say indeed,but I have seen mixed results.
You have done it?
Did you also test without the shims?


----------



## acoustic

Bloax said:


> View attachment 2557879
> 
> 
> For one reason or another, this CPU/Board are hard-walling at 4200 MT/s, 4194 though? Perfectly fine!
> 
> Wacky.


Have you tried going one step higher than 4200? 4266 or 4300? Could just be a freq hole


----------



## Bloax

Yes, I've tried both Multiplier Assault, and BCLK-creep - both spontaneously combust under Full Load for no perceivable reason, with no working solutions found. (yet?)


Raimond said:


> Also what do you guys think off the comment on the MSI forum, about above 1.4 ram voltages, the guy says it cause voltages spikes to the IMC.
> Could it damage the IMC?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> __
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI Global English Forum
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> forum-en.msi.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> the guy makes the comment is RemusM,first page in the middle











whoahh wow guys memory dangeroujs

meanwhile here's a good fren of mine by the name of Veii:








slamming 1.69v into a kit of memory that is "supposed" to fold over and collapse at either 4000+ MT/s or 1.56v+
on a processor that supposedly shouldn't do more than 1900 FCLK

He's been torturing it for over a year, _and it keeps on doing better settings regardless_, through better configuration and know-how.


The only examples I've heard of memory controllers _actually degrading_ was on first-generation DDR4, quad channel x99, running 1T command-rate.
Besides that, never heard or seen anything. Cache/Ring degrading over time on Skylake+++ (Coffee/Comet Lake)? Yes, memory - no.

You _can_ probably fry the memory controller by running it at ridiculous voltages (1.5+ SA? on Intel?, 1.15+ VDDP on Zen3) with a very high procODT impedance (60+ ohm) and throwing lots of memory at high voltage into a very heavy workload, but these things survive such conditions (except nobody runs such a high procODT) while running <8 GB of memory regardless.

The problem with that setup to fry the IMC?
You'd need to do that without trying lower voltages first - as you'd otherwise notice that they perform _worse_ than lower voltages (on ambient cooling) - they are deep into "negative voltage scaling" territory, barring the odd freakazoid chip that likes it real hot.

Perhaps it is that I haven't toyed with 64 GB setups, but I've never found anything "good" in high procODT impedances.
In fact I've found that running the lowest you can POST, while upping CPU 1.8v/CPU AUX/CPU 1P8/"VCCIN" (a 1.8v "by default" voltage with many names) to make them run, results in my DIMMs being able to run lower RRD/WTR/(CCD_L, on Intel) than if I didn't. And those settings are important for Practical Memory Performance. :- )


here, have an injection of memory ramblings:
random memory rants:








MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread


I suggest stop buying into the Ram hype thing.Cheap Ram can be fine 100% and no difference in PC Gaming. Truth is 3000Mhz Ram can be just as Fast in PC Gaming as 4000Mhz with tuned memory and not even extreme tuned memory. I personally run CL17 Gear 2 4000Mhz Ram on RTX 3080,12900K 5400Mhz at...




www.overclock.net












MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread


I suggest stop buying into the Ram hype thing.Cheap Ram can be fine 100% and no difference in PC Gaming. Truth is 3000Mhz Ram can be just as Fast in PC Gaming as 4000Mhz with tuned memory and not even extreme tuned memory. I personally run CL17 Gear 2 4000Mhz Ram on RTX 3080,12900K 5400Mhz at...




www.overclock.net












[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


So for ddr4000 I need to go from 1.32 to 1.56?!? That’s A LOT for just 100mhz gain? With these procODT/RTT settings on my sticks, +/- 100 MCLK costs 0.06v, and +/- 1 tRCDRD costs 0.09v (while keeping all primary timings equal) So if yours scale similarly, then it's 1.32v to 1.56v if you want...




www.overclock.net












Any difference between Patriot Viper Steel 4000 and 4400...


https://www.overclock.net/threads/msi-pro-z690-a-ddr4-wifi-owners-thread.1795717/page-10#post-28945685 Those settings are mostly cosmetic - to reduce WTR_L, you reduce tWRRD_sg 🤡




www.overclock.net





tCKE wackiness:
[Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread (translation: running a proper set of RTT terminations --> tCKE wants to be 9 at 1900 MCLK, +/- 2 each multiple of 100)
if you don't do that, then memory training will impose random delays until it works, not necessarily perfectly

old "grug discovers how to run different DIMMs in a 4x8 config" post:








MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread


Why Z690? B660 also allows memory OC which is the only thing you can do on 12700 nonk (excluding BCLK which is a whole another topic) But the board is great overall, the bios is nice and fast, etc.. Works really good for me with 126 version. I can recommend it myself. Because here in Greece...




www.overclock.net





👋🤡 may good memeory clocks come ur way
rember kids: lower timing, not alway better
test performance b4 u wreck urself with timeouts


----------



## Raimond

Bloax said:


> View attachment 2557891
> 
> 
> whoahh wow guys memory dangeroujs
> 
> meanwhile here's a good fren of mine:
> View attachment 2557893
> 
> slamming 1.69v into a kit of memory that is "supposed" to fold over and collapse at either 4000+ MT/s or 1.56v+
> on a processor that supposedly shouldn't do more than 1900 FCLK
> 
> He's been torturing it for over a year, _and it keeps on doing better settings regardless_, through better configuration and know-how.
> 
> 
> The only examples I've heard of memory controllers _actually degrading_ was on first-generation DDR4, quad channel x99, running 1T command-rate.
> Besides that, never heard or seen anything. Cache/Ring degrading over time on Skylake+++ (Coffee/Comet Lake)? Yes, memory - no.
> 
> You _can_ probably fry the memory controller by running it at ridiculous voltages (1.5+ SA? on Intel?, 1.15+ VDDP on Zen3) with a very high procODT impedance (60+ ohm) and throwing lots of memory at high voltage into a very heavy workload, but these things survive such conditions (except nobody runs such a high procODT) while running <8 GB of memory regardless.
> 
> The problem with that setup to fry the IMC?
> You'd need to do that without trying lower voltages first - as you'd otherwise notice that they perform _worse_ than lower voltages (on ambient cooling) - they are deep into "negative voltage scaling" territory, barring the odd freakazoid chip that likes it real hot.
> 
> Perhaps it is that I haven't toyed with 64 GB setups, but I've never found anything "good" in high procODT impedances.
> In fact I've found that running the lowest you can POST, while upping CPU 1.8v/CPU AUX/CPU 1P8/"VCCIN" (a 1.8v "by default" voltage with many names) to make them run, results in my DIMMs being able to run lower RRD/WTR/(CCD_L, on Intel) than if I didn't. And those settings are important for Practical Memory Performance. :- )
> 
> 
> here, have an injection of memory ramblings:
> random memory rants:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread
> 
> 
> I suggest stop buying into the Ram hype thing.Cheap Ram can be fine 100% and no difference in PC Gaming. Truth is 3000Mhz Ram can be just as Fast in PC Gaming as 4000Mhz with tuned memory and not even extreme tuned memory. I personally run CL17 Gear 2 4000Mhz Ram on RTX 3080,12900K 5400Mhz at...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread
> 
> 
> I suggest stop buying into the Ram hype thing.Cheap Ram can be fine 100% and no difference in PC Gaming. Truth is 3000Mhz Ram can be just as Fast in PC Gaming as 4000Mhz with tuned memory and not even extreme tuned memory. I personally run CL17 Gear 2 4000Mhz Ram on RTX 3080,12900K 5400Mhz at...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> 
> So for ddr4000 I need to go from 1.32 to 1.56?!? That’s A LOT for just 100mhz gain? With these procODT/RTT settings on my sticks, +/- 100 MCLK costs 0.06v, and +/- 1 tRCDRD costs 0.09v (while keeping all primary timings equal) So if yours scale similarly, then it's 1.32v to 1.56v if you want...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any difference between Patriot Viper Steel 4000 and 4400...
> 
> 
> https://www.overclock.net/threads/msi-pro-z690-a-ddr4-wifi-owners-thread.1795717/page-10#post-28945685 Those settings are mostly cosmetic - to reduce WTR_L, you reduce tWRRD_sg 🤡
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> tCKE wackiness:
> [Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread (translation: running a proper set of RTT terminations --> tCKE wants to be 9 at 1900 MCLK, +/- 2 each multiple of 100)
> if you don't do that, then memory training will impose random delays until it works, not necessarily perfectly
> 
> old "grug discovers how to run different DIMMs in a 4x8 config" post:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread
> 
> 
> Why Z690? B660 also allows memory OC which is the only thing you can do on 12700 nonk (excluding BCLK which is a whole another topic) But the board is great overall, the bios is nice and fast, etc.. Works really good for me with 126 version. I can recommend it myself. Because here in Greece...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.overclock.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 👋🤡 may good memeory clocks come ur way
> rember kids: lower timing, not alway better
> test performance b4 u wreck urself


haha thanxs for this alot off info


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> I have read somewhere,that the pressure in the socket secure mechanism itself is causing the bending, so if you mount a cpu cooler on it ,that is totaly flat it would not matter. U=Y ou need alot off paste to even it up a bit
> 
> the shims would decrease the pressure,what you say indeed,but I have seen mixed results.
> You have done it?
> Did you also test without the shims?


from the moment I put the washers in the loading mechanism it stopped 
*throttling on R23*


----------



## Bloax

Raimond said:


> haha thanxs for this alot off info


The only thing unmentioned is that the Usual Procedure(tm) for tertiaries is starting at _sg 8, _dg 4, _dr/dd 8 -- then later seeing if any of them remain stable when moved down, and perhaps more importantly - if any performance is gained or LOST (y-cruncher 2.5 billion digit calculation times tends to be a consistent "go-to" measuring stick) from running these lower values.

And the fact that contrary to popular belief, RDWR is not flat at all - it's _either_ flat x/x/x/x for sg/dg/dr/dd -- or x/x/x/x+1 - *or* x/x/x-1/x-1 ... Possibly more permutations, haven't found sticks that demand them though!
An important caveat, as running an RDWR "permutation" that is undesireable makes the memory _mysteriously_ explosive. (easy settings, easy crashes, ***??)
It _can be_ that "auto" figures out the desired "offsets", so probably don't set it at first on an unknown memory kit. Note down any excursions from _sg, and try keeping them when pushing it lower!


oh and btw, on b-die running tRAS = tCL + tRCD & tRC = tRAS + tRP (tRC is done automagically on LGA1700) then tRFC as a multiple of tRC (usually 6-8, rarely 5, higher if bad cooling) is a cool trick for not getting lost in the sauce

but god damn that's just _too much_ to cram into one turkey post


----------



## KyKo.

KyKo. said:


> from the moment I put the washers in the loading mechanism it stopped
> *throttling on R23*


----------



## Shonk

I have been messing with overclocking my ram on and off the last few weeks
23 1/2 hours into a 24 hour test it failed

What would you guys change first

Clearly i could just nerf things but i want to keep it as tight as i can
(Ignore 27 Threads it seems to have bumped up before i started it its set at 24 now..)


----------



## Bloax

Shonk said:


> I have been messing with overclocking my ram on and off the last few weeks
> 23 1/2 hours into a 24 hour test it failed
> 
> What would you guys change first
> 
> Clearly i could just nerf things but i want to keep it as tight as i can
> (Ignore 27 Threads it seems to have bumped up before i started it its set at 24 now..)
> 
> View attachment 2557917


With Micron 16 Gbit B sticks like that, you should probably try and go in this direction: MSI PRO Z690-A DDR4/WIFI Owners Thread
No point being hardstuck 3900 on ICs that could go much higher in Gear2


----------



## Shonk

Not interested in Gear 2..

I sent my Z690 Aorus Master back due to not being impressed with gear 2 and the fact it couldnt run 4 sticks

I will be happy just getting 3900/4000 110% stable 

It boots 4000 just fine but want to find 3900 100% stable timings first as tight as poss


----------



## acoustic

Shonk said:


> I have been messing with overclocking my ram on and off the last few weeks
> 23 1/2 hours into a 24 hour test it failed
> 
> What would you guys change first
> 
> Clearly i could just nerf things but i want to keep it as tight as i can
> (Ignore 27 Threads it seems to have bumped up before i started it its set at 24 now..)
> 
> View attachment 2557917


If you failed at 23 1/2 hours, I'd venture to say it was due to heat, not unstable timings per-say. You could try reducing tREFI, with the intention of lowering the sticks temperature sensitivity.. beyond that, primary timings are your best bet. Your tRFC is loose enough I think.


----------



## Raphie

Bloax said:


> The initial BIOSes of this board were stuck around 4000 single-rank, 3800 dual-rank (barring a few 1.5vSA exceptions) - no clue about 4x8, this version goes up to 4200ish SR, supposedly the same for DR.
> 
> I haven't had success running 4x8 stable past ~3848, despite the fact that it boots up 4x8 4200 15-15-15 just fine and does light loads without problems.
> Instant, seemingly incurable BSOD upon 100% load though! 🤡
> 
> My processor is a little unusual in that it doesn't seem to have SA voltage preferences besides liking to sit at 1.30v, below doesn't really help - above starts crashing hard.


 This is the same thing I see, 3900, beyond that still boots, but BSOD under load with 4 sticks no matter what.


----------



## Raphie

@Bloax I’ve noticed that going from 2T to 1T, in a very tight tweaked setting, actually slows down y-cruncher and geekbench and ilc with about 3-5%?
how is that possible?


----------



## Bloax

Well there are a few options;

1) 1T is broken (right now?)
2) 1T reveals that your tertiaries don't play well with the rest of your settings, causing timeouts and losing performance on repeating commands
3) Neither of the above, but 1T being a "motherboard vendor's implementation of memory training" (no "native" Intel implementation at all) means that it trains very different deep-under-the-hood timings which end up pooping performance.


----------



## Craftyman

Raimond said:


> I donwloaded it on the msi beta download page on the msi forum site
> \I will check if it is still available
> 
> not available anymore
> I would try the 11 official bios, that one is also stable.


Alright I will give that a shot tomorrow, thanks for checking for me. If anyone's interested I made some really good progress on tightening subtimings today:
















no boot loops and only a few crashes in windows after which I relaxed the culprit timings. Tested this through TM5 absolute and y-cruncher and it passed. I'll run memtest again tonight. Can I push the tREFI to 65535? Also when should I be concerned about temps? maxxed out at 49.8c playing Dying Light 2 for 4 hours but didn't have a single issue:









Tertiaries and Primaries are on my list for tomorrow. It's just crazy how much speed you can get when you tune your RAM correctly.


----------



## Shonk

acoustic said:


> If you failed at 23 1/2 hours, I'd venture to say it was due to heat, not unstable timings per-say. You could try reducing tREFI, with the intention of lowering the sticks temperature sensitivity.. beyond that, primary timings are your best bet. Your tRFC is loose enough I think.


Thanks i will try that after my current run thats at 10418% if it fails

DRAM Voltage 1.350V (From 1.370 as i just put a touch more in for 3900 from 3600 hadnt actually tested 1.35V)
VDDQ TX Voltage 1.20V (From 1.30V 1.35V causes worse RTL's randomly on train btw..)
tWRRD_dr 7 (From 6 everyone seems to run 7 and it also ties in with the rest of my sub timings)
tWRRD_dd 7 (From 6 everyone seems to run 7 and it also ties in with the rest of my sub timings)

You may be onto something with the heat thing i was playing Tiny Tina when it failed
I pretty much play games alot of the time through the stability test
I also have stress fpu enabled in karhu
Im just about to go play now


----------



## Raphie

Bloax said:


> Well there are a few options;
> 
> 1) 1T is broken (right now?)
> 2) 1T reveals that your tertiaries don't play well with the rest of your settings, causing timeouts and losing performance on repeating commands
> 3) Neither of the above, but 1T being a "motherboard vendor's implementation of memory training" (no "native" Intel implementation at all) means that it trains very different deep-under-the-hood timings which end up pooping performance.


You tell me 
below is what runs faster @ 2T than 1T
also the park A,B,C,D now being 40ns, after 48ns went fine
This is all stable, but maybe too fast for 1T?


----------



## KyKo.

Bloax said:


> Well there are a few options;
> 
> 1) 1T is broken (right now?)
> 2) 1T reveals that your tertiaries don't play well with the rest of your settings, causing timeouts and losing performance on repeating commands
> 3) Neither of the above, but 1T being a "motherboard vendor's implementation of memory training" (no "native" Intel implementation at all) means that it trains very different deep-under-the-hood timings which end up pooping performance.


what you are explaining is
The T1 works and performs well when
the timings and overclocking are correct?


----------



## shrimpmaster

Raphie said:


> You tell me
> below is what runs faster @ 2T than 1T
> also the park A,B,C,D now being 40ns, after 48ns went fine
> This is all stable, but maybe too fast for 1T?
> View attachment 2557947


Try setting RRD_L to 6, relax tras and trfc a bit. For me tras 35 was faster than 30.
I had similar settings on my single rank kit and 1T was clearly faster on everything.

Also if your IMC is not stable it can slow down things a bit. Maybe increase SA a bit?


----------



## KyKo.

KyKo. said:


> what you are explaining is
> The T1 works and performs well when
> the timings and overclocking are correct?


Now I see 
trains very different deep-under-the-hood timings which end up pooping performance.

so it is directly related to the quality of training from motherboards 
I Am right?


----------



## Raphie

That's more like it  Any more suggestions from here?


----------



## Raphie

increase on Y-Cruncher, R23 and MLC too, 41.4 lowest yet.


----------



## HOODedDutchman

KyKo. said:


> *HOODedDutchman*
> 
> It's honestly stupid that the d15 can't even flatten it out since it's got steel backplate and mounts super tight.----
> 
> the rear metal plate hold in a straight plane the motherboard helping it not to bend
> then we have the socket at this enhanced level
> the processor does not sit in the socket but at 1700 pins (LGA1700)
> EVERY ONE PIN IS INDEPENDENT
> WE DO NOT HAVE TO DO WITH TWO FLAT SURFACES WITH ONE PROCESSOR IN THE CENTER
> 
> AND FOUR PAGES BEFORE I REFERRING TO THE 12TH GENERATION PROBLEM
> 
> if you turn the cooler upside down and touch the mechanical level of Stanley steel on the surface of block , you will see with the help of light that it has a curve that is not flat, in fact this curve creates different 0.2 mm above the natural line.
> the reason for the existence of this curve is the best possible contact with the processed
> because they know that - the loading mechanism will create a curve on the surface of the processor
> at 1700 socket the pressure is much higher
> and the curve created in the processor is much larger
> resulting not good contact in the center of DIE
> THIS IS the reason for use 1.1MM WASHERS
> we reduce the pressure of the loading mechanism for better contact


I don't want to mess with the washer mod as I've seen mixed results and most say once the CPU is bent the washer mod doesn't work. Going to probably grab the new thermalright antibending plate when it's available. Honestly having any 240mm+ aio as an intake is going to smoke the nh-d15 by about 10° even if mounting is perfect. If you top mount the rad in exhaust orientation they are very similar but when you have them bringing colder air from the outside through the rad they beat air cooling by a good margin. I tested this widely for Corsair about 6 years ago. They provided me a 240mm aio and I did a long writeup and comparison vs the nh-d15. Intake, exhaust, different case fan orientations, same fans with locked fan speed, etc. Had a pinned post for about 3 or 4 years on their forums but once newer AIOs came out they got rid of it.


----------



## KyKo.

HOODedDutchman said:


> I don't want to mess with the washer mod as I've seen mixed results and most say once the CPU is bent the washer mod doesn't work. Going to probably grab the new thermalright antibending plate when it's available. Honestly having any 240mm+ aio as an intake is going to smoke the nh-d15 by about 10° even if mounting is perfect. If you top mount the rad in exhaust orientation they are very similar but when you have them bringing colder air from the outside through the rad they beat air cooling by a good margin. I tested this widely for Corsair about 6 years ago. They provided me a 240mm aio and I did a long writeup and comparison vs the nh-d15. Intake, exhaust, different case fan orientations, same fans with locked fan speed, etc. Had a pinned post for about 3 or 4 years on their forums but once newer AIOs came out they got rid of it.



if you don't want to mess with the washer exist another solution..









Thermal Grizzly High Performance Cooling Solutions - CPU Contact Frame


Hochwertige Wärmeleitlösungen für Computerchips




www.thermal-grizzly.com













Thermalright launches anti-bend frame for Intel 12th Gen desktop CPUs | Club386


Thermalright makes an anti-bending frame for Alder Lake processors.




www.club386.com





no matter if it is ready bent this solution actually help
because in the better environment (press and support) and with the help of temperature copper (the cover of die) rolling back to original form (not completely) but this is better than before.


----------



## Bloax

KyKo. said:


> what you are explaining is
> The T1 works and performs well when
> the timings and overclocking are correct?


Yes, if everything aligns perfectly within tRAS and then tRC - the memory doesn't stall, or repeat tRAS/tRC, when it finishes a burst of commands.

If you're seeing +5 tRAS being beneficial (which is then another +5 on tRC), then there are roughly 4-10 cycles somewhere (tertiaries, RDWR, tCCDL, most probable candidates) that we have to save, or make slower. (As was done with RRDL, which can be called 0-4 times within tFAW, hard to tell which way to go)

This is also why messing with tRFC/tREFI can easily have unpredictable behaviour, as they too can cause more unwanted stalls despite "going faster".


2T is slightly less "vulnerable" to this, because we're already stalling waiting for the commands to be picked up.


edit: in fact, measuring +tFAW in increments of 1 might be a much more effective, and less "invasive" solution to this problem than raising tRAS/tRC - as we get the same "effect" of a global delay (on RRD & WTR) without affecting the entire cycle length.
+tFAW also has a precision of 1 clock, instead of 2 like +tRAS (as raising tRAS also raises tRC)







from there we might have an idea of how many cycles to try and delay things in tertiaries, or just keep the tFAW delay if it performs better (without timeout errors)


----------



## HOODedDutchman

KyKo. said:


> if you don't want to mess with the washer exist another solution..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thermal Grizzly High Performance Cooling Solutions - CPU Contact Frame
> 
> 
> Hochwertige Wärmeleitlösungen für Computerchips
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.thermal-grizzly.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thermalright launches anti-bend frame for Intel 12th Gen desktop CPUs | Club386
> 
> 
> Thermalright makes an anti-bending frame for Alder Lake processors.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.club386.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> no matter if it is ready bent this solution actually help
> because in the better environment (press and support) and with the help of temperature copper (the cover of die) rolling back to original form (not completely) but this is better than before.


Ya I said that in the comment you replied to. Don't think either are available yet tho. At least not in North America. tbh the temps I'm getting now with the x63 are great considering it's around 1.27-1.3v under load.


----------



## KyKo.

HOODedDutchman said:


> Ya I said that in the comment you replied to. Don't think either are available yet tho. At least not in North America. tbh the temps I'm getting now with the x63 are great considering it's around 1.27-1.3v under load.











11.89US $ 25% OFF|Thermalright Intel 12th Cpu Bending Corrector Frame Protector Lga1700/1800 Buckle Fix Substitute Cnc Aluminum - Fans & Cooling - AliExpress


Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com




www.aliexpress.com


----------



## HOODedDutchman

KyKo. said:


> 11.89US $ 25% OFF|Thermalright Intel 12th Cpu Bending Corrector Frame Protector Lga1700/1800 Buckle Fix Substitute Cnc Aluminum - Fans & Cooling - AliExpress
> 
> 
> Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aliexpress.com


Nice thanks. Hope it's legit lol.


----------



## Raphie

Bloax said:


> Yes, if everything aligns perfectly within tRAS and then tRC - the memory doesn't stall, or repeat tRAS/tRC, when it finishes a burst of commands.
> 
> If you're seeing +5 tRAS being beneficial (which is then another +5 on tRC), then there are roughly 4-10 cycles somewhere (tertiaries, RDWR, tCCDL, most probable candidates) that we have to save, or make slower. (As was done with RRDL, which can be called 0-4 times within tFAW, hard to tell which way to go)
> 
> This is also why messing with tRFC/tREFI can easily have unpredictable behaviour, as they too can cause more unwanted stalls despite "going faster".
> 
> 
> 2T is slightly less "vulnerable" to this, because we're already stalling waiting for the commands to be picked up.


@Bloax, so looking at my DragonBall any other things that look odd?
My RTL is now 67/69
and my park is 40

Welcome any improvement suggestions


----------



## Bloax

I haven't the faintest clue, that's why I vaguely refer to tertiaries (RDRD/WRWR/WRRD) and RDWR :- )

Could be +1 on RDRD/WRWR_sg, could be +1 on RDWR, could be +1 on WRRD_dr/dd, could be all at once! Could also be RDRD/WRWR/WRRD _dr/dd -1 instead!
Hell, could even be CCD_L 8, 7 or 6 on top of it all


All that I know is that having to raise tRAS above tCL+tRCD is a symptom of something not being right in that area.
(and it doesn't help that the 4400 sticks have some weird delay requirements)


----------



## Raphie

The journey continues 40ns Here we come!


----------



## Raphie

So here is an interesting observation:
I've tested my ambient and load temps with different SA settings and they are both the same (auto and 1.300)
Then I took a good look at HWinfo and it actually disclosed something interesting. The BIOS voltage is NOT what is consumed, but is what's requested. Meaning it gets fed what it needs by the Voltage regulator. 
This would mean than a manual setting would only be required if AUTO is not enough to support your OC, rather than setting a ceiling that is either to low, or when compared to auto still gets the same voltage from the regulator. 
Why would HWinfo otherwise explicitly make this comment?


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> So here is an interesting observation:
> I've tested my ambient and load temps with different SA settings and they are both the same (auto and 1.300)
> Then I took a good look at HWinfo and it actually disclosed something interesting. The BIOS voltage is NOT what is consumed, but is what's requested. Meaning it gets fed what it needs by the Voltage regulator.
> This would mean than a manual setting would only be required if AUTO is not enough to support your OC, rather than setting a ceiling that is either to low, or when compared to auto still gets the same voltage from the regulator.
> Why would HWinfo otherwise explicitly make this comment?
> 
> View attachment 2557991


in my case with this settings with auto SA doesn't boot
1.300 and up for boot


----------



## Raphie

So I'm right? if AUTO passes, system gets enough
if not you set SA to manual i.e. 1.300 and that's then the minimum that the regulator needs to provide
so adjusting SA, assuming you're downclocking doesn't make any sense. As you can only raise the bar, not lower it.


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> So I'm right? if AUTO passes, system gets enough
> if not you set SA to manual 1.300 and that's then the minimum that the regulalor needs to provide
> so adjusting SA assuming you're downclocking doesn't make any sense.


No.

The note in HWINFO is just telling you where it's reading the voltage from. Because it's reading the VID, it's not reading from the output of the voltage regulator, but simply what the cores are asking for. This doesn't have anything to do with setting Auto or Manual. Most Motherboards set to Auto ignore the CPU's requested VID and determine the SA voltage itself, which can lead to overvolting in some cases, or undervolting in others.

The SA VID is weird since it usually reports whatever you set it to in the BIOS. Regardless, it's an accurate reading as far as I've seen documented. If you look at your Core VID, it won't always read what you tell it, which is why you view Socket Sense or Die Sense VCORE reading, not Core VID.


----------



## Raphie

So basically you're saying there is no way validating what actually happens in reality which both BIOS settings. 
What if the regulator is actually doing a great job? how would you know if it's too much? (to little would not boot or crash)


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> So I'm right? if AUTO passes, system gets enough
> if not you set SA to manual i.e. 1.300 and that's then the minimum that the regulator needs to provide
> so adjusting SA, assuming you're downclocking doesn't make any sense. As you can only raise the bar, not lower it.


take a look at the default values from XMP profile 2


----------



## acoustic

Raphie said:


> So basically you're saying there is no way validating what actually happens in reality which both BIOS settings.
> What if the regulator is actually doing a great job? how would you know if it's too much? (to little would not boot or crash)


The regulator does not determine what your default VID is. That's coded by Intel to the chip. You are controlling the regulator when you go to Manual. When you set to Auto, the motherboard is controlling the regulator. I haven't seen any documentation showing that the VID and voltage regulator output do not match for System Agent, and I haven't seen anything showing the CPU controlling the SA regulator on Z690 boards; it seems to happen on the locked chipsets though, where people are reporting 0.900mv stock SA voltage and struggling to run 3200 1:1.

We know it doesn't always match (and usually doesn't) for Core VID and output side of the voltage regulator for your CPU cores.


----------



## Raphie

Ok, for me so far on my Pro Z690 it has been fine. No boot issues on auto, still not able to do 4000 with any SA setting (auto, or 1.300 <> 1.450)


----------



## Raphie

getting close to 40ns now  tRAS to 31, tREFI from 292 to 304


----------



## Bloax

I wasn't expecting to see tFAW-nudging to have a positive impact at 1T, but here we are.
Unfortunately then my setup is rather, uh.. Questionable to replicate. (BCLK 112.6, core 39x, atom 32x, ring 36x) :- )



Code:


Start Date:            Sun Apr 24 22:26:34 2022
End Date:              Sun Apr 24 22:28:06 2022

Total Computation Time:    89.052 seconds
Start-to-End Wall Time:    91.355 seconds

CPU Utilization:           1839.68 %  +  0.56 % kernel overhead
Multi-core Efficiency:     91.98 %  +  0.03 % kernel overhead

so these y-cruncher snippets are rather meaningless besides being better than either RRDL 6, tRAS 35 tRFC 300, or just RRDL 4 on its own at tFAW 16 (shown is the last option);


Code:


Start Date:            Sun Apr 24 22:00:46 2022
End Date:              Sun Apr 24 22:02:18 2022

Total Computation Time:    89.571 seconds
Start-to-End Wall Time:    91.958 seconds

CPU Utilization:           1831.42 %  +  0.66 % kernel overhead
Multi-core Efficiency:     91.57 %  +  0.03 % kernel overhead

unexpected but i'll take it


----------



## Raphie

So @Bloax what would your optimal Dragonball then look like for these 4 badboys in 1T @ 3900? At standard cpu clocking. Based upon your knowledge, pinching through skewed benchmark outcomes?
You are so next level, That I would really value your recommendation here.
so 1T means 18 tFAW?
my 1T results are very inconsistent, sometimes higher, often lower. Only MLC is giving consistent higher throughput at lower latencies.
but AIDA (62k <> 65k) and Y-cruncher (77 - 79sec) are all over the place.
also at 1T the fans spin up further, which means more heat? Faster CPU throttling?!? Hence the inconsistency?


----------



## Bloax

It's rather important that you do memeory performance measurements with a static CPU setup, otherwise boosting algorithms get in the way. :- )

I don't know what the optimal would look like, I just took a stab in the dark and looked for whether some values (17-21) of tFAW performed better than 16, and 18 did.
The only thing I can speculate is up there, is that I should probably raise RRDL (there wasn't any _benefit_ to RRDL 4 vs. 6) as well as RDRD/WRWR _dr/dd to 8


Knowing that timeouts and stalls exist is one thing, but figuring out _where_ they lie, that's all guesswork as far as I can tell.


----------



## Raphie

Thnx! You confirmed my suspicion. I was hoping for some std ratios that I could validate, but it seems they are not there
then about the 4 parks, I can boot 40, 48, 60, 80 without problems. 48 seems the fastest. 40, 60, 80 all bench slower.
though 40 provides better MLC latency. Is this a sweetspot thing? Or is 40 better, if it works, but it also points out the painpoints elsewhere?
my rtl’s are now 67 on A and 69 on B, I assume that’s as tight as it gets?


----------



## Bloax

RTLs as far as I've been able to see thus far, are merely an expression of total memory latency from issuing a command to receiving something in memory controller cycles. (The numbers are much lower in gear2)
It goes down with lower primary timings, but can't be adjusted, and has only been relevant to adjust if you attempt to run a memory configuration that _the board can't figure out the RTLs for on its own_ - such as my weird Viper 4400 + old Ripjaws 3200 14-14-14 4x8 config.

So the only way you'd get them lower is by running 3898 14-14-14 instead

Different Park terminations performing better or worse sounds like run-to-run variation to me, as I've never actually seen them be relevant for more than voltage requirement/scaling.
(As well as "maximum performance ceiling", where Nom 40 Wr 80 Park 40 was the only set that would boot up 4600 16-16-16 on this b550 Unify-X with the Viper 4k 16-16-16 sticks)
Although the possibility of them being beneficial in some other way certainly sounds intriguing.


----------



## Shonk

acoustic said:


> If you failed at 23 1/2 hours, I'd venture to say it was due to heat, not unstable timings per-say. You could try reducing tREFI, with the intention of lowering the sticks temperature sensitivity.. beyond that, primary timings are your best bet. Your tRFC is loose enough I think.



Yeah i think it was ram temps

DRAM Voltage 1.350V (From 1.370V)
VDDQ TX Voltage 1.20V (From 1.30V)
tWRRD_dr 7
tWRRD_dd 7
Karhu Pass 30033%


----------



## Raphie

1T progress, can anyone tell me what the maximum throughput is, I could aim for @ 3900, no proc OC?
I've never had nearly 69k copy in AIDA


----------



## Shonk

Raphie said:


> 1T progress, can anyone tell me what the maximum throughput is, I could aim for @ 3900, no proc OC?
> I've never had nearly 69k copy in AIDA


Try this


----------



## Raphie

thnX that gives me 63k read, 60k write, 61k copy also geekbench drops from 17800 to 16400


Shonk said:


> Try this
> View attachment 2558048


----------



## KyKo.

Shonk said:


> Try this
> View attachment 2558048


I think with this values 
tWTR_L must be 6 or 7 with tCWL 13


----------



## Raimond

Craftyman said:


> Alright I will give that a shot tomorrow, thanks for checking for me. If anyone's interested I made some really good progress on tightening subtimings today:
> 
> View attachment 2557943
> View attachment 2557945
> 
> 
> no boot loops and only a few crashes in windows after which I relaxed the culprit timings. Tested this through TM5 absolute and y-cruncher and it passed. I'll run memtest again tonight. Can I push the tREFI to 65535? Also when should I be concerned about temps? maxxed out at 49.8c playing Dying Light 2 for 4 hours but didn't have a single issue:
> View attachment 2557944
> 
> 
> Tertiaries and Primaries are on my list for tomorrow. It's just crazy how much speed you can get when you tune your RAM correctly.


 I would check airflow to the RAM, mine was also about 47 c.ingame,because I had the fan setup wrong.
now it’s about 41 to 42 c


----------



## Shonk

KyKo. said:


> I think with this values
> tWTR_L must be 6 or 7 with tCWL 13


tWRRD_sg 26
tWRRD_dg 23
should have set
tWTR_L 6 (if it was on auto)
tWTR_S 3 (if it was on auto)
tCWL same if on auto

Its bugged in the bios on my z690 but still actually gets set correct
my z390 it shows correct values in bios


----------



## Shonk

Raphie said:


> thnX that gives me 63k read, 60k write, 61k copy also geekbench drops from 17800 to 16400


The only thing i can think of is you had some things not on auto
that should get changed lower as i get gains with all of them settings

Edit just checked my Geekbench score
2172 Single-Core Score
18796 Multi-Core Score





Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. Z690 AORUS ELITE AX DDR4 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. Z690 AORUS ELITE AX DDR4 with an Intel Core i9-12900K processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## Bloax

Those are different DIMMs using different memory ICs with different timing requirements, and rather predictably - behaving differently. 🤒

The RDWR_dd+1 is distinctly a requirement on the Viper 4400 sticks to run stable, I couldn't tell you why.


----------



## Shonk

Bloax said:


> Those are different DIMMs using different memory ICs with different timing requirements, and rather predictably - behaving differently. 🤒
> 
> The RDWR_dd+1 is distinctly a requirement on the Viper 4400 sticks to run stable, I couldn't tell you why.


That is true as someone who has never owned Samsung B Die i expected them to outperform Micron in every scenario and sub timing
Considering the legendary status they have esp at the voltage people put through them compared to my 32GB Dual Rank Micron B Die Sticks at 1.350V


----------



## Raphie

Shonk, can you do your bench @ stock CPU, see what the difference is? I think @ stock, I'm already there?
leave everything else as is, just BC and MP's back to stock value? TA.


----------



## Shonk

what are your multipliers on each core 0-15


----------



## Raphie

I'm on all cores, no OC


----------



## Shonk

Ok so i will presume you are on
52,51,50,50,49,49,49,49,39,39,39,39,37,37,37,37

2120 Single-Core Score
18102 Multi-Core Score






Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. Z690 AORUS ELITE AX DDR4 - Geekbench Browser


Benchmark results for a Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. Z690 AORUS ELITE AX DDR4 with an Intel Core i9-12900K processor.



browser.geekbench.com


----------



## Bloax

Shonk said:


> That is true as someone who has never owned Samsung B Die i expected them to outperform Micron in every scenario and sub timing


Recent Ballistix PCBs have been very good at running low secondary timings, only matched by high-end b-die (very expensive) PCBs.

The weakness of the Micron memory ICs remains their higher tRCD (the most important timing for performance), as well as _significantly_ worse tRFC - which means that despite having extremely good secondaries, the transfer process still gets halted by RFC a lot to make the comparison unfavourable versus b-die at similar frequencies.

Keyword "frequency" though - there's a reason I bring up attempting to shoot for the highest they want to go in Gear2, as you still might be able to do 4400-4900 MT/s in 4x8, and it could easily be that Whatever You Do actually benefits more from that than 3900 Gear1.


----------



## Shonk

Bloax said:


> Recent Ballistix PCBs have been very good at running low secondary timings, only matched by high-end b-die (very expensive) PCBs.
> 
> The weakness of the Micron memory ICs remains their higher tRCD (the most important timing for performance), as well as _significantly_ worse tRFC - which means that despite having extremely good secondaries, the transfer process still gets halted by RFC a lot to make the comparison unfavourable versus b-die at similar frequencies.
> 
> Keyword "frequency" though - there's a reason I bring up attempting to shoot for the highest they want to go in Gear2, as you still might be able to do 4400-4900 MT/s in 4x8, and it could easily be that Whatever You Do actually benefits more from that than 3900 Gear1.



My Son's PC is a Z690 Aorus Master +12900k + 2 x 32 GB Micron 4800 @ 5400 in Gear 2
And as i said I Returned my Z690 Aorus Master due to it being unable to post with 4 sticks and not being impressed with Gear 2 in the slightest
we both have identical setups and tweaks
My fps are much better in games than his and i was running at 3733 15-17-17-34-CR1 at the time

Tbh i wouldnt be interested in Gear 2 until around 8400


----------



## snootaiscool

Raimond said:


> Hi, can I I aks you what Aida score do you have with your 12700 k,thanxs🙂




















This is with 4.7GHz P-core/3.6GHz E-core and 4.0GHz ring BTW. AIDA64 is known for being really weird at times (under the right conditions I can get 45-46ns in Intel MLC by comparison). I also threw in Y-cruncher 1B and 2.5B in for good measure.


----------



## Raimond

snootaiscool said:


> View attachment 2558191
> 
> 
> View attachment 2558189
> 
> This is with 4.7GHz P-core/3.6GHz E-core and 4.0GHz ring BTW. AIDA64 is known for being really weird at times (under the right conditions I can get 45-46ns in Intel MLC by comparison). I also threw in Y-cruncher 1B and 2.5B in for good measure.


Thank you for this post..
We can compare a bit this way,if you want too off couse.
What memory kit are you using,cant see what motheboard you are using?I asume its a b die kit also?
I am using the 12700k at the stock,no ring speed adjustment or core overclock ect:
my scores,with timings shared in this tthread adjusted ,to what improved latency and what not iomproving latency,
Need to learn a lot,.how timings work,lol,it is still a bit complicated for me lol. But I learn a lot from this thread:









Also if someone sees something that I can improve,please let me know


----------



## snootaiscool

Raimond said:


> Thank you for this post..
> We can compare a bit this way,if you want too off couse.
> What memory kit are you using,cant see what motheboard you are using?I asume its a b die kit also?
> I am using the 12700k at the stock,no ring speed adjustment or core overclock ect:
> my scores,with timings shared in this tthread adjusted ,to what improved latency and what not iomproving latency,
> Need to learn a lot,.how timings work,lol,it is still a bit complicated for me lol. But I learn a lot from this thread:
> 
> View attachment 2558224
> 
> 
> Also if someone sees something that I can improve,please let me know


My kit's a Ripjaws V DDR4-4000 16-16-16-36 Dual Rank 32GB. Mobo is a Prime-P WIFI D4 on the 1013 BETA bios. My PC is incapable of posting above 1.5v and it needs to run 15-15-15-28 from the BIOS then apply 14-15-14-28 in OS, but everything else is perfectly solid for a 24/7 daily given how good the timings are.
Also my RTLs strangely enough seem to "flatten out" whenever I put my PC to sleep then wake it. Goes from 71/71 & 73/73 to just 73/73 & 73/73.


----------



## _sane_

What do you guys think does anything look wrong or too low here? RDRD_sg didn't go lower. I set WTR_L to 6 but it shows 8.


----------



## Raimond

snootaiscool said:


> My kit's a Ripjaws V DDR4-4000 16-16-16-36 Dual Rank 32GB. Mobo is a Prime-P WIFI D4 on the 1013 BETA bios. My PC is incapable of posting above 1.5v and it needs to run 15-15-15-28 from the BIOS then apply 14-15-14-28 in OS, but everything else is perfectly solid for a 24/7 daily given how good the timings are.
> Also my RTLs strangely enough seem to "flatten out" whenever I put my PC to sleep then wake it. Goes from 71/71 & 73/73 to just 73/73 & 73/73.


thats odd no posting with 1.5 v voltage? alderlake motherboards are still a bit bugged.
Great that your system works nicely.

I cant boot 14 properly,lol,maybe at 3900mhz,yes but,dont know it for sure.I am glad
I did not think my system would even boot 4000mhz but is does and is stable.
I am not that lucky most off the time with hardware.
I think the IMC of my 12700k could do even better but the mem kit does not or just need more voltage.


----------



## chronoreverse

Just picked up some cheap b-die (2x16GB DR 3733 17-19-19-39) and playing around with it on my MSI Pro-A DDR4. My 12600k's IMC seems to be quite limited, can't boot at 3866 but some voltage tweaks and BCLK overclocking let me reach 3857. Interestingly, increasing SA past 1.25V reduced stability. Increasing VDDQ at all also reduced stability (tried 1.3V and slowly went back down until stock 1.2V).

I bumped up SA PLL SFR incrementally to 1.125V which is the board max and it improved stability each time. *Is this a safe voltage?*

I decided to dial back to 3800 and after setting all the timings (14-16-16-36 + all the others), it's burned through 4 rounds of anta777 absolut so far and Y-cruncher had no trouble. Maybe I'll try gear 2 later to see what frequency I could hit


----------



## Raimond

chronoreverse said:


> Just picked up some cheap b-die (2x16GB DR 3733 17-19-19-39) and playing around with it on my MSI Pro-A DDR4. My 12600k's IMC seems to be quite limited, can't boot at 3866 but some voltage tweaks and BCLK overclocking let me reach 3857. Interestingly, increasing SA past 1.25V reduced stability. Increasing VDDQ at all also reduced stability (tried 1.3V and slowly went back down until stock 1.2V).
> 
> I bumped up SA PLL SFR incrementally to 1.125V which is the board max and it improved stability each time. *Is this a safe voltage?*
> 
> I decided to dial back to 3800 and after setting all the timings (14-16-16-36 + all the others), it's burned through 4 rounds of anta777 absolut so far and Y-cruncher had no trouble. Maybe I'll try gear 2 later to see what frequency I could hit



Too bad its limited, IMC quality divers alot It seems.
I have seen 12600k do 4100+ here in these thread to.
I dont know if that SA pll voltage is save.
Sometimes its better to dial back i bit.
I have done the same as you, backing down voltages a bit.
To see what is stable at the lowest with my 12700 imc
Its the SA voltage,that I am testing.
I tested it at 1.350 for 4000mhz 15 15 15 15 32?

I have turned that down,because the less voltages needed the better off course.
Look like my 12700k does not care about SA voltage
It is stable strresstesting at 1.350.. without an problem
But I am testing now at SA Voltage @1.180(!) @4000 mhz 15 15 15 32
And it looks like its not unstable to at that voltage either.
Testing with TM5 right now....

VDDQ is at stock also at stock settings 1.200

is’nt gear 2 much slower @Bloax ?


----------



## Craftyman

Raimond said:


> I would check airflow to the RAM, mine was also about 47 c.ingame,because I had the fan setup wrong.
> now it’s about 41 to 42 c


Yep I pointed a 140mm fan at my RAM and was able to run memtest all day without errors. I am also in that 41-42 range. Got 1 errorin memtest at 45-46 so I'm right on the cutting edge there.

Thinking of buying the corsair dominator double fan ram cooler... or waiting until I have enough scratch for a full custom loop and a ram waterblock (of all things I thought I'd never ever consider...)


----------



## Raimond

Ah what I thought,airflow, closer to the 40 you want it to have, like you have now

You got b die right?

Strange thing with b die,it can handle a crazy amount off voltage, but can be very sensitive to temperature
Great memtest now without passes now 

Active cooling by casefans or ram cooler is needed,especialy when you game, the gpu also heats up the ram,so it can get even higher then with stresstesting RAM alone and it could produce errors,because off to high temps.
Depends on what voltage you use

Whats you ram voltage now?


----------



## Raimond

Lol
passed TM5 memtest (with extreme 1 anta 777 config)memtest
and Y Cruncher for an hour


*With SA voltage at 1.180*

RAM voltage 1.490
@4000mhz 15 15 15 15 32


----------



## gerardfraser

MSI PRO Z-690-A DDR4
DDR4 Dual Rank Gear 1 2x16GB CL15 4000Mhz
SA Voltage - 1.20v BIOS 7D25IMS-124U2
VDDQ- 1.20v default but I can set lower and stability is fine
DRAM voltage 1.5V
G.SKILL Ripjaws V (2 x 16GB) Model F4-4000C17D-32GVKB 

Aida64,Y-cruncher,Cinebench ,HWinfo 64 for anyone interested


----------



## Raimond

Really great score,with cruncher 

have you tested with harku memtest also?

I have found out with my 12700k,it passed Y cruncher, tm5 with extreme 1 config like a breeze,but instantly fails with Harku,,with the exact same settings.


Will test even more its very odd,It could be that Harku is way better to spot errors.
I needed to up the SA voltage and now it is more stable, it does not error straight awa any more .lol.But iI will let it test for some will to see what happens

This is just to warn you a bit,it could be less stable as think you think..
At least that I thought it would be stable,but not.

Going to use Harku now.
I now run it with 1.240 SA voltage and it still runs,about 400% now. I have seen @Raphie pass 30000 right? So I am only at the beginning lol


----------



## Raimond

Considered Harku stable?


----------



## Raphie

Yes, Karhu is the real test, at least 10.000% coverage.


----------



## Raimond

Raphie said:


> Yes, Karhu is the real test, at least 10.000% coverage.


Indeed it is, I thought memtest pro and tm5 with cruncher would Be enough thought,but quess I was wrong,lol.


----------



## chronoreverse

Raimond said:


> Indeed it is, I thought memtest pro and tm5 with cruncher would Be enough thought,but quess I was wrong,lol.


Well, the real test using TM5 isn't Anta777's Extreme. He's released Absolut which is much more intense and finding errors Extreme or Universal2 doesn't find for me. It's the best option for those who are cheap like me!


----------



## gerardfraser

do not


chronoreverse said:


> Well, the real test using TM5 isn't Anta777's Extreme. He's released Absolut which is much more intense and finding errors Extreme or Universal2 doesn't find for me. It's the best option for those who are cheap like me!


i would never pay for useless program when the free one is good enough,also to 99% of people any ram will do.I am also cheap on certain things lol.
People spending 10K on there system to run games at 720p/1080p lowest settings are special people.

When truth meets reality is the ram stuff is bs,normal people being tricked by bs is all propaganda to me.

I actually only 4K PC Game so any BIOS is fine and any CPU clocks and Ram is fine.I do run all core overclocks up to 5600Mhz when PC gaming but truth is I get same FPS at 4900Mhz - 5600Mhz and changing Ram G1 CL14 4000Mhz to G2 CL17 4000Mhz is the same,it is all for E-peen but real world difference there is none.

P-Core 5300Mhz Vs P-Core 4900Mhz
E-Core 4000Mhz E-Core 3700Mhz
Ring 4200Mhz Ring default 3600Mhz

1920x1080
Avg 96.94 Vs 96.03
Min 77.15 75.66
Max 123.98 123.57


----------



## Raimond

Well I did notice some little stability issues with in the first place,that’s why I did buy it.
And also thought why not, I did pay a hell lot more for the system itself.

but I see that I used the wrong TM 5
config? were can I find the config,also ?
edit : found it.

@4k gaming,gpu is the bottleneck,so you will not notice a thing with gaming,for me thats no suprise.

playing myself 1440p 144hz p,will not notice it either or maybe a little,it’s just fun to tune the system.
I did not buy b die to leave it at stock,lol


----------



## Raphie

It’s only €10,00 a happy meal costs more.


----------



## Lango

_At first, sorry for my (kinda) bad english. lel_

I made the experience, that TM5 with extreme preset and Karhu (with CPU cache enabled) was the best combo during the last years with different systems. AMD or Intel, doesn't matter.
TM5 for 1st instance, Karhu for the 2nd and overnight tests.
TM5 is especially great for fast tests. It shows in couple of seconds errors if the RAM-OC is way too much, while Karhu needs more time to find something.
After timing/voltage adjustments and after the 12 minutes in TM5 has passed, the next minutes aren't so critical. It's then more temperature related.
If the first circle (around 50 minutes) passed without errors, then the 2nd and 3rd circles are most of the time just a waste of time and energy.
Had no case where errors appeared during 2nd and 3rd circle.

While Karhu took always (much) longer with B-Die modules to find the first errors. Makes me always wonder when people say the opposite.
For me, Karhu is only great for long tests where the temperatures are high during several hours.

Before ADL, I've also used other things like GSAT etc. but it was actually only a waste of time.
If the usual tools were stable, then GSAT didn't show something else.

Anyway, the combo of TM5 and Karhu was the best for me so far to test only the RAM. 
Paired with y-cruncher it's imo pretty perfect with modern CPUs.

After all time consuming tests are done (CPU and RAM), I always add a little extra voltage of 0.02 to them. Just as little buffer.
As example: If the RAM with 4000Mhz 15-15-15-32 and tight subtimings is stable with 1.47v, then it's final 1.49v.
Never had weird crashes / surprises this way with games or work related stuff.

Might sound like BS to some people who made different experiences. But as said before, that's the experience in general which I made during the last years with AMD and Intel.
This is not meant to be a generalization.


*@ Rainmond, Raphie and co:*

Do you also test real world stuff? I mean, sure, synthetic tools are nice to make quick comparisons and so on, but do you see also any improvements beside those tools?
I'm pretty perplexed when people waste tons of their time to improve tiny things like the latency in Intel MLC (as rough example) from 42ns to 41.7ns. 😅
I know, reaching and breaking the limits in synthetic tools might be a lot fun, but those improvements can actually also cause lower performance in normal apps/games, even when the tools say it's stable.
Just check from time to time your apps/games if there are also improvements or perfomance drops. Don't only trust what the tools say/show.

*@ gerardfraser*

I agree here and there, because it's mostly the GPU-Limit. Maybe try other examples which have a lot raytracing stuff, then you might see differences.


----------



## Shonk

where do i get y-cruncher launcher?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Shonk said:


> where do i get y-cruncher launcher?


download Benchmate:






BenchMate







benchmate.org


----------



## Shonk

Can i not get the launcher?

i hate installing crap


----------



## Raimond

Lango said:


> _At first, sorry for my (kinda) bad english. lel_
> 
> I made the experience, that TM5 with extreme preset and Karhu (with CPU cache enabled) was the best combo during the last years with different systems. AMD or Intel, doesn't matter.
> TM5 for 1st instance, Karhu for the 2nd and overnight tests.
> TM5 is especially great for fast tests. It shows in couple of seconds errors if the RAM-OC is way too much, while Karhu needs more time to find something.
> After timing/voltage adjustments and after the 12 minutes in TM5 has passed, the next minutes aren't so critical. It's then more temperature related.
> If the first circle (around 50 minutes) passed without errors, then the 2nd and 3rd circles are most of the time just a waste of time and energy.
> Had no case where errors appeared during 2nd and 3rd circle.
> 
> While Karhu took always (much) longer with B-Die modules to find the first errors. Makes me always wonder when people say the opposite.
> For me, Karhu is only great for long tests where the temperatures are high during several hours.
> 
> Before ADL, I've also used other things like GSAT etc. but it was actually only a waste of time.
> If the usual tools were stable, then GSAT didn't show something else.
> 
> Anyway, the combo of TM5 and Karhu was the best for me so far to test only the RAM.
> Paired with y-cruncher it's imo pretty perfect with modern CPUs.
> 
> After all time consuming tests are done (CPU and RAM), I always add a little extra voltage of 0.02 to them. Just as little buffer.
> As example: If the RAM with 4000Mhz 15-15-15-32 and tight subtimings is stable with 1.47v, then it's final 1.49v.
> Never had weird crashes / surprises this way with games or work related stuff.
> 
> Might sound like BS to some people who made different experiences. But as said before, that's the experience in general which I made during the last years with AMD and Intel.
> This is not meant to be a generalization.
> 
> 
> *@ Rainmond, Raphie and co:*
> 
> Do you also test real world stuff? I mean, sure, synthetic tools are nice to make quick comparisons and so on, but do you see also any improvements beside those tools?
> I'm pretty perplexed when people waste tons of their time to improve tiny things like the latency in Intel MLC (as rough example) from 42ns to 41.7ns. 😅
> I know, reaching and breaking the limits in synthetic tools might be a lot fun, but those improvements can actually also cause lower performance in normal apps/games, even when the tools say it's stable.
> Just check from time to time your apps/games if there are also improvements or perfomance drops. Don't only trust what the tools say/show.
> 
> *@ gerardfraser*
> 
> I agree here and there, because it's mostly the GPU-Limit. Maybe try other examples which have a lot raytracing stuff, then you might see differences.


I understand it, if tigt up the timings you will degrease the performance, I have tested games,between tight up the timings and it's all good with my cpu.
Memorycontroller and also memory itself,looks like it is not stressed out too much.

I game between these tweaks when it was stable with an memtest,that I will notice if it is stable and the performance is stilll,ooks like it's all ok.


----------



## Raimond

Shonk said:


> Can i not get the launcher?
> 
> i hate installing crap


do you want the benchmark or only y cruncher the stresstest?

First hit with google,when you need the stresstest:



y-cruncher - A Multi-Threaded Pi Program



Benchmate is a very nice tool tho use,I recommend itno crap at all,lol


----------



## KyKo.

ON MSI Z690 platform HOW MUCH HARD IT IS TO OVERCLOCK HIGHER THEN 3866 WITH 4X8GB DDR4 Bdie memory ?


----------



## Raimond

KyKo. said:


> ON MSI Z690 platform HOW MUCH HARD IT IS TO OVERCLOCK HIGHER THEN 3866 WITH 4X8GB DDR4 Bdie memory ?


Pretty hard I think??


----------



## KyKo.

All these days I'm struggling to past higher than 3866 
after 3900 the volts scaling very weird even with the right voltages one hour after test show up errors
maybe I'm facing some limitations ...


----------



## Raimond

IMC limitation? , it needs pretty high SA voltage I see to be stable.

I have got some decent results with my12700k, is 0 errors with:

tm5 absolute config,
Also with Harku 26000% plus

4000mhz 15 15 15 15 32
SA voltage 1.180
RAM voltage 1.52

I thought SA voltage would cause Harku to give errors, but it‘s the RAM voltage. I think it’s because off the dual rank,it needs a bit more voltage.
Memory Temp is ok l about 42 c with TM5.


----------



## KyKo.

Raimond said:


> IMC limitation? , it needs pretty high SA voltage I see to be stable.
> 
> I have got some decent results with my12700k, is 0 errors with:
> 
> tm5 absolute config,
> Also with Harku 26000% plus
> 
> 4000mhz 15 15 15 15 32
> SA voltage 1.180
> RAM voltage 1.52
> 
> I thought SA voltage would cause Harku to give errors, but it‘s the RAM voltage. I think it’s because off the dual rank,it needs a bit more voltage.
> Memory Temp is ok l about 42 c with TM5.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2558854



VDDQ ?
you have also 4x8GB ?


----------



## Raimond

VDDQ 1.200


----------



## Shonk

Have settled on this with mine


----------



## KyKo.

you guys have different configuration OF ram 
i am on 4x8GB


----------



## OLDFATSHEEP

DR 2*16GB, Gear 1, SA 1.48V, VDIMM 1.58V, VDDQ 1.5V


----------



## martin231

Hi, i hope i am writing in the right thread.

I am choosing a z690 MB for my* i7-12700k*, what would you please recommend?

I would like to *overclock a bit* (nothing extreme, mainly CPU/a little bit of RAM), mainly for *gaming *purposes.

I *dont care* about *RGB *or *Wi-Fi* or *Bluetooth*.

I have:
*rtx2080
650W PSU
DDR4 3600 cl16 RAM.*

I went through a lot of reviews and i am thinking about:
*ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4* (seems pretty expensive for me, i dont know if it is worth the price)
*ASUS TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 *or *MSI MAG Z690 TOMAHAWK WIFI DDR4* or *MSI MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4* (similar motherboards in terms of overclocking from what i understood, i am probably wrong)
*GIGABYTE Z690 AORUS ELITE DDR4* or *GIGABYTE Z690 AORUS ELITE AX *(similar to MBs above in terms of overclocking?)
*MSI Pro Z690-A DDR4* (the "entrly level" motherboard, not too good for overclocking?)

Can i please ask you, what motherboard would you recommend for me? It does not have to be mentioned above, if you have any tips i will appreciate it a lot!

Thank you!


----------



## Groove2013

OLDFATSHEEP said:


> DR 2*16GB, Gear 1, SA 1.48V, VDIMM 1.58V, VDDQ 1.5V
> View attachment 2558948
> 
> 
> View attachment 2558947


Same for me, but only B2. A2 not higher than 4200 MHz.


----------



## OLDFATSHEEP

Groove2013 said:


> Same for me, but only B2. A2 not higher than 4200 MHz.


Sometimes it may need more than 3 rounds to train the ram. Could try more times.


----------



## Raimond

martin231 said:


> Hi, i hope i am writing in the right thread.
> 
> I am choosing a z690 MB for my* i7-12700k*, what would you please recommend?
> 
> I would like to *overclock a bit* (nothing extreme, mainly CPU/a little bit of RAM), mainly for *gaming *purposes.
> 
> I *dont care* about *RGB *or *Wi-Fi* or *Bluetooth*.
> 
> I have:
> *rtx2080
> 650W PSU
> DDR4 3600 cl16 RAM.*
> 
> I went through a lot of reviews and i am thinking about:
> *ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4* (seems pretty expensive for me, i dont know if it is worth the price)
> *ASUS TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 *or *MSI MAG Z690 TOMAHAWK WIFI DDR4* or *MSI MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4* (similar motherboards in terms of overclocking from what i understood, i am probably wrong)
> *GIGABYTE Z690 AORUS ELITE DDR4* or *GIGABYTE Z690 AORUS ELITE AX *(similar to MBs above in terms of overclocking?)
> *MSI Pro Z690-A DDR4* (the "entrly level" motherboard, not too good for overclocking?)
> 
> Can i please ask you, what motherboard would you recommend for me? It does not have to be mentioned above, if you have any tips i will appreciate it a lot!
> 
> Thank you!



MSI Pro Z690-A DDR4,that one is very good value andd it is good for overclocking also,look at this thread alone,there are a few users here off this motherboard.
Do you want better audio codec als also cooling for all m2 slots then the tomahawk or edge wifi ddr4 or the better options.


----------



## KyKo.

martin231 said:


> Hi, i hope i am writing in the right thread.
> 
> I am choosing a z690 MB for my* i7-12700k*, what would you please recommend?
> 
> I would like to *overclock a bit* (nothing extreme, mainly CPU/a little bit of RAM), mainly for *gaming *purposes.
> 
> I *dont care* about *RGB *or *Wi-Fi* or *Bluetooth*.
> 
> I have:
> *rtx2080
> 650W PSU
> DDR4 3600 cl16 RAM.*
> 
> I went through a lot of reviews and i am thinking about:
> *ASUS ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4* (seems pretty expensive for me, i dont know if it is worth the price)
> *ASUS TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 *or *MSI MAG Z690 TOMAHAWK WIFI DDR4* or *MSI MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4* (similar motherboards in terms of overclocking from what i understood, i am probably wrong)
> *GIGABYTE Z690 AORUS ELITE DDR4* or *GIGABYTE Z690 AORUS ELITE AX *(similar to MBs above in terms of overclocking?)
> *MSI Pro Z690-A DDR4* (the "entrly level" motherboard, not too good for overclocking?)
> 
> Can i please ask you, what motherboard would you recommend for me? It does not have to be mentioned above, if you have any tips i will appreciate it a lot!
> 
> Thank you!


yes I agree with *Raimond*

Also MSI have better BIOS setup compared to gigabyte or Asus

But I think 650w PSU is the minimum power and this have as a result PSU to struggle on full Load when gaming 

Better to go for 850 or 1000w

What configuration memory you have 2x16GB OR 4x8GB ?


----------



## KyKo.

KyKo. said:


> 11.89US $ 25% OFF|Thermalright Intel 12th Cpu Bending Corrector Frame Protector Lga1700/1800 Buckle Fix Substitute Cnc Aluminum - Fans & Cooling - AliExpress
> 
> 
> Smarter Shopping, Better Living! Aliexpress.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.aliexpress.com



Τhey arrived !!!






Thermal Grizzly Intel 12th Gen. CPU Contact Frame


CPU-Befestigungsrahmen von Thermal Grizzly, für Intel Sockel LGA-1700-Mainboards, <span class="important-info">Nur mit Intel-CPUs der 12. Generation kompatibel!</span>




www.caseking.de










look on your local marketplace !!


----------



## rulik006

What VDDQ is doing?
4000 gear1 stock VDDQ 1.20v
Zero impact on anything


----------



## HyperC

KyKo. said:


> Τhey arrived !!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thermal Grizzly Intel 12th Gen. CPU Contact Frame
> 
> 
> CPU-Befestigungsrahmen von Thermal Grizzly, für Intel Sockel LGA-1700-Mainboards, <span class="important-info">Nur mit Intel-CPUs der 12. Generation kompatibel!</span>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.caseking.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> look on your local marketplace !!


But 3 weeks shipping!! At least US... keep thinking do I buy both ILM and direct die , or just direct die maybe i should pull off my water block and see what happened because I got 3 cores 6c hotter


----------



## neteng101

gerardfraser said:


> MSI PRO Z-690-A DDR4
> DDR4 Dual Rank Gear 1 2x16GB CL15 4000Mhz
> SA Voltage - 1.20v BIOS 7D25IMS-124U2


Has MSI fixed the earlier bios not training dual rank memory at those speeds or did you have to enter some settings manually to get it to even boot at 4000 G1?


----------



## gerardfraser

neteng101 said:


> Has MSI fixed the earlier bios not training dual rank memory at those speeds or did you have to enter some settings manually to get it to even boot at 4000 G1?


Every BIOS has worked at Dual rank Gear 1 4000Mhz on MSI Pro Z-690-A DDR4.As the BIOS ages the Less SA voltage is required to run Dual rank Gear 1 4000Mhz

Release BIOS 7D25IMS-100 - first BIOS SA 1.46V Dual rank Gear 1 4000Mhz


Newer BIOS Sa 1.20V Dual rank Gear 1 4000Mhz


----------



## Raimond

new beta bios voor some msi z690 ddr boards:






MSI Global English Forum


...




forum-en.msi.com





Scroll down to see them
I posted this for anyone who want to try  it


----------



## imrevoau

Can post at 4133 but not stable. 4000 is stable at current settings but auto training was playing around a bit. 12700KF. Latency still seems a bit high at 48.9 ns so not sure what's going on there. Also had to set BLCK at 100.20 (Thanks MSI)


----------



## Raimond

For an 12700f,if it is at stock core and ring clock,that’s not high.
Because core and also ring speed, do have an impact on these scores.
what benchmark did you use?

Also what b die kit are you using?


----------



## imrevoau

Raimond said:


> For an 12700f,if it is at stock core and ring clock,that’s not high.
> Because core and also ring speed, do have an impact on these scores.
> what benchmark did you use?
> 
> Also what b die kit are you using?


Im using 5 Core 4.7 Cache.

AIDA 64. Everything closed for lowest latency

Im using a G Skill Trident Z 2x16 kit. 4000 cl17-18-18-38 @1.4v


----------



## Raimond

aha also an gskill kit,I am using :

F4-3600C16D-32GTZN

2x16gb 3600mhz cl16 b die

Ans also have an 12700k

Try lower this timing:

trfc to 270 

and check again.


----------



## imrevoau

Raimond said:


> aha also an gskill kit,I am using :
> 
> F4-3600C16D-32GTZN
> 
> 2x16gb 3600mhz cl16 b die
> 
> Ans also have an 12700k
> 
> Try lower this timing:
> 
> trfc to 270
> 
> and check again.


Will try it. Just want to make sure all my temps stay okay since they are already a bit borderline (50c is when I start erroring and RAM can get to around 47-48


----------



## Raimond

that pretty hot, I had the same problem,problem was airflow around the memory, what voltage are you using?

put an fan on it,if you can.


----------



## imrevoau

Raimond said:


> that pretty hot, I had the dame problem,problem was airflow around the memory, what voltage are you using?
> 
> put an fan on it,if you can.


im running 1.5v. Yeah my airflow isn't the greatest in my case


----------



## Raimond

imrevoau said:


> im running 1.5v. Yeah my airflow isn't the greatest in my case


Can you increase airflow?
Or can you add a fan, zip tied on the RAM?
If not I would back down a bit, because you are indeed add bordeline stable,with temps
Most important is a stable system,at least that is what I think.

I run my Gsill bdie at 1.5v also with temps max with gaming. 44 to 45c
Memory stresstest is lower at 42 to 43c.

My 3080 ti gpu is just a big heatsource and it heats up the RAM a bit when gaming,but not to much to be unstable


----------



## imrevoau

Raimond said:


> Can you increase airflow?
> Or can you add a fan, zip tied on the RAM?
> If not I would back down a bit, because you are indeed add bordeline stable,with temps
> Most important is a stable system,at least that is what I think.
> 
> I run my Gsill bdie at 1.5v also with temps max with gaming. 44 to 45c
> Memory stresstest is lower at 42 to 43c.
> 
> My 3080 ti gpu is just a big heatsource and it heats up the RAM a bit when gaming,but not to much to be unstable


I probably will get some new fans eventually but for now i think i'm quite happy with my performance


----------



## imrevoau

Feel like latency should still be a little bit lower, but pretty happy regardless


----------



## Raphie

Nice! Which sticks? And how many?


----------



## imrevoau

Raphie said:


> Nice! Which sticks? And how many?


*F4-4000C17D-32GTZRB*

Just the 1 kit, so 2x16


----------



## Raimond

imrevoau said:


> Feel like latency should still be a little bit lower, but pretty happy regardless
> View attachment 2560227



No tis is very good latency for an 12700 cpu,your scores are very similar with my 12700k

I am also running an Gskill kit like you


----------



## imrevoau

Raimond said:


> No tis is very good latency for an 12700 cpu,your scores are very similar with my 12700k
> 
> I am also running an Gskill kit like you


Thanks, just thought it could be maybe 44/45 but if it’s similar to yours that’s good then


----------



## Raimond

cpu overclock helps with the scores,you have better latency then mine(I have about 50 with aida) because you have an mild overclock tyour score is a bit better.


----------



## imrevoau

Raimond said:


> cpu overclock helps with the scores,you have better latency then mine(I have about 50 with aida) because you have an mild overclock tyour score is a bit better.


I can go with 51 core and 48 ring, but the voltage is a bit higher than I'd like (1.39)


----------



## Raimond

mine is running stock @ 1.110v

I am using ann d15 noctua.If I want to overclock I need an better cooler

memory is @ 4000 15 15 15 15 30 like your


----------



## Raimond

imrevoau said:


> I can go with 51 core and 48 ring, but the voltage is a bit higher than I'd like (1.39)


Do you have e cores disabled or enabled?


----------



## imrevoau

Raimond said:


> Do you have e cores disabled or enabled?


e cores disabled, i'm on an older windows 10 version right now


----------



## urkent

Hi !
my story is that i had 3333 CL16 hyperX. Then i thought - (looking at all these low latency bench'es from userbenchmark) that if i can change it, not paying anthing or much on top to change - I should do that.
So with my 9900k i was got at userbench at stock /xmp but never done anything more.
On my first bought-new base which is 12700k with all power limits removed at 5.1 and 4 Ghz, we know that only timings can be better. (just look at the screenshots - same kit - ddr4 3600 cl 16 16 16 36)
Last shot ist with my OC i could do as an absolute 'idiot' not understanding anything.

So no real reason here for me maybe to post some' , but if anyone give some shout out's to make it more stable or convinient, specially for RAM intense programs like PUBG - go on . Lot's of crashes there'
The win10 memtest i passed. Doing a memtest86 next these days.

So i got this silver/red gskill at 15 15 15 34 at 1.39 with other changes tRC 49 , tRRD_S on 4 , tRRD_L on 8 , tRFC on 300 , tRTP on 42 , and command Rate 2 in gear1

9900k








12700k with xmp








3600 cl15









cinebench R15 was also stable with my cpu oc - so this causes not crashes - got a score of 3690 - absolutely insane 12700k

' an absolute timing' noob from germany . . . oh and the L2 and L3 Cache tests are more bad than without my oc - so anything from --> go on with xmp to --> i know
what your OC is missing . . . is very welcome 2 x 16 GB

ps. why is it that the board not saves new timings . . . at least my setting turned out as not stable
uuhh i made just the latency test with XMP and it came at 54.8ms
all the more exited i am for any suggestions /let's see if xmp passes memtest
curious that i found the changed times in windows, but memtest showed still old ones . . .
xmp passed 1,5 tests. i guess i'm doing better with that at the moment
exited for some tipps, that 3700mhz with xmp no chance i made running with 1.4 that was no problem with the 9900k.


----------



## VULC

CPU: 1.37v LLC 5 1.285v under R23.

4 X 8GB B-die DDR4 Patriot Viper 4400mhz sticks

VCCSA 1.34v
VDDQ 1.39v
DRAM 1.5v


----------



## Raphie

Did you test Karhu? I never managed to pass this setup 10k% coverage in Karhu, everything else went fine.


----------



## VULC

Raphie said:


> Did you test Karhu? I never managed to pass this setup 10k% coverage in Karhu, everything else went fine.


It's a dedicated gaming PC as long as it's game stable that's all it's used for. I don't run anything other than R23 and basic memory tests. Most real-world work or game scenarios never stress your setup as much as these apps that are used here do.


----------



## urkent

@VULC is your northbridge clock what? the e-cores? no way . . . what did you do


----------



## VULC

I don't really play BIOS and stress test got better things to do.


----------



## VULC

urkent said:


> @VULC is your northbridge clock what? the e-cores? no way . . . what did you do


TF are you talking about? E cores are switched off.


----------



## acoustic

That's gonna be some horrendous memory corruption over time lol

I get the "game stable" thing, but with memory OC.. doesn't really work that way, especially with maxed tREFI. Playing with fire.


----------



## urkent

VULC said:


> TF are you talking about? E cores are switched off.


ahh was kinda first idea - yep - and better things to do is like my first 'go to working with oc too


----------



## Cam1

acoustic said:


> That's gonna be some horrendous memory corruption over time lol
> 
> I get the "game stable" thing, but with memory OC.. doesn't really work that way, especially with maxed tREFI. Playing with fire.


What do you mean playing with fire ?

What should i do to be safe ? i just use this "random" settings that improve the aida64 results but i have no idea if i can still improve and what to do then.


----------



## acoustic

Cam1 said:


> What do you mean playing with fire ?
> 
> What should i do to be safe ? i just use this "random" settings that improve the aida64 results but i have no idea if i can still improve and what to do then.


Unstable tREFI will cause data corruption. Being safe means stress-testing with TM5, Karhu, MTP, etc, and doing it under realistic loads (like GPU warming the case up) so your memory gets warm. tREFI makes your memory sticks significantly more temperature sensitive so it's especially important to stress-test when you max it at 65535 for 24/7 use. You'll corrupt an entire OS overtime if it's not properly tested.

Settings shouldn't be set "random" either. Copying some settings from users with similar sticks as you is fine, but understanding what each setting your changing is really important when it comes to OCing memory for 24/7 use. Lots of reading and researching is a good idea, lest you boot the PC one day with an unrecoverable Windows installation.


----------



## VULC

acoustic said:


> Unstable tREFI will cause data corruption. Being safe means stress-testing with TM5, Karhu, MTP, etc, and doing it under realistic loads (like GPU warming the case up) so your memory gets warm. tREFI makes your memory sticks significantly more temperature sensitive so it's especially important to stress-test when you max it at 65535 for 24/7 use. You'll corrupt an entire OS overtime if it's not properly tested.
> 
> Settings shouldn't be set "random" either. Copying some settings from users with similar sticks as you is fine, but understanding what each setting your changing is really important when it comes to OCing memory for 24/7 use. Lots of reading and researching is a good idea, lest you boot the PC one day with an unrecoverable Windows installation.


I've got ram fans running on the sticks. It's seems stable as a rock every test I do. Windows seem fine running sfc and DISM doesn't pick up any issues. Plus those tests are extreme and in no way represent any real world use case. Running resizable bar on every game so CPU is talking directly to the GPU GDDR6X during game play also.


----------



## Agent-A01

VULC said:


> I've got ram fans running on the sticks. It's seems stable as a rock every test I do. Windows seem fine running sfc and DISM doesn't pick up any issues. Plus those tests are extreme and in no way represent any real world use case.* Running resizable bar on every game so CPU is talking directly to the GPU GDDR6X during game play also.*


That is not how that works. Resizeable bar does not mean system memory isn't used. VRAM is for texture data


----------



## VULC

Agent-A01 said:


> That is not how that works. Resizeable bar does not mean system memory isn't used. VRAM is for texture data


Yes I know it's being used and stable af for me. Plus I'm only using rebar for latency improvments. The max trefi boogie man going to get me. Even windows telling me my image and file integrity aren't corrupt.


----------



## Raphie

@VULC each OC journey is different, but there are certain principles you need to take into account, in order for your setup to sustain. Stability testing being one, otherwise in 2 months it’s not Windows, but it’s you.
If a quarterly corrupted windows is not a problem for you, fine. If it is, take the advice given here.


----------



## VULC

Raphie said:


> @VULC each OC journey is different, but there are certain principles you need to take into account, in order for your setup to sustain. Stability testing being one, otherwise in 2 months it’s not Windows, but it’s you.
> If a quarterly corrupted windows is not a problem for you, fine. If it is, take the advice given here.


I just said my windows isn't corrupt nor is it being corrupted. DISM ScanHealth and SFC /scannow can verify this is ain't brain surgery.


----------



## sew333

bb


----------



## bass junkie xl

I just recently started runing my 3080 @ full load while testing tm5 absolute and y cruncher. to get the temp to stay away from . tm5 is fine up to 51c but y cruncher doesn tlike 47c so. my temps in game dim temp don't go past 39c so. just something to take in to account . I'm doing 32gb 4133 flat 15s @ 42.1 NS gear 1 with 12900ks @ 54/51 ring


----------



## acoustic

VULC said:


> I just said my windows isn't corrupt nor is it being corrupted. DISM ScanHealth and SFC /scannow can verify this is ain't brain surgery.


I hope it blows up in your face. Your attitude towards others offering a piece of advice who have probably been doing this longer than you is astounding.


----------



## VULC

acoustic said:


> I hope it blows up in your face. Your attitude towards others offering a piece of advice who have probably been doing this longer than you is astounding.


Blows up in my face? What a douchebag.


----------



## imrevoau

Did I get lucky with my memory controller on my 12700KF? I managed to stabilise 4133 (albeit with 1.4 SA) which was surprising to me. I’m only running 4000 though because 1.4 SA is a bit too high for my tastes


----------



## VULC

imrevoau said:


> Did I get lucky with my memory controller on my 12700KF? I managed to stabilize 4133 (albeit with 1.4 SA) which was surprising to me. I’m only running 4000 though because 1.4 SA is a bit too high for my tastes


Seems like the standard for most IMCs. I can get 4000 cl 15 flat at 1.34v SA and 1.39v VDDQ. I had a bad IMC on one 12900K I had to run 1.34v SA and 1.39v VDDQ to just run XMP so I sent it back. Tried 4133Mhz at 1.35v SA but it's unstable.


----------



## david azulay

On the kit my of
*crucial ballistix 32gb kit ddr4 3600mhz cl16*

I oc to 5333mhz cl19/23/23/48
gir 2
vccsa 1.34v
ram 1.5v
VDDDQ 1.5V
my everyday use
on frequency is 5067 MHz CL19 / 23/23/48
This is an amazing overclock kit.
My computer is based
asus prime z690 d4
intel i7 12700k oc to 5.1ghz
benchmark on the ram kit In
linpack
tm5 anta777
occt avx2


----------



## david azulay




----------



## david azulay

crucial ballistix 32gb kit ddr4 3600mhz cl16 Overclock to 5067Mhz


crucial ballistix 32gb kit ddr4 3600mhz cl16 Overclock to 5067Mhz cl19 19/23/23/48stress test For memories on the 5067 MHz frequency




www.youtube.com


----------



## Agent-A01

imrevoau said:


> Did I get lucky with my memory controller on my 12700KF? I managed to stabilise 4133 (albeit with 1.4 SA) which was surprising to me. I’m only running 4000 though because 1.4 SA is a bit too high for my tastes


What did you use to determine stability?

I've found that y-cruncher is necessary to find 100% stability. Y-cruncher will need a lot more SA than any memtest.


----------



## Raphie

Y-cruncher pass p2.5 5 out of 5 and 10.000% Karhu coverage


----------



## KyKo.

Finally I found stability on 4000 CL15 OC
with (VIPER STEEL 4400CL19) 4X8GB
Thanks to* Bloax *suggestions again !!!
only with the old 1.23 BETA BIOS who msi subscribe like Improved memory compatibility.
I spent days to testing different bios with different voltaj on SA 1.3-1.4 VDDQ 1.2-1.47 DRAM 1,53-1.57V
Finally I add up WITH SA 1.35V VDDQ1.45V DRAM 1.55V


----------



## Raphie

Congrats man! Amazing job!


----------



## KyKo.

Raphie said:


> Congrats man! Amazing job!


thank you a lot *Raphie*


----------



## snootaiscool

imrevoau said:


> Did I get lucky with my memory controller on my 12700KF? I managed to stabilise 4133 (albeit with 1.4 SA) which was surprising to me. I’m only running 4000 though because 1.4 SA is a bit too high for my tastes


My IMC can do 1.45v SA/DDR4-4100 (and by extension 4133 I assume) and DDR4-4000 with just 1.35v SA. Obviously I only daily 1.35v because that's what I personally deem as the safety limit for 12th Gen, although it's really hard to say. I don't really know if I would deem 1.4v as safe.


----------



## GeneO

KyKo. said:


> Finally I found stability on 4000 CL15 OC
> with (VIPER STEEL 4400CL19) 4X8GB
> Thanks to* Bloax *suggestions again !!!
> only with the old 1.23 BETA BIOS who msi subscribe like Improved memory compatibility.
> I spent days to testing different bios with different voltaj on SA 1.3-1.4 VDDQ 1.2-1.47 DRAM 1,53-1.57V
> Finally I add up WITH SA 1.35V VDDQ1.45V DRAM 1.55V


Very nice! 

I have a question about 4000 MHz results I have seen in this thread I am puzzled about (I have a 10900K on a Asus Hero Z490). I thought the maximum DDR4 bandwidth was 64 GB/s but I see several posts of 4000/CL15 that are getting above that. How is that?

I am running 4000 16-16-16-32 on my g.skill bdie and am getting approx. 63000 62000 600000 on AIDA,. and am getting a better latency of 39ns (AIDA) and 36.5 on Intel MLC. I assume this is because gear 2 is being used on alder lake. But I don't understand the bandwidth exceeding the theoretical limit? What is the source of this differences? Is it AIDA64 versions?


----------



## VULC

bass junkie xl said:


> I just recently started runing my 3080 @ full load while testing tm5 absolute and y cruncher. to get the temp to stay away from . tm5 is fine up to 51c but y cruncher doesn tlike 47c so. my temps in game dim temp don't go past 39c so. just something to take in to account . I'm doing 32gb 4133 flat 15s @ 42.1 NS gear 1 with 12900ks @ 54/51 ring
> View attachment 2561627


Nice numbers what voltages are being used?


----------



## KyKo.

GeneO said:


> Very nice!
> 
> I have a question about 4000 MHz results I have seen in this thread I am puzzled about (I have a 10900K on a Asus Hero Z490). I thought the maximum DDR4 bandwidth was 64 GB/s but I see several posts of 4000/CL15 that are getting above that. How is that?
> 
> I am running 4000 16-16-16-32 on my g.skill bdie and am getting approx. 63000 62000 600000 on AIDA,. and am getting a better latency of 39ns (AIDA) and 36.5 on Intel MLC. I assume this is because gear 2 is being used on alder lake. But I don't understand the bandwidth exceeding the theoretical limit? What is the source of this differences? Is it AIDA64 versions?





On 10th-gen it's more easy to overclock B die 4x8GB configuration compare to 12th-gen
On 10th-gen you can reach 35ns more easily compare to 12th-gen
12th-gen have hard time with 4x8GB configuration their prefer 2x8GB or 2x16GB
now I'm running 4000cl15 GR1 N2/T2 on MLC i have 60800(MB/s) and 44-45(ns)
before that I was on 3800cl15 GR1 N2/T2 on MLC i have 57000(MB/s) and 44-45(ns)













The 3800CL15 GR1 N2/T2 run with DRAM 1.47v SA 1.30v VDDQ 1.35v = 57000(MB/s) and 44-45(ns)
The 4000CL15 GR1 N2/T2 run with DRAM 1.55v SA 1.35v VDDQ 1.45v = 60800(MB/s) and 44-45(ns)


----------



## Bloax

GeneO said:


> I thought the maximum DDR4 bandwidth was 64 GB/s but I see several posts of 4000/CL15 that are getting above that. How is that?


AIDA is a silly benchmark, that has a bug where it can read read out cache-polluted numbers that inflate the numbers - that's how.








Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui


Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com




much less silly way of measuring (arguably pointless) memory numbers
I say arguably pointless, because the only thing that matters is end-result performance, not the numbers leading up to it.
Haswell may produce better Memory Latency In Optimal Conditions(tm) readouts than Alder Lake, but would you actually want to run things on a Haswell over an Alder Lake processor? ; )

For memeory stability, I prefer making sure it passes this:
https://dl.dropbox.com/s/qnf2cckk5iqu4uo/testmem5_with_sheet2.zip (technically speaking that's ""25 cycles of TM5 1usmus_v3"" but good luck just assembling that)

Then throwing y-cruncher at it overnight like so:








Both HNT and VST are extremely hot, so watch out ;- )

If it doesn't die within a few hours, it's pretty much good to go.


----------



## GeneO

Bloax said:


> AIDA is a silly benchmark, that has a bug where it can read read out cache-polluted numbers that inflate the numbers - that's how.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui
> 
> 
> Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> much less silly way of measuring (arguably pointless) memory numbers
> I say arguably pointless, because the only thing that matters is end-result performance, not the numbers leading up to it.
> Haswell may produce better Memory Latency In Optimal Conditions(tm) readouts than Alder Lake, but would you actually want to run things on a Haswell over an Alder Lake processor? ; )
> 
> For memeory stability, I prefer making sure it passes this:
> https://dl.dropbox.com/s/qnf2cckk5iqu4uo/testmem5_with_sheet2.zip (technically speaking that's ""25 cycles of TM5 1usmus_v3"" but good luck just assembling that)
> 
> Then throwing y-cruncher at it overnight like so:
> View attachment 2561984
> 
> Both HNT and VST are extremely hot, so watch out ;- )
> 
> If it doesn't die within a few hours, it's pretty much good to go.


Yes, I agree with all of that about benches, your preaching to the choir . And I wasn't suggesting that an older processor was better because it had better latency, I don't know where that came from. I was just wondering how these AIDA64 bandwidth numbers exceed the maximum capable. I think the newer version of AIDA64 must be worse about this. I only see that in this forum with newer AIDA64 version.

I use Intel MLC for a better measurement of the latency.

I usually test with many cycles of TM5 absolut, Karhu and gsat, I haven't tried ycruncher yet for a measurement of performance though.


----------



## Ichirou

Just posting my current daily 4,133 MHz CL14 1T Gear 1 config with 4x16 GB (64 GB) Micron B-die. Needs 1.61V VDIMM, and 1.34V VCCSA.
4,200 CL14 1T is stable as well, but I need to put the DIMMs on water in order to push higher bandwidth. They're overheating at around 1.63V+.


----------



## VULC

My epeen is going higher now. So far ran R23 and passed no issues. Guys putting in 1.55v + dram voltage to make your ram overclock y crunch stable. Your ram life span is going to be decreased dramatically unless you have sufficient cooling.


----------



## Tergon123

VULC said:


> My epeen is going higher now. So far ran R23 and passed no issues. Guys putting in 1.55v + dram voltage to make your ram overclock y crunch stable. Your ram life span is going to be decreased dramatically unless you have sufficient cooling.
> 
> View attachment 2562047


Nice Photoshop job


----------



## Ichirou

VULC said:


> My epeen is going higher now. So far ran R23 and passed no issues. Guys putting in 1.55v + dram voltage to make your ram overclock y crunch stable. Your ram life span is going to be decreased dramatically unless you have sufficient cooling.
> 
> View attachment 2562047


AIDA64 has issued with BCLK overclocking on Z690. Causes incorrect score results.
Samsung B-die is now sold at up to 1.60V XMP. I've been running my Micron B-die kit at 1.63V since late 2020 without any issue. YMMV.


----------



## VULC




----------



## imrevoau

Agent-A01 said:


> What did you use to determine stability?
> 
> I've found that y-cruncher is necessary to find 100% stability. Y-cruncher will need a lot more SA than any memtest.


TM5 absolute. I'm back at 4000 now. 4133 did pass 6-7 times though


----------



## david azulay

crucial 32gb kit ddr4 3600mhz cl16 ballistix
mobo asus prime z690 D4
CPU intel i7 12700k - p 5.1ghz / E 3.9ghz / ring 3.9ghz
test 
3733Mhz cl14/18/18/36/1T
Gear 1
VccSA 1.2V
Vddr 1.45v
Vddq 1.2v

vs

4600Mhz cl18/21/21/44/1T
Gear 2
VccSA 1.2V
Vddr 1.5v
Vddq 1.3v


----------



## edkieferlp

You should be able to tighten some of them up like tFAW (16), tRRD S/L(4/6).


----------



## Luggage

VULC said:


> My epeen is going higher now. So far ran R23 and passed no issues. Guys putting in 1.55v + dram voltage to make your ram overclock y crunch stable. Your ram life span is going to be decreased dramatically unless you have sufficient cooling.
> 
> View attachment 2562047


CB r23 hardly cares about memory and is definitely not a stability test for memory.

Several kits have 1.5-1.6 as XMP voltage.


----------



## david azulay

edkieferlp said:


> You should be able to tighten some of them up like tFAW (16), tRRD S/L(4/6).


no
tFAW 
Lower than 36
and trrd/l/s
The minimum without errors 5/8


Errors in TM5 ANTA777 After half an hour


TFAW 38
TRRD/L/S 8/5
on errors
Even after a few hours
Also the ODT The perfect combination in my board 
RTT WR 80
RTT PARK 48
RTT NOM 0


----------



## edkieferlp

david azulay said:


> no
> tFAW
> Lower than 36
> and trrd/l/s
> The minimum without errors 5/8
> 
> 
> Errors in TM5 ANTA777 After half an hour
> 
> 
> TFAW 38
> TRRD/L/S 8/5
> on errors
> Even after a few hours
> Also the ODT The perfect combination in my board
> RTT WR 80
> RTT PARK 48
> RTT NOM 0


Is the CR1 doing that, 3733 is not high on freq. I have no idea on gear2/4600, never tried running real high in gear2 mode.


----------



## david azulay

edkieferlp said:


> Is the CR1 doing that, 3733 is not high on freq. I have no idea on gear2/4600, never tried running real high in gear2 mode.


5333Mhz cl19/23/23/48
gear 2


----------



## david azulay

edkieferlp said:


> Is the CR1 doing that, 3733 is not high on freq. I have no idea on gear2/4600, never tried running real high in gear2 mode.


----------



## Raphie

We should limit memory OC achievements to stock CPU clocks + MLC crosscheck.
too many skewed AIDA shots.


----------



## Groove2013

@Ichirou @bscool run 4133 18-18-18-38 with my 2×16 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP and manually stopped Karhu at slightly less than 10000%.

maybe that's just my sticks that can't do 14-15 or 15-15 at 4133, since they're not that new and require higher voltage than current 3600 14 or 4000 16 CMP sticks, but also can't tolerate high voltage.

will see if my sticks still can do 4133 16-16-16-36 10000% Karhu and if yes, then I might simply buy 3600 14 or 4000 17 2×16 kit.

but who knows, maybe it's the IMC that can't do 4133 14 or 15.

the only way to know it for sure is to buy another, most recent 2×16 B-DIE kit.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> @Ichirou @bscool run 4133 18-18-18-38 with my 2×16 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP and manually stopped Karhu at slightly less than 10000%.
> 
> maybe that's just my sticks that can't do 14-15 or 15-15 at 4133, since they're not that new and require higher voltage than current 3600 14 or 4000 16 CMP sticks, but also can't tolerate high voltage.
> 
> will see if my sticks still can do 4133 16-16-16-36 10000% Karhu and if yes, then I might simply buy 3600 14 or 4000 17 2×16 kit.
> 
> but who knows, maybe it's the IMC that can't do 4133 14 or 15.
> 
> the only way to know it for sure is to buy another, most recent 2×16 B-DIE kit.


Raising frequency and tightening tCL pushes the IMC harder, so it needs more VCCSA, if raising VDIMM does nothing.


david azulay said:


> 5333Mhz cl19/23/23/48
> gear 2


Oof, that latency really hurts. But at least we have some clarification about running 5,000+ MHz on Gear 2.


----------



## david azulay

Ichirou said:


> Raising frequency and tightening tCL pushes the IMC harder, so it needs more VCCSA, if raising VDIMM does nothing.
> 
> Oof, that latency really hurts. But at least we have some clarification about running 5,000+ MHz on Gear 2.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> @Ichirou @bscool run 4133 18-18-18-38 with my 2×16 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP and manually stopped Karhu at slightly less than 10000%.
> 
> maybe that's just my sticks that can't do 14-15 or 15-15 at 4133, since they're not that new and require higher voltage than current 3600 14 or 4000 16 CMP sticks, but also can't tolerate high voltage.
> 
> will see if my sticks still can do 4133 16-16-16-36 10000% Karhu and if yes, then I might simply buy 3600 14 or 4000 17 2×16 kit.
> 
> but who knows, maybe it's the IMC that can't do 4133 14 or 15.
> 
> the only way to know it for sure is to buy another, most recent 2×16 B-DIE kit.


4133 3×16 36 tFAW 16 passed 10000% Karhu.
Trying 4133 15-16-16-36 tFAW16.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> Raising frequency and tightening tCL pushes the IMC harder, so it needs more VCCSA, if raising VDIMM does nothing.


I know about IMC. But who knows, it could be my sticks as well that don't like 14-15 or 15-15 for 4133 and VDIMM can't be raised any further.

3600 14/4000 16, normally, require less VDIMM, so should help to reach 4133 14/15, at similar or even lower VDIMM, if the IMC isn't the real limit.

4200 bootable, but even at 3×18 38 it's insta blue screen, as soon as I start Karhu.

but well, for 4200, one needs 42x multi, instead of only 31.075 multi for 4133.
that's in addition to tight timings.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> I know about IMC. But who knows, it could be my sticks as well that don't like 14-15 or 15-15 for 4133 and VDIMM can't be raised any further.
> 
> 3600 14/4000 16, normally, require less VDIMM, so should help to reach 4133 14/15, at similar or even lower VDIMM, if the IMC isn't the real limit.
> 
> 4200 bootable, but even at 3×18 38 it's insta blue screen, as soon as I start Karhu.
> 
> but well, for 4200, one needs 42x multi, instead of only 31.075 multi for 4133.
> that's in addition to tight timings.


What I meant is that, assuming a kit can do 4,200 14-15-15-XX, you need more VCCSA at 4,200 14-15-15-XX than 4,200 15-15-15-XX.
I know, because I have tested it out myself.


----------



## VULC

Luggage said:


> CB r23 hardly cares about memory and is definitely not a stability test for memory.
> 
> Several kits have 1.5-1.6 as XMP voltage.


Bwahahaha lol. I'm running the same voltages as other people with the same setup why would I run these useless synthetic memory stress tests.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> What I meant is that, assuming a kit can do 4,200 14-15-15-XX, you need more VCCSA at 4,200 14-15-15-XX than 4,200 15-15-15-XX.
> I know, because I have tested it out myself.


understandable. same, have tested it with Apex and 10900K back then.

could pass 10000% Karhu with my 2×16 3800 14-16-16 @ 4133 15-16-16-36 1.61 V and SA/VDDQ TX 1.5.
not that that much is needed, it's just that I set it all to such values.

4133 15-15-15-35 doesn't last longer than few hours.

maybe 4133 15-16-15 or 14-16-15 tFAW 16 will work.
have to check.


----------



## Groove2013

4133 14-16-14 survived for 2 hrs of Karhu.
Testing 14-16-15 now (tFAW 16).

If that works, then it's my 2×16 3800 14-16-16 1.5 V kit that simply can't do tRCD 15, at 4133.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool @Ichirou If after like 5 hrs of Karhu (10000%) it will still be running 14-16-15 at 4133, then the question is what to buy, 4000 16 1.4 or 3600 14 1.45...
because 4000 16 1.4 is tighter than 3600 14 1.45, if you take the lower voltage into account, but no guaranty it will be able to do 14-15-15 at 4133 or 14-14-14 at lower frequency.

3600 can do 14-14-14, guaranteed, but at 4000, CL16, at only 1.4 V, is slightly tighter bin...


----------



## Luggage

VULC said:


> Bwahahaha lol. I'm running the same voltages as other people with the same setup why would I run these useless synthetic memory stress tests.


You do you but R23 cares so little about ram you probably get the same score at jedec as your 4000 rate.


----------



## Ichirou

@Groove2013 Some kits will do tighter tRCD while others can't.
From my own experience, the 3,600 flat-14 kit will do 4,000 14-15-15-XX at like, 1.58V or so. tRCD 14 overheats.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> @Groove2013 Some kits will do tighter tRCD while others can't.
> From my own experience, the 3,600 flat-14 kit will do 4,000 14-15-15-XX at like, 1.58V or so. tRCD 14 overheats.


well, that doesn't help me much, because my 3800 14-16 can also do 14-15, as long as it's 4000 MHz.
but as you can see, at 4133, it can't do 14-15-15 - only 14-16-15.

so the question still stands, 3600 14 1.45 or 4000 16 1.4 as next/alternative kit, for 4133 14-15.

haven't decided, yet, whether 14-15-15 instead of 14-16-15 is worth the cost of another RAM kit...


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> well, that doesn't help me muchm because my 3800 14-16 csn also do 14-15, as long as it's 4000 MHz.
> but as you can see, at 4133, it can't do 14-15 - only 14-16.
> 
> so the question still stands, 3600 14 1.45 or 4000 16 1.4 as next/alternative kit, for 4133 14-15.
> 
> javen't decided, yet, whether 14-15 instead of 14-16 is worth the cost of another RAM kit...


It's not.
@bscool has a 4,000 CL14 kit since he bought it when it was new. Not much of a gain. Does the same as 3,600 CL14 albeit with less VDIMM.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> It's not.
> @bscool has a 4,000 CL14 kit since he bought it when it was new. Not much of a gain. Does the same as 3,600 CL14 albeit with less VDIMM.


so 3600 14 is a "better" buy, since it's confirmed it can do tRCD and tRP 14, although not known until which frequency?
because with 4000 16, not sure it can do 14-14-14, although it requires lower voltage for 4000 16-16-16-36.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> so 3600 14 is a "better" buy, since it's confirmed it can do tRCD and tRP 14, although not known until which frequency?
> because with 4000 16, not sure it can do 14-14-14, although it requires lower voltage for 4000 16-16-16-36.


I'm fairly confident that pretty much any B-die kit made in 2021 and onwards will no longer do tRCD 14 at 4,000+ MHz without overheating.
All of the top bins are 2020 and prior.
You might get lucky with a 1 in 100 kit, but it's really not worth the gamble.

If anything, buy any decent B-die kit and put the RAM under water. That'll let you hit tRCD 14.
The issue right now is not kits failing to run tRCD 14; it's that kits are not strong enough to run at a low enough VDIMM not to overheat it with fan cooling.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> I'm fairly confident that pretty much any B-die kit made in 2021 and onwards will no longer do tRCD 14 at 4,000+ MHz without overheating.
> All of the top bins are 2020 and prior.
> You might get lucky with a 1 in 100 kit, but it's really not worth the gamble.
> 
> If anything, buy any decent B-die kit and put the RAM under water. That'll let you hit tRCD 14.
> The issue right now is not kits failing to run tRCD 14; it's that kits are not strong enough to run at a low enough VDIMM not to overheat it with fan cooling.


I'm fine with under 40°C.

4000 CL14 appeared in Q2 2021, same as 3600 14, 4400 17 and 4000 16.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> I'm fine with under 40°C.
> 
> 4000 CL14 appeared in Q2 2021, same as 3600 14, 4400 17 and 4000 16.


Yeah, and those kits can't really do tRCD 14 at 4,000 MHz either.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> Yeah, and those kits can't really do tRCD 14 at 4,000 MHz either.


because DR isn't SR )))


----------



## snootaiscool

Ichirou said:


> I'm fairly confident that pretty much any B-die kit made in 2021 and onwards will no longer do tRCD 14 at 4,000+ MHz without overheating.
> All of the top bins are 2020 and prior.
> You might get lucky with a 1 in 100 kit, but it's really not worth the gamble.
> 
> If anything, buy any decent B-die kit and put the RAM under water. That'll let you hit tRCD 14.
> The issue right now is not kits failing to run tRCD 14; it's that kits are not strong enough to run at a low enough VDIMM not to overheat it with fan cooling.


Or in the case of the Ripjaws V, the heatspreaders are so dogshoite that you need a 2150RPM 120mm fan to stabilize period with High Frequency + 1.5v VDIMM. With both side panels removed. 
I'm 50/50 on if I'm able to do DDR4-4000 flat 14 with watercooling though. DDR4-3600 flat 14 was no issue for me but tRCD 14 DDR4-4000 just sounds like a brutal beating for ADL's IMC (because it is).


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool @Ichirou If after like 5 hrs of Karhu (10000%) it will still be running 14-16-15 at 4133, then the question is what to buy, 4000 16 1.4 or 3600 14 1.45...
> because 4000 16 1.4 is tighter than 3600 14 1.45, if you take the lower voltage into account, but no guaranty it will be able to do 14-15-15 at 4133 or 14-14-14 at lower frequency.
> 
> 3600 can do 14-14-14, guaranteed, but at 4000, CL16, at only 1.4 V, is slightly tighter bin...


I have had a dozen or more different DR bin and it is lotto. Buy the best bin but it is still down to luck/lotto. Some of my best bins have been 3600c14-15-15 and 4000c16-16-16 along with 4000c14-15-15. But they are all so close it doesnt matter outside of the dud kits that will only do something like 4000c16-16-16. The best kits will do 4133c15-15-15 in the 1.55 to 1.5635 range on z690. 4400c17-18-17 kit I have is also decent.

I didnt have all the kits to test on z690 but of the ones I did I would buy 4000c16-16-16 kit. I know a couple others who bought them and they could do [email protected] if the IMC could.


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> the best 4000c16-16-16 kits will do 4133c15-15-15 in the 1.55 to 1.5635 range on z690.
> 
> I didnt have all the kits to test on z690 but of the ones I did I would buy 4000c16-16-16 kit. I know a couple others who bought them and they could do [email protected] if the IMC could.


then that's what I will, since it's also cheaper than 3600 14 1.45 and has marginally better XMP.

14×1.45:3600×2000=11.28 ns
16×1.40:4000×2000=11.00 ns
close to 1% better XMP for 4000 16.

my Jan 2021 3800 14-16 1.5 needs like 1.61 V for 4133 14-15.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> then that's what I will, since it's also cheaper than 3600 14 1.45 and has marginally better XMP.
> 
> 14×1.45:3600×2000=11.28 ns
> 16×1.40:4000×2000=11.00 ns
> close to 1% better XMP for 4000 16.
> 
> my Jan 2021 3800 14-16 1.5 needs like 1.61 V for 4133 14-15.


and the thing is also that I can't go higher than 1.61 VDIMM, since Karhu will complain.

So I'm stuck frequency and timings wise, because of how high VDIMM has to be and how "low" the VDIMM limit is.

So having the ability to do something like 4133 14-15 at like only 1.55-1.57 VDIMM, would leave some space for 4200 14-15 or 15-15, at something like 1.6-1.63 VDIMM, if not 4266, provided the IMC is decent.


----------



## Groove2013

will see if BIOS 1504 for Strix D4 is any better than 1404


----------



## Groove2013

2×16 4133 14-16-15 passed 10000% Karhu.


----------



## Groove2013

with 5.3/5.2 GHz cores/cache and all the other timings tuned, 4133 14-16-15-28 reaults in 41.5-41.7 ns in Aida64, with different known and unneeded Windows tasks/processes, since it's a fresh Win 10 install.

for some reason it says 12900K, instead of KS.
probably due to outdated Aida64 version.
but since I have E-cores off anyways - no need for latest Aida64 version.


----------



## Groove2013

with tRCD 15, instead of 16, although not Karhu stable, it's 41.3 ns, instead of 41.6 ns in Aida64.


----------



## Groove2013

still tempted to buy 2×16 4000 16...


----------



## rulik006

Raimond said:


> mine is running stock @ 1.110v
> 
> I am using ann d15 noctua.If I want to overclock I need an better cooler
> 
> memory is @ 4000 15 15 15 15 30 like your
> 
> View attachment 2560243


Had exactly the same latency, but should be around 47
Where those 3ns, maybe some one knows?
Maybe windows or cpu, because with DDR5 3-5ns loss too


----------



## Raimond

your north bridge(cache) is really low,that can cause the low score,also timings are key..
And you have ddr5 now,the have not the tight timings.You need to tweak them.There is an ddr5 topic for this so,I would look there for info


----------



## Groove2013

with BIOS 1504 (Strix D4), 4133 14-*15*-15 finally boots for me, even if it needs to train several times.

with BIOS 1404 it was no boot, unless I changed to 4133 14-*16*-15 or it booted with 14-*15*-15, but only 1 time, after dozens of minutes of failed trainings, without changing any settings.

maybe I now will be able to finally stabilize 4133 14-*15*-15, instead of 14-*16*-15.


----------



## Groove2013

still not possible to stabilize tRCD 15 @ 4133, but BIOS 1504 is definitely better (training/boot) and it's rather my RAM or CPU IMC that can't do tRCD 15 @ 4133.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool @Ichirou I'm so stupid for wanting to buy new DDR4 RAM kit, simply because I can't achieve what I want, thinking current RAM kit could be the possible limit...

will leave only 2 cores and no HT enabled and only 1 stick at a time a this way test each stick in the best RAM slot/channel, to see max possible VDIMM, frequency and timings for my Jan 2021 2×16 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 sticks.

leaving only 1 stick, only 2 cores and no HT, should make it easier for the IMC and better chances to see what each stick can do and not the IMC itself.

also lowered CPU frequency, again, to test sticks only and not the IMC.

in case sticks will show good results, I will, probably, try to buy another 12900KS.


----------



## Groove2013

4400 CL16 boots (1 stick B2)
4300 CL15 boots (1 stick B2)


----------



## Raphie

Besides lower settings what are you actually try to achieve? Higher benchmarks? You’ll need a heck of a lot more voltage, for marginal gains (if any)


----------



## Ichirou

@Groove2013 Yes, it's really pointless to bin Samsung B-die unless you're a hardcore overclocker.
The differences between each kit are marginal at best, and mostly boil down to simply how much VDIMM is necessary to achieve the same settings.

Again, tRCD is extremely temperature sensitive, so tightening it is best on water. Otherwise, you'll have to loosen it.


----------



## Groove2013

one 16 GB stick in slot B2 is running already almost 1 h Karhu 4300 15-15-15-35 @ 1.61 VDIMM (3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 XMP).

I simply set VDIMM to 1.61 V in the BIOS.
doesn't mean this much is required.

so I think my sticks aren't bad at all, despite being older (Jan. 2021) than 3600 14, 4000 14, 4000 16 or 4400 17 and it's rather the IMC that sucks.


----------



## Groove2013

enabled all 8 P-cores + HT, instead of only 2 P-cores with no HT and only 4.0 GHz cores/cache, and raised cores/cache frequency past 5.0 GHz and insta BSOD at same 4300 15-15-15-35 1 stick B2.

IMC 100%.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> enabled all 8 P-cores + HT, instead of only 2 P-cores with no HT and only 4.0 GHz cores/cache, and raised cores/cache frequency past 5.0 GHz and insta BSOD at same 4300 15-15-15-35 1 stick B2.
> 
> IMC 100%.


I'm stupid - forgot to increase vcore, when re-enabled all P-cores + HT and >5.0 GHz cores/cache... was still 1.2 V vcore )))


----------



## bass junkie xl

i havew g.skill royals 32 gb 16x2 4000 c 16-16-16-36 @ 4133 cl 15-15-15-35 1.55v doing 41.8 ns in adia ( no back ground apps ) on bios 1404 ks one strix d4 passes absolute for 12 hrs and y cruncher all day long . 

ill flash this new bios and try 4133 14-15-15-35 1.55 - 1.62v ish and try 4200 - 4266 . my ks is sp 104 ps


----------



## grifers

Hello, good morning. What program do you use to measure the stability of the RAM overlock? I have 2 modules of 16 GB Gskill Dual-Rank at 4000 Mhz and latencies 15-15-15-35 2T with the secondary timmings touched. This particular model of memory:









G.Skill Trident Z RGB - Memoria RAM DDR4-4000 MHz, CL16-16-16-36, 1,40 V, 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) : Amazon.es: Informática


Compra online G.Skill Trident Z RGB - Memoria RAM DDR4-4000 MHz, CL16-16-16-36, 1,40 V, 32 GB (2 x 16 GB). Envío en 1 día GRATIS con Amazon Prime.



www.amazon.es





It is together with a 12700KF DELID at 5100 Mhz P-cores, 4100 mhz e-cores and 4200 Mhz Uncore Cache, all this perfectly stable with 1 hour of Handbrake. The RAM overclock is stable with 2 hours (a full cycle) of TestMem5 and the "Absolout Anta777" profile, is this enough?

I have a problem of random white/gray screenshots while playing, no matter how much load the game itself has, I can be hours and hours playing that for example I press the volume button on the keyboard and the system crashes with gray/white screenshot, even in a loading screen of a game (where there is no intensive use of CPU or GPU). The graphics card is not because it is stock, and I understand that the white/gray screenshots with system lockup have more to do with the RAM issue or something to do with the system Memory. RAM voltage is 1.47, SA is on Auto at 1.35 and VDDQ at 1.35, as I say this is stable for 2 hours of TestMem5 and Anta777's profile that one. Here is a screenshot:










My suspicions go for the RAM memory, so I ask what alternative program I can try to check the stability in the memory overclock with these Alder lake and z690 board. Thanks in advance.

- P.D My Motherboard is Asus Z690 TUF Gaming Plus D4, RAM is in GEAR 1 mode


----------



## VULC

bass junkie xl said:


> i havew g.skill royals 32 gb 16x2 4000 c 16-16-16-36 @ 4133 cl 15-15-15-35 1.55v doing 41.8 ns in adia ( no back ground apps ) on bios 1404 ks one strix d4 passes absolute for 12 hrs and y cruncher all day long .
> 
> ill flash this new bios and try 4133 14-15-15-35 1.55 - 1.62v ish and try 4200 - 4266 . my ks is sp 104 ps


How much SA and VDDQ? I'm only running 1.5v on my b die kit might crank it but don't want to run more then 1.35sa. I can crank vddq I'm only on 1.4v on VDDQ.


----------



## Raimond

grifers said:


> Hello, good morning. What program do you use to measure the stability of the RAM overlock? I have 2 modules of 16 GB Gskill Dual-Rank at 4000 Mhz and latencies 15-15-15-35 2T with the secondary timmings touched. This particular model of memory:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.Skill Trident Z RGB - Memoria RAM DDR4-4000 MHz, CL16-16-16-36, 1,40 V, 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) : Amazon.es: Informática
> 
> 
> Compra online G.Skill Trident Z RGB - Memoria RAM DDR4-4000 MHz, CL16-16-16-36, 1,40 V, 32 GB (2 x 16 GB). Envío en 1 día GRATIS con Amazon Prime.
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.es
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is together with a 12700KF DELID at 5100 Mhz P-cores, 4100 mhz e-cores and 4200 Mhz Uncore Cache, all this perfectly stable with 1 hour of Handbrake. The RAM overclock is stable with 2 hours (a full cycle) of TestMem5 and the "Absolout Anta777" profile, is this enough?
> 
> I have a problem of random white/gray screenshots while playing, no matter how much load the game itself has, I can be hours and hours playing that for example I press the volume button on the keyboard and the system crashes with gray/white screenshot, even in a loading screen of a game (where there is no intensive use of CPU or GPU). The graphics card is not because it is stock, and I understand that the white/gray screenshots with system lockup have more to do with the RAM issue or something to do with the system Memory. RAM voltage is 1.47, SA is on Auto at 1.35 and VDDQ at 1.35, as I say this is stable for 2 hours of TestMem5 and Anta777's profile that one. Here is a screenshot:
> 
> View attachment 2562913
> 
> 
> My suspicions go for the RAM memory, so I ask what alternative program I can try to check the stability in the memory overclock with these Alder lake and z690 board. Thanks in advance.
> 
> - P.D My Motherboard is Asus Z690 TUF Gaming Plus D4, RAM is in GEAR 1 mode




GPU's are never stock ,most are factory overclocked...
Also would try an different gpu driver.

Also check for cache or memory errors,for memory would recommend Harku.
I have had the problem,that TM5 would not find any error,but Harku found one, straight away

Also check if ingame memory temps are higher then stresstesting.
I notice that memory temps are higher when gaming,because offf the heat off other components.
If its b die it could be more sensitive for temp spiking.

also would check with everything at stock(no cpu and memory overclock),if the problem disappears


----------



## grifers

Raimond said:


> GPU's are never stock ,most are factory overclocked...
> Also would try an different gpu driver.
> 
> Also check for cache or memory errors,for memory would recommend Harku.
> I have had the problem,that TM5 would not find any error,but Harku found one, straight away
> 
> Also check if ingame memory temps are higher then stresstesting.
> I notice that memory temps are higher when gaming,because offf the heat off other components.
> If its b die it could be more sensitive for temp spiking.
> 
> also would check with everything at stock(no cpu and memory overclock),if the problem disappears


Thank you. Where can I download the Harku program? When you refer to Memory temperatures, do you mean the RAM? What is the maximum temperature so that it does not degrade in these RAMs for 24/7?

Best regards!


----------



## Raimond

sorry its Karhu,my mistake:



RAM Test - Karhu Software



you need to buy it,unfortunatly

But b die is very temp sensitive,but it also depends on the kit. between 40 to 45c is recommended.
But you will get errors when the b die ,reaches its temp limit.
Put a fan on it or tho lower the temps and also check if the problem goes away.

The temps wont damage the memory,only causes errors

Also indeed check SA voltage and RAM voltage.
I only change SA voltage and ram voltage to stabilize the RAM,other voltages i dont bother
If you have cache errors,up the vcore a bit and check again

.


----------



## grifers

Raimond said:


> sorry its Karhu,my mistake:
> 
> 
> 
> RAM Test - Karhu Software
> 
> 
> 
> you need to buy it,unfortunatly
> 
> But b die is very temp sensitive,but it also depends on the kit. between 40 to 45c is recommended.
> But you will get errors when the b die ,reaches its temp limit.
> Put a fan on it or tho lower the temps and also check if the problem goes away.
> 
> The temps wont damage the memory,only causes errors
> 
> Also indeed check SA voltage and RAM voltage.
> I only change SA voltage and ram voltage to stabilize the RAM,other voltages i dont bother
> If you have cache errors,up the vcore a bit and check again
> 
> .



Thank you very much for the explanation, it helps me a lot. I did not know about the RAM temperatures. I have a Lian Li Lancool 2 Mesh with this arrangement of fans, this is my computer:



I think that the front fans already put cold air to the memories, however I will check the temperatures playing with the Hwinfo! Thank you very much, I will comment if everything is ok. For the karhu program no problem, 10 euros is nothing and I've read that it is a very good RAM overclock tester.

Best regards

Edit - @Raimond 2 and a half hours of back 4 blood, 1440p/Ultra without Vysnc:



How do you see the RAM temperatures? The problem of this white/gray screen with lock seems not to occur if I play in windowed mode, when I play in full screen and I give up and down the volume or press the "windows" key on the keyboard to go to the desktop (it has happened to me with Far Cry 6 also :S), that step of 2D-3D or whatever, is conducive (it seems), to give the white/gray screen more often.

The graphics card lasts hours and hours without artifacts or temperature problems. It also holds 10 minutes of furmark without any problem, this screen-bleed has me confused. I'm going to pass a Karhu Mem Test that I have already bought to see if I get any error memories, how many hours or so is yours?

I don't know what it can be. I have nothing in the background (only afterburner monitoring). I lowered the Uncore/cache from 4400 to 4200, left the RAM tertiary in Auto and raised the VDDQ from 1.35 to 1.365 so that the RAM is more relaxed. Let's see what the Karhu mem test says, if everything is OK then the focus is closing and it may be the CPU overclock or "something". I have also thought about something in the graphic that makes it crash when I make a drastic change of mode 3D-2D, I don't know. I have also thought that it could be the Resizable Bar giving by ass, at the end it is a technology that manages the memory of the graphics, and I am sure that it is some memory problem, either RAM or graphics card. When it is CPU it is either blue screen or reboot, in fact when I was tuning the Overclock and I lacked voltage (I was unstable), the system reacted like this, it just rebooted or blue screen or directly frozen screen, but white/gray screen? Anyway, it's a pain 

By the way, are these values in BIOS OK?


----------



## opheen

Got my Motherboard and Cpu yesterday whohoo! 3900Mhz 100:100 G1 - CommandRate2N VCCSA 1.3v VDDQ 1.5v DRAM 1.6v those sticks have been running with 1.6v for almost 3 years now Watercooled with EKmonark modules and XSPC RAM block. (TeamGroup) SKU : *TTCED432G3200HC14BDC01 *
Motherboard Msi Pro z690-A DDR4 Cpu 12700Kf 5.1ghz All E-cores Disable 1.315v vCore LL4.


----------



## HyperC

Man I must be like the only person that can't adjust the VDDG. Still anything from 1.20v no matter what bios I get BSOD


----------



## opheen

HyperC said:


> Man I must be like the only person that can't adjust the VDDG. Still anything from 1.20v no matter what bios I get BSOD


What Board do you have ? You mean VDDQ or is VDDG different name for same thing on your board ? .


----------



## HyperC

Asus TUF gaming wifi plus


----------



## opheen

HyperC said:


> Asus TUF gaming wifi plus


Hmm 4x8 or 2x16 DR ? On some motherboards with 2x16 DR you have to set : RttWr - Rttnom - RttPark Manually to boot and make it stable. rare you need it with 4x8sr


----------



## HyperC

4x8 4400 vipers


----------



## opheen

Vipers are good normally, so is the price to what are you running yours on? i still have a set with 2x8 4400c19 layin around here somewhere.


----------



## HyperC

3800 atm 14 timings , I haven't tried booting passed 4000 on 1505 bios yet. But I see like 4 members here always using different vddg to get stable and once I change mine from 1.20v I'll bsod I'm so lost I have noticed my training ohms from channel a/b are different A does 69 25 25 B 71 or 75 25 25


----------



## opheen

HyperC said:


> 3800 atm 14 timings , I haven't tried booting passed 4000 on 1505 bios yet. But I see like 4 members here always using different vddg to get stable and once I change mine from 1.20v I'll bsod I'm so lost I have noticed my training ohms from channel a/b are different A does 69 25 25 B 71 or 75 25 25


Tried to move around the sticks on the motherboard ?`Sometime it helps to get the best stick off your 4 vipers closer to cpu or the other way. tighten the cpu socket and re seat the cpu ? how high have you been on DRAMvoltage ? 69A B71 is "ok" 69-75 is not..


----------



## Raimond

grifers said:


> Thank you very much for the explanation, it helps me a lot. I did not know about the RAM temperatures. I have a Lian Li Lancool 2 Mesh with this arrangement of fans, this is my computer:
> 
> 
> 
> I think that the front fans already put cold air to the memories, however I will check the temperatures playing with the Hwinfo! Thank you very much, I will comment if everything is ok. For the karhu program no problem, 10 euros is nothing and I've read that it is a very good RAM overclock tester.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Edit - @Raimond 2 and a half hours of back 4 blood, 1440p/Ultra without Vysnc:
> 
> 
> 
> How do you see the RAM temperatures? The problem of this white/gray screen with lock seems not to occur if I play in windowed mode, when I play in full screen and I give up and down the volume or press the "windows" key on the keyboard to go to the desktop (it has happened to me with Far Cry 6 also :S), that step of 2D-3D or whatever, is conducive (it seems), to give the white/gray screen more often.
> 
> The graphics card lasts hours and hours without artifacts or temperature problems. It also holds 10 minutes of furmark without any problem, this screen-bleed has me confused. I'm going to pass a Karhu Mem Test that I have already bought to see if I get any error memories, how many hours or so is yours?
> 
> I don't know what it can be. I have nothing in the background (only afterburner monitoring). I lowered the Uncore/cache from 4400 to 4200, left the RAM tertiary in Auto and raised the VDDQ from 1.35 to 1.365 so that the RAM is more relaxed. Let's see what the Karhu mem test says, if everything is OK then the focus is closing and it may be the CPU overclock or "something". I have also thought about something in the graphic that makes it crash when I make a drastic change of mode 3D-2D, I don't know. I have also thought that it could be the Resizable Bar giving by ass, at the end it is a technology that manages the memory of the graphics, and I am sure that it is some memory problem, either RAM or graphics card. When it is CPU it is either blue screen or reboot, in fact when I was tuning the Overclock and I lacked voltage (I was unstable), the system reacted like this, it just rebooted or blue screen or directly frozen screen, but white/gray screen? Anyway, it's a pain
> 
> By the way, are these values in BIOS OK?
> 
> View attachment 2562941


I would really put all on stoock settings and check if its gone,thats the only way to sort out if it is indeed the overclock .

as for Karhu, 20000 ,minimum of 10000


----------



## HyperC

Atm I believe 1.485v dimm 3800 14 14 14 30 and secondary tighten . I have not tried to bin my sticks won't be able to mess with my pc again for another hour or so. I did reseat it couple weeks back when I lapped it


----------



## opheen

heheh, BIOS is fun when you get the respons you want, when youre not get that it is the worst place on earth 😅 If you have a FAN blowing on your sticks or some form of cooilng i would with 1.55vDRAM +++ 8gb Vipers have memIC only on one side so they handle volt and temps pretty good if a fan blowing on them.. when i go cl13\14 3733 or cl14\15\16 3800 and up i use minimum 1.55vDRAM it is a reson why they have lifetime warranty on G.Skill and TeamGroup memory sticks with B-die IC's


----------



## Groove2013

experimenting with just one 16 GB B-DIE stick (actively air cooled) in slot B2, with only 2 P-cores (HT off) and only 4.0 GHz cores/cache at 1.4 vcore LLC6 (just in case), to see what my sticks can do and not my CPU's memory controller.

will see which frequency is possible at 14-15-15 and 15-15-15 and vdimm required.

I, of course, can also leave only 1 core enabled, with like 800 MHz frequency, but I think it's fine like this, to see what sticks are actually capable of, when not limited by CPU memory controller.


----------



## opheen

Groove2013 said:


> experimenting with just one 16 GB B-DIE stick (actively air cooled) in slot B2, with only 2 cores (HT off) and only 4.0 GHz at 1.4 vcore LLC6 (just in case), to see ehat my sticks can do and not my CPU's memory controller.
> 
> will see which frequency is possible at 14-15-15 and 15-15-15 and vdimm required.


With 11gen or 12gen ? That is how confirm if it is the IMC or Sticks that holding you back. and ofc you need to set Rttwr - nom - park manually with the specs your memory require, Rttwr60 - Rttnom48 - Rttpark80 with dualrank on my msi z690 pro-a ddr4.


----------



## tunste

grifers said:


> Hello, good morning. What program do you use to measure the stability of the RAM overlock? I have 2 modules of 16 GB Gskill Dual-Rank at 4000 Mhz and latencies 15-15-15-35 2T with the secondary timmings touched. This particular model of memory:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.Skill Trident Z RGB - Memoria RAM DDR4-4000 MHz, CL16-16-16-36, 1,40 V, 32 GB (2 x 16 GB) : Amazon.es: Informática
> 
> 
> Compra online G.Skill Trident Z RGB - Memoria RAM DDR4-4000 MHz, CL16-16-16-36, 1,40 V, 32 GB (2 x 16 GB). Envío en 1 día GRATIS con Amazon Prime.
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.es
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is together with a 12700KF DELID at 5100 Mhz P-cores, 4100 mhz e-cores and 4200 Mhz Uncore Cache, all this perfectly stable with 1 hour of Handbrake. The RAM overclock is stable with 2 hours (a full cycle) of TestMem5 and the "Absolout Anta777" profile, is this enough?
> 
> I have a problem of random white/gray screenshots while playing, no matter how much load the game itself has, I can be hours and hours playing that for example I press the volume button on the keyboard and the system crashes with gray/white screenshot, even in a loading screen of a game (where there is no intensive use of CPU or GPU). The graphics card is not because it is stock, and I understand that the white/gray screenshots with system lockup have more to do with the RAM issue or something to do with the system Memory. RAM voltage is 1.47, SA is on Auto at 1.35 and VDDQ at 1.35, as I say this is stable for 2 hours of TestMem5 and Anta777's profile that one. Here is a screenshot:
> 
> View attachment 2562913
> 
> 
> My suspicions go for the RAM memory, so I ask what alternative program I can try to check the stability in the memory overclock with these Alder lake and z690 board. Thanks in advance.
> 
> - P.D My Motherboard is Asus Z690 TUF Gaming Plus D4, RAM is in GEAR 1 mode


Good Evening,

I have same motherboard and cpu as you. I just got G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model* F4-4000C16D-32GVKA* DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000); Timing 16-16-16-36,CAS Latency 16, Voltage 1.40V. I have 120mm fam on the ram. Great temps after adjusting my 12 fans in Q fan to a more agrssive profile om my 15 year old Extended Ascension Extended Mountain Modcase

I am running this ram timings: CL 15, 15, 15,35, tRC 50, tRFC 320, T2, Gear 1; SA @ 1,399v, VDDQXT @ 1.49v, Ring 41, memory clock @ 2000; on ASUS X690 TUF with 1504 bios. This bios made it possible to run my memory @ 2000 MHz clock. My 12700K IMC would not run DDR4 over 1900 MHz before this bios on my ASUS Z690 TUF. I am running my 12700K (P: 53,53,53,52,52,52,52,51; E: 40,39,39,39: 1,38v.). The 12700K is water cooled on custion waterloop.

This bios with this *F4-4000C16D-32GVKA* DDRr ram has made a difference with my system. I see better gaming performance and smooth game play at 1440p over 600 fps on Madden 2022 in online gameplay.

I would tell you to increase VDDQXT voltage to almost 1.50v and SA to almost 1.4. Get the 1504 bios.

I am Y-Cruncher stable, and TestMem5 stable.


----------



## opheen

tunste said:


> Good Evening,
> 
> I have same motherboard and cpu as you. I just got G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model* F4-4000C16D-32GVKA* DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000); Timing 16-16-16-36,CAS Latency 16, Voltage 1.40V. I have 120mm fam on the ram. Great temps after adjusting my 12 fans in Q fan to a more agrssive profile om my 15 year old Extended Ascension Extended Mountain Modcase
> 
> I am running this ram timings: CL 15, 15, 15,35, tRC 50, tRFC 320, T2, Gear 1; SA @ 1,399v, VDDQXT @ 1.49v, Ring 41, memory clock @ 2000; on ASUS X690 TUF with 1504 bios. This bios made it possible to run my memory @ 2000 MHz clock. My 12700K IMC would not run DDR4 over 1900 MHz before this bios on my ASUS Z690 TUF. I am running my 12700K (P: 53,53,53,52,52,52,52,51; E: 40,39,39,39: 1,38v.). The 12700K is water cooled on custion waterloop.
> 
> This bios with this *F4-4000C16D-32GVKA* DDRr ram has made a difference with my system. I see better gaming performance and smooth game play at 1440p over 600 fps on Madden 2022 in online gameplay.
> 
> I would tell you to increase VDDQXT voltage to almost 1.50v and SA to almost 1.4. Get the 1504 bios.
> 
> I am Y-Cruncher stable, and TestMem5 stable.


Have you tried too disable E-Cores work the cache higher ? I run with 5.1 all , 4.5 cache E-cores disable, so the 8 P-cores gets the 25Mb of L3 cache for them self. that rly got things going.. and ofc ring\cache att 45 helps with latency. The E-cores get whey to hot cuz many game engines have no instruction for them and if you try to set affinity on them the anticheat ****ing kicks in ...


----------



## tunste

opheen said:


> Have you tried too disable E-Cores work the cache higher ? I run with 5.1 all , 4.5 cache E-cores disable, so the 8 P-cores gets the 25Mb of L3 cache for them self. that rly got things going.. and ofc ring\cache att 45 helps with latency. The E-cores get whey to hot cuz many game engines have no instruction for them and if you try to set affinity on them the anticheat ****ing kicks in ...


No, just trying for a stable overclock on P cores and ram.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> experimenting with just one 16 GB B-DIE stick (actively air cooled) in slot B2, with only 2 P-cores (HT off) and only 4.0 GHz cores/cache at 1.4 vcore LLC6 (just in case), to see what my sticks can do and not my CPU's memory controller.
> 
> will see which frequency is possible at 14-15-15 and 15-15-15 and vdimm required.
> 
> I, of course, can also leave only 1 core enabled, with like 800 MHz frequency, but I think it's fine like this, to see what sticks are actually capable of, when not limited by CPU memory controller.


running Karhu at 4200 MHz 14-15-15 tFAW 16 at (almost) 1.65 vdimm with my 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 XMP (Jan. 2021)

with new 3600 14 1.45 or 4000 16 1.4, 4266 14 would have been possible, probably, at comparable vdimm.
4200 14 would have been possible at something like 1.6-1.63, instead of my (almost) 1.65 vdimm


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> running Karhu at 4200 MHz 14-15-15 tFAW 16 at (almost) 1.65 vdimm with my 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 XMP (Jan. 2021)
> 
> with new 3600 14 1.45 or 4000 16 1.4, 4266 14 would have been possible, probably, at comparable vdimm.
> 4200 14 would have been possible at something like 1.6-1.63, instead of my (almost) 1.65 vdimm


passed 10000% Karhu at 1.64375 vdimm (bios).

now trying 4200 14-15-*14* tFAW 16.


----------



## Raphie

Groove2013 said:


> passed 10000% Karhu at 1.64375 vdimm (bios).
> 
> now trying 4200 14-15-*14* tFAW 16.


I want my chips crispy well done pls


----------



## Groove2013

Raphie said:


> I want my chips crispy well done pls


not even 33°C at 1.64375 vdimm


----------



## Raphie

But still, 1.6v+ is living on the edge.
But good that you now found what‘s needed, makes the choice simpler wether you feel it’s worth it or not.


----------



## Groove2013

Raphie said:


> But still, 1.6v+ is living on the edge.
> But good that you now found what‘s needed, makes the choice simpler wether you feel it’s worth it or not.


OC'ed DDR5 voltage is not lower than OC'ed DDR4 voltage )


----------



## shrimpmaster

tunste said:


> Good Evening,
> 
> I have same motherboard and cpu as you. I just got G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model* F4-4000C16D-32GVKA* DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000); Timing 16-16-16-36,CAS Latency 16, Voltage 1.40V. I have 120mm fam on the ram. Great temps after adjusting my 12 fans in Q fan to a more agrssive profile om my 15 year old Extended Ascension Extended Mountain Modcase
> 
> I am running this ram timings: CL 15, 15, 15,35, tRC 50, tRFC 320, T2, Gear 1; SA @ 1,399v, VDDQXT @ 1.49v, Ring 41, memory clock @ 2000; on ASUS X690 TUF with 1504 bios. This bios made it possible to run my memory @ 2000 MHz clock. My 12700K IMC would not run DDR4 over 1900 MHz before this bios on my ASUS Z690 TUF. I am running my 12700K (P: 53,53,53,52,52,52,52,51; E: 40,39,39,39: 1,38v.). The 12700K is water cooled on custion waterloop.
> 
> This bios with this *F4-4000C16D-32GVKA* DDRr ram has made a difference with my system. I see better gaming performance and smooth game play at 1440p over 600 fps on Madden 2022 in online gameplay.
> 
> I would tell you to increase VDDQXT voltage to almost 1.50v and SA to almost 1.4. Get the 1504 bios.
> 
> I am Y-Cruncher stable, and TestMem5 stable.


Yes, I also noticed you need higher vddq tx and sa with bios after 1404. 1504 included.
Max stable I can get is 3900mhz no matter the bios«/voltages. My IMC is even worse than yours it seems...


----------



## tunste

Groove2013 said:


> not even 33°C at 1.64375 vdimm


Lol,

You pushing it to the edge. I like to keep my ram for a few years. I would feel safe running Samsung B-Die DDR4 with 1.50v -1.56v for daily use.

As I said trying to keep this ram for a few year; I will pass this setup to my wifey in 2 years after DDR5 timings get better then should be next generation of cpus then.


----------



## acoustic

Nothing has indicated 1.6v will kill mem chips. Just keep them cool. Someone has ran 1.6v daily for like 2-3 years or something like that with no issues or degradation.


----------



## Groove2013

4200 14-15-*14* requires even higher vdimm than 1.64375 (BIOS) vs. 4200 14-15-15.

now running 4300 15-15-15 at not even 1.6 vdimm.

it's CL14, at such frequency, that requires a lot of vdimm (BIOS).

4300 15-15-15 has higher bandwidth than 4200 14-15-15 and nanoseconds same or marginally better.


----------



## Groove2013

acoustic said:


> Nothing has indicated 1.6v will kill mem chips. Just keep them cool. Someone has ran 1.6v daily for like 2-3 years or something like that with no issues or degradation.


my B-DIE kit has spent many many weeks/months at 100% load, for countless hours, non-stop, at 1.6 vdimm and higher.
and that, since January 2021 and until now.


----------



## grifers

Hi! @Raimond I just saw that you said 10.000% being 20.000% the optimum, I have to try another day, I passed one of 10.000 (almost), and there is no error. Giving me 42 degrees the highest temperature in memory. I Activated the "CPU cache" option in the Ram Test program, another day I will test at 20,000 (it will be more than 6 hours).



At this point, then maybe it is the CPU overclock, or some graphics card driver issue, in reddit there is an open thread and several complain about the same / similar: (6900 XT and Samsung Odyssey G7)

(1) Freezing/ Crashing to Grey Screen : AMDHelp (reddit.com)

@tunste I have version 1304 is the one that gives me the best performance, the last one on the ASUS website is 1403 and I didn't like it. Where did you get that version 1504?.

Edit - My motherboard is the version without Wifi, for this version there is no BIOS 1504  as far as I see.


----------



## Groove2013

with both 16 GB sticks installed, all 8 P-cores enabled + HT and frequency past 5.0 GHz cores/cache, my 12900KS doesn't let me do more than 4000 MHz CL14 gear 1...


----------



## Raphie

3900 it is then  (Or CL15, if it boots 4K at all)


----------



## Groove2013

I could buy a 4000 CL16 2×16 kit and see if it can do tRCD 14, because it's like 1 ns better, if not more, vs. tRCD 15.

could also try my luck with another 12900KS, despite the price and lottery.

because what bothers me, is that despite 13900K being supported by Z690 mobos, it doesn't mean it will still have DDR4 IMC, like 7700K, athough being a refresh of 6700K, didn't have DDR3 IMC anymore.
+ my own last experience with 11900K being supported on Z490 boards, there were not as frequent BIOS updates as for Z590, not as new microcodes and some functionality/settings weren't present in Z490 BIOSes vs. Z590.

+ with same coes/cache frequency and exactly same RAM frequency and timings, nanoseconds in Aida64 were worse on Z490 with a 11900K.


----------



## opheen

Have they got tRTP Register to work now ? so you can go lower with tRP than tRCD ? 12gen supports the tRTP register.


----------



## Groove2013

opheen said:


> you can go lower with tRP than tRCD?


yes


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> I could buy a 4000 CL16 2×16 kit and see if it can do tRCD 14, because it's like 1 ns better, if not more, vs. tRCD 15.
> 
> could also try my luck with another 12900KS, despite the price and lottery.
> 
> because what bothers me, is that despite 13900K being supported by Z690 mobos, it doesn't mean it will still have DDR4 IMC, like 7700K, athough being a refresh of 6700K, didn't have DDR3 IMC anymore.
> + my own last experience with 11900K being supported on Z490 boards, there were not as frequent BIOS updates as for Z590, not as new microcodes and some functionality/settings weren't present in Z490 BIOSes vs. Z590.
> 
> + with same coes/cache frequency and exactly same RAM frequency and timings, nanoseconds in Aida64 were worse on Z490 with a 11900K.


Chances are you're going to have to put that on water. tRCD 14 at 4,000+ MHz is near impossible even with fan cooling.
It would have to be some pre-2021 bin that can do 4,000 flat-14 with like, 1.50V VDIMM.

At this point in time, you're better off waiting for Raptor Lake to come out and then buying binned Alder Lake chips that people liquidate.
High SP chips are already going under $1,000 USD and rapidly dropping.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> Chances are you're going to have to put that on water. tRCD 14 at 4,000+ MHz is near impossible even with fan cooling.
> It would have to be some pre-2021 bin that can do 4,000 flat-14 with like, 1.50V VDIMM.
> 
> At this point in time, you're better off waiting for Raptor Lake to come out and then buying binned Alder Lake chips that people liquidate.
> High SP chips are already going under $1,000 USD and rapidly dropping.


I know, I better don't buy anything now anymore and keep my SP99 P-cores 12900KS and my 2×16 GB 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP from Jan. 2021.


----------



## bass junkie xl

12900 ks sp 104 - P / sp 80 E 
bios 1504 

16x 2 gb royal 4000 - 16-16-16-36 1.40x xmp kit 
@ 4133 - 15-15-15-35 1.55 v gear 1 doing 
69k read
65.9 k write 
73.1 k copy
41.7ns latency in adia 64 ( safe mode ) and 43 ns in windows with clean boot 

stable in y cruncher and 8 hrs of tm,5 absolute 

Bios 1404 the above settings were stable to so new bios is fine for me 

i run 5.4 ghz P core and 5.1 ring HT on stable @ 1.32 v with ram @ 4133 15s flat in y cruncher and tm5 
5.5 ghz ht off and 5.6 ghzht off and5.7 ghz ht off game stable with 4133 c15 . 


5.2 ghz / 4.9 ring needs 1.19 v to pass y cruncher in bios 1504 vs 1. 20 v for 1404 . 

will try ram @ 4200 - 4266 at some point and post back 

i do have the thermalright lga 1700 brakcet that makes cpu socket flat does work pretty good 
@ 54/51 ring ht on e cores off y cruncher hits up to 90c hotest core 81 c coldest core average of 86c @ 300 w ish on a artic liqwuid freezer 420mm aio push pull


----------



## opheen

12700Kf - and 3900 with "Basic B-die timings" 

Then I have a stable setup to store in the bios. Booted 4000 cl14 but trained RTL's to 69-76 so did not bother to start with it now as it is quite possible I can not get it stable once. I wanted to get a stable setup before I jump into the rabbit hole.


----------



## VULC

bass junkie xl said:


> 12900 ks sp 104 - P / sp 80 E
> bios 1504
> 
> 16x 2 gb royal 4000 - 16-16-16-36 1.40x xmp kit
> @ 4133 - 15-15-15-35 1.55 v gear 1 doing
> 69k read
> 65.9 k write
> 73.1 k copy
> 41.7ns latency in adia 64 ( safe mode ) and 43 ns in windows with clean boot
> 
> stable in y cruncher and 8 hrs of tm,5 absolute
> 
> Bios 1404 the above settings were stable to so new bios is fine for me
> 
> i run 5.4 ghz P core and 5.1 ring HT on stable @ 1.32 v with ram @ 4133 15s flat in y cruncher and tm5
> 5.5 ghz ht off and 5.6 ghzht off and5.7 ghz ht off game stable with 4133 c15 .
> 
> 
> 5.2 ghz / 4.9 ring needs 1.19 v to pass y cruncher in bios 1504 vs 1. 20 v for 1404 .
> 
> will try ram @ 4200 - 4266 at some point and post back
> 
> i do have the thermalright lga 1700 brakcet that makes cpu socket flat does work pretty good
> @ 54/51 ring ht on e cores off y cruncher hits up to 90c hotest core 81 c coldest core average of 86c @ 300 w ish on a artic liqwuid freezer 420mm aio push pull


That's sweet bro my 4 x 8GB Vipers are doing 4000 CL15 flat at 1.5v Dram, 1.34 SA, 1.39 VDDQ. I set 4133mhz and pumped 1.55v into them with 1.45 VDDQ no go crashing in R23. With 4 sticks I'm sure SA would need to go up higher, but I'm getting 44ns flat on AIDA with regular boot up. I'm also running x51 on the CPU 1.37v LLC 5 with +2 Turbo Velocity Boost. This gives me 5300 in-game and x51 during R23. I'd rather do it this way than have flat x52 I'm also running LF II 420. Ring is min x48 and the target is max x50 with down bin disabled since I'm running 1.37v on CPU no stress about overvolting.


----------



## Raphie

What does MLC show you?


----------



## VULC

Raphie said:


> What does MLC show you?


----------



## Raphie

Very, very nice.
can you Y-crunch p2.5 and Karhu 10k%+


----------



## VULC

Raphie said:


> Very, very nice.
> can you Y-crunch p2.5 and Karhu 10k%+


It's game stable so not really using these tests but I never got any crashes for my use case either way. Another member with the same sticks said he needed 1.55v with 1.45 VDDQ to run Y Crunch but I don't run that so why would I pump more volts if not needed. I'm sure if i up ring to 51 i could drop to 43ns.


----------



## Groove2013

@Ichirou @bscool Karhu's been running already for several hours 2×16 GB at 4000 MHz 14-15-14-15 tFAW 16 at 1.56250 vdimm (BIOS) and 1.545 vdimm (HWiNFO).

does it say anything to you about the quality of these 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 vdimm sticks?


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> Chances are you're going to have to put that on water. tRCD 14 at 4,000+ MHz is near impossible even with fan cooling.
> It would have to be some pre-2021 bin that can do 4,000 flat-14 with like, 1.50V VDIMM.


I think I keep my kit, since I aim for more than just 4000 MHz RAM frequency and thus, tRCD 14 isn't possible anyways and my kit is capable of tRCD 15 anyways, at 4133 or 4200 MHz.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @Ichirou @bscool Karhu's been running already for several hours 2×16 GB at 4000 MHz 14-15-14-15 tFAW 16 at 1.56250 vdimm (BIOS) and 1.545 vdimm (HWiNFO).
> 
> does it say anything to you about the quality of these 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 vdimm sticks?


They must be pretty good to run those timings, clocks and voltages.


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> They must be pretty good to run those timings, clocks and voltages.


sticks temp is sub 35°C with almost 2000 rpm 140 mm EKWB Vardar.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool is tRP 14 also somewhat difficult and vdimm intensive?


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool is tRP 14 also somewhat difficult and vdimm intensive?


Probably. I have never tried it. I usually just stick with what i have used from the begining([email protected] or [email protected])


----------



## Groove2013

I see that my vdimm comes mainly from my tRCD that can go lower than 15.


----------



## Groove2013

.


----------



## Groove2013

.


----------



## Groove2013

since I can't go higher than 4000 MHz, I will try to lower all the timings as much as possible, to have the nanoseconds, although lower than 4100/4133/4200/4266/4300 bandwidth.


----------



## Groove2013

@sugi0lover is tRFC affected by tCL and/or vdimm?


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> Probably. I have never tried it. I usually just stick with what i have used from the begining([email protected] or [email protected])


why not simply and only 4266 15-16-16, instead of 4133 15-15-15?


----------



## VULC

Groove2013 said:


> why not simply and only 4266 15-16-16, instead of 4133 15-15-15?


If your gaming your not bandwidth limited by 4000 even 3600mhz if you work on large videos do rendering etc then you need more bandwidth. It all depends on your goal. DDR5 is better if you game and work.


----------



## Groove2013

now testing tRP13 (4000 14-15-*13*).


----------



## Groove2013

VULC said:


> If your gaming your not bandwidth limited by 4000 even 3600mhz


I'm only gaming, thus responsiveness is more important than bandwidth.


----------



## Groove2013

but still would have prefered 4200 14-15 )))


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> why not simply and only 4266 15-16-16, instead of 4133 15-15-15?


Depends on the cpu I am using. One of them wont do 4266c15-16-16. Only 4133c15-15-15 or 4266c16-16-16.


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> Depends on the cpu I am using. One of them wont do 4266c15-16-16. Only 4133c15-15-15 or 4266c16-16-16.


why would you keep several CPUs and not just one that's best overall?

same for RAM - the best of them all.


----------



## Groove2013

I hope so much that Raptor won't have worse RAM performance on Z690, like Rocket on Z490 and that BIOS and microcode updates will be good enough.
Because, I'm almost certain, that there won't be any DDR4 boards anymore, despite Raptor supporting DDR4 or only like H or B boards, like it was the case with i7-6700K (DDR3/DDR4) back then.

a good Z690 DDR4 board is what is needed.

because DDR5 and IMCs and mobos revolving around still need some time/polish.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> why would you keep several CPUs and not just one that's best overall?
> 
> same for RAM - the best of them all.


3 z690 MB


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> 3 z690 MB


what were you able to achieve with Apex as RAM frequency and timings?
MLC nsnoseconds?


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> what were you able to achieve with Apex as RAM frequency and timings?
> MLC nsnoseconds?


It is better than my ddr4 depending on Inject Delay.

ddr4 ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


----------



## Groove2013

.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> and MLC for your DDR4?


Doesn the link work but here

What does yours look like?


----------



## Groove2013

so 158 ns for 4133 15 vs. 81 ns for 7000 30?

how to understand this?
because I've never used MLC before.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> so 158 ns for 4133 15 vs. 81 ns for 7000 30?
> 
> how to understand this?
> because I've never used MLC before.


I dont know how it relates. I just notice in the upper ones ddr5 is much better and the lower ddr4 slightly better.


----------



## Groove2013

ok, 4000 14-15-14-15 tFAW 16 it is then.
just need to find the lowest vdimm.

later will increase vdimm, to see whether it helps to lower tRFC.


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> I dont know how it relates. I just notice in the upper ones ddr5 is much better and the lower ddr4 slightly better.


then I will continue to use Aida64 nanoseconds for comparison.


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> Probably. I have never tried it. I usually just stick with what i have used from the begining([email protected] or [email protected])


haven't tried 4200 15-15-15?


----------



## VULC

Test in fps not ns. Check max overclock ddr4 beats or matches ddr5.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> haven't tried 4200 15-15-15?


No. I guess it doesnt matter enough to me. I know that nothing will change if I can run 4400c14-14-14 or 4000c15-15-15 outside of benchmarks. Not like I can tell a difference.


----------



## opheen

Rabbit hole time, att 45ns with this still working my way down.. i just run karhu to 500% and 10 min R23 between timing change, then i will fully test it when i feel its time to stop.


----------



## Cam1

tunste said:


> Good Evening,
> 
> I have same motherboard and cpu as you. I just got G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Intel XMP 2.0 Desktop Memory Model* F4-4000C16D-32GVKA* DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000); Timing 16-16-16-36,CAS Latency 16, Voltage 1.40V. I have 120mm fam on the ram. Great temps after adjusting my 12 fans in Q fan to a more agrssive profile om my 15 year old Extended Ascension Extended Mountain Modcase
> 
> I am running this ram timings: CL 15, 15, 15,35, tRC 50, tRFC 320, T2, Gear 1; SA @ 1,399v, VDDQXT @ 1.49v, Ring 41, memory clock @ 2000; on ASUS X690 TUF with 1504 bios. This bios made it possible to run my memory @ 2000 MHz clock. My 12700K IMC would not run DDR4 over 1900 MHz before this bios on my ASUS Z690 TUF. I am running my 12700K (P: 53,53,53,52,52,52,52,51; E: 40,39,39,39: 1,38v.). The 12700K is water cooled on custion waterloop.
> 
> This bios with this *F4-4000C16D-32GVKA* DDRr ram has made a difference with my system. I see better gaming performance and smooth game play at 1440p over 600 fps on Madden 2022 in online gameplay.
> 
> I would tell you to increase VDDQXT voltage to almost 1.50v and SA to almost 1.4. Get the 1504 bios.
> 
> I am Y-Cruncher stable, and TestMem5 stable.


That's insane, ppls didn't stop telling that it's cause of IMC and now you just prove that bios has to do with this !
Would you mind share your Bios (.CMO) file so i can try it ?
I have "same" hardware as yours but i'm not good at setting up the bios...
Thanks in advance


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> @Ichirou @bscool Karhu's been running already for several hours 2×16 GB at 4000 MHz 14-15-14-15 tFAW 16 at 1.56250 vdimm (BIOS) and 1.545 vdimm (HWiNFO).
> 
> does it say anything to you about the quality of these 3800 14-16-16-36 1.5 vdimm sticks?


Good bin for post-2021.


Groove2013 said:


> @bscool is tRP 14 also somewhat difficult and vdimm intensive?


tRP is temperature sensitive and does require some VDIMM.


Groove2013 said:


> @sugi0lover is tRFC affected by tCL and/or vdimm?


tRFC is limited by frequency, VDIMM, temps.


Groove2013 said:


> ok, 4000 14-15-14-15 tFAW 16 it is then.
> just need to find the lowest vdimm.
> 
> later will increase vdimm, to see whether it helps to lower tRFC.


Increasing VDIMM does allow you to lower tRFC further with Samsung B-die.


----------



## Groove2013

I guess I will stop with 5.2/5.1 GHz cores/cache (non-AVX custom complete run of Prime95) of my 12900KS and 4000 MHz CL14 gear 1.
42.2 ns in Aida64 is enough for me.


----------



## opheen

Stopped here. got my RTL's trained good and it feels butter smooth when i play. hope the stability tests feel the same way --


----------



## Groove2013

Will see how low I can set tRFC with max vdimm that my sticks will tolerate in Karhu without errors (10000%).

with 11900K and Apex Z590, for 4000 MHz gear 1, tRFC was 234, with same sticks, at max 1.59 vdimm (BIOS) and 1.611 vdimm HWiNFO.


----------



## bscool

Just got some of the ILM replacement frames to try. Put one on Strix d4 to see if it effects mem OC and so far so good.

Boots and benches 4266c15-15-15 DR. Never booted that before so probably the new bios letting me run that.

CPU at defaults


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> Just got some of the ILM replacement frames to try. Put one on Strix d4 to see if it effects mem OC and so far so good.
> 
> Boots and benches 4266c15-15-15 DR. Never booted that before so probably the new bios letting me run that.
> 
> CPU at defaults


why was your cache at only 3.6 GHz?

can you, please, rerun Aida without E-cores and with the cache at like 5.0 GHz?

would be interesting to see nanosecs in Aida64, to know what I'm missing with only 4000 MHz CL14.

otherwise it's just few GB better read/write/copy than 4000 CL14.

maybe higher cache frequency can also slightly increase the bandwidth.


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> why was your cache at only 3.6 GHz?
> 
> can you, please, rerun Aida without E-cores and with the cache at like 5.0 GHz?
> 
> would be interesting to see nanosecs in Aida64, to know what I'm missing with only 4000 MHz CL14.
> 
> otherwise it's just few GB better read/write/copy than 4000 CL14.
> 
> maybe higher cache frequency can also slightly increase the bandwidth.


Cpu was at default so it shows 3600 but clocks up to 4700 for aida64 bench.

I dont have the ddr4 system running right now, working on putting ILM frame on Apex and having stability issues with mem now 

I know latency is in the area of sub 42ns though with cache at 50 and 4266c15


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> Cpu was at default so it shows 3600 but clocks up to 4700 for aida64 bench.
> 
> I know latency is in the area of sub 42ns though with cache at 50 and 4266c15


so no sense, for me, to try get another 12900KS, with better IMC, since the difference is not noticable at all.
one has to measure it several times, to see there is a difference.
good for me then.


----------



## spin5000

I've read about quite a few people having DDR4 RAM issues with the Z690 Gigabyte boards. Have those issues been resolved? Can I expect to do dual-rank B-die 4000 Mhz CL14 with my 12900KS on Gigabyte boards like I can with ASUS & MSI? Or do the Gigabyte and fast RAM issue still exist today with current BIOSs?


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> Just got some of the ILM replacement frames to try. Put one on Strix d4 to see if it effects mem OC and so far so good.
> 
> Boots and benches 4266c15-15-15 DR. Never booted that before so probably the new bios letting me run that.
> 
> CPU at defaults


vdimm?


----------



## bscool

Groove2013 said:


> vdimm?


For what? 4266c15-15-15? It is in the screenshot. 1.563v


----------



## Groove2013

bscool said:


> For what? 4266c15-15-15? It is in the screenshot. 1.563v


then you could max out vdimm and crank up tREFI and lower tRFC.


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> I've read about quite a few people having DDR4 RAM issues with the Z690 Gigabyte boards. Have those issues been resolved? Can I expect to do dual-rank B-die 4000 Mhz CL14 with my 12900KS on Gigabyte boards like I can with ASUS & MSI? Or do the Gigabyte and fast RAM issue still exist today with current BIOSs?


Gigabyte has been terrible this generation, last generation, and probably will continue to be in future generations. Just avoid them like your life depends on it.
Get a decent MSI instead if you're looking for a budget pick. Don't take a risk by trying to save a little bit of money. It pays off in the long run.


----------



## Agent-A01

bscool said:


> Just got some of the ILM replacement frames to try. Put one on Strix d4 to see if it effects mem OC and so far so good.
> 
> Boots and benches 4266c15-15-15 DR. Never booted that before so probably the new bios letting me run that.
> 
> CPU at defaults


Frames made zero difference for me(thermalright). Was a waste of money


----------



## Ichirou

Agent-A01 said:


> Frames made zero difference for me(thermalright). Was a waste of money


It depends entirely on the CPU cooler. Some will respond with gains, others won't. It's either an upgrade or a sidegrade. But for $10, worth a bet.
At least it's not as expensive as the Thermal Grizzly copy.


----------



## tunste

Cam1 said:


> That's insane, ppls didn't stop telling that it's cause of IMC and now you just prove that bios has to do with this !
> Would you mind share your Bios (.CMO) file so i can try it ?
> I have "same" hardware as yours but i'm not good at setting up the bios...
> Thanks in advance
> 
> 
> Cam1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> That's insane, ppls didn't stop telling that it's cause of IMC and now you just prove that bios has to do with this !
> Would you mind share your Bios (.CMO) file so i can try it ?
> I have "same" hardware as yours but i'm not good at setting up the bios...
> Thanks in advance
> 
> 
> 
> Prior to this bios, 1504 and new ram, I could not get 32 GB G.Skill FlareX DDR4 (4x 8GB) stable with ram running ram clocked above a 1900 memory clock. I can now running 2000 Mhz memory clock.(15,15, 15, 30, tRC 50, 320) .
> 
> I am using this system for online gaming as well as home office. I am now running my DDR4 (2 x 16GB) clocked 1900MHz with timings: (14,15,13,28, tRC 41, 270, T2, Gear 1). This CL 14 gives me beat gaming fell for online gaming @1440p on 240 MHz 27inch monitor. I have not gotten that good to pull my bios settings. Get those posted here when I figure it out. I have raised my ring to 4300 MHz from 4100 MHz.
> 
> The most important thing is can your cpu IMC handle the stress of tight ram settings @ high memory clocks. This is still the silicone lottery if cpu IMC can handle those tight settings. This bios 1504 is better for my cpu max ram clocks for me..
> 
> This forum is a good source of information.on ram overclocking. This bios is forcing more SA voltage and VDDQ TX voltage for stable ram overclocking.
Click to expand...


----------



## opheen

Here is what i ended up with. VCCSA(SystemAgentVoltage) 1.3v - VDDQ-TX 1.5v - DRAM volt 1.59v -- Rttwr60 - Rttnom48 - Rttpark80.


----------



## opheen

Motherboard:MSI z690 PRO-A DDR4 CPU:12700KF RAM: 2x16gb DR TeamGroup T-Create cl [email protected] 1.35v


----------



## tunste

opheen said:


> Here is what i ended up with. VCCSA(SystemAgentVoltage) 1.3v - VDDQ-TX 1.5v - DRAM volt 1.59v -- Rttwr60 - Rttnom48 - Rttpark80.
> View attachment 2563333


Great job,

I used some of your setting. I have G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB DDR4 (2 x 16GB) Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA running (@ 3900 MHz (14,15,13,28,41,270,Gear1, CR2)|. DDR 4 ram at 1.57v with 120mm fan directly over it, SA @ 1.42, VDDQ TX @1.54v. The new 1504 bios for my ASUS Z690 has improved ram stability. I could not run stable with ram clocked at 1950 MHz but can now with low settings. This is fun now.


.


----------



## Ichirou

tunste said:


> Great job,
> 
> I used some of your setting. I have G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB DDR4 (2 x 16GB) Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA running (@ 3900 MHz (14,15,13,28,41,270,Gear1, CR2)|. DDR 4 ram at 1.57v with 120mm fan directly over it, SA @ 1.42, VDDQ TX @1.54v. The new 1504 bios for my ASUS Z690 has improved ram stability. I could not run stable with ram clocked at 1950 MHz but can now with low settings. This is fun now.
> 
> 
> .
> View attachment 2563359
> View attachment 2563360


Would not suggest dailying with VCCSA over 1.35-1.40V.


----------



## solon

imc/ram/bios ver sweetspot


----------



## Groove2013

Agent-A01 said:


> Frames made zero difference for me(thermalright). Was a waste of money


I've simply removed the retention mechanism of the motherboard and the CPU is pushed down only by the pressure of waterblock springs.
no bending and 0 money spent


----------



## tunste

Ichirou said:


> Would not suggest dailying with VCCSA over 1.35-1.40V.


Thanks,

I now set SA to1.37v and VDDQ TX tro 1.500v


----------



## spin5000

Agent-A01 said:


> Frames made zero difference for me (thermalright). Was a waste of money


I thought you're really supposed to use these frames before you've ever mounted the CPU?

I've read the frames are supposed to prevent the CPU's IHS from becoming concave over time (although some people report improved temps on used CPUs). From what I understand, if the CPU has already been mounted for a while, gone through many heat cycles, etc. and it's IHS has become concave, then there's only so much these frames can do. Many people have had temps increase over a few months due to the known Intel 12th-gen ILM issue. I think these frames from Thermalright and Thermal Grizzly are supposed to prevent that.

Furthermore, some IHSs may even be a touch convex from the factory. In those cases, the convex IHS and ILM issue wanting to make the IHS concave can sort of cancel each other out and make the IHS flat. In that (probably) rare situation, you'd luck out and have a flat IHS after all is said and done.

Finally, some cooler plates may not be flat. I read a Youtube comment that one/some of EK's waterblocks (possibly on their AIO) is purposely convex in order to fit flush with a concave CPU. In that case, making the CPU flat would theoretically have a negative effect on temps.

I'm heavily leaning towards using a Thermalright frame the first time I setup my new (never mounted) 12900KS.

P.S. On top of all of that, I heard that coolers with spring-screws are less problematic with the 12th-gen ILM issue than coolers without springs. My trusty Swiftech H320 (360 mm) AIO uses spring-screws; does that mean I won't encounter the issue? Ahhh, so many variables!!!


----------



## Kubko

Hey, I recently upgraded to 12900K and wanted to tune my ram as best I could. I could post 4200+ with sa 1.4, so I went 1.35 for 4100, however I had trouble to run cl15 without bumping ram voltage above rated 1.5v so I went stable to sa 1.25v c15 without touching ram voltage. So in case I bump voltage to 1.55-1.6v, what would be better, something like 4000 cl14 or 4100 cl15? My sa is limiting factor anyways since I dont want to run 1.4 daily.

also for timings, anything I can improve? Its myfirst time tuning, so I maybe did not tune everything properly, thanks!


----------



## Ichirou

Kubko said:


> Hey, I recently upgraded to 12900K and wanted to tune my ram as best I could. I could post 4200+ with sa 1.4, so I went 1.35 for 4100, however I had trouble to run cl15 without bumping ram voltage above rated 1.5v so I went stable to sa 1.25v c15 without touching ram voltage. So in case I bump voltage to 1.55-1.6v, what would be better, something like 4000 cl14 or 4100 cl15? My sa is limiting factor anyways since I dont want to run 1.4 daily.
> 
> also for timings, anything I can improve? Its myfirst time tuning, so I maybe did not tune everything properly, thanks!
> 
> View attachment 2563572


You more or less have the timings right, although tRFC and tREFI can be pushed further.
At 4,000 MHz, you want to try for 14-15-15-XX. But above that, you can loosen the primaries a bit.
Just put in 1.35V VCCSA and 1.50V VDDQ and see what you can achieve. Set cache to at least 40x.


----------



## tunste

opheen said:


> Here is what i ended up with. VCCSA(SystemAgentVoltage) 1.3v - VDDQ-TX 1.5v - DRAM volt 1.59v -- Rttwr60 - Rttnom48 - Rttpark80.
> View attachment 2563333


I decided to go DDR4 clocked to 20002 MHz; VCCSA(SystemAgentVoltage) 1.3950v - VDDQ-TX 1.5v - DRAM volt 1.565v


----------



## Groove2013

have food 99% of the timings for 4000 MHz gear 1 with my Trident Z Neo (2×16 GB) 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP (Jan. 2021).
(12900 KS P-cores SP99, E-cores off and BIOS 1504)

now testing tRFC 227 at 1.60625 VDIMM (BIOS) / 1.598 VDIMM (HWiNFO), since that's the max vdimm I can do without RAM related errors.

once I find the min stable/doable tRFC, I will see how far I can go with tREFI.

sticks max temp at 100% load is 35°C with a 140 mm EKWB Vardar fan at almost 1900 rpm.

SA and VDDQ TX voltages are both at 1.5 V, just in case.
doesn't mean that much for both is required.

will see by how much I can lower SA and VDDQ TX voltages, once I finish with all the timings.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> have food 99% of the timings for 4000 MHz gear 1 with my Trident Z Neo (2×16 GB) 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP (Jan. 2021).
> (12900 KS P-cores SP99, E-cores off and BIOS 1504)
> 
> now testing tRFC 227 at 1.60625 VDIMM (BIOS) / 1.598 VDIMM (HWiNFO), since that's the max vdimm I can do without RAM related errors.
> 
> once I find the min stable/doable tRFC, I will see how far I can go with tREFI.
> 
> sticks max temp at 100% load is 35°C with a 140 mm EKWB Vardar fan at almost 1900 rpm.
> 
> SA and VDDQ TX voltages are both at 1.5 V, just in case.
> doesn't mean that much for both is required.
> 
> will see by how much I can lower SA and VDDQ TX voltages, once I finish with all the timings.


tRFC 227 has passed slightly more than 10000% Karhu.

now maxed out tREFI and also testing it.


----------



## Groove2013

wondering if changing *tXPDLL* can help lower nanoseconds.

it's 26 for me. but don't know whether it's related to any other timings and by how much I can lower it or to what.

tXP 4 and PPD 0.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> have food 99% of the timings for 4000 MHz gear 1 with my Trident Z Neo (2×16 GB) 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP (Jan. 2021).
> (12900 KS P-cores SP99, E-cores off and BIOS 1504)
> 
> now testing tRFC 227 at 1.60625 VDIMM (BIOS) / 1.598 VDIMM (HWiNFO), since that's the max vdimm I can do without RAM related errors.
> 
> once I find the min stable/doable tRFC, I will see how far I can go with tREFI.
> 
> sticks max temp at 100% load is 35°C with a 140 mm EKWB Vardar fan at almost 1900 rpm.
> 
> SA and VDDQ TX voltages are both at 1.5 V, just in case.
> doesn't mean that much for both is required.
> 
> will see by how much I can lower SA and VDDQ TX voltages, once I finish with all the timings.


finished with all the timings, finally.

now need to drop SA and VDDQ TX.


----------



## Groove2013

I've changed tREFI via Mem TweakIt in Windows, but tREFIx9 remained at 135, same as it was for tREFI 16000 and that's why it passed Karhu.

now I've restarted the PC and set tREFI to 262000 in the BIOS and now it's not doing even 13 secs of Karhu, since tREFIx9 is now correct and corresponds to 255 and not 135.

so still need to find max tREFI that's stable in Karhu and rebooting the PC each time to change tREFI in BIOS only, so it boots with correct tREFIx9 into Windows.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> I've changed tREFI via Mem TweakIt in Windows, but tREFIx9 remained at 135, same as it was for tREFI 16000 and that's why it passed Karhu.
> 
> now I've restarted the PC and set tREFI to 262000 in the BIOS and now it's not doing even 13 secs of Karhu, since tREFIx9 is now correct and corresponds to 255 and not 135.
> 
> so still need to find max tREFI that's stable in Karhu and rebooting the PC each time to change tREFI in BIOS only, so it boots with correct tREFIx9 into Windows.


omg, I've already lowered SA and have forgotten I've done so and was thinking that tREFI 262143 is not possible )))


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> omg, I've already lowered SA and have forgotten I've done so and was thinking that tREFI 262143 is not possible )))


ok, tREFI 262143 is still not possible, despite maxed out SA, when tREFIx9 is correct and corresponds to 255.

so now testing for max possible tREFI with maxed out voltages.


----------



## Ichirou

@Groove2013 Advanced Timings Configuration
Also, tREFI can only go to 65536 max on DDR4 due to design. And I've tested out going beyond just for the hell of it. It doesn't do anything; just gets ignored and reduced back to 65536 internally.


----------



## Groove2013

still curious what's the max tREFI I'll be able to do, to 1 digit precisely.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> still curious what's the max tREFI I'll be able to do, to 1 digit precisely.


tREFI is better when it is a multiple of 8192


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> tREFI is better when it is a multiple of 8192


now testing tREFI 163840.
already more than 60 mins Karhu tREFIx9 255.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> now testing tREFI 163840.
> already more than 60 mins Karhu tREFIx9 255.


Did you test AIDA before actually bothering with it? It's going to be the same scores as 65536, lol.
DDR4 by design cannot go above 65536.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> Did you test AIDA before actually bothering with it? It's going to be the same scores as 65536, lol.
> DDR4 by design cannot go above 65536.


I haven't )))
will check bandwidth, ns and PhotoWorxx


----------



## acoustic

tREFI above 65535/6 does nothing for DDR4. It's just lazy BIOS writing - tREFI higher than that is for DDR5 use only.


----------



## tunste

Groove2013 said:


> ok, tREFI 262143 is still not possible, despite maxed out SA, when tREFIx9 is correct and corresponds to 255.
> 
> so now testing for max possible tREFI with maxed out voltages.


Great job.

Could you post screenshots of voltages for SA, VDdQ TX, ram voltage, ram settings??


----------



## Groove2013

tunste said:


> Great job.
> 
> Could you post screenshots of voltages for SA, VDdQ TX, ram voltage, ram settings??


not finished tuning, yet.


----------



## tunste

Groove2013 said:


> not finished tuning, yet.


I am looking forward to seeing those numbers. I have finished tuning my G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (16,16,16,36 @ 1.4v). I am running my DDR4 clocked to 4002 MHz (14,15,14,30,44,270,Gear1, CR2)
| SA @ 1.38, VDDQ TX @ 1.5v, DDR4 @ voltage 1.570. 12700K cores: P (53,53,53,52,52,52,51,51) E: (40,40,40,40) | cpu voltage: 1.376


----------



## Groove2013

tunste said:


> I am looking forward to seeing those numbers. I have finished tuning my G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (16,16,16,36 @ 1.4v). I am running my DDR4 clocked to 4002 MHz (14,15,14,30,44,270,Gear1, CR2)
> | SA @ 1.38, VDDQ TX @ 1.5v, DDR4 @ voltage 1.570. 12700K cores: P (53,53,53,52,52,52,51,51) E: (40,40,40,40) | cpu voltage: 1.376
> View attachment 2563780


you can further lower tRFC, by increasing RAM voltage to something like 1.6 V.

tRFC boosts FPS in games.


----------



## Groove2013

but you need to actively cool your sticks with a fan blowing air directly onto them.


----------



## tunste

Groove2013 said:


> but you need to actively cool your sticks with a fan blowing air directly onto them.


I have 120mm fan blowing directly on the ram , temp not over 40 C gaming.


----------



## Raphie

Ichirou said:


> tREFI is better when it is a multiple of 8192


This! And most forgiving @ 32768 and below. Have not seen any performance uptick on higher values, other than higher voltage required, more heat produced.


----------



## Cam1

tunste said:


> I am looking forward to seeing those numbers. I have finished tuning my G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (16,16,16,36 @ 1.4v). I am running my DDR4 clocked to 4002 MHz (14,15,14,30,44,270,Gear1, CR2)
> | SA @ 1.38, VDDQ TX @ 1.5v, DDR4 @ voltage 1.570. 12700K cores: P (53,53,53,52,52,52,51,51) E: (40,40,40,40) | cpu voltage: 1.376
> View attachment 2563780


Hey can you share your Bios save ? i would like to try it on my board ! 
My setup is identical...


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> Did you test AIDA before actually bothering with it? It's going to be the same scores as 65536, lol.
> DDR4 by design cannot go above 65536.


tested auto tREFI (~16000) vs. 65545 and 262143.

between auto tREFi and 65535 there is slightly more than 0.5% difference in Aida64 PhotoWorxx and between 65535 and 262143, there is less than 0.5 % difference.

so I simply set tREFI to 65535.

between tRAS 15 and 28, there is no difference, so I set tRAS to 28, to not disturb people seeing my current tRAS value of 15.

looking for lowest possible SA now, in Karhu.


----------



## Groove2013

still testing min SA voltage for my 2×16 GB 4000 MHz 14-15-14-28-2T-227 gear 1 with Karhu RAM Test, but I already can tell that SA voltage will be lower than 1.25 V (BIOS), because now it's at 1.22 V (BIOS) and Karhu's been running for more than 1 hour already.

after this I will see to what I can lower VDDQ TX from current 1.5 V (BIOS).


----------



## Groove2013

I use Karhu only to find out max possible RAM frequency and lowest possible timings.

for all the final voltages I've always been using a full custom (non-AVX) Prime95 run, with FFTs in-place.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> still testing min SA voltage for my 2×16 GB 4000 MHz 14-15-14-28-2T-227 gear 1 with Karhu RAM Test, but I already can tell that SA voltage will be lower than 1.25 V (BIOS), because now it's at 1.22 V (BIOS) and Karhu's been running for more than 1 hour already.
> 
> after this I will see to what I can lower VDDQ TX from current 1.5 V (BIOS).


min stable SA voltage is 1.223 V (BIOS), for Karhu 10000%.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> still testing min SA voltage for my 2×16 GB 4000 MHz 14-15-14-28-2T-227 gear 1 with Karhu RAM Test, but I already can tell that SA voltage will be lower than 1.25 V (BIOS), because now it's at 1.22 V (BIOS) and Karhu's been running for more than 1 hour already.
> 
> after this I will see to what I can lower VDDQ TX from current 1.5 V (BIOS).


Karhu's been running for an hour already with VDDQ TX 1.25 V (BIOS).


----------



## opheen

Groove2013 said:


> Karhu's been running for an hour already with VDDQ TX 1.25 V (BIOS).


SA 1.25v \ VDDQ TX 1.25v is stable here with [email protected] G1 CR2N [tRFC 237-tREFI 40000] 1.6v DRAM. Baseclock 100.25. 12700Kf P-Cores 5.1 \Ring-Cache 4.7 1.345v (1.295\1.3v Load) vcore LLC4 E-Cores=Disabled. Msi Pro z690-A DDR4 . Bios v1.4 . 2x16Gb TeamGroup T-Create 3200 cl14


----------



## GeneO

Groove2013 said:


> I use Karhu only to find out max possible RAM frequency and lowest possible timings.
> 
> for all the final voltages I've always been using a full custom (non-AVX) Prime95 run, with FFTs in-place.


Karhu picks up trefi and trfi instabilities that TM5 (even absolut) don't seem to catch IME.


----------



## xGeNeSisx

Despite passing MemtestHcl and TM5, after a few hours playing God of War I started experiencing BSoD. Even after rebooting, placing the system under heavy load resulted in more crashes. Only explanation I can think of is elevated temperature on the DRAM modules caused overclock to become unstable. Modules don't really get above 49 to 51C, but likely went a bit higher under sustained load. Very strange, reverted to XMP profile for now and everything is fine.


----------



## opheen

xGeNeSisx said:


> Despite passing MemtestHcl and TM5, after a few hours playing God of War I started experiencing BSoD. Even after rebooting, placing the system under heavy load resulted in more crashes. Only explanation I can think of is elevated temperature on the DRAM modules caused overclock to become unstable. Modules don't really get above 49 to 51C, but likely went a bit higher under sustained load. Very strange, reverted to XMP profile for now and everything is fine.


49c - 51c is starting to get hot, No doubt it can cause errors. 45c or lower is ideal in my experience.


----------



## xGeNeSisx

opheen said:


> 49c - 51c is starting to get hot, No doubt it can cause errors. 45c or lower is ideal in my experience.


Slightly raised fan speed on radiator fans which sit over the sticks and temps are sitting below 45 now. Something else is amiss with my voltages. Experiencing instability after prolonged time of system being under load. Lowered E-cores and ring to 38x. Will try to bump VDDQ and vcore to see if that alleviates it.


----------



## opheen

xGeNeSisx said:


> Slightly raised fan speed on radiator fans which sit over the sticks and temps are sitting below 45 now. Something else is amiss with my voltages. Experiencing instability after prolonged time of system being under load. Lowered E-cores and ring to 38x. Will try to bump VDDQ and vcore to see if that alleviates it.


Hmm i after i lapped my cpu + washer-mod and changed Block from EK Velocity Plexi\Nickel to Watercool Heatkiller IV Pro, and got it to 83-85c P-core and 60-62c E-core under full load. Allowed med to run 5.1p - 3.8e ring 46 Without any issues att all. Vcore 1.34v LLC4(Droop to 1.295v Under load) SA 1.25 - VDDQTX 1.25v - DRAM 1.6v. Before i could only run 3.7e - 4.2 Ring Same vcore volt. And i used 1.3v SA 1.5v VDDQTX . Feels like it helps to lower SA and VDDQTX for stability.. mby its just a feeling. i should lower them before i lapped and changed block so could compare.. When P-cores goes above 90c the system crashed when E-cores was enabled. With E-cores Disabled it was no problem to go above 90c.


----------



## Rbk_3

Pretty happy. 12900KS at 5.3/5.0 Ring Ecore disabled 1.35V LLC6. Runs around 1.30 underload.


----------



## Groove2013

Rbk_3 said:


> Pretty happy. 12900KS at 5.3/5.0 Ring Ecore disabled 1.35V LLC6. Runs around 1.30 underload.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2563958


what's your cooling for CPU?


----------



## HyperC

I got my ILM bracket still have a nice 8c difference on 2 cores, So guess back to lapping might have to use my KPX liquid metal out  .. Funny part is when I lapped it the first time cpu was concaved the whole die area I got zero gains cpu or memory. So if nothing changes with the relap then I'll delid or reflow the IHS. Modding the waterblock doesn't seem possible not thick enough to DD


----------



## Rbk_3

Groove2013 said:


> what's your cooling for CPU?


240 AIO


----------



## opheen




----------



## Audioboxer

Hi guys, AMD tourist here, while I'm going to do some reading in here now as someone gratefully in possession of a 4000C14 DR kit of b-die what Z690 DDR4 boards have the best memory controllers? As far as I'm aware there are no 2 DIMM DDR4 Intel boards.










I'm running 3800C13 right now, though tRCDRD remains at 14 on my B550 Unify X and 5950x to be stable. So it's a great kit.

Just considering a move to a 12900k and keeping my DDR4 kit for the next year or two until DDR5 is much better. Would love to push this kit more, I've had it as high as 4533, albeit it unsycned on AMD. I can't even run it 4000 synced due to WHEA issues above 1900FCLK on my 5950x.

*edit* - Even although I don't care/want RGB and would prefer a black motherboard, it seems the Asus ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WIFI D4 is one of the only DDR4 boards with a clear CMOS button (love those for OCing lol).


----------



## Kryuger

Memory bought in either late 2017 or late 2018. Spent free time once in a while tuning the memory and this is the best I've been able to achieve. Cost me about $375 for the 32 GB pair back then, so it has done me exceptionally well over the years. Honestly never thought I'd see it run at CR1 at 4000 MT/s.

*F4-3733C17-16GTZR*
SA 1.20v
DRAM 1.52v
VDDQ 1.40v

*12900K*
P-Core 5.1 GHz
E-Core 4.0 GHz
Ring 4.2 GHz

*Intel MLC 43.2ns*

I can probably lower the voltage of all 3 by a single stepping, but don't have too much time at the moment to fully test the changes. Incredibly happy with this kit and I think I'll wait until Meteor Lake to upgrade to DDR5.

Moving from 4000 CR2 to 4000 CR1 required these changes:

SA 1.15v -> 1.20v
DRAM 1.50v -> 1.52v
VDDQ 1.325v -> 1.400v
IA AC Loadline 12 -> 16

tRTL is misaligned and running at 79


----------



## xGeNeSisx

Well you gents were totally right, RAM temps are causing the instability when higher than ~50C. Wondering if anyone has any ideas for RAM cooling. Even if a small fan is offset and over CPU block it will likely help RAM and VRM. I have little clearance so I'm not sure those clip on coolers will work. I have a 90mm slim Noctua fan I could engineer into something, but I'm not quite sure how to make it work. Don't want to go for a RAM waterblock right now, maybe down the line. Here's what I'm working with, any ideas? Might also try popping some PCIE slot covers out to make sure hot air isn't trapping too much.


----------



## imrevoau

just testing my new ram OC settings. its pretty good I can match DDR5 timings. super happy with the performance over my pentium g3258


----------



## Ichirou

Audioboxer said:


> Hi guys, AMD tourist here, while I'm going to do some reading in here now as someone gratefully in possession of a 4000C14 DR kit of b-die what Z690 DDR4 boards have the best memory controllers? As far as I'm aware there are no 2 DIMM DDR4 Intel boards.
> 
> View attachment 2564075
> 
> 
> I'm running 3800C13 right now, though tRCDRD remains at 14 on my B550 Unify X and 5950x to be stable. So it's a great kit.
> 
> Just considering a move to a 12900k and keeping my DDR4 kit for the next year or two until DDR5 is much better. Would love to push this kit more, I've had it as high as 4533, albeit it unsycned on AMD. I can't even run it 4000 synced due to WHEA issues above 1900FCLK on my 5950x.
> 
> *edit* - Even although I don't care/want RGB and would prefer a black motherboard, it seems the Asus ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WIFI D4 is one of the only DDR4 boards with a clear CMOS button (love those for OCing lol).


Either the ASUS Strix or the MSI Edge. I've used both, and kept the Edge myself as it is better for Micron B-die.
You can run 4,000 CL13 on the Strix just fine; you need enough VDIMM though. And the IMC depends on the CPU, not the motherboard.


xGeNeSisx said:


> Well you gents were totally right, RAM temps are causing the instability when higher than ~50C. Wondering if anyone has any ideas for RAM cooling. Even if a small fan is offset and over CPU block it will likely help RAM and VRM. I have little clearance so I'm not sure those clip on coolers will work. I have a 90mm slim Noctua fan I could engineer into something, but I'm not quite sure how to make it work. Don't want to go for a RAM waterblock right now, maybe down the line. Here's what I'm working with, any ideas? Might also try popping some PCIE slot covers out to make sure hot air isn't trapping too much.


I've used the Corsair Vengeance clip-on fan for the longest time; it's much better than a lot of solutions.
Once you go for a water block though, you won't ever want to turn back. Heat is no longer a factor for the RAM. It's never hot or even warm.


----------



## opheen

Audioboxer said:


> Hi guys, AMD tourist here, while I'm going to do some reading in here now as someone gratefully in possession of a 4000C14 DR kit of b-die what Z690 DDR4 boards have the best memory controllers? As far as I'm aware there are no 2 DIMM DDR4 Intel boards.
> 
> View attachment 2564075
> 
> 
> I'm running 3800C13 right now, though tRCDRD remains at 14 on my B550 Unify X and 5950x to be stable. So it's a great kit.
> 
> Just considering a move to a 12900k and keeping my DDR4 kit for the next year or two until DDR5 is much better. Would love to push this kit more, I've had it as high as 4533, albeit it unsycned on AMD. I can't even run it 4000 synced due to WHEA issues above 1900FCLK on my 5950x.
> 
> *edit* - Even although I don't care/want RGB and would prefer a black motherboard, it seems the Asus ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WIFI D4 is one of the only DDR4 boards with a clear CMOS button (love those for OCing lol).


ASRock > Z690M-ITX/ax and Z690I AORUS ULTRA PLUS DDR4 (rev. 1.0) Key Features | Motherboard - GIGABYTE Global


----------



## Ichirou

Don't recommend ASRock/Gigabyte for Z690...


----------



## opheen

Ichirou said:


> Don't recommend ASRock/Gigabyte for Z690...


I did not recommend, but that's the only 2 z690ddr4 Boards that have 2 slot 1DCP. A friend of mine have the Asrock z690 ITX DDR4 paired with 12900k and B-die.. Works for him..


----------



## Netarangi

Stable on Testmem5 1usmus and extreme but failed OCCT AVX. Thought this was stable but did a OCCT today and errors....

Any timings stand out as off here? Or should I just start over?


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> View attachment 2564248
> 
> 
> Stable on Testmem5 1usmus and extreme but failed OCCT AVX. Thought this was stable but did a OCCT today and errors....
> 
> Any timings stand out as off here? Or should I just start over?


Most likely VCCSA, not the RAM itself. Or RAM is overheating because of tRCD / tRP after a prolonged period of time.


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> Most likely VCCSA, not the RAM itself. Or RAM is overheating because of tRCD / tRP after a prolonged period of time.


Thanks ser. What do if it is VCCSA? I currently have it at 1.35.

I can try increasing trcd and trp, these happen about 6min into OCCT. Haven't had a problem with memtest5 though even after 3 hours extreme. I have same ram as you btw!


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Thanks ser. What do if it is VCCSA? I currently have it at 1.35.
> 
> I can try increasing trcd and trp, these happen about 6min into OCCT. Haven't had a problem with memtest5 though even after 3 hours extreme. I have same ram as you btw!


Try up to 1.45V VCCSA just to rule it out. And test out TM5 with anta777 ABSOLUT as well. It could be due to tRFC being too tight.


----------



## opheen

Netarangi said:


> Thanks ser. What do if it is VCCSA? I currently have it at 1.35.
> 
> I can try increasing trcd and trp, these happen about 6min into OCCT. Haven't had a problem with memtest5 though even after 3 hours extreme. I have same ram as you btw!


 Mby try to loosen up tRDRD_sg/dr/dd and tWRWR_sg/dr/dd ?

'


----------



## Netarangi

opheen said:


> Mby try to loosen up tRDRD_sg/dr/dd and tWRWR_sg/dr/dd ?
> 
> '
> View attachment 2564318


Thanks lads will try shortly.

Love your wallpaper btw


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> Try up to 1.45V VCCSA just to rule it out. And test out TM5 with anta777 ABSOLUT as well. It could be due to tRFC being too tight.


Been stable for 30min on 1.45v. Previously was only hitting 6min before erroring so I assume it was the memory controller?

I read somewhere that 1.35 is max you should go? Maybe I misread that.. Should I try 1.4 and if stable then allgood?


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Been stable for 30min on 1.45v. Previously was only hitting 6min before erroring so I assume it was the memory controller?
> 
> I read somewhere that 1.35 is max you should go? Maybe I misread that.. Should I try 1.4 and if stable then allgood?


Most likely the IMC then, if raising VCCSA fixes it.
1.52V is the theoretical max limit as set by Intel, but for daily use, you should stay under 1.35V, max 1.40V.
Setting 1.45V is mostly just to rule it out as a possible cause for the instability. But now you know.
So you'll have to dial back your RAM overclock in some way.

VCCSA requirements are raised by RAM capacity, total bandwidth, die type and rank, memory frequency, and CAS latency. Cache ratio as well.
The rest don't affect it by much if at all.
Start with loosening the tertiarties, then tCL, before lastly reducing frequency. Those are the biggest factors that you have the most control over.
Or just daily 1.40V if you don't mind that marginally higher potential for degradation. Depends on your goals.

On a side note, y-cruncher's main and component tests are better for IMC testing. Clearer and much faster.


----------



## opheen

Netarangi said:


> Been stable for 30min on 1.45v. Previously was only hitting 6min before erroring so I assume it was the memory controller?
> 
> I read somewhere that 1.35 is max you should go? Maybe I misread that.. Should I try 1.4 and if stable then allgood?


What is your Cache\Ring ratio att? Tried to go 1 or 2 down ? and VCCSA 1.3 VDDQTX 1.3 or work them down if the tune feels stabile
I would sacrifice 1/2 down with the ring ratio and rather than jumping into the rabbit hole


----------



## tunste

Netarangi said:


> View attachment 2564248
> 
> 
> Stable on Testmem5 1usmus and extreme but failed OCCT AVX. Thought this was stable but did a OCCT today and errors....
> 
> Any timings stand out as off here? Or should I just start over?


Need more information
What is VDDQ TX voltage?; What ram voltage?; Is the ram Samsung B-Die?; What is ram rated timings? What is the processor?? 12700K or 12900K; What is your Ring?; What is P cores frequency?

The processor IMC will determine what ram frequency you can run. I put a 120mm fan on the ram to keep temperatures down.

My system:
*CPU:* Intel 12700K| *motherboard*: ASUS TUF Gaming Z690-Plus WiFi D4 | *ram:* G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 CL16, 4000C16D-32GVKA @ 3800 MHz (14,15,13,28,41,250,Gear1, CR2) |

I went with the tightest timings for online gaming @ 1440p. My ram can run 4000 MHz but (15, 16,15,35, 280)


----------



## KedarWolf

Netarangi said:


> View attachment 2564248
> 
> 
> Stable on Testmem5 1usmus and extreme but failed OCCT AVX. Thought this was stable but did a OCCT today and errors....
> 
> Any timings stand out as off here? Or should I just start over?


Go into OCCT settings and see if disabling monitoring helps. Sometimes the monitoring in the background is a problem and causes errors.


----------



## Groove2013

@bscool @Ichirou can't do 4000 14-15-14-28 anymore. only 15-15-15-28, because outside it's like 35°C, whereas it was around 20°C or marginally higher, when I managed to do 4000 14-15-14-28 Karhu stable.

so need water for RAM, because sticks reach ~40°C, instead slightly less than 35°C previously.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool @Ichirou can't do 4000 14-15-14-28 anymore. only 15-15-15-28, because outside it's like 35°C, whereas it was around 20°C or marginally higher, when I managed to do 4000 14-15-14-28 Karhu stable.
> 
> so need water for RAM, because sticks reach ~40°C, instead slightly less than 35°C previously.


Raise tRP to 15 and lower VDIMM. Problem probably solved. Also, get better fans on the RAM.


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> @bscool @Ichirou can't do 4000 14-15-14-28 anymore. only 15-15-15-28, because outside it's like 35°C, whereas it was around 20°C or marginally higher, when I managed to do 4000 14-15-14-28 Karhu stable.
> 
> so need water for RAM, because sticks reach ~40°C, instead slightly less than 35°C previously.





Ichirou said:


> Raise tRP to 15 and lower VDIMM. Problem probably solved. Also, get better fans on the RAM.


tRP 15 is not enough.
had to also increase tCL to 15, thus worse RTLs and tRDWRs.
tRFC 227 is also not possible anymore.

will put RAM under water in the near feature and problem solved.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> tRP 15 is not enough.
> had to also increase tCL to 15, thus worse RTLs and tRDWRs.
> tRFC 227 is also not possible anymore.
> 
> will put RAM under water in the near feature and problem solved.


You set tRFC to 227? That's probably why your RAM was struggling, then.
Loosen it to 260-300 and you'll find it much easier to run everything else.


----------



## opheen

below 277 tRFC gives nothing att all to me, tried to go all the way down to 232 and still 45ns and same bandwidht .. so the sweetsport must be around where you suggest one place. 
*Ichirou*


----------



## Ichirou

opheen said:


> below 277 tRFC gives nothing att all to me, tried to go all the way down to 232 and still 45ns and same bandwidht .. so the sweetsport must be around where you suggest one place.
> *Ichirou*


Performance always scales, but every 40 or so reduction in tRFC is at best a 0.1 ns reduction in minimum latency, which is not really all that meaningful in actual use.
Cool for benchmarking, not realistic as a daily stable if it means sacrificing other timings.


----------



## opheen

Ichirou said:


> Performance always scales, but every 40 or so reduction in tRFC is at best a 0.1 ns reduction in minimum latency, which is not really all that meaningful in actual use.
> Cool for benchmarking, not realistic as a daily stable if it means sacrificing other timings.


Can not be a big difference, it gets too tight so things start to feel a little strange in play, etc., for example jumping and various functions feel unnaturally fast .. 
especially with tCKE lower than 8.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> You set tRFC to 227? That's probably why your RAM was struggling, then.
> Loosen it to 260-300 and you'll find it much easier to run everything else.


it's unable to 14-15-15 or 14-15-15 even with all the rest of timings at auto, except tFAW 16.

so it's not tRFC being a problem, but the temp inside the room, due to thr temp in the street now.

with like 10-15°C lower temp on the street it was no problem to do more than 10000% Karhu 4000 14-15-14-28-2-227.


----------



## opheen




----------



## Ichirou

opheen said:


> View attachment 2564586
> View attachment 2564587


Haha, I didn't even think of this when I used it before. What a brilliant idea.
I water cool now, so it's not longer an issue, but that's really smart.


----------



## opheen

The RAM cooler from Corsair is retired, BTW EK Monark modules and XSPC-RAMblock fit together!


----------



## opheen

After many attempts and ugly words, I finally got to train RTL's and stabilized 4000 cl14, suddenly the motherboard chose to play on the same team as me


----------



## Ichirou

opheen said:


> After many attempts and ugly words, I finally got to train RTL's and stabilized 4000 cl14, suddenly the motherboard chose to play on the same team as me
> 
> View attachment 2564602


I don't think tRCD 14 is going to be stable at that voltage and frequency. Have you stability tested yet?


----------



## opheen

Ichirou said:


> I don't think tRCD 14 is going to be stable at that voltage and frequency. Have you stability tested yet?


Karhu 10k and OCCT for 1 hour, mby its too kind ? my g.skill's are more sensetiv on tRCD , The TeamGroup kit seems to handle it, i think it will work for my use


----------



## opheen

They are quite cool, and with 3x240mm radiators and 1x120mm radiator, 13x 120mm fans and 2x 140mm 2xDDC pumps, I keep a steady temp even during heavy tasks, water temp of 33 \ 34c if I push with 600-700w. when i game its about 31-32c.


----------



## Ichirou

opheen said:


> Karhu 10k and OCCT for 1 hour, mby its too kind ? my g.skill's are more sensetiv on tRCD , The TeamGroup kit seems to handle it, i think it will work for my use


Have you tested TM5 anta777?
And yeah, the G.Skill really sucks when it comes to cooling. Bad design.
That's a messy loop you've got there, but if it works, it works, heh.


----------



## opheen

Ichirou said:


> Have you tested TM5 anta777?
> And yeah, the G.Skill really sucks when it comes to cooling. Bad design.
> That's a messy loop you've got there, but if it works, it works, heh.


Normally looks a little nicer but has made some attempts with higher flow rate to see how much it is to gain from increasing flow rate. I have TM5 anta777 configs. but karhu with "Stress FPU" crouched off tends to reveal something before TM5 does, but I will not claim that it is "BulletProof".


----------



## massivex

opheen said:


> Karhu 10k and OCCT for 1 hour, mby its too kind ? my g.skill's are more sensetiv on tRCD , The TeamGroup kit seems to handle it, i think it will work for my use


Karhu and OCCT are a bit too kind in general, from personal experience. Eventually I always end up using HCI MemTest(Pro) and it usually takes a few good hours or some more to pick up subtimings errors but it finds them. I'v completely ditched Karhu for now, I only use it to double check after I've already used HCI MemTest and TM5, just to be safe. But as kind as OCCT is, it would never ever let me get away with tRCD 14. The only time I managed tRCD 14 was on 3800, and when I managed to keep the tempratures in the low 30s, but at 36~37c+ it would error instantly. So maybe now that you're using a RAM block I assume your temps should be in the 30s when stress testing so perhaps it is possible?
I'm waiting for all the watercooling components to install a custom loop with a RAM block as well, so I'm really interested if 14 will be possible. But I can't do 4000 like you though! Thanks to this IMC only 3900...

Edit: I just wanted to say that I only have the free version of OCCT, so I'm limited to only 1 hour. And also, I find OCCT/Memory/SSE with %95 of the RAM to be very useful to find the lowest needed vDIMM in usually a couple of minutes to maybe 30 mins at most.


----------



## massivex

opheen said:


> After many attempts and ugly words, I finally got to train RTL's and stabilized 4000 cl14, suddenly the motherboard chose to play on the same team as me
> 
> View attachment 2564602


Very similar timings to mine but I think you can squeeze a bit more, try the following, I'm %99.99 certain you can manage these:
tRAS: 32 -> 28
tCKE:8 -> 4
tRDRD_sg: 8 -> 7
tWRWR_sg: 8 -> 7

tWRRD_sg/dg are a bit tricky, you'll have to find what works for you, for me the lowest I can go on 3900C14 is _sg 26 and _dg 23, on 3900C15 it can do _sg 26 and _dg 21 which is the lowest you can go.

As for your RTLs, if you can manually set all of them to 69 that would be ideal. Good luck!


----------



## opheen

massivex said:


> Karhu and OCCT are a bit too kind in general, from personal experience. Eventually I always end up using HCI MemTest(Pro) and it usually takes a few good hours or some more to pick up subtimings errors but it finds them. I'v completely ditched Karhu for now, I only use it to double check after I've already used HCI MemTest and TM5, just to be safe. But as kind as OCCT is, it would never ever let me get away with tRCD 14. The only time I managed tRCD 14 was on 3800, and when I managed to keep the tempratures in the low 30s, but at 36~37c+ it would error instantly. So maybe now that you're using a RAM block I assume your temps should be in the 30s when stress testing so perhaps it is possible?
> I'm waiting for all the watercooling components to install a custom loop with a RAM block as well, so I'm really interested if 14 will be possible. But I can't do 4000 like you though! Thanks to this IMC only 3900...
> 
> Edit: I just wanted to say that I only have the free version of OCCT, so I'm limited to only 1 hour. And also, I find OCCT/Memory/SSE with %95 of the RAM to be very useful to find the lowest needed vDIMM in usually a couple of minutes to maybe 30 mins at most.


I think the memorytemp is around 30-34c, i have to stress GPU and CPU pretty hard to reach 34-35c watertemp like 500-700w no tempsensor on TG T-Create's : \ . This kit is "binned"
whether it is permissible to use that term ,been thrue many kit's before got this. i tried to say that my watercooled Ripjaws2x16DR 4000 cl17-18-18-38 will not do tRCD 14 att 4000 with 1.612v DIMM.
I started high with VDDQTX 1.5v and VCCSA1.3v to begin with ..had my 11gen freshly in my mind when i set voltages probably🤷‍♂️
but boot 4100G1 with 1.25SA 1.25VDDQ..so i did not get the worst IMC. the only way i know of that works to lock RTL's is fastboot.. on z690-A DDR4.


----------



## opheen

massivex said:


> Very similar timings to mine but I think you can squeeze a bit more, try the following, I'm %99.99 certain you can manage these:
> tRAS: 32 -> 28
> tCKE:8 -> 4
> tRDRD_sg: 8 -> 7
> tWRWR_sg: 8 -> 7
> 
> tWRRD_sg/dg are a bit tricky, you'll have to find what works for you, for me the lowest I can go on 3900C14 is _sg 26 and _dg 23, on 3900C15 it can do _sg 26 and _dg 21 which is the lowest you can go.
> 
> As for your RTLs, if you can manually set all of them to 69 that would be ideal. Good luck!


I use tCL+tRCD +4 when i tried to train the RTL's, 
normally the motherboard has set them to 71 76 no matter what I have done.


----------



## massivex

opheen said:


> I think the memorytemp is around 30-34c, i have to stress GPU and CPU pretty hard to reach 34-35c watertemp like 500-700w no tempsensor on TG T-Create's : \ . This kit is "binned"
> whether it is permissible to use that term ,been thrue many kit's before got this. i tried to say that my watercooled Ripjaws2x16DR 4000 cl17-18-18-38 will not do tRCD 14 att 4000 with 1.612v DIMM.
> I started high with VDDQTX 1.5v and VCCSA1.3v to begin with ..had my 11gen freshly in my mind when i set voltages probably🤷‍♂️
> but boot 4100G1 with 1.25SA 1.25VDDQ..so i did not get the worst IMC. the only way i know of that works to lock RTL's is fastboot.. on z690-A DDR4.


Oh brother that sounds awesome! I can't wait I get all the parents and I can finally install a custom loop for the first time. 30c+ sounds ideal, pretty much takes memory heat out of the equation, I hate having to have fans over the RAM. I do however plan to first install the loop without the RAM block (just CPU/GPU block), just to see what the RAM temps will be like once that silly exhaust fan on the Founder's Edition card doesn't cook the dimms. Ah man that's a bummer not having a temp sensor on the DIMMs, it's one one of the reason I wasn't too keen on getting TG or Oloy (which I've heard some have sensor and some don't), but I guess now that you got a water block it doesn't really matter anymore! I'm surprised that on AlderLake not much VCCSA is needed at all, currently using 1.2v on 3900C14 but 1.18v passed 12h+ duration test as well, but below ~1.33v VDDQTX it won't boot to BIOS so I'm using 1.35v, it's strange that most people on MSI motherboards seem to need less VDDQTX. Honestly I would be pretty damn happy with 4000C14 if I were you, that's pretty much AlderLake goals for most people.
If you just set all the the RTLs to 69 like here does that let you boot? On Asus mobo I have I disable fastboot and now it trains the RTL correctly everytime but I can also set manually and it will boot.
By the way how did you remove the RAM heatspreaders? I'm still not sure how I will do that, I think I'll try to soak them in paint thinner for a couple of hours.


----------



## opheen

massivex said:


> Oh brother that sounds awesome! I can't wait I get all the parents and I can finally install a custom loop for the first time. 30c+ sounds ideal, pretty much takes memory heat out of the equation, I hate having to have fans over the RAM. I do however plan to first install the loop without the RAM block (just CPU/GPU block), just to see what the RAM temps will be like once that silly exhaust fan on the Founder's Edition card doesn't cook the dimms. Ah man that's a bummer not having a temp sensor on the DIMMs, it's one one of the reason I wasn't too keen on getting TG or Oloy (which I've heard some have sensor and some don't), but I guess now that you got a water block it doesn't really matter anymore! I'm surprised that on AlderLake not much VCCSA is needed at all, currently using 1.2v on 3900C14 but 1.18v passed 12h+ duration test as well, but below ~1.33v VDDQTX it won't boot to BIOS so I'm using 1.35v, it's strange that most people on MSI motherboards seem to need less VDDQTX. Honestly I would be pretty damn happy with 4000C14 if I were you, that's pretty much AlderLake goals for most people.
> If you just set all the the RTLs to 69 like here does that let you boot? On Asus mobo I have I disable fastboot and now it trains the RTL correctly everytime but I can also set manually and it will boot.
> By the way how did you remove the RAM heatspreaders? I'm still not sure how I will do that, I think I'll try to soak them in paint thinner for a couple of hours.


In my other system I have water-cooled ripjaws with temp sensor and see that the temp is exactly the same as the water temp maybe 1 degree warmer than the water.
The difference between 3900 cl14 and 4000 cl14 is so small that I can not see the difference when it comes to games. To remove heatsinks I use a hair dryer or heat gun, must be very careful if you use a heat gun, with a hair dryer it is only to heat as much as you can, it is wise to choose ram pieces without RGB. If I try to set RTL manually as in the picture you refer to, the motherboard will not boot.


----------



## opheen




----------



## Groove2013

good thermal pads, also on the PCB and not only on memory chips, and good heatsinks are for sure way more effective than doublesided tape that barely transfered anything to very thin heatsinks.


----------



## Lax91

Hi,
I'm new to overclocking, and I wanted to overclock my memory a bit because I heard that XMP timings were bad "out of the box".
The sticks are 2*8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX rated for 3600C14 XMP.
My motherboard is an ASUS Strix Z690-A D4 and I have an air-cooled 12700KF nunning at stock.

For context, I want a "safe" 24/7 OC, especially voltage-wise since the sticks are low-profile. My aim would be 4000C15 or 3800C14.

Here are the XMP timings and voltages :
















I've been following this guide , and here are my OC timings and voltages (I haven't tightened tWR yet).

















As you can see I've actually lowered VCCSA because I thought it was quite high by default... I also used conservative values for tRFC and tREFI (I think ?).
So far I haven't been able to be stable at CL15.
I have tried, to no success :

loosening the tRDWRs (up to the XMP timings)
setting tCWL to 14 instead of 15

Do you see anything wrong with my timings ? Any advice to reach 4000C15 ?
I haven't tried 3900C15, would it be better ? Or maybe 3800C14 ? My main use would be gaming.

In AIDA, with the OC I score 65976,3 in reads, and 50,4333 latency (I would like to lower the latency more if possible).
With the default XMP profile, it was 56453,7 / 54,4667.

Thanks in advance !


----------



## massivex

opheen said:


> In my other system I have water-cooled ripjaws with temp sensor and see that the temp is exactly the same as the water temp maybe 1 degree warmer than the water.
> The difference between 3900 cl14 and 4000 cl14 is so small that I can not see the difference when it comes to games. To remove heatsinks I use a hair dryer or heat gun, must be very careful if you use a heat gun, with a hair dryer it is only to heat as much as you can, it is wise to choose ram pieces without RGB. If I try to set RTL manually as in the picture you refer to, the motherboard will not boot.


Thanks for the tip!  I'll might try the hair-dryer method, I also have a heatgun but I'm reluctant to use it, I've way overheated things in the past before LOL. For me what fixed the RTLs from jumping around was disabled fast boot, prior to that I would sometimes get 71/69 but now I'm getting 69/69 constantly. I have an older MSI Z170 motherboard and when I tried to manually set the RTLs it also didn't boot, but with Asus Z690 it works like a charm. 

I just don't get how you are passing OCCT with tRCD 14 !!! What kind of witchcraft is this? All I did was change it from 15 to 14 and OCCT crashes in 15 seconds, and this was with 1.625v vDIMM (I didn't wanna try go higher).


----------



## massivex

Lax91 said:


> Hi,
> I'm new to overclocking, and I wanted to overclock my memory a bit because I heard that XMP timings were bad "out of the box".
> The sticks are 2*8GB Corsair Vengeance LPX rated for 3600C14 XMP.
> My motherboard is an ASUS Strix Z690-A D4 and I have an air-cooled 12700KF nunning at stock.
> 
> For context, I want a "safe" 24/7 OC, especially voltage-wise since the sticks are low-profile. My aim would be 4000C15 or 3800C14.
> 
> Here are the XMP timings and voltages :
> View attachment 2564646
> View attachment 2564647
> 
> 
> I've been following this guide , and here are my OC timings and voltages (I haven't tightened tWR yet).
> 
> View attachment 2564648
> View attachment 2564649
> 
> 
> As you can see I've actually lowered VCCSA because I thought it was quite high by default... I also used conservative values for tRFC and tREFI (I think ?).
> So far I haven't been able to be stable at CL15.
> I have tried, to no success :
> 
> loosening the tRDWRs (up to the XMP timings)
> setting tCWL to 14 instead of 15
> 
> Do you see anything wrong with my timings ? Any advice to reach 4000C15 ?
> I haven't tried 3900C15, would it be better ? Or maybe 3800C14 ? My main use would be gaming.
> 
> In AIDA, with the OC I score 65976,3 in reads, and 50,4333 latency (I would like to lower the latency more if possible).
> With the default XMP profile, it was 56453,7 / 54,4667.
> 
> Thanks in advance !


Nice, I have the same CPU and motherboard, but first of all the, with that RAM,the max frequency that you'll be able to run will be determined most likely by the integrated memory controller on the CPU. Mine for example can boot 4000 & 4133 but can only pass stability tests on 3900. It's going to be very easy to determine to max frequency, if it's not stable it will crash in a couple of minutes, afterwards you can start tuning the primaries and then the subtimings (but not necessary in that order though).
For 3900C15 with pretty much maxed out subtimings as low as I can go I only need 1.46v vDIMM, but for 3900C14 I need 1.56v. So if you plan on running CL14 on 3900+ you will most likely need some sort of active cooling like a fan over the RAM or you can get a RAM fan cooler.
Start out with all auto subtimings and just run 4000 16-16-16-36 on Gear1, if you leave VCCSA at Auto it will probably be 1.33v+ but you most likely need 1.2v but you can leave that at Auto for now. If you have trouble booting then bump up VDDQTX to 1.35v or 1.4v+. You won't need more than 1.5v vDIMM for now. Once you boot to Windows, run OCCT>Test>Memory and set %95 of the Memory and choose SSE like this. If you've made it to 30+mins then now you can lower to primaries the 15-15-15-35 and maybe bump vDIMM to 1.53v just to be safe (although that's over kill), and repeat the previous process. If CL15 works then lower the primaries to 14-15-15-35 and try vDIMM from 1.56v to 1.60v at most. Once you found your frequency and CL then you can tune the primaries to say something like 4000-14-15-15-28 or 14-15-14-28 and afterwards do the subtimings. I personally don't use OCCT for subtimings though, I prefer to use HCI MemTest for that.


----------



## Netarangi

Thinking of getting an ASUS TUF Gaming Z690. Is this the best board around this price range? Or would an MSI be better?

12700kf
Corsair vengeance lpx b die 4000mhz


----------



## massivex

Netarangi said:


> Thinking of getting an ASUS TUF Gaming Z690. Is this the best board around this price range? Or would an MSI be better?
> 
> 12700kf
> Corsair vengeance lpx b die 4000mhz


At this price range it's between the MSI Tomahawk and the Asus TUF, when I had to make a decision between these I kept going back and forth but eventually decided to get the MSI Edge for a bit more since it had all the missing features that Tomahawk and TUF lacked. 
But that's only half the story, I ended up getting a used Edge motherboard from Amazon 3rd party vendor, so I returned it. And ended up buying the Asus Strix D4 brand new from someone on marketplace for cheaper than the TUF or Edge would have been.


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> Thanks for the tip!  I'll might try the hair-dryer method, I also have a heatgun but I'm reluctant to use it, I've way overheated things in the past before LOL. For me what fixed the RTLs from jumping around was disabled fast boot, prior to that I would sometimes get 71/69 but now I'm getting 69/69 constantly. I have an older MSI Z170 motherboard and when I tried to manually set the RTLs it also didn't boot, but with Asus Z690 it works like a charm.
> 
> I just don't get how you are passing OCCT with tRCD 14 !!! What kind of witchcraft is this? All I did was change it from 15 to 14 and OCCT crashes in 15 seconds, and this was with 1.625v vDIMM (I didn't wanna try go higher).


tRCD 14 at 4,000 MHz is insanely heat sensitive. You need to put it under water to even remotely stand a chance of stabilizing it.
If you want to have a chance of doing it on air, the RAM would need to be binned so well that it can do 4,000 flat-14 at 1.50V VDIMM max.

Removing the heatspreaders isn't that hard. I used a hair dryer as well. But don't forcefully pull them off the DIMMs, either.
Heat > pull > heat > pull. Eventually it'll come off.


Netarangi said:


> Thinking of getting an ASUS TUF Gaming Z690. Is this the best board around this price range? Or would an MSI be better?
> 
> 12700kf
> Corsair vengeance lpx b die 4000mhz





massivex said:


> At this price range it's between the MSI Tomahawk and the Asus TUF, when I had to make a decision between these I kept going back and forth but eventually decided to get the MSI Edge for a bit more since it had all the missing features that Tomahawk and TUF lacked.
> But that's only half the story, I ended up getting a used Edge motherboard from Amazon 3rd party vendor, so I returned it. And ended up buying the Asus Strix D4 brand new from someone on marketplace for cheaper than the TUF or Edge would have been.


ASUS and MSI trade blows this generation for DDR4. Just go for value and/or features.
I tested out both the ASUS Strix and the MSi Edge, and eventually stuck with the Edge myself.
4,133-4,200 CL14 1T Gear 1 stable with 4x16 GB.


----------



## Lax91

massivex said:


> Nice, I have the same CPU and motherboard, but first of all the, with that RAM,the max frequency that you'll be able to run will be determined most likely by the integrated memory controller on the CPU. Mine for example can boot 4000 & 4133 but can only pass stability tests on 3900. It's going to be very easy to determine to max frequency, if it's not stable it will crash in a couple of minutes, afterwards you can start tuning the primaries and then the subtimings (but not necessary in that order though).
> For 3900C15 with pretty much maxed out subtimings as low as I can go I only need 1.46v vDIMM, but for 3900C14 I need 1.56v. So if you plan on running CL14 on 3900+ you will most likely need some sort of active cooling like a fan over the RAM or you can get a RAM fan cooler.
> Start out with all auto subtimings and just run 4000 16-16-16-36 on Gear1, if you leave VCCSA at Auto it will probably be 1.33v+ but you most likely need 1.2v but you can leave that at Auto for now. If you have trouble booting then bump up VDDQTX to 1.35v or 1.4v+. You won't need more than 1.5v vDIMM for now. Once you boot to Windows, run OCCT>Test>Memory and set %95 of the Memory and choose SSE like this. If you've made it to 30+mins then now you can lower to primaries the 15-15-15-35 and maybe bump vDIMM to 1.53v just to be safe (although that's over kill), and repeat the previous process. If CL15 works then lower the primaries to 14-15-15-35 and try vDIMM from 1.56v to 1.60v at most. Once you found your frequency and CL then you can tune the primaries to say something like 4000-14-15-15-28 or 14-15-14-28 and afterwards do the subtimings. I personally don't use OCCT for subtimings though, I prefer to use HCI MemTest for that.


Thanks for your reply

So far at 4000C16 I'm "stable" at 1.45 vDIMM and 1.25 VCCSA.
I have already tightnened most of the timings as you can see in my screenshot. The only notable ones I have left on auto are tWR and tWTRS/L.
I've used TestMem5 to test stability so far (the 1h extreme preset). When I settle on something I'm satisfied with, I'll do more stability testing using other software.

If I don't want to increase any voltages (yes I'm stubborn haha), I'll maybe try 3900 C15. I suppose it's overall better than 4000C16 ?
Then, who knows, maybe I'll be able to run 3900C14...

Do you see any beginner error in my timings ? Should I change some before trying 3900C15 ?


----------



## massivex

Ichirou said:


> ASUS and MSI trade blows this generation for DDR4. Just go for value and/or features.
> I tested out both the ASUS Strix and the MSi Edge, and eventually stuck with the Edge myself.
> 4,133-4,200 CL14 1T Gear 1 stable with 4x16 GB.


It's been months since I researched on the mobos on making the purchase but I remember seeing the Edge and Strix described as top dawgs for ADL DDR4 and the Edge was significantly cheaper so I went for that. Apparently the Amazon I ordered from was a 3rd party vendor and sent me a used one, it had thermal paste remains on the CPU bracket LOL, and everything was so banged up, like how does one get a million scratches on the USB stick and cleaning brush that the mobo came with? Looked like some satanic cult used it or something. An hour later I opened up FB Marketplace and saw the same guy that I bought my RAM from selling the Asus Strix D4, brand new purchased from Amazon, for the same price as the cheap MSI Z690 PRO-A was going for, so I snagged that motherboard from him instead of waiting for a replacement on the Edge motherboard. 
But anyway I can't get 4000 G1 CR2 stable no matter what so I assume it's the mediocre IMC on the 12700k. I'm just a casual user that enjoys some mild to mediocre overclocking so I think honestly I would have been fine even with the barebones MSI PRO-A motherboard. May I ask, out of curiosity, what is that you preferred on the Edge over the Strix? Cheers


----------



## Ichirou

Lax91 said:


> Thanks for your reply
> 
> So far at 4000C16 I'm "stable" at 1.45 vDIMM and 1.25 VCCSA.
> I have already tightnened most of the timings as you can see in my screenshot. The only notable ones I have left on auto are tWR and tWTRS/L.
> I've used TestMem5 to test stability so far (the 1h extreme preset). When I settle on something I'm satisfied with, I'll do more stability testing using other software.
> 
> If I don't want to increase any voltages (yes I'm stubborn haha), I'll maybe try 3900 C15. I suppose it's overall better than 4000C16 ?
> Then, who knows, maybe I'll be able to run 3900C14...
> 
> Do you see any beginner error in my timings ? Should I change some before trying 3900C15 ?
> View attachment 2564764


Samsung B-die is safe up to 1.60V VDIMM as long as you add some fans to cool it.
There are plenty of kits being sold up to 1.60V on XMP now.
You really don't need to be too conservative. And for the most part, 2x8 GB B-die is mega cheap anyway, and will get cheaper as time goes by.

I'd suggest throwing 1.55-1.60V at the sticks and doing 4,000 14-15-15-XX-1T.
tWR to like 10-12, tRFC down to like 260 or less, tRRD_L/S to 4, tWTR_L/S to 6/1, tRTP to 5-6, tCWL to 12. tREFI to max, tCKE to 0.


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> It's been months since I researched on the mobos on making the purchase but I remember seeing the Edge and Strix described as top dawgs for ADL DDR4 and the Edge was significantly cheaper so I went for that. Apparently the Amazon I ordered from was a 3rd party vendor and sent me a used one, it had thermal paste remains on the CPU bracket LOL, and everything was so banged up, like how does one get a million scratches on the USB stick and cleaning brush that the mobo came with? Looked like some satanic cult used it or something. An hour later I opened up FB Marketplace and saw the same guy that I bought my RAM from selling the Asus Strix D4, brand new purchased from Amazon, for the same price as the cheap MSI Z690 PRO-A was going for, so I snagged that motherboard from him instead of waiting for a replacement on the Edge motherboard.
> But anyway I can't get 4000 G1 CR2 stable no matter what so I assume it's the mediocre IMC on the 12700k. I'm just a casual user that enjoys some mild to mediocre overclocking so I think honestly I would have been fine even with the barebones MSI PRO-A motherboard. May I ask, out of curiosity, what is that you preferred on the Edge over the Strix? Cheers


Overall faster training (and less randomness between BIOS versions), nice clean and optimized interface (IMO anyway), much more timings available for you to configure (along with many of the implied values revealed), and QVL lists showing much more favour towards multi-DIMM configurations. However, I dislike the lack of a CMOS reset button and the inability to tighten certain timings even further (there are minimums set for each timing).

I'd say that they both trade blows, and neither of them are objectively better than the other in any meaningful capacity. And truth be told, I actually bought a second ASUS Strix _again_, but resold it without even unboxing it. Managed to profit off of that, which offset the loss from my selling my first Strix. So I broke even. I was just too lazy to bother redoing all of the overclocks again, don't want to have to test a dozen different BIOSes, and I have no way of knowing whether or not 4x16 GB will play nicely on the Strix.

Maybe in the future if the Strix becomes dirt cheap second-hand, I might give it a try, but highly, highly unlikely.


----------



## massivex

Lax91 said:


> Thanks for your reply
> 
> So far at 4000C16 I'm "stable" at 1.45 vDIMM and 1.25 VCCSA.
> I have already tightnened most of the timings as you can see in my screenshot. The only notable ones I have left on auto are tWR and tWTRS/L.
> I've used TestMem5 to test stability so far (the 1h extreme preset). When I settle on something I'm satisfied with, I'll do more stability testing using other software.
> 
> If I don't want to increase any voltages (yes I'm stubborn haha), I'll maybe try 3900 C15. I suppose it's overall better than 4000C16 ?
> Then, who knows, maybe I'll be able to run 3900C14...
> 
> Do you see any beginner error in my timings ? Should I change some before trying 3900C15 ?
> View attachment 2564764


You lucky dawg! Since your IMC can do 4000 then I would just go for 4000 15-15-15-XX, I assume the required vDIMM will be in the 1.45~1.50v range. To find out the vDIMM run OCCT like this, and if your vDIMM is too low you'll get an error in 3~15 mins, and remember you can do vDIMM increments in small 5mv segments. Honestly I'm not experienced enough to answer if 3900C15 is better than 4000C16. I don't see anything in your subtimings that should cause errors but quite the contrary you still have them a bit loose, which is good to have them loose when you're tuning your primaries, the only thing that stands out is the tRDWR running flat 10s, if you run into errors you can bump them to 11 or 12 but since you're running single rank DIMMs you should be able to do flat 10s. As for VCCSA that's fine you can keep it at 1.25v for now, after you finish tuning your ram then you can work on finding your lowest stable VCCSA, I assume you should be fine at 1.2v-ish.

Edit: You can also try @Ichirou advice on finding the lowest stable vDIMM <3


Ichirou said:


> TM5 with 1usmus to start with is enough to give you errors within the 1-2 minutes if your VDIMM isn't enough. anta777 ABOLUT is even stronger.


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> You lucky dawg! Since your IMC can do 4000 then I would just go for 4000 15-15-15-XX, I assume the required vDIMM will be in the 1.45~1.50v range. To find out the vDIMM run OCCT like this, and if your vDIMM is too low you'll get an error in 3~15 mins, and remember you can do vDIMM increments in small 5mv segments. Honestly I'm not experienced enough to answer if 3900C15 is better than 4000C16. I don't see anything in your subtimings that should cause errors but quite the contrary you still have them a bit loose, which is good to have them loose when you're tuning your primaries, the only thing that stands out is the tRDWR running flat 10s, if you run into errors you can bump them to 11 or 12 but since you're running single rank DIMMs you should be able to do flat 10s. As for VCCSA that's fine you can keep it at 1.25v for now, after you finish tuning your ram then you can work on finding your lowest stable VCCSA, I assume you should be fine at 1.2v-ish.


OCCT isn't as good as TM5 or Karhu for RAM, or y-cruncher for CPU and IMC. I wouldn't recommend it in any capacity, really.


----------



## massivex

Ichirou said:


> OCCT isn't as good as TM5 or Karhu for RAM, or y-cruncher for CPU and IMC. I wouldn't recommend it in any capacity, really.


Oh lol don't get me wrong I don't use OCCT for RAM and I wouldn't recommend it for that, it's way to soft the memory and lets you get away with much looser timings compared to other programs, but I just found it works really fast, within a couple of minutes, to simply find the lowest stable vDIMM, nothing more, I'll start off with purposely lowish vDIMM and then work up 5mv increments, usually it errors in a couple of minutes and once it runs for 15+mins then I can assume it's good, maybe bump up another 5~10mv to be safe, and I'll move on the HCI/TM5. 
I'm really fond of HCI MemTest(Pro) as for now for finding errors but it's slow, I'll usually have to wait a good couple of hours after every single timing changed before I can move on to the next. At some point later on I'll also run TM5. Honestly haven't really tried y-cruncher yet, does it hit the CPU hard in terms of temps? Because I'm still on budget air cooler, waiting for all the parts to arrive so I can assemble my first water cooling loop (RAM block included)!
As for OCCT finding lowest vDIMM, when I have some time I'll mess around and check if Karhu or one of the TM5 scripts does it faster


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> Oh lol don't get me wrong I don't use OCCT for RAM and I wouldn't recommend it for that, it's way to soft the memory and lets you get away with much looser timings compared to other programs, but I just found it works really fast, within a couple of minutes, to simply find the lowest stable vDIMM, nothing more, I'll start off with purposely lowish vDIMM and then work up 5mv increments, usually it errors in a couple of minutes and once it runs for 15+mins then I can assume it's good, maybe bump up another 5~10mv to be safe, and I'll move on the HCI/TM5.
> I'm really fond of HCI MemTest(Pro) as for now for finding errors but it's slow, I'll usually have to wait a good couple of hours after every single timing changed before I can move on to the next. At some point later on I'll also run TM5. Honestly haven't really tried y-cruncher yet, does it hit the CPU hard in terms of temps? Because I'm still on budget air cooler, waiting for all the parts to arrive so I can assemble my first water cooling loop (RAM block included)!
> As for OCCT finding lowest vDIMM, when I have some time I'll mess around and check if Karhu or one of the TM5 scripts does it faster


TM5 with 1usmus to start with is enough to give you errors within the 1-2 minutes if your VDIMM isn't enough. anta777 ABOLUT is even stronger.

y-cruncher is the hardest test you can throw at your CPU and IMC at the moment. Nothing comes close to it. If you can pass both the main and the component stress test (with all options enabled, or at least SFT, HNT, and VST), you're pretty much rock stable. It is _not _a RAM test, however.


----------



## massivex

Ichirou said:


> Overall faster training (and less randomness between BIOS versions), nice clean and optimized interface (IMO anyway), much more timings available for you to configure (along with many of the implied values revealed), and QVL lists showing much more favour towards multi-DIMM configurations. However, I dislike the lack of a CMOS reset button and the inability to tighten certain timings even further (there are minimums set for each timing).
> 
> I'd say that they both trade blows, and neither of them are objectively better than the other in any meaningful capacity. And truth be told, I actually bought a second ASUS Strix _again_, but resold it without even unboxing it. Managed to profit off of that, which offset the loss from my selling my first Strix. So I broke even. I was just too lazy to bother redoing all of the overclocks again, don't want to have to test a dozen different BIOSes, and I have no way of knowing whether or not 4x16 GB will play nicely on the Strix.
> 
> Maybe in the future if the Strix becomes dirt cheap second-hand, I might give it a try, but highly, highly unlikely.


Gosh man the training on the Strix is frustrating, I have an older MSI Z170 M7 Gaming and it rains so fast even with fast boot disabled. Like really dude, every reboot on the Strix, especially if I know it's most likely not going to boot but I still try it anyway is killing my braincells looking at the ceiling waiting for something to happen. I getcha the cmos reset is kinda nice to have but it's faster for me to reach the 2pin on the motherboard with a screwdriver than reach around the back of the case and find that button. I did notice from Buildzoid's videos that the MSI seems to have more configurations available which I didn't see on the Strix so I wondered if they're in some other section that I haven't checked. As for the interface, coming from MSI, I'm getting used to it, it seems like Asus is renaming stuff. When doing my research before buying the Z690 motherboard I recall reading on a couple of sites that Asus has more "refined" BIOS but I'm not sure what they meant by it. And as for the BIOS updates as for now I'm sticking to an older version but last time I updated things didn't work as well.

Sorry but I lol'd when I read you bought it again, but I know what you mean, and glad you managed to break even.

Oh by the way I wanted to ask you about the RAM timings, since I'm running 2x16GB Dual Rank, can I set all the _dd timings to 1 or 0 (not sure if there's a difference)? I tried dropping them to 0 and then HCI MemTest dropped from 1400+MB/s speed per thread (16 threads total with e-cores off) to 800+MB/s, so I was confused if HCI running almost half slower is a red flag or something. And how did get tWRRD_dg 20 ? I can't even boot under 21. Thanks!


----------



## massivex

Ichirou said:


> TM5 with 1usmus to start with is enough to give you errors within the 1-2 minutes if your VDIMM isn't enough. anta777 ABOLUT is even stronger.
> 
> y-cruncher is the hardest test you can throw at your CPU and IMC at the moment. Nothing comes close to it. If you can pass both the main and the component stress test (with all options enabled, or at least SFT, HNT, and VST), you're pretty much rock stable. It is _not _a RAM test, however.


Hahaha alright then I'll give TM5 1usmus/absolut a try later on, I've used them overnight to re-verify my tuning after using HCI, but never used them explicitly to find lowest stable vDIMM. Guess I'll leave y-cruncher out for now until I get the custom loop installed.


----------



## opheen

Ichirou said:


> TM5 with 1usmus to start with is enough to give you errors within the 1-2 minutes if your VDIMM isn't enough. anta777 ABOLUT is even stronger.
> 
> y-cruncher is the hardest test you can throw at your CPU and IMC at the moment. Nothing comes close to it. If you can pass both the main and the component stress test (with all options enabled, or at least SFT, HNT, and VST), you're pretty much rock stable. It is _not _a RAM test, however.


1 - 0 to you 😰 TM5 with ABOLUT gives me errors after 10-15 min with 14 tRCD att 1.612 vccsa 1.27 vddqtx 1.27.


----------



## massivex

opheen said:


> 1 - 0 to you 😰 TM5 with ABOLUT gives me errors after 10-15 min with 14 tRCD att 1.612 vccsa 1.27 vddqtx 1.27.


It's all good brother, it was expected to happen, makes me wondered what program did you stress test before hand that made you think your tRCD 14 was stable initially? But anyway you should probably be able to take vdimm down to 1.55v+ now


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> Gosh man the training on the Strix is frustrating, I have an older MSI Z170 M7 Gaming and it rains so fast even with fast boot disabled. Like really dude, every reboot on the Strix, especially if I know it's most likely not going to boot but I still try it anyway is killing my braincells looking at the ceiling waiting for something to happen. I getcha the cmos reset is kinda nice to have but it's faster for me to reach the 2pin on the motherboard with a screwdriver than reach around the back of the case and find that button. I did notice from Buildzoid's videos that the MSI seems to have more configurations available which I didn't see on the Strix so I wondered if they're in some other section that I haven't checked. As for the interface, coming from MSI, I'm getting used to it, it seems like Asus is renaming stuff. When doing my research before buying the Z690 motherboard I recall reading on a couple of sites that Asus has more "refined" BIOS but I'm not sure what they meant by it. And as for the BIOS updates as for now I'm sticking to an older version but last time I updated things didn't work as well.
> 
> Sorry but I lol'd when I read you bought it again, but I know what you mean, and glad you managed to break even.
> 
> Oh by the way I wanted to ask you about the RAM timings, since I'm running 2x16GB Dual Rank, can I set all the _dd timings to 1 or 0 (not sure if there's a difference)? I tried dropping them to 0 and then HCI MemTest dropped from 1400+MB/s speed per thread (16 threads total with e-cores off) to 800+MB/s, so I was confused if HCI running almost half slower is a red flag or something. And how did get tWRRD_dg 20 ? I can't even boot under 21. Thanks!


Yeah, I didn't quite enjoy the training on the Strix either. It's not bad, but it's not nearly as quick and consistent as it is on the Edge. On the Edge, it knows exactly whether or not a configuration is stable. If it is, it almost always boots just fine. if not, it'll cause all sorts of problems.

The CMOS reset pins on MSI boards are not useful for me due to my case design; access is physically blocked. But the way I force the BIOS into safe mode is to cycle the power four times in a row with the power button, as soon the PC starts to boot.

Yes, MSI offers more memory configurations and also reveals much more values than ASUS does. The BIOS isn't really that hard to get used to, once you give it a good day or two. After you do so, you'll actually find that it's easier to use than ASUS.

_dr only affects dual rank DIMMs, and _dd affects communications between DIMMs, especially channels. Outside of those configurations, they generally shouldn't do much.

tWRRD should be left on Auto and tWTR should be changed directly for Z690. Tertiaries differ depending on the die, and to a lesser extent BIOS.
I can run tRDRD_sg and tWRWR_sg at 5 with these sticks, but it needs a lot more VDIMM and VCCSA due to the increased bandwidth.


----------



## massivex

Ichirou said:


> Yeah, I didn't quite enjoy the training on the Strix either. It's not bad, but it's not nearly as quick and consistent as it is on the Edge. On the Edge, it knows exactly whether or not a configuration is stable. If it is, it almost always boots just fine. if not, it'll cause all sorts of problems.
> 
> The CMOS reset pins on MSI boards are not useful for me due to my case design; access is physically blocked. But the way I force the BIOS into safe mode is to cycle the power four times in a row with the power button, as soon the PC starts to boot.
> 
> Yes, MSI offers more memory configurations and also reveals much more values than ASUS does. The BIOS isn't really that hard to get used to, once you give it a good day or two. After you do so, you'll actually find that it's easier to use than ASUS.
> 
> _dr only affects dual rank DIMMs, and _dd affects communications between DIMMs, especially channels. Outside of those configurations, they generally shouldn't do much.
> 
> tWRRD should be left on Auto and tWTR should be changed directly for Z690. Tertiaries differ depending on the die, and to a lesser extent BIOS.
> I can run tRDRD_sg and tWRWR_sg at 5 with these sticks, but it needs a lot more VDIMM and VCCSA due to the increased bandwidth.


What you described on the Edge is exactly how it feels on the MSI Z170 Gaming M7! Plus there's a post code so you can know and know before hand if it's going to boot. I figured that your cmos pinned must be physically blocked or something like that, I'll try to remember the power cycle method, might come in handy for future reference. 

Oh I was doing it the other way around then? left tWTR_S/L on Auto and tuned it through tWRRD_sg/dg, seen it recommended on a few guides for Intel. Well thanks for sharing your knowledge, I'm very close to squeezing out the most of what I can of these bdie, it's excruciating but it's sort of fun, it's like grinding some MMORPG game trying to achieve the best stats out of your character.


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> What you described on the Edge is exactly how it feels on the MSI Z170 Gaming M7! Plus there's a post code so you can know and know before hand if it's going to boot. I figured that your cmos pinned must be physically blocked or something like that, I'll try to remember the power cycle method, might come in handy for future reference.
> 
> Oh I was doing it the other way around then? left tWTR_S/L on Auto and tuned it through tWRRD_sg/dg, seen it recommended on a few guides for Intel. Well thanks for sharing your knowledge, I'm very close to squeezing out the most of what I can of these bdie, it's excruciating but it's sort of fun, it's like grinding some MMORPG game trying to achieve the best stats out of your character.


On older motherboards, tWTR doesn't always respond to direct changes, so you had to tweak them with tWRRD instead.
But newer motherboards have corrected that. Or at least, made accommodations to simplify it.

It's easier to power cycle on ASUS though. Only need to do it like once instead of four times.


----------



## massivex

@Ichirou It's almost midnight here and I unfortunately need to head to bed so I didn't have much time to test it out, I took my stable 1.556v vDIMM to 1.550v. Ran 1usmus_v3 couple of times and it consistently picked it up in 2 under mins and one time it need 2+ mins. Absolut seemed a bit slower in that regard, needed 5+ mins. Karhu needed 1~3 mins on a few runs. OCCT/Memory/SSE needed 2+ mins. If I had to nitpick it seems that 1usmus_v3 on average so maybe half a minute faster than the rest, albeit I only ran each program a handful of times. Bottom line I'm glad to have found out that vDIMM instabilities can be picked up really fast regardless across the board.
Gonna set tRP to 13 overnight and see if it's stable and afterwards only need to tune the tRFC/tREFI (which are currently are 300/40000) and I'll be finished with the tuning for 3900C14 G1 CR2 for good! G'night !


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> @Ichirou It's almost midnight here and I unfortunately need to head to bed so I didn't have much time to test it out, I took my stable 1.556v vDIMM to 1.550v. Ran 1usmus_v3 couple of times and it consistently picked it up in 2 under mins and one time it need 2+ mins. Absolut seemed a bit slower in that regard, needed 5+ mins. Karhu needed 1~3 mins on a few runs. OCCT/Memory/SSE needed 2+ mins. If I had to nitpick it seems that 1usmus_v3 on average so maybe half a minute faster than the rest, albeit I only ran each program a handful of times. Bottom line I'm glad to have found out that vDIMM instabilities can be picked up really fast regardless across the board.
> Gonna set tRP to 13 overnight and see if it's stable and afterwards only need to tune the tRFC/tREFI (which are currently are 300/40000) and I'll be finished with the tuning for 3900C14 G1 CR2 for good! G'night !


You may be able to run your kit at 1T if you boost VDIMM and VCCSA.
Also, boosting VDDQ to 1.50-1.60V will allow you to reduce VDIMM even more.


----------



## opheen

massivex said:


> It's all good brother, it was expected to happen, makes me wondered what program did you stress test before hand that made you think your tRCD 14 was stable initially? But anyway you should probably be able to take vdimm down to 1.55v+ now


Karhu and OCCT... TM5 with ABOLUT smashes hard 98\99% use physical .... :\ My system will not get corrupted with the workloads i do on my pc with, tRCD14. i said earlier that i do not claim that its pullet proof


----------



## opheen

It's the temperature that makes them fail, and i am not gonne spend time tryin to cool them more, afraid i cant get out off that rabbit hole 😅


----------



## Lax91

Ichirou said:


> Samsung B-die is safe up to 1.60V VDIMM as long as you add some fans to cool it.
> There are plenty of kits being sold up to 1.60V on XMP now.
> You really don't need to be too conservative. And for the most part, 2x8 GB B-die is mega cheap anyway, and will get cheaper as time goes by.
> 
> I'd suggest throwing 1.55-1.60V at the sticks and doing 4,000 14-15-15-XX-1T.
> tWR to like 10-12, tRFC down to like 260 or less, tRRD_L/S to 4, tWTR_L/S to 6/1, tRTP to 5-6, tCWL to 12. tREFI to max, tCKE to 0.


Well that's the thing, I can't add fans since my CPU is air-cooled with a massive nh d15 that completely covers the RAM sticks😁
Also my sticks are low profile so I don't want them to fry haha

If I try C15 with my current timings/frequency, I get an instant BSOD. Would lowering the frequency to 3900 help ?
Can I set tCWL to 12 while keeping tCL at 16 or 15 ?


----------



## Groove2013

Lax91 said:


> Can I set tCWL to 12 while keeping tCL at 16 or 15 ?


no. 12 is for CL13 and 12.
14 is for CL144 and 15.


----------



## Ichirou

Lax91 said:


> Well that's the thing, I can't add fans since my CPU is air-cooled with a massive nh d15 that completely covers the RAM sticks😁
> Also my sticks are low profile so I don't want them to fry haha
> 
> If I try C15 with my current timings/frequency, I get an instant BSOD. Would lowering the frequency to 3900 help ?
> Can I set tCWL to 12 while keeping tCL at 16 or 15 ?


Jerry rig some mini Noctuas on top of the RAM. Or stick a 120mm onto your GPU to blow on the RAM.
Or just ditch the NH-D15 and swap to an AIO instead.


Groove2013 said:


> no. 12 is for CL13 and 12.
> 14 is for CL144 and 15.


tCWL 12 works for tCL 12-14.
tCWL 14 works for tCL 14-16.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> tCWL 12 works for tCL 12-14.
> tCWL 14 works for tCL 14-16.


Asus boards don't let you set it to 12, if you do CL14 and don't let you set it to 14, if you do tCL16.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> Asus boards don't let you set it to 12, if you do CL14 and don't let you set it to 14, if you do tCL16.


?


----------



## Netarangi

Just swapped mobo from Gigabyte z690 ud ddr4 to ASUS TUF Gaming. Was going to get MSI Tomahawk but shop was sold out.. This'll do.

My Corsair Vengeance LPX booted right to desktop using XMP 4000mhz cl16, the Gigabyte couldn't even boot at 4000mhz cl18. Idle cpu temps on Noctua dh15 was 33 degrees and now it's 28 

Question.. Do I need to do a complete Windows reinstall? I am aware it would be best practice, I have used DeviceCleanup and got rid of a ton of old drivers but not sure if that'll be fine.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> ?


changed in Windows or in the BIOS?


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> changed in Windows or in the BIOS?


BIOS.


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Just swapped mobo from Gigabyte z690 ud ddr4 to ASUS TUF Gaming. Was going to get MSI Tomahawk but shop was sold out.. This'll do.
> 
> My Corsair Vengeance LPX booted right to desktop using XMP 4000mhz cl16, the Gigabyte couldn't even boot at 4000mhz cl18. Idle cpu temps on Noctua dh15 was 33 degrees and now it's 28
> 
> Question.. Do I need to do a complete Windows reinstall? I am aware it would be best practice, I have used DeviceCleanup and got rid of a ton of old drivers but not sure if that'll be fine.


It's best that you do. When I swapped from the ASUS Strix to the MSI Edge, the OS would constantly BSOD every five minutes. Had to reinstall Windows to fix it.
Was very likely due to driver incompatibility. Even on the Strix, it was a fresh Windows install with nothing on it besides some overclocking software.


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> It's best that you do. When I swapped from the ASUS Strix to the MSI Edge, the OS would constantly BSOD every five minutes. Had to reinstall Windows to fix it.
> Was very likely due to driver incompatibility. Even on the Strix, it was a fresh Windows install with nothing on it besides some overclocking software.


Okay so I reinstalled Windows and have set these timings. So far stable Testmem5 extreme 13 cycles, OCCT both memory tests for an hour:

View attachment 2564831


1) Only set primaries, tRFC, tREFI and left rest on auto (edit: opps I also set trrdl/ds and tfaw). Do you think I should proceed from here or do my numbers look off? Sorry I am a _bit _of a noob with Intel OC, having been AM4 for past year.

2) I've noticed my CPU is maxing out at 95% usage.. It's not thermal throttling and I haven't played with any CPU settings in bios aside from IMC voltage. What do?


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Okay so I reinstalled Windows and have set these timings. So far stable Testmem5 extreme 13 cycles, OCCT both memory tests for an hour:
> 
> View attachment 2564831
> 
> 
> 1) Only set primaries, tRFC, tREFI and left rest on auto (edit: opps I also set trrdl/ds and tfaw). Do you think I should proceed from here or do my numbers look off? Sorry I am a _bit _of a noob with Intel OC, having been AM4 for past year.
> 
> 2) I've noticed my CPU is maxing out at 95% usage.. It's not thermal throttling and I haven't played with any CPU settings in bios aside from IMC voltage. What do?


Gear Mode 1
Frequency 4,000 MHz
VDIMM ~1.60V
VCCSA ~1.35V
VDDQ Auto

tCL = 14
tRCD = 15
tRP = 14-15
tRAS = 28-32
CR = 1

tWR = 10-12
tRFC = ~260
tRRD_L/S = 4/4
tWTR_L/S = 6/1
tRTP = 5-6
tFAW = 16
tCWL = 12

tREFI = 65536
tCKE = 0-2

tRDRD_sg/dd & tWRWR_sg/dd = 5-7
tRDWR_sg/dg/dd = 10-13
All of the _dg = 4
All of the _dr to 1
All of the _dd to the same as _sg

tCCD_L/S = same as sg & dg

Round Trip Latency mode to Dynamic Mode


----------



## bscool

Netarangi said:


> Okay so I reinstalled Windows and have set these timings. So far stable Testmem5 extreme 13 cycles, OCCT both memory tests for an hour:
> 
> View attachment 2564831
> 
> 
> 1) Only set primaries, tRFC, tREFI and left rest on auto (edit: opps I also set trrdl/ds and tfaw). Do you think I should proceed from here or do my numbers look off? Sorry I am a _bit _of a noob with Intel OC, having been AM4 for past year.
> 
> 2) I've noticed my CPU is maxing out at 95% usage.. It's not thermal throttling and I haven't played with any CPU settings in bios aside from IMC voltage. What do?


Your in gear 2. Gear 1 using 2t will give you better performance and lower latency.

I havent tried SR in a while on Strix but to run 1t in gear 1 needed an older bios. Not sure how newer bios do with SR and gear 1 1t.

Edit added a 4000c15 also so you have something to go off for timings and voltages for gear 1 if you want to try it.


----------



## opheen

Then I take a break from bios and JBAT1🤗


----------



## Netarangi

bscool said:


> Your in gear 2. Gear 1 using 2t will give you better performance and lower latency.
> 
> I havent tried SR in a while on Strix but to run 1t in gear 1 needed an older bios. Not sure how newer bios do with SR and gear 1 1t.
> 
> Edit added a 4000c15 also so you have something to go off for timings and voltages for gear 1 if you want to try it.


Have tried these settings but can't get it above 3900 gear 1:










VDIM 1.55
VCCSA 1.35
VDDQ 1.36

Testing the below numbers now, as I can't boot any higher frequency:


----------



## opheen

I found out something strange yesterday, or strange it is not but, I did a little experiment on what is max frequency I can boot, so I thought we run on with a little volt .. 1.35v VCCSA and 1.5v VDDQTX for to be absolutely sure that was enough volts, so I started at 4000G1 100-100. with 17-18-18-38 1.55v DRAM, and did not get to boot 4000Mhz for everything in the world .. so I started to go down on VCCSA and VDDQTX and only got booted when VCCSA was on 1.3v and VDDQTX 1.29v I know not how much impact VDDQTX had, but that too much VCCSA can definitely have the opposite effect when trying to boot higher frequencies, fully aware that this is "Old news" but thought I could share it with you. 1.25-1.28v VCCSA was sweetspot in my case. 4133G1 100-133. stopped it on. over it was just to forget.


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Have tried these settings but can't get it above 3900 gear 1:
> 
> View attachment 2564878
> 
> 
> VDIM 1.55
> VCCSA 1.35
> VDDQ 1.36
> 
> Testing the below numbers now, as I can't boot any higher frequency:
> 
> View attachment 2564879


Likely an IMC weakness then. You can test 1.40-1.45V VCCSA and also 1.50-1.60V VDDQ just to see whether it will allow you to boot.
But I wouldn't daily VCCSA above 1.35V. It would only be for curiosity's sake.

If you loosen tCL, you will have a better chance of booting a higher frequency.


----------



## opheen

Netarangi said:


> Have tried these settings but can't get it above 3900 gear 1:
> 
> View attachment 2564878
> 
> 
> VDIM 1.55
> VCCSA 1.35
> VDDQ 1.36
> 
> Testing the below numbers now, as I can't boot any higher frequency:
> 
> View attachment 2564879


Mby


Netarangi said:


> Have tried these settings but can't get it above 3900 gear 1:
> 
> View attachment 2564878
> 
> 
> VDIM 1.55
> VCCSA 1.35
> VDDQ 1.36
> 
> Testing the below numbers now, as I can't boot any higher frequency:
> 
> View attachment 2564879


----------



## Netarangi

Thanks for replies and all of your help guys! Really appreciate it.

Will test out the configs above 

Haven't tried the 4000 cl14 yet @Ichirou


----------



## opheen

Netarangi said:


> Thanks for replies and all of your help guys! Really appreciate it.
> 
> Will test out the configs above
> 
> Haven't tried the 4000 cl14 yet @Ichirou


I think he ment that you can try to loose up even more , like 16-16-16-36 og 17-18-18-38 tRFC 350-400. To make it easyer for your IMC.


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Thanks for replies and all of your help guys! Really appreciate it.
> 
> Will test out the configs above
> 
> Haven't tried the 4000 cl14 yet @Ichirou


No point trying 4,000 CL14 if you can't even run your current config at 4,000 MHz. There's a bit of an IMC weakness as it is.
But do test VDDQ up to 1.50-1.60V first, and VCCSA up to 1.40-1.45V just to see if the IMC _can_ handle it, but just not well enough to be worth dailying.


----------



## Groove2013

TeamGroup DDR4 4000 15-15-15-35 1.5 2×16








TeamGroup Xtreem DDR4-4000 CL15 2x 16 GB Engineering Sample - Overclockers Dream


TeamGroup has sent over a special media-only pre-binned T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-4000 kit that is ready to be put through the paces! This 32 GB memory kit is dual-rank (2x16 GB) with amazing XMP timings of 15-15-15-35. We dive into the question of whether top-tier memory really grants more...




www.techpowerup.com


----------



## Groove2013

Groove2013 said:


> TeamGroup DDR4 4000 15-15-15-35 1.5 2×16
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> TeamGroup Xtreem DDR4-4000 CL15 2x 16 GB Engineering Sample - Overclockers Dream
> 
> 
> TeamGroup has sent over a special media-only pre-binned T-Force Xtreem ARGB DDR4-4000 kit that is ready to be put through the paces! This 32 GB memory kit is dual-rank (2x16 GB) with amazing XMP timings of 15-15-15-35. We dive into the question of whether top-tier memory really grants more...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.techpowerup.com


most probably no temp sensors, as usual for TeamGroup and also slightly worse than G.Skill 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4 2×16.


----------



## tunste

Netarangi said:


> Have tried these settings but can't get it above 3900 gear 1:
> 
> View attachment 2564878
> 
> 
> VDIM 1.55
> VCCSA 1.35
> VDDQ 1.36
> 
> Testing the below numbers now, as I can't boot any higher frequency:
> 
> View attachment 2564879


Sometimes it is the silicon lottery, your ram frequency is limited on how good your processor IMC is. I have same motherboard, ASUS Z6900 TUF Gaming Plus WIFI D4, but 12700K processor with G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA. Before 1504 bios and GSkill F4-4000C16D-32GVKA, I could not get stable low latency ram settings @ 3900 MHz ram frequency.
*Current Systen: June 22*: *CPU:* Intel 12700K| *motherboard*: ASUS TUF Gaming Z690-Plus WiFi D4 | *ram:* G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (@ 3900 MHz (14,15,13,28,250,Gear1, CR2). | I have VDIM: 1.536v, SA VID: 1.369v, VDDQ: 1.50v. | I also have 120mm fan blowing on ram. I have custom waterloop cooling cooling my processor in 12 year old Mountain Mod Accession Extended PC tower with 5 ARCTIC BioniX F140-140 mm fans and 6 120 mm Cougar CF-V12HPB Vortex Hydro-Dynamic Bearing fans. 

I can now do 4000 MHz ram frequency ((15,16,15,30,270,Gear1, CR2) but better gaming experience online with 3900MHz ram frequency (14,15,13,28,250,Gear1, CR2).


----------



## opheen

tunste said:


> Sometimes it is the silicon lottery, your ram frequency is limited on how good your processor IMC is. I have same motherboard, ASUS Z6900 TUF Gaming Plus WIFI D4, but 12700K processor with G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA. Before 1504 bios and GSkill F4-4000C16D-32GVKA, I could not get stable low latency ram settings @ 3900 MHz ram frequency.
> *Current Systen: June 22*: *CPU:* Intel 12700K| *motherboard*: ASUS TUF Gaming Z690-Plus WiFi D4 | *ram:* G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (@ 3900 MHz (14,15,13,28,250,Gear1, CR2). | I have VDIM: 1.536v, SA VID: 1.369v, VDDQ: 1.50v. | I also have 120mm fan blowing on ram. I have custom waterloop cooling cooling my processor in 12 year old Mountain Mod Accession Extended PC tower with 5 ARCTIC BioniX F140-140 mm fans and 6 120 mm Cougar CF-V12HPB Vortex Hydro-Dynamic Bearing fans.
> 
> I can now do 4000 MHz ram frequency ((15,16,15,30,270,Gear1, CR2) but better gaming experience online with 3900MHz ram frequency (14,15,13,28,250,Gear1, CR2).
> 
> 
> View attachment 2564916
> View attachment 2564917


tCKE lower than 6 tends to feel weird in intense FPS games, feels like things not responding normally.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

So if I am reading the info correctly I have Micron B-die? Confirming die type is the only hand-holding I _need _but if someone has set-and-forget voltages to use (for single rank) as a springboard I won't complain. Kind of embarrassed to even say that.


----------



## Ichirou

MIXEDGREENS said:


> View attachment 2564934
> 
> 
> So if I am reading the info correctly I have Micron B-die? Confirming die type is the only hand-holding I _need _but if someone has set-and-forget voltages to use (for single rank) as a springboard I won't complain. Kind of embarrassed to even say that.


Yep, looks like it. Below are my settings; you should be able to achieve something similar, subject to the voltages required.


----------



## Netarangi

tunste said:


> Sometimes it is the silicon lottery, your ram frequency is limited on how good your processor IMC is. I have same motherboard, ASUS Z6900 TUF Gaming Plus WIFI D4, but 12700K processor with G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) Model F4-4000C16D-32GVKA. Before 1504 bios and GSkill F4-4000C16D-32GVKA, I could not get stable low latency ram settings @ 3900 MHz ram frequency.
> *Current Systen: June 22*: *CPU:* Intel 12700K| *motherboard*: ASUS TUF Gaming Z690-Plus WiFi D4 | *ram:* G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (@ 3900 MHz (14,15,13,28,250,Gear1, CR2). | I have VDIM: 1.536v, SA VID: 1.369v, VDDQ: 1.50v. | I also have 120mm fan blowing on ram. I have custom waterloop cooling cooling my processor in 12 year old Mountain Mod Accession Extended PC tower with 5 ARCTIC BioniX F140-140 mm fans and 6 120 mm Cougar CF-V12HPB Vortex Hydro-Dynamic Bearing fans.
> 
> I can now do 4000 MHz ram frequency ((15,16,15,30,270,Gear1, CR2) but better gaming experience online with 3900MHz ram frequency (14,15,13,28,250,Gear1, CR2).
> 
> 
> View attachment 2564916
> View attachment 2564917


Hey thank you for posting these, gives me a good idea of what to aim for.

Wondering what cinebench r23 score you get on that setup? I have a Noctua DH15 and struggling to hit 23k, could get 24k on my previous **** gigabyte board without cpu oc


----------



## Ichirou

The NH-D15 is really not all that great for the 12th Gen (I've tested it myself).
You should invest in a good AIO (380mm or higher, preferrably Arctic) if you want to push good clocks.


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> The NH-D15 is really not all that great for the 12th Gen (I've tested it myself).
> You should invest in a good AIO (380mm or higher, preferrably Arctic) if you want to push good clocks.


Yeah I need to get an AIO at some point.. Could be next upgrade.










Think I'm settling for these timings now

1.5 vdimm
1.3 vddq and vccsa


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Yeah I need to get an AIO at some point.. Could be next upgrade.
> 
> View attachment 2565032
> 
> 
> Think I'm settling for these timings now
> 
> 1.5 vdimm
> 1.3 vddq and vccsa


Does raising all voltages not allow you to go further?


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Promising start!
Memory Try it -> DDR4-5000
vSA 1.35v
vDimm 1.6v
everything else auto

5000 no post, 4800 it's benching strong enough on comedically loose timings to be worth exploring further.


----------



## Ichirou

MIXEDGREENS said:


> View attachment 2565076
> 
> 
> 
> Promising start!
> Memory Try it -> DDR4-5000
> vSA 1.35v
> vDimm 1.6v
> everything else auto
> 
> 5000 no post, 4800 it's benching strong enough on comedically loose timings to be worth exploring further.


No point doing Gear 2 on Z690, unless your IMC is really poor on Gear 1. The insane latency hit is not worth the slight bandwidth increase.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Ichirou said:


> No point doing Gear 2 on Z690, unless your IMC is really poor on Gear 1. The insane latency hit is not worth the slight bandwidth increase.


I'm going to go with "trust but verify" and spend at least a little time poking around. Nothing ventured nothing gained!


----------



## Ichirou

MIXEDGREENS said:


> I'm going to go with "trust but verify" and spend at least a little time poking around. Nothing ventured nothing gained!


You'll never achieve Gear 1 latencies with Gear 2, but feel free, I guess.


----------



## Rbk_3

Been rock solid at 4000 14-15-15-28 at 1.60V 1.30SA for a couple weeks now. Very pleased with it.










Have an 80mm dangling from the top of my case with a ziptie right on the ram. Seems to be working amazingly. Never seem to go over 45C at 1.6V


----------



## tunste

Netarangi said:


> Hey thank you for posting these, gives me a good idea of what to aim for.
> 
> Wondering what cinebench r23 score you get on that setup? I have a Noctua DH15 and struggling to hit 23k, could get 24k on my previous **** gigabyte board without cpu oc


I have 24968pts in cinebench r23 with AMD 6800XT @ default.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Ichirou said:


> You'll never achieve Gear 1 latencies with Gear 2, but feel free, I guess.


My hope was the lower IMC speed would mean being able to crank down the tertiaries and then RTL as a result. Playing around with them had zero effect good or bad in everything I measured unfortunately, and MSI has changed the behavior of InitRTL from what I remember of my DDR3 days. Wish I had the kind of free time as I did back then.

Looks like overall I got a pretty average IMC and set of sticks. Time to boldly go where everyone else already has been!


----------



## Ichirou

MIXEDGREENS said:


> My hope was the lower IMC speed would mean being able to crank down the tertiaries and then RTL as a result. Playing around with them had zero effect good or bad in everything I measured unfortunately, and MSI has changed the behavior of InitRTL from what I remember of my DDR3 days. Wish I had the kind of free time as I did back then.
> 
> Looks like overall I got a pretty average IMC and set of sticks. Time to boldly go where everyone else already has been!


Gear 2 was still acceptable on Z590 as the latency penalty wasn't as severe, so it was still possible to ramp up the RAM to high frequencies to balance out that latency hit.
But Z690 is just different altogether. For DDR4, anyway.


----------



## Kaltenbrunner

With i7-12700k, today I ran 9h10min of P95 custom using 15GB ram, and AVX turned off. Average P-cores was 4830MHz, just because it didn't need to run at 50x I guess, there was no temp or power limiting.

The ram was Patriot Viper steel 4000cl16, in xmp1 4000 16-16-16-36-52-2T G1, 1.45V, with SA voltage set to 1.435V

So that's the longest P95 run I've done on this system. I haven't messed with any timings, or tried upping the ram speed, but I guess there's not much voltage headroom left.

Some day I'll get another 2x8 for dual rank. Hope they work together in my MSI pro z690-A


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> Does raising all voltages not allow you to go further?


I just can't get y cruncher running any longer than 10 seconds when freq is above 3800 cl14. Tried 1.6 vdimm, 1.5 vddq 1.4vccsa

Would it be worth going to cl16 if it can go over 3800?


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> I just can't get y cruncher running any longer than 10 seconds when freq is above 3800 cl14.
> 
> Would it be worth going to cl16 if it can go over 3800?


Due to the nature of Gear 1, possibly. You'll have to bench AIDA64 and see.


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> Due to the nature of Gear 1, possibly. You'll have to bench AIDA64 and see.


K y cruncher lasted 25 seconds with the max voltages you posted above, longest its tested for so far. I'll stick with the cl14 3800


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> K y cruncher lasted 25 seconds with the max voltages you posted above, longest its tested for so far. I'll stick with the cl14 3800


If it BSODs with CLOCK_WATCHDOG, it's not enough Vcore.
If it simply errors, it's most likely not enough VCCSA.


----------



## bass junkie xl

my dual rank needed 1.35 v vddq a d 1.35 v vcssa to pass y and absolute tm5 if I ran 1.30v vddq or 1.45 v vddq y would error out. 

on my 8gb x 4 I needed 1.40v vddq for 4000 flat 15s , and 1.35v vcssa but after some tweaking if I lowerd vcssa to 1.31v vcssa I could lower my vcore on my 12900k from 1.35v down to 1.31v to pass y . 

try some different combos ,


----------



## opheen

bass junkie xl said:


> my dual rank needed 1.35 v vddq a d 1.35 v vcssa to pass y and absolute tm5 if I ran 1.30v vddq or 1.45 v vddq y would error out.
> 
> on my 8gb x 4 I needed 1.40v vddq for 4000 flat 15s , and 1.35v vcssa but after some tweaking if I lowerd vcssa to 1.31v vcssa I could lower my vcore on my 12900k from 1.35v down to 1.31v to pass y .
> 
> try some different combos ,
> [/QUOTEF





bass junkie xl said:


> my dual rank needed 1.35 v vddq a d 1.35 v vcssa to pass y and absolute tm5 if I ran 1.30v vddq or 1.45 v vddq y would error out.
> 
> on my 8gb x 4 I needed 1.40v vddq for 4000 flat 15s , and 1.35v vcssa but after some tweaking if I lowerd vcssa to 1.31v vcssa I could lower my vcore on my 12900k from 1.35v down to 1.31v to pass y .
> 
> try some different combos ,


I went down from 49 to 48 on ring\cache and set my vCore up with droopy loadline and a littlebit high idle voltage, loosen up timings as much i could without loosing performance to get down my VCCSA and VDDQTX vccsa1.26v vddqtx1.26v.


----------



## RighteousOne

Hi ... new to the forum, overclocking and all things ddr ram related.

A few ago, I bought 128GB of 3600MHz ddr4 ram (32GBx4) from Newegg, i.e. Corsairs Dominator Platinum RGB (18-22-22-42, 1.35V, CMT128GX4D3600C18) and was stress testing the kit using RAMTest in an Asus TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 with an i9-12900K processor, running latest 1504 version bios I flashed a few days ago.

I got 3 results shown below. The kit failed the first time around within 12 minutes. Run the test following day and it failed within 1.5 hours. Last night, I run it all night long and it's not failed for 12 hours until I stopped it. So, I'm confused whether the kit is good, or should I get a replacement from Newegg? Did all of you who run this test (or other even more stringest tests) do it with fans over your ram kits or not?

In all 3 test cases, the ram temperatures (dram modules 0-3) were approximately ~ 50C, ~54C, ~55C and ~ 51C. The outer two sticks were cooler than the inner two sticks and this is whether the case was open and close to an air conditioner or not.


----------



## edkieferlp

RighteousOne said:


> Hi ... new to the forum, overclocking and all things ddr ram related.
> 
> A few ago, I bought 128GB of 3600MHz ddr4 ram (32GBx4) from Newegg, i.e. Corsairs Dominator Platinum RGB (18-22-22-42, 1.35V, CMT128GX4D3600C18) and was stress testing the kit using RAMTest in an Asus TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 with an i9-12900K processor, running latest 1504 version bios I flashed a few days ago.
> 
> I got 3 results shown below. The kit failed the first time around within 12 minutes. Run the test following day and it failed within 1.5 hours. Last night, I run it all night long and it's not failed for 12 hours until I stopped it. So, I'm confused whether the kit is good, or should I get a replacement from Newegg? Did all of you who run this test (or other even more stringest tests) do it with fans over your ram kits or not?
> 
> In all 3 test cases, the ram temperatures (dram modules 0-3) were approximately ~ 50C, ~54C, ~55C and ~ 51C. The outer two sticks were cooler than the inner two sticks and this is whether the case was open and close to an air conditioner or not.
> 
> View attachment 2565423


post a pick of HWinfo64 so we can see voltages that are set (Dram, VCCSA, VDDQ tx etc).


----------



## RighteousOne

edkieferlp said:


> post a pick of HWinfo64 so we can see voltages that are set (Dram, VCCSA, VDDQ tx etc).













Hope this is readable enough. Thanks!


----------



## Anulu

I am testing a new Build for a Client i5 12600 non K on Asus Prime Z690 P Wifi D4 with 2x16gb Gskill B-Die.If i load xmp the Ram is running 15-15-15-35-2t-Gear 1 stable.
I am now testing DDR4000 19-19-19-38 1t gear 2 Testmem no errors after 3 Cycles.VCCSA is only 0.9v i cant change it with this Cpu so i wonder whats bettter gear 1 with 2 t or gear 2 with 1t at higher Frequency?


----------



## bscool

Anulu said:


> I am testing a new Build for a Client i5 12600 non K on Asus Prime Z690 P Wifi D4 with 2x16gb Gskill B-Die.If i load xmp the Ram is running 15-15-15-35-2t-Gear 1 stable.
> I am now testing DDR4000 19-19-19-38 1t gear 2 Testmem no errors after 3 Cycles.VCCSA is only 0.9v i cant change it with this Cpu so i wonder whats bettter gear 1 with 2 t or gear 2 with 1t at higher Frequency?


What frequency in gear 1? If 4000 then gear 1 2t without a doubt.

Gear 2 1t makes very little difference compared the the latency reduction of running gear 1. You can test it and see around a 8 to 10ns reduction using gear 1 using something like Adia64 or Intel Memory Latency checker.

This is assuming both are dialed in sub timings and not getting skewed by some off the wall auto settings.









Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui


Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> If it BSODs with CLOCK_WATCHDOG, it's not enough Vcore.
> If it simply errors, it's most likely not enough VCCSA.












First time I've had it pass any tests at CL14 above 3800mhz  Will leave it for a few hours

1.5 VDIMM
1.35 VDDQ
1.35 VCCSA

Ive tried 3900 at 1.55 dimm, 1.4 for others, getting errors after 2min. Even at 14-16-16-30 and loosening other timings. I'm sure I could get it stable at 3900 but would take a bit of work..


----------



## Anulu

bscool said:


> What frequency in gear 1? If 4000 then gear 1 2t without a doubt.
> 
> Gear 2 1t makes very little difference compared the the latency reduction of running gear 1. You can test it and see around a 8 to 10ns reduction using gear 1 using something like Adia64 or Intel Memory Latency checker.
> 
> This is assuming both are dialed in sub timings and not getting skewed by some off the wall auto settings.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui
> 
> 
> Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com


Thx
i didnt have enough Time to optimize the Subtimings and just played around for a few Hours after installing Windows.
Aida Latency is [email protected] gear1 and was around 70 with ddr4000 c19-1t gear2.
Im gonna do the subtimings tomorrow with [email protected] and save some Profiles.
The 12600 was on sale and the Guy has a tight Budget for a gaming Pc .i can sell him that Trash B-Die +1080ti i dont use anymore 
btw im impressed by the 12600.Stays very cool with a Scythe Fuma2 and Single Core Performance in CPUz is around 750pts


----------



## edkieferlp

RighteousOne said:


> View attachment 2565431
> 
> 
> 
> Hope this is readable enough. Thanks!


Ok, looking at this we see Dram =1.35, VCCSA= 1.35 and VDDQ tx =1.20 with ram temps unloaded around 40c, MB/case around 30-31c.
Those 50+c temps are not good but the first test errored in 15min, did it reach 50's at that point?

I am no expert on memory, especially 128gig but I do have a few questions.

1) do you really need 128gig, having that much and populating all DIMMs puts a lot more strain on the memory controller.
2) are there any 4x 32gig listed that are validated?
Edit: I see only one Corsair 3600 kit (CMK128GX4M4D3600C18(Ver3.44) ).thats not to say only that kit will work but it helps.

So looks like these are Micron chips and while I think they're not as sensitive to temps it would be nice if you could get them around mid 40's.

That said there are few things you could test before returning, try only two sticks in proper slots and see if passes ok.
The other thing you could raise the VDDQ tx to 1.35, that " might" help.

See what others say, there a lot of guys with far more experience than me.


----------



## RighteousOne

edkieferlp said:


> Ok, looking at this we see Dram =1.35, VCCSA= 1.35 and VDDQ tx =1.20 with ram temps unloaded around 40c, MB/case around 30-31c.
> Those 50+c temps are not good but the first test errored in 15min, did it reach 50's at that point?
> 
> I am no expert on memory, especially 128gig but I do have a few questions.
> 
> 1) do you really need 128gig, having that much and populating all DIMMs puts a lot more strain on the memory controller.
> 2) are there any 4x 32gig listed that are validated?
> Edit: I see only one Corsair 3600 kit (CMK128GX4M4D3600C18(Ver3.44) ).thats not to say only that kit will work but it helps.
> 
> So looks like these are Micron chips and while I think they're not as sensitive to temps it would be nice if you could get them around mid 40's.
> 
> That said there are few things you could test before returning, try only two sticks in proper slots and see if passes ok.
> The other thing you could raise the VDDQ tx to 1.35, that " might" help.
> 
> See what others say, there a lot of guys with far more experience than me.


Temps reach 50+c rather quickly, even within 15 minutes.
1)Yes, for my scientific applications.
2) Not sure what you mean by validated 4x32gig. They come from Corsair as a quad pack, so I assume they were tested that way.

Are you saying your temps only reach 40s when running stress tests but much cooler under normal /idle conditions?


----------



## edkieferlp

RighteousOne said:


> Temps reach 50+c rather quickly, even within 15 minutes.
> 1)Yes, for my scientific applications.
> 2) Not sure what you mean by validated 4x32gig. They come from Corsair as a quad pack, so I assume they were tested that way.
> 
> Are you saying your temps only reach 40s when running stress tests but much cooler under normal /idle conditions?








TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 | Motherboards | ASUS Gloabl


ASUS TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 is an Intel® Z690 (LGA 1700) ATX gaming motherboard with 16 DrMOS power stages, PCIe 5.0, four M.2 slots, WiFi 6, USB 3.2 Gen 2x2 Type-C®, and Aura Sync RGB lighting.




www.asus.com




The MB is tested with those listed sticks and config.
I don't have 128gigs, only two sticks 16gig total but yes temps will vary according to load. mine at idle are like low 30's ,durning gaming they reach low 40'c.
Memory stress test would go slightly more but again the gaming is higher because of vid temps into case.


----------



## edkieferlp

PSA:
I know there been a few guys/gals here running on P cores only saying this helps with testing memory with programs like TM5.

I have used it in the past once I pass memtest86 from usb stick I will run TM5 in windows.
So I looked into it a bit and sure enough, when you run TM5 only the E cores were running max for me (4 E on a 12600k), now that test default ([email protected]) only took like 1.5hrs so I never paid much attention to it.

Any way to fix this while still having E cores enabled I used the program ProcessLasso and set the TM5.exe to CPU sets of only the P cores.
So now only the P cores get maxed out and you do need to make one edit in the test file.
The line core=0 needs to be changed to how many threads you set in affinity/CPU sets, so for me as an example 6 P cores would be 12 value, 16 if running a 12900k.

I am pretty sure you could use normal affinity too, CPU sets is safer affinity type change.
So just a workaround so you don't need to disable E cores in bios if you want to run all cores.


----------



## KedarWolf

RighteousOne said:


> Hi ... new to the forum, overclocking and all things ddr ram related.
> 
> A few ago, I bought 128GB of 3600MHz ddr4 ram (32GBx4) from Newegg, i.e. Corsairs Dominator Platinum RGB (18-22-22-42, 1.35V, CMT128GX4D3600C18) and was stress testing the kit using RAMTest in an Asus TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 with an i9-12900K processor, running latest 1504 version bios I flashed a few days ago.
> 
> I got 3 results shown below. The kit failed the first time around within 12 minutes. Run the test following day and it failed within 1.5 hours. Last night, I run it all night long and it's not failed for 12 hours until I stopped it. So, I'm confused whether the kit is good, or should I get a replacement from Newegg? Did all of you who run this test (or other even more stringest tests) do it with fans over your ram kits or not?
> 
> In all 3 test cases, the ram temperatures (dram modules 0-3) were approximately ~ 50C, ~54C, ~55C and ~ 51C. The outer two sticks were cooler than the inner two sticks and this is whether the case was open and close to an air conditioner or not.
> 
> View attachment 2565423


Go into Advanced and try running it with CPU cache Enabled.


----------



## RighteousOne

KedarWolf said:


> Go into Advanced and try running it with CPU cache Enabled.


Ok, thanks ... and the reasoning behind this option is .... (I'm genuinely curious)


----------



## Groove2013

Anulu said:


> btw im impressed by the 12600.Stays very cool with a Scythe Fuma2 and Single Core Performance in CPUz is around 750pts


that's until you properly OC RAM )))


----------



## Groove2013

more than 10.000% Karhu and full TM5 Absolut.
SA 1.224 V (BIOS)
VDDQ TX 1.315 V (BIOS)
VDIMM 1.60625 V (BIOS)

don't pay attention to cores and cache frequency and Vcore, because ratios and Vcore I just set them like that, since later it will be delidded and cooling improved.

Р-cores SP99 and 5.4 GHz possible.
cache > 5.0 GHz also.
RAM sticks Trident Z Neo 2x16 GB 3800 MHz 14-16-16-36 1.5 V XMP (Jan. 2021)


----------



## Anulu

Groove2013 said:


> that's until you properly OC RAM )))










At least 3600Gear1 works.I could not feel a difference playing PUBG and BFV with this 200$Cpu and 100$ Ram compared to my 5950x @ Asus CH8 Impact and the Gskill [email protected] with all Subtimings optimized.
When this Guy asked me to build a System for him i tought about a 5700x with a cheaper x570 Board,but i decided to go with that Cpu and the Prime Z690 because its faster in Gaming,runs Cooler and he can upgrade to a secondhand K Cpu in 2-3 Years and push the Ram to the Limit for more Bandwith.

btw where can i download that Asrock Timing Configurator Version you Guys use?Or does this only work with the higher End Asus Boards?

Edit: that 99.8 BCKL is really annoying,Cant find an Option in Bios to raise it just a little bit


----------



## edkieferlp

Anulu said:


> View attachment 2565631
> 
> At least 3600Gear1 works.I could not feel a difference playing PUBG and BFV with this 200$Cpu and 100$ Ram compared to my 5950x @ Asus CH8 Impact and the Gskill [email protected] with all Subtimings optimized.
> When this Guy asked me to build a System for him i tought about a 5700x with a cheaper x570 Board,but i decided to go with that Cpu and the Prime Z690 because its faster in Gaming,runs Cooler and he can upgrade to a secondhand K Cpu in 2-3 Years and push the Ram to the Limit for more Bandwith.
> 
> btw where can i download that Asrock Timing Configurator Version you Guys use?Or does this only work with the higher End Asus Boards?
> 
> Edit: that 99.8 BCKL is really annoying,Cant find an Option in Bios to raise it just a little bit











[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


Welcome to the Daily Memory Overclock thread for DDR4 memory on the Z690 and Z790 Chipset (LGA1700). Z690 Tools ASRock Timing Configurator (4.0.13) ASUS MemTweakIt (20210910) MSI Dragon Ball (1.0.0.08) MSI Dragon Power (1.0.0.6)




www.overclock.net










Z690 Bios and Tools


ASRock: ASrock Timing Configurator for Z690 ASrock Xp Tuner Z690 Aqua OC 1.63NK11 Z690 Aqua OC 1.63NK18 (easier DDR5 OC) ... Z690 Aqua OC 4.05 Z690 Aqua OC 4.05C10 --> non K OC Z690 Aqua OC 5.05NK07 Z690 Aqua OC 5.05NK08 Z690 Aqua OC 5.05NK09 ASUS: Worktool ADL 1106 Worktool ADL 1121 TurboV Co...



community.hwbot.org





link to it is there, should work. you need 4.0.13 and yes it will work on that MB AFAIK.


----------



## forart.it

Hi everyone,
we're a small italian noprofit devoted to create audio/video contents for emerging artists and we're going to upgrade our main workstation (now equipped with i7-7700 / F4-3000C16D-16GISB / ASUS MAXIMUS VIII HERO / 1Tb Samsung 970 EVO+) to Intel 12th gen platform.

We already buyed 4 x Ripjaws V F4-4000C18-8GVK (~134€), a Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 (~31€) and we're watching for i5-12500 non-K.

We do need other users' experiences to choose a right - budget (around 200€) - Z690 mainbord to complete the new config: we're watching for Gigabyte Z690 UD DDR4 but seems that there are _several_ conflicting opinions around its RAM handling capabilities (note that we will use gear1 settings only).

Thanks in advance to anyone who can / want help us.


----------



## Anulu

Worked a litte bit on the Subtimings:







VDimm is 1.375v with good Airflow sub 40c im gonna Heat the System up a bit with Gaming and then run Memtest again @40-45c
Running Aida Stresstest right now with Cpu VID set to "best Case Scenario" and Powerlimit off @50-55c after 45min+


----------



## Ichirou

forart.it said:


> Hi everyone,
> we're a small italian noprofit devoted to create audio/video contents for emerging artists and we're going to upgrade our main workstation (now equipped with i7-7700 / F4-3000C16D-16GISB / ASUS MAXIMUS VIII HERO / 1Tb Samsung 970 EVO+) to Intel 12th gen platform.
> 
> We already buyed 4 x Ripjaws V F4-4000C18-8GVK (~134€), a Thermalright Peerless Assassin 120 (~31€) and we're watching for i5-12500 non-K.
> 
> We do need other users' experiences to choose a right - budget (around 200€) - Z690 mainbord to complete the new config: we're watching for Gigabyte Z690 UD DDR4 but seems that there are _several_ conflicting opinions around its RAM handling capabilities (note that we will use gear1 settings only).
> 
> Thanks in advance to anyone who can / want help us.


Get the best ASUS or MSI that you can afford. Avoid Gigabyte and ASRock.


----------



## edkieferlp

Anulu said:


> Worked a litte bit on the Subtimings:
> View attachment 2565697
> 
> VDimm is 1.375v with good Airflow sub 40c im gonna Heat the System up a bit with Gaming and then run Memtest again @40-45c
> Running Aida Stresstest right now with Cpu VID set to "best Case Scenario" and Powerlimit off @50-55c after 45min+


Since you are one of the few who are testing that VID behavior option, make sure and test some AVX2 workloads as I think that would show any lack of voltage. See if Y cruncher passes few times.
Also did you notice a VID change going to "best case scenario" in HWinfo or whatever monitoring app?


----------



## forart.it

Ichirou said:


> Get the best ASUS or MSI that you can afford. Avoid Gigabyte and ASRock.


...can you argument please ?

According to many reviews (and to @zhrooms post #13 of this 3ad) GB Z690 DDR4 UD offers better power design than counterparts:








Keep in mind that we don't gaming at all nor need overclocking.

Thanks.


----------



## bscool

forart.it said:


> ...can you argument please ?
> 
> According to many reviews (and to @zhrooms post #13 of this 3ad) GB Z690 DDR4 UD offers better power design than counterparts:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that we don't gaming at all nor need overclocking.
> 
> Thanks.


Gigabyte had issues with ddr4 memory OC at 4000 plus from what I saw. If you dont care about OC memory any of the z690 ddr4 should work.

Not sure how Gigabyte does with 4x8 but I know on 2x16 they were behind MSI and Asus for memory OC. RTLs are an issues from what I saw past about 4000 in gear 1. MIght have gotten better with newer bioses but I havent seen anything.

Edit looking at your MB QVL and Gskill ram config I think you might have issues running 4x8 in gear 1 at higher clocks. Looks like they show 3200 for 4x8. You might be able to do 3800 to 4000 but will probably take manually setting voltages and timings.


----------



## forart.it

bscool said:


> Gigabyte had issues with ddr4 memory OC at 4000 plus from what I saw. If you dont care about OC memory any of the z690 ddr4 should work.
> 
> Not sure how Gigabyte does with 4x8 but I know on 2x16 they were behind MSI and Asus for memory OC. RTLs are an issues from what I saw past about 4000 in gear 1. MIght have gotten better with newer bioses but I havent seen anything.
> 
> Edit looking at your MB QVL and Gskill ram config I think you might have issues running 4x8 in gear 1 at higher clocks. Looks like they show 3200 for 4x8. You might be able to do 3800 to 4000 but will probably take manually setting voltages and timings.


1st of all thanks for explainations.

Well ASUS is out of games @ 200€ level, for us (their PRIME Z690-P dosn't fit our needs)

On RAM clocking side, our target is to reach 3600 @ gear1.

Last but not least, we tested those 4 x Ripjaws V on our MAXIMUS VIII HERO - which claims to be able to reach up to 3800 - for fun and cannot work other than 3200 / 16-18-18-38 (manual settings, XMP won't boot at all).


----------



## Anulu

edkieferlp said:


> Since you are one of the few who are testing that VID behavior option, make sure and test some AVX2 workloads as I think that would show any lack of voltage. See if Y cruncher passes few times.
> Also did you notice a VID change going to "best case scenario" in HWinfo or whatever monitoring app?


I did Prime95 small FFTs and Diifference from "best Case" to "Auto" is more than 100mv! @ allCore Boost 4,4ghz
With lower VID Cpu stays low 70s but on Auto it goes up to 85c 
I have also noticed in Battefield 5 no more Spikes to 70+ with lower VID.
Gonna Test again and Single Core too but i played Hours of BFV which uses AVX


----------



## edkieferlp

Anulu said:


> I did Prime95 small FFTs and Diifference from "best Case" to "Auto" is more than 100mv! @ allCore Boost 4,4ghz
> With lower VID Cpu stays low 70s but on Auto it goes up to 85c
> I have also noticed in Battefield 5 no more Spikes to 70+ with lower VID.
> Gonna Test again and Single Core too but i played Hours of BFV which uses AVX


Prime95 small FFT's is a heat generator, that is interesting on voltage change, I take it you have not messed with LLC, AC_LL or DC_LL values.

I forgot your on none K so frequencies are slightly lower 4.4 vers 4.5 for 12600k plus 60w limit. I guess there better chance that working on none k but you can always tweak the voltages if needed little more.

PS: What does Vcore show for all core 4.4 load?


----------



## Anulu

edkieferlp said:


> I take it you have not messed with AC_LL or DC_LL values.
> PS: What does Vcore show for all core 4.4 load?


No other changes for Voltages in Bios all on AUTO.VCore drops to ~1.1Vcore in _best Case_ and ~1.22 on Auto.
Im testing now with OCCT AVX2 small and Voltages/Temps are same like it was with Prime 95 small/smallest

I used this VID Option a while ago on a Prime z370/8700k
I think its really usefull and much easier than what i had to do on other Boards like the GB Z390 Master to achieve Stability with AC/DC, LLC and offset VCore


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> The NH-D15 is really not all that great for the 12th Gen (I've tested it myself).
> You should invest in a good AIO (380mm or higher, preferrably Arctic) if you want to push good clocks.











Amazon.com: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - Multi Compatible All-in-One CPU AIO Water Cooler, Compatible with Intel & AMD, Efficient PWM Controlled Pump, Fan Speed: 200-1800 RPM, LGA1700 compatible - Black : Electronics


Buy ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - Multi Compatible All-in-One CPU AIO Water Cooler, Compatible with Intel & AMD, Efficient PWM Controlled Pump, Fan Speed: 200-1800 RPM, LGA1700 compatible - Black: Water Cooling Systems - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases



www.amazon.com





This will do? I'll be sure to include the 1700 bracket too.

Local shops only have Kraken Z/X73 or the Corsair H150i at the moment.. I could pick one of those up tomorrow or wait three weeks for arctic (then maybe longer if it gets held for import tax..). Impulsiveness says buy a Kraken, brain says import and be patient.

Reckon its worth importing this over those 2?

Edit: there's also the EK AIO 360 D RGB locally. I've heard these are good too.


----------



## Ichirou

forart.it said:


> ...can you argument please ?
> 
> According to many reviews (and to @zhrooms post #13 of this 3ad) GB Z690 DDR4 UD offers better power design than counterparts:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Keep in mind that we don't gaming at all nor need overclocking.
> 
> Thanks.


For the past few generations, Gigabyte has included good hardware on their boards, but their software (BIOS) is so godawful, you're better off throwing it into a volcano and then hiring a monkey to code it instead.

Get an ASUS or MSI. Don't cheap out. Or nobody's gonna help you once you experience troubles and get told to replace your motherboard as the solution.


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> Amazon.com: ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - Multi Compatible All-in-One CPU AIO Water Cooler, Compatible with Intel & AMD, Efficient PWM Controlled Pump, Fan Speed: 200-1800 RPM, LGA1700 compatible - Black : Electronics
> 
> 
> Buy ARCTIC Liquid Freezer II 360 - Multi Compatible All-in-One CPU AIO Water Cooler, Compatible with Intel & AMD, Efficient PWM Controlled Pump, Fan Speed: 200-1800 RPM, LGA1700 compatible - Black: Water Cooling Systems - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This will do? I'll be sure to include the 1700 bracket too.
> 
> Local shops only have Kraken Z/X73 or the Corsair H150i at the moment.. I could pick one of those up tomorrow or wait three weeks for arctic (then maybe longer if it gets held for import tax..). Impulsiveness says buy a Kraken, brain says import and be patient.
> 
> Reckon its worth importing this over those 2?
> 
> Edit: there's also the EK AIO 360 D RGB locally. I've heard these are good too.


Check reviews for the Arctic 360mm and decide for yourself if it's sufficient


----------



## Netarangi

Ichirou said:


> Check reviews for the Arctic 360mm and decide for yourself if it's sufficient


Lol k


----------



## KedarWolf

I think some people have trouble booting if they manually set the IOLs and RTLs.

A trick I learned from older Intel builds, is to set your RAM divider low, like 3800 or 4000, reboot, see what the IOLs and RTLs are, they'll be low.

Raise or lower your RAM speed until you get around the ones you are shooting for.

Manually set them at what they are on the lower divider, raise your RAM speeds again and then your PC should boot as long as the IOLs and RTLs aren't too low.

There are set settings they need to be at to get your PC to boot and if you set them wrong, the PC often won't boot.

Lowering the RAM divider finds the lower settings that work and gets your PC to boot setting them manually.


----------



## Groove2013

@Ichirou @bscool tested ns difference in Aida64 with cache at 4.7 GHz vs. 5.2 GHz and it's, at least, 1 ns lower/better, at 5.2 GHz.


----------



## Ichirou

Groove2013 said:


> @Ichirou @bscool tested ns difference in Aida64 with cache at 4.7 GHz vs. 5.2 GHz and it's, at least, 1 ns lower/better, at 5.2 GHz.


Sounds about right. It's not going to be a massive decrease. Latency is very hard to hit 40ns with unless it's some stable 4,266+ CL14 Gear 1 config with Samsung B-die.
And that involves a very strong IMC.


----------



## Groove2013

Ichirou said:


> Sounds about right. It's not going to be a massive decrease. Latency is very hard to hit 40ns with unless it's some stable 4,266+ CL14 Gear 1 config with Samsung B-die.


I think I will stop with 5.2 P-cores and 5.1 cache, because for 5.3 and 5.2, it asks for 1.35 V and more, while 5.2 and 5.1 cache is like 1.3 V or less (Prime95 non-AVX) with my aluminium 280×27 mm EK-AiO D-RGB Elite and liquid metal between IHS and waterblock.


----------



## Groove2013

Hope 13900K(S) will have better IMC, in general.


----------



## Lax91

Hi,

I'm back after some more testing.
I've found that 4000C16 wasn't stable under "gaming" (I've used the FF XIV benchmark), maybe because of the heat generated by the GPU ?
So I've reverted to 3600C14 and started tightening the timings more.

So far I'm satisfied with the performance, but now I wanted to tighten RTL/IOL, and I don't know how to do it...
I have enabled "Round Trip Latency" under "memory training algorithms" (ASUS Z690 Motherboard), but it doesn't seem to have changed anything : my RTLs are still 67 :









What's the correct way to tighten RTLs ? What values should I try ?
Also, where can I see the IOLs ?
Thanks !


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

40 minutes into overnight stability test. Don't foresee any issues. Cruised on up from 3600 CL18 to 4000 CL16 in as predictable and boring a fashion as you could imagine. 4200 CL18 Gear 1 POSTed but BSOD before desktop. I'll probably try out 1t if this passes but other than that I'm good on RAM OCing, got a ton of pushback trying to tighten RCD RP and RAS said "**** it" and left them on auto.










Settings:
System Agent 1.35v
VDD 1.6v
VDDQ 1.3v
CAS 16
CWL 16
RRD_S 6
RRD_L 8
FAW 24

Everything else auto. Pretty happy with the results/effort ratio

Heads up to anyone on an MSI MB: Manually set your CWL. It's the only auto rule that would occasionally insert a completely unviable value.


----------



## bscool

Lax91 said:


> Hi,
> 
> I'm back after some more testing.
> I've found that 4000C16 wasn't stable under "gaming" (I've used the FF XIV benchmark), maybe because of the heat generated by the GPU ?
> So I've reverted to 3600C14 and started tightening the timings more.
> 
> So far I'm satisfied with the performance, but now I wanted to tighten RTL/IOL, and I don't know how to do it...
> I have enabled "Round Trip Latency" under "memory training algorithms" (ASUS Z690 Motherboard), but it doesn't seem to have changed anything : my RTLs are still 67 :
> 
> View attachment 2565906
> 
> What's the correct way to tighten RTLs ? What values should I try ?
> Also, where can I see the IOLs ?
> Thanks !


On later z690 bios from Asus round trip latency is enabled by default. So they are corect at 67. I looked at an old screenshot I had when testing 3600c14 and it showed the same.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> On later z690 bios from Asus round trip latency is enabled by default. So they are corect at 67. I looked at an old screenshot I had when testing 3600c14 and it showed the same.


Hi Bscool, you think we should enable round trip latency option on older bios too?


----------



## Groove2013

edkieferlp said:


> Hi Bscool, you think we should enable round trip latency option on older bios too?


yes, definitely.


----------



## Lax91

bscool said:


> On later z690 bios from Asus round trip latency is enabled by default. So they are corect at 67. I looked at an old screenshot I had when testing 3600c14 and it showed the same.


Ok thank you, I have bios 901.
Is 67 the tightest I can get ? Or should I try for more ?


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> Hi Bscool, you think we should enable round trip latency option on older bios too?


It wont hurt anything if it is enabled by default setting it to enabled will just make sure it is on. 

I dont remember which bios version they enabled it by default. I know bios 901 it is enabled by default. But I think it was enabled by default even before that.


----------



## bscool

Lax91 said:


> Ok thank you, I have bios 901.
> Is 67 the tightest I can get ? Or should I try for more ?


I dont messs with them unless having stability issues.

You can try tightening them but it most likely wont boot if you set them manually.


----------



## spin5000

I'm really struggling with my 12900KS and MSI Z690 Edge to get my previous 11900KF & Gigabyte Aorus Z590 Ultra RAM timings working.

I have a G.Skill 32 GB (2x 16 GB) Trident Royal kit. It's the Samsung B-Die 3600 16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v kit. I kept frequency at 3600 MHz with the following voltages: DRAM 1.49, VCCSA 1.325, VCCIO 1.28. I could probably go lower on all 3 voltages but I didn't try since I was 1000000% stable in every stress test for hours and hours on end.

WIth the 12900KS system, I used the same DRAM & VCCSA voltages plus tried VCCSA 1.300 along with VDDQ 1.28, 1.35, and 1.40 but I can't even post with my previous timings.

I can post at the default XMP of 3600 MHz and with the primaries lowered to the same as before to 14-15-15-35 1T, tREFI 65534, tRFC 260, gear 1. It's when I start adjusting secondary and/or tertiary timings that I keep being un-postable. I then lowered those to 15-15-15-35, 2T, tREFI 16xxx, tRFC320, but it still won't post once make change to the other timings.

I can't post past 3866 MHz even with DRAM from stock 1.35v -> 1.55v. I then set the primaries to 20-30-30-50 and STILL can't post past 3866 MHz. How??????


In short, I can post 3600 MHz 14-15-15-35 1T but I can't post past 3866 MHz even with timings at 20-30-30-50 2T @ 1.55v. Do I have the worst Samsing B-Die kit in the history of B-Die or something?


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> It wont hurt anything if it is enabled by default setting it to enabled will just make sure it is on.
> 
> I dont remember which bios version they enabled it by default. I know bios 901 it is enabled by default. But I think it was enabled by default even before that.


Looking at my text profile the setting is on auto (Round Trip Latency [Auto]). I am on 0.707 bios still.
All is running good so not really need to mess with it but as far as RTL go only thing I came across is if your SA voltage is to low RTL will raise/spread the values.

I am at 3866 with CL 16 and both are 73/73.


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> I'm really struggling with my 12900KS and MSI Z690 Edge to get my previous 11900KF & Gigabyte Aorus Z590 Ultra RAM timings working.
> 
> I have a G.Skill 32 GB (2x 16 GB) Trident Royal kit. It's the Samsung B-Die 3600 16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v kit. I kept frequency at 3600 MHz with the following voltages: DRAM 1.49, VCCSA 1.325, VCCIO 1.28. I could probably go lower on all 3 voltages but I didn't try since I was 1000000% stable in every stress test for hours and hours on end.
> 
> WIth the 12900KS system, I used the same DRAM & VCCSA voltages plus tried VCCSA 1.300 along with VDDQ 1.28, 1.35, and 1.40 but I can't even post with my previous timings.
> 
> I can post at the default XMP of 3600 MHz and with the primaries lowered to the same as before to 14-15-15-35 1T, tREFI 65534, tRFC 260, gear 1. It's when I start adjusting secondary and/or tertiary timings that I keep being un-postable. I then lowered those to 15-15-15-35, 2T, tREFI 16xxx, tRFC320, but it still won't post once make change to the other timings.
> 
> I can't post past 3866 MHz even with DRAM from stock 1.35v -> 1.55v. I then set the primaries to 20-30-30-50 and STILL can't post past 3866 MHz. How??????
> 
> 
> In short, I can post 3600 MHz 14-15-15-35 1T but I can't post past 3866 MHz even with timings at 20-30-30-50 2T @ 1.55v. Do I have the worst Samsing B-Die kit in the history of B-Die or something?


Z690 is somewhat different from previous generations. Chances are, the tertiaries are causing problems. Or tCWL. Try leaving those on Auto. (Or all of the subtimings on Auto, really.)
You'll need to find a new baseline again, and retighten the subtimings from there.


edkieferlp said:


> Looking at my text profile the setting is on auto (Round Trip Latency [Auto]). I am on 0.707 bios still.
> All is running good so not really need to mess with it but as far as RTL go only thing I came across is if your SA voltage is to low RTL will raise/spread the values.
> 
> I am at 3866 with CL 16 and both are 73/73.


Raising VCCSA lets you tighten the RTLs??? Can anyone else vouch for this? Sounds like a misconception.


----------



## edkieferlp

Ichirou said:


> Z690 is somewhat different from previous generations. Chances are, the tertiaries are causing problems. Or tCWL. Try leaving those on Auto. (Or all of the subtimings on Auto, really.)
> You'll need to find a new baseline again, and retighten the subtimings from there.
> 
> Raising VCCSA lets you tighten the RTLs??? Can anyone else vouch for this? Sounds like a misconception.


I am not saying it will tighten a good RTL value, what I meant was while I was rasing freq 3800>3866 and tightening timings I noticed RTL went to like 73/75 at the time I was at like VCCSA 1.24 or thereabouts. I had just lowered it prior because I didn't need it higher. now when I raised VCCSA to like 1.26+ RTL went to 73/73 I also noticed the training time on the first reboot after changes seemed faster.
EDit: I also have these setting on RTL but I only added the 73 values after I saw it was running 73/73 just to make sure it wouldn't change later for some reason.

Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHA [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [0]
Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHA [-]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [0]


----------



## Ichirou

edkieferlp said:


> I am not saying it will tighten a good RTL value, what I meant was while I was rasing freq 3800>3866 and tightening timings I noticed RTL went to like 73/75 at the time I was at like VCCSA 1.24 or thereabouts. I had just lowered it prior because I didn't need it higher. now when I raised VCCSA to like 1.26+ RTL went to 73/73 I also noticed the training time on the first reboot after changes seemed faster.
> EDit: I also have these setting on RTL but I only added the 73 values after I saw it was running 73/73 just to make sure it wouldn't change later for some reason.
> 
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC0 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC0 CHA [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [0]
> Round Trip Latency Init Value MC1 CHA [Auto]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value Mode Sign MC1 CHA [-]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [0]


It's more likely that it was just bad RTL training the first time around. I doubt that the VCCSA increase allowed the RTLs to go lower.
Try reducing VCCSA to 1.24V again, with the RTLs locked in.


----------



## edkieferlp

Ichirou said:


> It's more likely that it was just bad RTL training the first time around. I doubt that the VCCSA increase allowed the RTLs to go lower.
> Try reducing VCCSA to 1.24V again, with the RTLs locked in.


You may be right, I didn't keep trying as this TUF MB doesn't have post codes so I hate it when it takes long training and I don't know what's going on.


----------



## spin5000

Ichirou said:


> Z690 is somewhat different from previous generations. Chances are, the tertiaries are causing problems. Or tCWL. Try leaving those on Auto. (Or all of the subtimings on Auto, really.)
> You'll need to find a new baseline again, and retighten the subtimings from there.


OK. I'll try to start with a new baseline regarding the subtimings.

What about the frequency and primaries? 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v (stock XMP). No problem. 3600 MHz 14-15-15-35 @1.49v (can probably do it a way lower volts but haven't tried), no problem. 3866+ MHz 20-30-30-50 @ 1.55v, no post. How is there such a hard wall at 3866 MHz with:
A) Sammy B-Die
B) such high voltage (1.5, 1.55 DRAM, 1.3, 1.325, 1.35 VCCSA, 1.4, 1.45 VDDQ)
C) such loose timings
Y it still won't post on an MSI Z690 Edge + 12900KS????


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> OK. I'll try to start with a new baseline regarding the subtimings. What about the frequency and primaries? 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36 @ 1.35v (stock XMP). No problem. 3600 MHz 14-15-15-35 @1.49v (can probably do it a way lower volts but haven't tried), no problem. 3866+ MHz 20-30-30-50 @ 1.55v, no post.


Did you leave the subtimings on Auto before trying to boot a higher frequency? And set VCCSA to 1.45V to rule out the IMC for now.
VDDQ should not be an issue on Auto. But you can slap on 1.50-1.60V to rule it out if you want.

Use BIOS V1.40 for the 12900KS. Or test V1.22 if you can run it stable on that CPU, since it is even better (but released pre-12900KS).
The Edge isn't really popular with people here, so there aren't really any people giving their experiences about the BIOSes. I'm pretty much the only one.
V1.22 is currently the absolute best (for non-12900KS CPUs), but I have not yet tested V1.70 which was recently released.


----------



## spin5000

Ichirou said:


> Did you leave the subtimings on Auto before trying to boot a higher frequency? And set VCCSA to 1.45V to rule out the IMC for now.
> VDDQ should not be an issue on Auto. But you can slap on 1.50-1.60V to rule it out if you want.
> 
> Use BIOS V1.40 for the 12900KS. Or test V1.22 if you can run it stable on that CPU, since it is even better (but released pre-12900KS).
> The Edge isn't really popular with people here, so there aren't really any people giving their experiences about the BIOSes. I'm pretty much the only one.
> V1.22 is currently the absolute best (for non-12900KS CPUs), but I have not yet tested V1.70 which was recently released.


Yes, I put the subtimings back to auto. I'm using the new BIOS that just came out like 2 days ago since I just got the CPU and board so figured I'd update to the latest.
Wouldn't the other MSI Z690 DDR4 boards like the popular Z690-A Pro be similar in terms of RAM OC and RAM BIOS?


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> Yes, I put the subtimings back to auto. I'm using the new BIOS that just came out like 2 days ago since I just got the CPU and board so figured I'd update to the latest.
> Wouldn't the other MSI Z690 DDR4 boards like the popular Z690-A Pro be similar in terms of RAM OC and RAM BIOS?


RAM OC, yes. board BIOS, no.

I'm arguably the most hardcore overclocker on the Edge right now, and I can tell you for certain that V1.22 is the best BIOS released.
But I haven't tested a 12900KS on it yet, so I cannot tell you about its compatibility (it was released before the 12900KS).

I just tested out V1.70 (latest). Literal hot garbage. It wouldn't even start y-cruncher no matter what voltages I threw at it.
Another crap BIOS like V1.10, but slightly not as terrible as that. _(That one would constantly keep freezing even in the BIOS...)_

Try V1.40 if you're on a 12900KS. It's the closest to V1.22, albeit with slightly less overclocking headroom.


----------



## opheen




----------



## SuperMumrik

Ichirou said:


> I can tell you for certain that V1.22 is the best BIOS released


I can't seem find this bios on the MSI site.
Tnx! 😎


----------



## RighteousOne

Ladies and Gentlemen ... please enlighten me as I'm new to ddr4 overclocking. I understand the desire to ran ddr4 ram as its fastest clock speeds while providing a stable environment to the PC. I understand the need to change voltages and primary timings to make that happen. But I fail to see the need to further tweak extra timings, such as secondary and tertiary timings to get that last extra oomph from the ram. What apps are you running that would justify the crazy amounts of time spent tweaking these secondary and tertiary timings? Can you tell the difference between a system whose secondary/tertiary timings have been optimized versus one that leaves them at their default levels?


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

RighteousOne said:


> Ladies and Gentlemen ... please enlighten me as I'm new to ddr4 overclocking. I understand the desire to ran ddr4 ram as its fastest clock speeds while providing a stable environment to the PC. I understand the need to change voltages and primary timings to make that happen. But I fail to see the need to further tweak extra timings, such as secondary and tertiary timings to get that last extra oomph from the ram. What apps are you running that would justify the crazy amounts of time spent tweaking these secondary and tertiary timings? Can you tell the difference between a system whose secondary/tertiary timings have been optimized versus one that leaves them at their default levels?


Sometimes a hobby is just a hobby.


----------



## RighteousOne

MIXEDGREENS said:


> Sometimes a hobby is just a hobby.


I thought so and I appreciate the honesty. Thanks!


----------



## Ichirou

SuperMumrik said:


> I can't seem find this bios on the MSI site.
> Tnx! 😎


It is called "7D31v12". The one released on Feb 18.


RighteousOne said:


> Ladies and Gentlemen ... please enlighten me as I'm new to ddr4 overclocking. I understand the desire to ran ddr4 ram as its fastest clock speeds while providing a stable environment to the PC. I understand the need to change voltages and primary timings to make that happen. But I fail to see the need to further tweak extra timings, such as secondary and tertiary timings to get that last extra oomph from the ram. What apps are you running that would justify the crazy amounts of time spent tweaking these secondary and tertiary timings? Can you tell the difference between a system whose secondary/tertiary timings have been optimized versus one that leaves them at their default levels?


Well, my kit is running at 56% more performance over stock XMP, so you tell me. 
4,133 MHz CL14 1T Gear 1 with 4x16 GB (64 GB) Micron B-die. Min 44.4ns latency.


----------



## spin5000

[delete]


----------



## RighteousOne

Ichirou said:


> It is called "7D31v12". The one released on Feb 18.
> 
> Well, my kit is running at 56% more performance over stock XMP, so you tell me.
> 4,133 MHz CL14 1T Gear 1 with 4x16 GB (64 GB) Micron B-die. Min 44.4ns latency.


No doubt an excellent reading. I have a 4x32GB (128GB total) Corsair Dominator kit @3600MHz (14-22-22-42) @ Vcc = 1.35v and it has refused so far to run reliably above stock XMP speeds. I really want to hit the 4000MHz target but have failed. To be fair, I'm new to OC rams but have increased all sorts of voltages (Vcc, Vccsa, etc) so far but to no avail. I returned it last week to Newegg for another one, thinking I had a bad module within the kit. Replacement similar kit arrives next week.


----------



## spin5000

Ichirou said:


> It is called "7D31v12". The one released on Feb 18.
> 
> Well, my kit is running at 56% more performance over stock XMP, so you tell me.
> 4,133 MHz CL14 1T Gear 1 with 4x16 GB (64 GB) Micron B-die. Min 44.4ns latency.


Does Alder Lake have different latency than Rocket Lake? The reason I ask is because I only ran 3600 MHz 14-15-15-35 1T Gear 1 on my 11900KF yet I had about the same latency as you at around 45 ns. I would have thought 4133 while keeping CL14, 1T, and gear 1 would be in the mid-to-high 30s...



Ichirou said:


> RAM OC, yes. board BIOS, no.
> 
> I'm arguably the most hardcore overclocker on the Edge right now, and I can tell you for certain that V1.22 is the best BIOS released.
> But I haven't tested a 12900KS on it yet, so I cannot tell you about its compatibility (it was released before the 12900KS).
> 
> I just tested out V1.70 (latest). Literal hot garbage. It wouldn't even start y-cruncher no matter what voltages I threw at it.
> Another crap BIOS like V1.10, but slightly not as terrible as that. _(That one would constantly keep freezing even in the BIOS...)_
> 
> Try V1.40 if you're on a 12900KS. It's the closest to V1.22, albeit with slightly less overclocking headroom.


I downloaded some BIOS's from MSI's site and opened their text files to see the version #s. I see a v1.2 but not a v1.22. Is v1.2 the exact same?



Ichirou said:


> RAM OC, yes. board BIOS, no.
> 
> I'm arguably the most hardcore overclocker on the Edge right now, and I can tell you for certain that V1.22 is the best BIOS released.
> But I haven't tested a 12900KS on it yet, so I cannot tell you about its compatibility (it was released before the 12900KS).
> 
> I just tested out V1.70 (latest). Literal hot garbage. It wouldn't even start y-cruncher no matter what voltages I threw at it.
> Another crap BIOS like V1.10, but slightly not as terrible as that. _(That one would constantly keep freezing even in the BIOS...)_
> 
> Try V1.40 if you're on a 12900KS. It's the closest to V1.22, albeit with slightly less overclocking headroom.


OK. I'm about to try v1.4. I'll raise VCCSA to 1.5 to try and get IMC quality out of the equation.

EDIT: Progress made. I don't know if it's from going from BIOS v1.7 to v1.4 or from increasing VCCSA from 1.35v to 1.5v but I can finally post beyond 3866 MHz. I enabled XMP but loosened the primaries from XMP's 16-16-16-36 to 20-30-30-50 in order to get them out of the equation. DRAM: 1.55v, VCCSA 1.5v, VDDQ: auto. I posted up to and including 4133 MHz. 4266 and 4200 didn't post even after raising DRAM from 1.55v to 1.6v and VDDQ from auto to 1.5v.

Should I start with lowering primaries until I can't post or lowering VCCSA until I can't post? 1.5V is surely too high for daily, no?

EDIT 2: Raised DRAM to 1.61v to get it out of the equation as much as possible for now with the following results:
4133 MHz 16-16-16-36 = pass
4133 MHz 15-16-16-36 = pass
4133 MHz 15-15-15-35 = pass
4133 MHz 14-15-15-35 = pass
4133 MHz 14-14-14-34 = fail to post
4100 MHz 14-14-14-34 = pass
4100 MHz 13-14-14-34 = fail to post
4000 MHz (100 multiplier) 13-14-14-34 = fail to post
4000 MHz (133 multiplier) 13-14-14-34 = fail to post

I doubt these will be stable during stress tests, but with regards to posting / training and Windows booting, 4133 MHz 14-15-15-35 and 4100 MHz 14-14-14-34 are the best I've achieved.


----------



## Ichirou

RighteousOne said:


> No doubt an excellent reading. I have a 4x32GB (128GB total) Corsair Dominator kit @3600MHz (14-22-22-42) @ Vcc = 1.35v and it has refused so far to run reliably above stock XMP speeds. I really want to hit the 4000MHz target but have failed. To be fair, I'm new to OC rams but have increased all sorts of voltages (Vcc, Vccsa, etc) so far but to no avail. I returned it last week to Newegg for another one, thinking I had a bad module within the kit. Replacement similar kit arrives next week.


Overclockability is heavily dependent on a number of different factors, including but not limited to: CPU IMC, capacity, memory die, voltage, etc.
4x32 GB is incredibly tough on the IMC, so I would not be surprised that it is having trouble pushing higher.
What CPU do you have, and what kind of die does your RAM use?


spin5000 said:


> Does Alder Lake have different latency than Rocket Lake? The reason I ask is because I only ran 3600 MHz 14-15-15-35 1T Gear 1 on my 11900KF yet I had about the same latency as you at around 45 ns. I would have thought 4133 while keeping CL14, 1T, and gear 1 would be in the mid-to-high 30s...
> 
> I downloaded some BIOS's from MSI's site and opened their text files to see the version #s. I see a v1.2 but not a v1.22. Is v1.2 the exact same?
> 
> OK. I'm about to try v1.4. I'll raise VCCSA to 1.5 to try and get IMC quality out of the equation.
> 
> EDIT: Progress made. I don't know if it's from going from BIOS v1.7 to v1.4 or from increasing VCCSA from 1.35v to 1.5v but I can finally post beyond 3866 MHz. I enabled XMP but loosened the primaries from XMP's 16-16-16-36 to 20-30-30-50 in order to get them out of the equation. DRAM: 1.55v, VCCSA 1.5v, VDDQ: auto. I posted up to and including 4133 MHz. 4266 and 4200 didn't post even after raising DRAM from 1.55v to 1.6v and VDDQ from auto to 1.5v.
> 
> Should I start with lowering primaries until I can't post or lowering VCCSA until I can't post? 1.5V is surely too high for daily, no?
> 
> EDIT 2: Raised DRAM to 1.61v to get it out of the equation as much as possible for now with the following results:
> 4133 MHz 16-16-16-36 = pass
> 4133 MHz 15-16-16-36 = pass
> 4133 MHz 15-15-15-35 = pass
> 4133 MHz 14-15-15-35 = pass
> 4133 MHz 14-14-14-34 = fail to post
> 4100 MHz 14-14-14-34 = pass
> 4100 MHz 13-14-14-34 = fail to post
> 4000 MHz (100 multiplier) 13-14-14-34 = fail to post
> 4000 MHz (133 multiplier) 13-14-14-34 = fail to post
> 
> I doubt these will be stable during stress tests, but with regards to posting / training and Windows booting, 4133 MHz 14-15-15-35 and 4100 MHz 14-14-14-34 are the best I've achieved.


Yes, Alder Lake has higher memory latency than all previous generations. And it's even worse if you run the RAM on Gear 2 instead of Gear 1.
The Feb 18 released BIOS is V1.22. That's the version number MSI gives inside the BIOS, not the file name.

V1.70 was utter garbage in my brief testing, so it's not surprising that you had much better luck with V1.40, which is what I found to be the best 12900KS-compatible BIOS version.
*Do not exceed 1.35-1.40V for VCCSA for daily use, and 1.45V for benchmarking.*
Frequency, CAS latency, and total bandwidth all affect the minimum VCCSA required to pass y-cruncher.

I'm not sure what you used to test so far.
Test with TM5 1usmus first, and if it passes, test anta777 ABSOLUT overnight to finalize. Lower VDDQ by 0.05V decrements until TM5 fails.
Finally, test with y-cruncher to lower your VCCSA. If you can't stay under 1.35-1.40V, opt to lower your overclock, or YOLO it with the expectation of swapping your chip down the road.


----------



## spin5000

Ichirou said:


> V1.70 was utter garbage in my brief testing, so it's not surprising that you had much better luck with V1.40, which is what I found to be the best 12900KS-compatible BIOS version.
> *Do not exceed 1.35-1.40V for VCCSA for daily use, and 1.45V for benchmarking.*
> Frequency, CAS latency, and total bandwidth all affect the minimum VCCSA required to pass y-cruncher.
> 
> I'm not sure what you used to test so far.
> Test with TM5 1usmus first, and if it passes, test anta777 ABSOLUT overnight to finalize. Lower VDDQ by 0.05V decrements until TM5 fails.
> Finally, test with y-cruncher to lower your VCCSA. If you can't stay under 1.35-1.40V, opt to lower your overclock, or YOLO it with the expectation of swapping your chip down the road.


I'm going to lower VCCSA to 1.35 - 1.4. I have no interest if something is stable at a voltage I won't daily (eg. VCCSA @ 1.5v).

So far, I can't even get 4000 MHz 14-15-15-35 stable. I get an error with Karhu within 20 or 30 %.

I have noticed thought that on auto, my MB setts VDDQ to just 1.20v. It seems most people's boards set it to 1.35 on auto. Should I set mine to 1.35? More?


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> I'm going to lower VCCSA to 1.35 - 1.4. I have no interest if something is stable at a voltage I won't daily (eg. VCCSA @ 1.5v).
> 
> So far, I can't even get 4000 MHz 14-15-15-35 stable. I get an error with Karhu within 20 or 30 %.
> 
> I have noticed thought that on auto, my MB setts VDDQ to just 1.20v. It seems most people's boards set it to 1.35 on auto. Should I set mine to 1.35? More?


Slap on 1.50-1.60V for VDDQ and pull it back down in TM5 once you have a stable overclock.


----------



## spin5000

Ichirou said:


> Slap on 1.50-1.60V for VDDQ and pull it back down in TM5 once you have a stable overclock.


What I did was increase VDDQ from 1.2v (auto) to 1.45v. That caused a boot fail. I then lowered it from 1.45v to 1.4v and that booted plus I'm currently at 2500% Karhu without an error as opposed to an error within 20 or 30 % with VDDQ at 1.2v. Interesting.

I'll do TM5 (Usmus and Anta Extreme or Final or whatever the most recent one's called) along with Memtest Pro. If those are all stable then I'll look into the frequencies and/or primaries I mentioned in earlier posts which I thought were unstable because it may have just been the too-low VDDQ all along. After that, I'll report back and begin work on sub-timings.


----------



## spin5000

Ah darn  Anta777 Extreme passed first cycle (around an hour or so) but very shortly after it went to cycle two, it got an error during test 6.

According to some research I did, an error on test 6 indicates the IMC being the issue.

What should I do? Error'd setup is:
4000 MHz (133 multiplier)
14-15-15-35 2T
all other subtimings auto (for now)
DRAM 1.6v
VCCSA 1.4v
VDDQ 1.4v
RAM Temperature absolute peaks:
DIMM 1: 39.3 deg C
DIMM 2: 42.0 deg C

I want to get 4000 14-15-15-35 to work so bad in order to match that rare, expensive kit G.Skill sold. If it is indeed IMC, any other tricks I can do to improve IMC stability? What about the other million settings and voltages in the BIOS?


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> What I did was increase VDDQ from 1.2v (auto) to 1.45v. That caused a boot fail. I then lowered it from 1.45v to 1.4v and that booted plus I'm currently at 2500% Karhu without an error as opposed to an error within 20 or 30 % with VDDQ at 1.2v. Interesting.
> 
> I'll do TM5 (Usmus and Anta Extreme or Final or whatever the most recent one's called) along with Memtest Pro. If those are all stable then I'll look into the frequencies and/or primaries I mentioned in earlier posts which I thought were unstable because it may have just been the too-low VDDQ all along. After that, I'll report back and begin work on sub-timings.


You only need 1usmus and anta777 ABSOLUT.

Some motherboards trip the FIVR when VDDQ is too high.


spin5000 said:


> Ah darn  Anta777 Extreme passed first cycle (around an hour or so) but very shortly after it went to cycle two, it got an error during test 6.
> 
> According to some research I did, an error on test 6 indicates the IMC being the issue.
> 
> What should I do? Error'd setup is:
> 4000 MHz (133 multiplier)
> 14-15-15-35 2T
> all other subtimings auto (for now)
> DRAM 1.6v
> VCCSA 1.4v
> VDDQ 1.4v
> RAM Temperature absolute peaks:
> DIMM 1: 39.3 deg C
> DIMM 2: 42.0 deg C
> 
> I want to get 4000 14-15-15-35 to work so bad in order to match that rare, expensive kit G.Skill sold. If it is indeed IMC, any other tricks I can do to improve IMC stability? What about the other million settings and voltages in the BIOS?


You can't use the 1usmus error code cheat sheet for anta777. anta777 was never designed to be diagnosed. Retest 1usmus and refer to below:





1usmus Error Diagnosis - Google Drive







docs.google.com




In your case, I would test tCL at 15 first. It lowers the VDIMM and VCCSA requirement.


----------



## opheen

spin5000 said:


> Ah darn  Anta777 Extreme passed first cycle (around an hour or so) but very shortly after it went to cycle two, it got an error during test 6.
> 
> According to some research I did, an error on test 6 indicates the IMC being the issue.
> 
> What should I do? Error'd setup is:
> 4000 MHz (133 multiplier)
> 14-15-15-35 2T
> all other subtimings auto (for now)
> DRAM 1.6v
> VCCSA 1.4v
> VDDQ 1.4v
> RAM Temperature absolute peaks:
> DIMM 1: 39.3 deg C
> DIMM 2: 42.0 deg C
> 
> I want to get 4000 14-15-15-35 to work so bad in order to match that rare, expensive kit G.Skill sold. If it is indeed IMC, any other tricks I can do to improve IMC stability? What about the other million settings and voltages in the BIOS?


Tried 100 multiplier ? My IMC like 100m better than 133m i run 4000G1\100\100 CR 2T\2N DRAM 1.59v VCCSA 1.26v VDDQTX 1.26v 14-15-13-28


----------



## RighteousOne

Ichirou said:


> Overclockability is heavily dependent on a number of different factors, including but not limited to: CPU IMC, capacity, memory die, voltage, etc.
> 4x32 GB is incredibly tough on the IMC, so I would not be surprised that it is having trouble pushing higher.
> What CPU do you have, and what kind of die does your RAM use?


12900K and Micron B-die, Asus TUF gaming D4 Wifi mobo ... what do you mean by "4x32GB is tough on the IMC". These memory controllers should be agnostic to the size of ram they control, right? Only the inherent DRAM timings and voltages should matter. My Azus mobo is rated to handle up to 5,333MHz overclock ram.


----------



## Ichirou

RighteousOne said:


> 12900K and Micron B-die, Asus TUF gaming D4 Wifi mobo ... what do you mean by "4x32GB is tough on the IMC". These memory controllers should be agnostic to the size of ram they control, right? Only the inherent DRAM timings and voltages should matter. My Azus mobo is rated to handle up to 5,333MHz overclock ram.


IMCs can be both good and bad. Even if the board, RAM, and voltages are the same, one 12900K might be able to support, for example, 4,133 MHz stable, but another might only be able to do 4,000 MHz stable. This is regardless of generation.

4x32 GB at 4,000 CL16 is harder to run than 4x8 GB at 4,000 CL16. Since it is quadruple the capacity. But if you were to loosen the timings a ton, then sure, you can lessen the load on the IMC. But that means the RAM performs much worse. The only way to keep the same timings and performance is if the IMC is strong enough to do so.

For Z690, unless you absolutely need the bandwidth, it's best to stay in Gear 1 for that massive reduction in latency. On Gear 1 in DDR4, only golden IMCs can boot up to 4,300+ MHz. I've binned five different K/KFs so far, and they all had different results with the same RAM and board.

I'm the only one on here and Reddit who needs high capacity RAM for work (4x16 GB for 64 GB total, also Micron B-die). The other overclockers are all using 32 GB or less.


----------



## spin5000

Ichirou said:


> You only need 1usmus and anta777 ABSOLUT.
> 
> Some motherboards trip the FIVR when VDDQ is too high.
> 
> You can't use the 1usmus error code cheat sheet for anta777. anta777 was never designed to be diagnosed. Retest 1usmus and refer to below:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 1usmus Error Diagnosis - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> docs.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In your case, I would test tCL at 15 first. It lowers the VDIMM and VCCSA requirement.


Just finished 6 cycles (about 50 mins long) of Usmus v3. Ended with 1 error. Test 9.
4000 MHz, mem multiplier 133, 15-15-15-35 2T, everything else set to auto
DRAM 1.60v, VCCSA 1.40v, VDDQ 1.375v










opheen said:


> Tried 100 multiplier ? My IMC like 100m better than 133m i run 4000G1\100\100 CR 2T\2N DRAM 1.59v VCCSA 1.26v VDDQTX 1.26v 14-15-13-28


I'm going to try 100 multi as well as lowering VCCSA and VDDQ because I heard they, like VCCIO on previous gens, can have the opposite effect of causing instability if too high.


----------



## opheen

spin5000 said:


> Just finished 6 cycles (about 50 mins long) of Usmus v3. Ended with 1 error. Test 9.
> 4000 MHz, mem multiplier 133, 15-15-15-35 2T, everything else set to auto
> DRAM 1.60v, VCCSA 1.40v, VDDQ 1.375v
> View attachment 2566235
> 
> I'm going to try 100 multi as well as lowering VCCSA and VDDQ because I heard they, like VCCIO on previous gens, can have the opposite effect of causing instability if too high.


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> Just finished 6 cycles (about 50 mins long) of Usmus v3. Ended with 1 error. Test 9.
> 4000 MHz, mem multiplier 133, 15-15-15-35 2T, everything else set to auto
> DRAM 1.60v, VCCSA 1.40v, VDDQ 1.375v
> View attachment 2566235
> 
> I'm going to try 100 multi as well as lowering VCCSA and VDDQ because I heard they, like VCCIO on previous gens, can have the opposite effect of causing instability if too high.


Hm, seems odd, considering the config you have. That's pretty loose.
If you're already on BIOS V1.40V, try increasing VDDQ to 1.50V.

Also, run y-cruncher's main test once (press 0 > 1 > 8 for 32 GB kits). See if you can even pass it.


----------



## spin5000

[delete]


----------



## spin5000

opheen said:


> View attachment 2566236


Yup. Just lowered VDDQ 1.375v -> 1.350v and VCCSA 1.400v -> 1.300v and, what do you know, Usmus 6 cycles finished with 0 errors. Maybe I was just lucky though, I mean, it's only a 50 minute test.



Ichirou said:


> If you're already on BIOS V1.40V, try increasing VDDQ to 1.50V.
> Also, run y-cruncher's main test once (press 0 > 1 > 8 for 32 GB kits). See if you can even pass it.


I read in some OC'ing guide that there's some sort of hard lock with VDDQ where you cannot go over 1.43v. I know some people here are clearly running VDDQ over 1.50v but this guide must be on to something because my system won't post with VDDQ above 1.43v. I tried 1.45 and 1.50, no post. 1.43v and anything under posts.



Ichirou said:


> Hm, seems odd, considering the config you have. That's pretty loose.


Ya. I just tested Usmus v3 again but this time I lowered VDDQ from 1.375v to 1.35v and VCCSA from 1.40v to 1.30v. I got through 6 cycles of Usmus with no error. Perhaps I was too high with VCCSA and/or VDDQ? I heard they also have a sweet spot, like VCCIO on older gens, where going too high can sometimes introduce instability. Or maybe I just got lucky? I'll try y-cruncher along with Linpack Extreme.


----------



## opheen

spin5000 said:


> Yup. Just lowered VDDQ 1.375v -> 1.350v and VCCSA 1.400v -> 1.300v and, what do you know, Usmus 6 cycles finished with 0 errors. Maybe I was just lucky though, I mean, it's only a 50 minute test.
> 
> I read in some OC'ing guide that there's some sort of hard lock with VDDQ where you cannot go over 1.43v. I know some people here are clearly running VDDQ over 1.50v but this guide must be on to something because my system won't post with VDDQ above 1.43v. I tried 1.45 and 1.50, no post. 1.43v and anything under posts.
> 
> Ya. I just tested Usmus v3 again but this time I lowered VDDQ from 1.375v to 1.35v and VCCSA from 1.40v to 1.30v. I got through 6 cycles of Usmus with no error. Perhaps I was too high with VCCSA and/or VDDQ? I heard they also have a sweet spot, like VCCIO on older gens, where going too high can sometimes introduce instability. Or maybe I just got lucky? I'll try y-cruncher along with Linpack Extreme.


I think lowering VCCSA is the key here, try to do just 1 setting\adjustment att the time, then you would know!


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> Yup. Just lowered VDDQ 1.375v -> 1.350v and VCCSA 1.400v -> 1.300v and, what do you know, Usmus 6 cycles finished with 0 errors. Maybe I was just lucky though, I mean, it's only a 50 minute test.
> 
> I read in some OC'ing guide that there's some sort of hard lock with VDDQ where you cannot go over 1.43v. I know some people here are clearly running VDDQ over 1.50v but this guide must be on to something because my system won't post with VDDQ above 1.43v. I tried 1.45 and 1.50, no post. 1.43v and anything under posts.
> 
> Ya. I just tested Usmus v3 again but this time I lowered VDDQ from 1.375v to 1.35v and VCCSA from 1.40v to 1.30v. I got through 6 cycles of Usmus with no error. Perhaps I was too high with VCCSA and/or VDDQ? I heard they also have a sweet spot, like VCCIO on older gens, where going too high can sometimes introduce instability. Or maybe I just got lucky? I'll try y-cruncher along with Linpack Extreme.


Different dies and memory ranks respond to VCCSA/VDDQ differently. Some need more/less, and some don't like voltages being too high.

Run y-cruncher to figure out what your ideal VCCSA is. It won't pass if it's too low.
VDDQ is something that you can lower by simply retesting 1usmus until it eventually throws errors.


----------



## spin5000

OK. RAM back at 14-15-15-35. Passed the following: TM5 Usmus v3 6-cycles, 5 tests of each Linpack Extreme stress test size (2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, 30 GB), 1 run of Y-Cruncher (5,000,000,000, 23.1 GB). That's still with the following voltages: DRAM 1.600, VCCSA 1.300, VDDQ 1.35

Should I try 14-14-14-34? 14-13-15-35? 14-15-13-35? 13-16-16-36? Etc....

EDIT: Tried 14-14-14-34 with same Y-Cruncher test:
VCCSA 1.300v = instant error
VCCSA 1.325v = instant error
VCCSA 1.350v = error at somewhere between 15 and 30 % (can't remember)
VCCSA 1.375v = error at 16%
VCCSA 1.400v = error at 5%


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> OK. RAM back at 14-15-15-35. Passed the following: TM5 Usmus v3 6-cycles, 5 tests of each Linpack Extreme stress test size (2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, 30 GB), 1 run of Y-Cruncher (5,000,000,000, 23.1 GB).
> Should I try 14-14-14-34? 14-13-15-35? 14-15-13-35? 13-16-16-36? Etc....
> 
> EDIT: Tried 14-14-14-34 with same Y-Cruncher test:
> VCCSA 1.300v = instant error
> VCCSA 1.325v = instant error
> VCCSA 1.350v = error at somewhere between 15 and 30 % (can't remember)
> VCCSA 1.375v = error at 16%
> VCCSA 1.400v = error at 5%


tRCD of 14 is near impossible at 4,000+ MHz unless you have a super binned kit that's probably under water. Raise it to 15.


----------



## wadec22

I'm also on the MSI Edge and have some 3200 cl14 b die showing up tomorrow to start tinkering with. I see some impressive results you guys are posting but with some serious voltage. Are those on air? I have a Corsair Dominator fan setup but am hoping for 24/7 safe gaming temps and looking at 1.5v+ I'm curious if the temps will even remain stable.


----------



## Ichirou

wadec22 said:


> I'm also on the MSI Edge and have some 3200 cl14 b die showing up tomorrow to start tinkering with. I see some impressive results you guys are posting but with some serious voltage. Are those on air? I have a Corsair Dominator fan setup but am hoping for 24/7 safe gaming temps and looking at 1.5v+ I'm curious if the temps will even remain stable.


You should invest in explicit cooling for the RAM if you want it to perform its best. Up to 1.60V is safe for Samsung B-die (as XMP kits are sold at that voltage).

For the MSI Edge with a 12900KS, use BIOS V1.40 for best overclocking. V1.22 if you want to test the waters with pre-12900KS BIOSes.

You should be able to do 4,000 14-15-15-XX on Gear 1 guaranteed with any 12900 chip under 1.60V VDIMM. But running stable above 4,000 MHz is where IMC quality plays a huge factor.


----------



## wadec22

Ichirou said:


> You should invest in explicit cooling for the RAM if you want it to perform its best. Up to 1.60V is safe for Samsung B-die (as XMP kits are sold at that voltage).
> 
> For the MSI Edge with a 12900KS, use BIOS V1.40 for best overclocking. V1.22 if you want to test the waters with pre-12900KS BIOSes.
> 
> You should be able to do 4,000 14-15-15-XX on Gear 1 guaranteed with any 12900 chip under 1.60V VDIMM. But running stable above 4,000 MHz is where IMC quality plays a huge factor.


thanks. what do you mean "explicit cooling"? The Corsair two fan cooler I have is not enough?


----------



## spin5000

Did a bunch more tests with y-Cruncher. 12900KS: 5.1 GHz all core @ 1.300v, e-cores disabled, cache 4.5 GHz (conservative settings so core frequency and cache/ring/uncore out of the RAM -testing equation). RAM frequency 4000 MHz (133 multiplier), DRAM 1.600v, VDDQ 1.35v

14-14-14-34
VCCSA 1.300v = instant error
VCCSA 1.325v = instant error
VCCSA 1.350v = error somewhere between 15 and 30 % (can't remember)
VCCSA 1.375v = error 16%
VCCSA 1.400v = error 5%

14-14-15-34
VCCSA 1.275v = error 5%
VCCSA 1.300v = error 22%
VCCSA 1.325v = error 12%

14-15-14-34
VCCSA 1.000v = error 2%
VCCSA 1.025v = pass
VCCSA 1.050v = pass
VCCSA 1.075v = pass
VCCSA 1.100v = pass
VCCSA 1.125v = pass
VCCSA 1.150v = pass
VCCSA 1.175v = pass
VCCSA 1.200v = pass
VCCSA 1.225v = pass
VCCSA 1.250v = pass
VCCSA 1.275v = pass
VCCSA 1.300v = pass
VCCSA 1.325v = pass
VCCSA 1.350v = pass
VCCSA 1.375v = pass
VCCSA 1.400v = pass

What next? Try tRAS 28 (15-15-14-28)? Or should I do TM5 Anta777 and Usmus @ 14-15-14-34 first?


----------



## Ichirou

wadec22 said:


> thanks. what do you mean "explicit cooling"? The Corsair two fan cooler I have is not enough?


That is explicit cooling. I thought you meant that you had Corsair Dominator RAM. My mistake lol.


spin5000 said:


> Did a bunch more tests with y-Cruncher. 12900KS: 5.1 GHz all core @ 1.300v, e-cores disabled, cache 4.5 GHz (conservative settings so core frequency and cache/ring/uncore out of the RAM -testing equation). RAM frequency 4000 MHz (133 multiplier), DRAM 1.600v, VDDQ 1.35v
> 
> 14-14-14-34
> VCCSA 1.300v = instant error
> VCCSA 1.325v = instant error
> VCCSA 1.350v = error somewhere between 15 and 30 % (can't remember)
> VCCSA 1.375v = error 16%
> VCCSA 1.400v = error 5%
> 
> 14-14-15-34
> VCCSA 1.275v = error 5%
> VCCSA 1.300v = error 22%
> VCCSA 1.325v = error 12%
> 
> 14-15-14-34
> VCCSA 1.000v = error 2%
> VCCSA 1.025v = pass
> VCCSA 1.050v = pass
> VCCSA 1.075v = pass
> VCCSA 1.100v = pass
> VCCSA 1.125v = pass
> VCCSA 1.150v = pass
> VCCSA 1.175v = pass
> VCCSA 1.200v = pass
> VCCSA 1.225v = pass
> VCCSA 1.250v = pass
> VCCSA 1.275v = pass
> VCCSA 1.300v = pass
> VCCSA 1.325v = pass
> VCCSA 1.350v = pass
> VCCSA 1.375v = pass
> VCCSA 1.400v = pass
> 
> What next? Try tRAS 28 (15-15-14-28)? Or should I do TM5 Anta777 and Usmus @ 14-15-14-34 first?


You really don't need to test all of those VCCSA voltages if a low one already passes. Or is it that you were working backwards?
If you can do 4,000 14-15-15-XX at only 1.03V, that might be a top-bin golden IMC.

Test booting 4,300 MHz in Gear 1. You'll need a lot of VDIMM for 14-15-15-XX, but 15-15-15-XX or 16-16-16-XX should be within reason.
VCCSA should be 1.40V+. But maybe less in your case.

It's insanely rare to get a chip that can run 4,300 MHz Gear 1 stable, so if yours can, it would be something to boast.


----------



## spin5000

Ichirou said:


> You really don't need to test all of those VCCSA voltages if a low one already passes. Or is it that you were working backwards?
> If you can do 4,000 14-15-15-XX at only 1.03V, that might be a top-bin golden IMC.


Yes, I was working my way backwards. I'm not confident it's a golden bin because I got 1 error on the 6th cycle of TM5 Usmus. Test 9. I didn't know what VCCSA to use from that long list of passes so I chose 1.300v. I'll try with DRAM and VCCSA still at 1.600v and 1.300v respectively but I'll raise VDDQ from 1.350v to 1.380v and if still errors 1.400v and then 1.43v.



Ichirou said:


> Test booting 4,300 MHz in Gear 1. You'll need a lot of VDIMM for 14-15-15-XX, but 15-15-15-XX or 16-16-16-XX should be within reason.
> VCCSA should be 1.40V+. But maybe less in your case.
> 
> It's insanely rare to get a chip that can run 4,300 MHz Gear 1 stable, so if yours can, it would be something to boast.


OK. I'll try. I don't really want to run VDIMM and VCCSA higher than 1.6v and 1.4v respectively but I'll try a few things and report back.


----------



## spin5000

Continuing from my previous post, I increased VDDQ from 1.350v to 1.375v and re-tried TM5 Usmus which then passed 7 cycles. I then moved onto TM5 Anta777 ABSOLUT and passed too but it only took 2 hr 25 mins. I thought it's supposed to last "all night". I thought "all night" would have meant anywhere from 6-12 hrs...It was definitely running Absolut as it clearly said it, and in admin mode...


----------



## acoustic

You have to change the settings in the cfg file to make it run more cycles. By default, it's only two.

I use MemTestPro specifically for overnight testing and quick tests of VCCSA. TM5 Absolut, Extreme1, and 1USMUS default are solid choices where you come back to the PC after a few hrs. At least that's how I use them.

4000CL15 stable at 1.050 VCCSA is hilarious. It's so ****ed how awful the 12700K IMC is on average. I need 1.30v VCCSA for 3800.. LOL.

I can't even post below 1.20v at 4000 GR1. Sad hours.


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> Yes, I was working my way backwards. I'm not confident it's a golden bin because I got 1 error on the 6th cycle of TM5 Usmus. Test 9. I didn't know what VCCSA to use from that long list of passes so I chose 1.300v. I'll try with DRAM and VCCSA still at 1.600v and 1.300v respectively but I'll raise VDDQ from 1.350v to 1.380v and if still errors 1.400v and then 1.43v.
> 
> OK. I'll try. I don't really want to run VDIMM and VCCSA higher than 1.6v and 1.4v respectively but I'll try a few things and report back.


You might have a golden IMC, and if you can confirm that, there is a ton of headroom for you to play around with. 

Managing 4,300 MHz Gear 1 stable at any VCCSA is a dream for any 12th Gen DDR4 user. You should not settle for less if it’s doable. 

Something like dailying 4,266 MHz or more is possible with reasonable VCCSA if your numbers are accurate.


spin5000 said:


> Continuing from my previous post, I increased VDDQ from 1.350v to 1.375v and re-tried TM5 Usmus which then passed 7 cycles. I then moved onto TM5 Anta777 ABSOLUT and passed too but it only took 2 hr 25 mins. I thought it's supposed to last "all night". I thought "all night" would have meant anywhere from 6-12 hrs...It was definitely running Absolut as it clearly said it, and in admin mode...


You need to manually edit the CFG files in the bin folder to extend the test duration. Change the number of cycles for 1usmus to 6 and ABSOLUT to like, 30.


----------



## Ichirou

acoustic said:


> You have to change the settings in the cfg file to make it run more cycles. By default, it's only two.
> 
> I use MemTestPro specifically for overnight testing and quick tests of VCCSA. TM5 Absolut, Extreme1, and 1USMUS default are solid choices where you come back to the PC after a few hrs. At least that's how I use them.
> 
> 4000CL15 stable at 1.050 VCCSA is hilarious. It's so ****ed how awful the 12700K IMC is on average. I need 1.30v VCCSA for 3800.. LOL.
> 
> I can't even post below 1.20v at 4000 GR1. Sad hours.


Yeah, that’s some pretty damn low VCCSA. But the subtimings are on auto, so that might be contributing to the lowered requirement. Once the subtimings are tightened, I wouldn’t be surprised if the VCCSA requirement shoots up. 

The TM5 tests are three cycles by default, not two. And yeah, anyone not on a 12900 struggles to score an IMC that can do even 4,000 MHz stable on Gear 1.


----------



## acoustic

To be honest with you, it's pretty unacceptable just how atrocious the IMC is on pretty much any chip below the 12900K. Not only are the P and E cores on average better on the 12900K, but Jesus.. the damn IMC is miles ahead.

Anyway, I could have swore it was only two cycles. I can check later. If it was stuck on two cycles, then it's likely there was a shadow error. I had that happen once, where TM5 said it was running still, but there was no memory usage and the timer was just running infinitely.


----------



## Ichirou

acoustic said:


> To be honest with you, it's pretty unacceptable just how atrocious the IMC is on pretty much any chip below the 12900K. Not only are the P and E cores on average better on the 12900K, but Jesus.. the damn IMC is miles ahead.
> 
> Anyway, I could have swore it was only two cycles. I can check later. If it was stuck on two cycles, then it's likely there was a shadow error. I had that happen once, where TM5 said it was running still, but there was no memory usage and the timer was just running infinitely.


That’s happens when you try to run more than just TM5. The program doesn’t have an auto retry built in, so if some other program takes up its memory space, it just hangs.


----------



## wadec22

I'm trying to get my new kit to just post and it's a no-go. Tried using a1/2 instead of b1/2, tried clearing cmos, tried swapping stick order. I've thrown in old kit to make sure xmp1 was off.... any ideas? It shows the kit as qvl on gskill site.


----------



## acoustic

Ichirou said:


> That’s happens when you try to run more than just TM5. The program doesn’t have an auto retry built in, so if some other program takes up its memory space, it just hangs.


Strange because I only let it use up to 28500MB and I didn't touch the PC.

Oh well


----------



## spin5000

After passing TM5 Usmus 6 cycles and Absolut 3 cycles, I ran Karhu overnight. It found an error at about 7850%. I don't think it's heat-related as the RAM are warm but they're both under the 50 and 45 degree mark that most people say to stay under for b-die. One maxed out at 41.5 deg and the other 43.5. Those are peaks, they may have even been running a little lower when the error occurred - I'm not sure. About an hour later I tried the test again but this time an error occurred at about 385%. Again, this is with the following voltages and RAM speeds: VCCSA 1.300, VDDQ 1.375, VDIMM 1.600. 4000 MHz, 14-15-14-34 2T, remaining timings auto. I've raised VCCSA to 1.325v trying again. If it fails again I will try with lowering VCCSA (1.2xx).



acoustic said:


> You have to change the settings in the cfg file to make it run more cycles. By default, it's only two.


What about the setting above (I think) of the cycles, I think it's a time with a percentage. Leave that alone?



acoustic said:


> 4000CL15 stable at 1.050 VCCSA is hilarious. It's so ****ed how awful the 12700K IMC is on average. I need 1.30v VCCSA for 3800.. LOL.
> 
> I can't even post below 1.20v at 4000 GR1. Sad hours.


It's actually CL14 and 1.025v  but, ya, like Ichirou said, it'll prob have to shoot up once subtimings are changed from auto. In fact, as I noted above, I'm currently testing with VCCSA @ 1.3xxv because VCCSA lower than that with dual-rank, 4000 MHz, CL14, and tightened subtimings seems too good to be true but what do I know?


----------



## spin5000

[delete]


----------



## spin5000

I just came home to a Karhu test with no failures. It was almost 11 hrs long and at 23,555% All I did from the previous 2 tests above which failed was open the room door and increase my 4 side-panel fan speeds, and lower VCCSA from 1.300v to 1.275v. Average temp of each stick for the test-duration is 36.9 and 39.0 degrees C with max peaks of 37.6 and 39.6 degrees C respectively. I fell into the trap of making two changes at once - cooling & VCCSA - so I don't know which change made me pass. Damn!



Ichirou said:


> If you can do 4,000 14-15-15-XX at only 1.03V, that might be a top-bin golden IMC.
> 
> Test booting 4,300 MHz in Gear 1. You'll need a lot of VDIMM for 14-15-15-XX, but 15-15-15-XX or 16-16-16-XX should be within reason.
> VCCSA should be 1.40V+. But maybe less in your case.
> 
> It's insanely rare to get a chip that can run 4,300 MHz Gear 1 stable, so if yours can, it would be something to boast.


OK. I tried 4300 MHz 16-16-16-36 2T. Kept my previous voltages: VDIMM 1.600, VCCSA 1.275, VDDQ 1.375v. Successfully booted into Windows on the first try. It froze and blue screened though (memory management error) as soon as I tried loading a webbrowser (which had probably 20-30 tabs to re-load). I then raised VDIMM to 1.65v and it failed completely to post the first time. After the PC auto shutoff and restarted, it once again successfully booted into Windows but once again blue-screened upon opening the web-browser (stop code: kmode_exception_not_Hhandled, what failed: WdNisDrv.sys.).

EDIT: Lowered VDIMM 1.650v -> 1.620v, raised VCCSA 1.275v -> 1.300v. Now the tabs opened up fine. I'm currently using the PC without seeming issues with RAM @ 4300 MHz, 16-16-16-36, gear 1. I'm too scared to stress test. Will probably fail in 1 second, lol.









Obviously numbers aren't great. Subtimings are all auto.


----------



## edkieferlp

Ichirou said:


> It's more likely that it was just bad RTL training the first time around. I doubt that the VCCSA increase allowed the RTLs to go lower.
> Try reducing VCCSA to 1.24V again, with the RTLs locked in.


Ok, I messed with this a bit last night.
I enabled "round trip latency" from auto to enabled. What this did settings wise cleared the lines with values to auto

Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73] > auto
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73] > auto

I left these alone

Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [0]
Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [0]

So now on reboot with VCCSA at 1.26 I was left with 73/75 RTL's. I then raised VCCSA to 1.3 but the same results 73/75. I then lowered it to 1.24 again the same thing.
So now I am at worse than started so I toggled the round trip latency but seems no diff either way.

I then lower freq from 3866 to 3800, the RTLs now are 73/73, I raise freq to 3900 and get 73/75 again.

So now I try and force 73/73 with these with 3866 and 1.3 on VCCSA

Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73]
Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73]

This resulted in 73/75 which seemed odd but it is what it is, I then lowered VCCSA to 1.27 (removed above lines to auto and I got finally 73/73 again.

I left it as is but I guess I should have tried 1.3 again to see if there were some sweat spot or it just trained well after so many training attempts.

As far as the round trip latency I think auto = enabled, at least on this bios version (0.707).


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> After passing TM5 Usmus 6 cycles and Absolut 3 cycles, I ran Karhu overnight. It found an error at about 7850%. I don't think it's heat-related as the RAM are warm but they're both under the 50 and 45 degree mark that most people say to stay under for b-die. One maxed out at 41.5 deg and the other 43.5. Those are peaks, they may have even been running a little lower when the error occurred - I'm not sure. About an hour later I tried the test again but this time an error occurred at about 385%. Again, this is with the following voltages and RAM speeds: VCCSA 1.300, VDDQ 1.375, VDIMM 1.600. 4000 MHz, 14-15-14-34 2T, remaining timings auto. I've raised VCCSA to 1.325v trying again. If it fails again I will try with lowering VCCSA (1.2xx).
> 
> What about the setting above (I think) of the cycles, I think it's a time with a percentage. Leave that alone?
> 
> It's actually CL14 and 1.025v  but, ya, like Ichirou said, it'll prob have to shoot up once subtimings are changed from auto. In fact, as I noted above, I'm currently testing with VCCSA @ 1.3xxv because VCCSA lower than that with dual-rank, 4000 MHz, CL14, and tightened subtimings seems too good to be true but what do I know?





spin5000 said:


> I just came home to a Karhu test with no failures. It was almost 11 hrs long and at 23,555% All I did from the previous 2 tests above which failed was open the room door and increase my 4 side-panel fan speeds, and lower VCCSA from 1.300v to 1.275v. Average temp of each stick for the test-duration is 36.9 and 39.0 degrees C with max peaks of 37.6 and 39.6 degrees C respectively. I fell into the trap of making two changes at once - cooling & VCCSA - so I don't know which change made me pass. Damn!
> 
> OK. I tried 4300 MHz 16-16-16-36 2T. Kept my previous voltages: VDIMM 1.600, VCCSA 1.275, VDDQ 1.375v. Successfully booted into Windows on the first try. It froze and blue screened though (memory management error) as soon as I tried loading a webbrowser (which had probably 20-30 tabs to re-load). I then raised VDIMM to 1.65v and it failed completely to post the first time. After the PC auto shutoff and restarted, it once again successfully booted into Windows but once again blue-screened upon opening the web-browser (stop code: kmode_exception_not_Hhandled, what failed: WdNisDrv.sys.).
> 
> EDIT: Lowered VDIMM 1.650v -> 1.620v, raised VCCSA 1.275v -> 1.300v. Now the tabs opened up fine. I'm currently using the PC without seeming issues with RAM @ 4300 MHz, 16-16-16-36, gear 1. I'm too scared to stress test. Will probably fail in 1 second, lol.
> View attachment 2566330
> 
> 
> Obviously numbers aren't great. Subtimings are all auto.


Karhu hammers the IMC, so yeah. And thermal errors are hard to diagnose. MEMORY_MANAGEMENT is usually not enough VDIMM. 
KMODE is usually not enough Vcore, or IMC voltage.


Try to see how high of a frequency you can boot. 
don’t hesitate to try to stabilize 4,266-4,300 MHz.


----------



## Ichirou

edkieferlp said:


> Ok, I messed with this a bit last night.
> I enabled "round trip latency" from auto to enabled. What this did settings wise cleared the lines with values to auto
> 
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73] > auto
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73] > auto
> 
> I left these alone
> 
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC0 CHA [0]
> Round Trip Latency Offset Value MC1 CHA [0]
> 
> So now on reboot with VCCSA at 1.26 I was left with 73/75 RTL's. I then raised VCCSA to 1.3 but the same results 73/75. I then lowered it to 1.24 again the same thing.
> So now I am at worse than started so I toggled the round trip latency but seems no diff either way.
> 
> I then lower freq from 3866 to 3800, the RTLs now are 73/73, I raise freq to 3900 and get 73/75 again.
> 
> So now I try and force 73/73 with these with 3866 and 1.3 on VCCSA
> 
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC0 CHA [73]
> Round Trip Latency Max Value MC1 CHA [73]
> 
> This resulted in 73/75 which seemed odd but it is what it is, I then lowered VCCSA to 1.27 (removed above lines to auto and I got finally 73/73 again.
> 
> I left it as is but I guess I should have tried 1.3 again to see if there were some sweat spot or it just trained well after so many training attempts.
> 
> As far as the round trip latency I think auto = enabled, at least on this bios version (0.707).


RTL training is a bit messy this generation. Just got keep retrying until they are tight, and then lock them in.
Swapping sticks around different slots can help in some cases.


----------



## edkieferlp

Ichirou said:


> RTL training is a bit messy this generation. Just got keep retrying until they are tight, and then lock them in.
> Swapping sticks around different slots can help in some cases.


When you say lock them in, do you mean these lines?

Round Trip Latency MC0 CHA R2 [73]
Round Trip Latency MC1 CHA R2 [73]


----------



## spin5000

[delete]


----------



## spin5000

I thought an increase in CL goes with every 266 MHz of RAM speed therefore I thought 4266 MHz CL15 would be around equivalent to 4000 MHz CL14. Upon testing, though, the following programs all show an increase in performance when using "only" 4200 MHz CL16 over 4000 MHz CL14:

Aida64
OCCT
Geekbench 3
Passmark Performance Test
Linpack Extreme
Y-Cruncher
I thought 4000 MHz 14-15-14-34 would have for sure been superior to 4200 MHz 16-16-16-36. Does this seem odd to anyone?



Ichirou said:


> Karhu hammers the IMC, so yeah. And thermal errors are hard to diagnose. MEMORY_MANAGEMENT is usually not enough VDIMM.
> KMODE is usually not enough Vcore, or IMC voltage.
> 
> 
> Try to see how high of a frequency you can boot.
> don’t hesitate to try to stabilize 4,266-4,300 MHz.


4266 and 4300 MHz booted into Windows while I used the PC just fine but whenever I restarted my PC with 4300 and 4266, the PC would eventually completely shut off. It would close out of Windows just fine but then when you get to the part where the screen is all black and you're waiting for the Motherboard Logo to come back on, the PC would instead completely shut down and then automatically turn back on again. It would then boot into Windows just fine though as if everything's OK. 4200 MHz is the highest frequency where that strange behavior _didn't_ happen so I guess that's a sign to not use those speeds?


----------



## spin5000

Any advice on stabilizing the following?: BIOS voltages set to: VDIMM 1.620v, VCCSA 1.350v VDDQ 1.375v

Error occurred during cycle 5 of TM5 Usmus. Error #13. I doubt it's temp related as max temps where 39 and 41 degrees C.


----------



## bscool

spin5000 said:


> Any advice on stabilizing the following?: BIOS voltages set to: VDIMM 1.620v, VCCSA 1.350v VDDQ 1.375v
> 
> Error occurred during cycle 5 of TM5 Usmus. Error #13. I doubt it's temp related as max temps where 39 and 41 degrees C.
> View attachment 2566409


Why bother with such loose subtimings and rtls. Tight subs and rtls at 4133 will outperform 4266 with loose subs by far.


Subtimings is where most of the performance comes from. Just my 2 cents I would get subtimings set and see if you can stabilize 4133c15-15-15. If you can then try 4200+


----------



## shrimpmaster

@spin5000
If your RTLs are training 75 / 83 there's no way your setup is stable. Can probably mess around with vccsa/ vddq TX to try and get it consistent every time it trains.

Edit:

I've also been testing this new 1601 bios and it's really good with b-die DR. Better than 1504. On 1504 I had to use 1.4 vddq TX for some reason to pass linpack xtreme and games.
On this bios I've even reduced it to 1.3v and still no errors. It's also 31ºC ambient here, soo cpu is hitting 90ºC on linpack xtreme. Extreme case.
Training is as good as previous 807, overall perfect.


----------



## spin5000

bscool said:


> Why bother with such loose subtimings and rtls. Tight subs and rtls at 4133 will outperform 4266 with loose subs by far.
> 
> 
> Subtimings is where most of the performance comes from. Just my 2 cents I would get subtimings set and see if you can stabilize 4133c15-15-15. If you can then try 4200+


Yes, you're correct, the subtimings make a huge difference to performance. 4133 CL15 and 4000 CL14 with tight subs would blow away 4266 with auto / loose subs. My strategy is to see what sort of RAM frequency and primaries I can run, fully stable ((TM5 Usmus, Anta777 absolut, Karhu, etc.),. After that, work on subtimings. I figured if I jumped straight into working on subtimings and came across instability, I wouldn't know if the problem was frequency, primaries, or subtimings whereas with this way, I know the frequency and primaries are not the problem. Is this a flawed strategy?

You want to know something strange? I can post and boot into Windows with 4300, 4266, 4200 MHz CL16, as well as 4000 CL14 yet 4133 nor 4100 MHz will post with CL15. Strange, right?



shrimpmaster said:


> @spin5000
> If your RTLs are training 75 / 83 there's no way your setup is stable. Can probably mess around with vccsa/ vddq TX to try and get it consistent every time it trains.


I don't know anything about RTLs (nor IOLs) other than they shouldn't be more than two apart from eachother (eg. 72/73, and 79/81).If my RTLs are all training to the same #, (let alone within two of eachother) like 83/83, 25/25, 75/75, I thought that was great, no??

That 4266 16-16-16-36 picture I posted in my previous post has completed 10 TM5 Usmus v3 cycles and is currently on cycle 14 of Anta777 Absolute (10 hrs, 5 mins) without an error. Does that indicate the RTLs are indeed fine or are those numbers still bad?


----------



## edkieferlp

spin5000 said:


> Yes, you're correct, the subtimings make a huge difference to performance. 4133 CL15 and 4000 CL14 with tight subs would blow away 4266 with auto / loose subs. My strategy is to see what sort of RAM frequency and primaries I can run, fully stable ((TM5 Usmus, Anta777 absolut, Karhu, etc.),. After that, work on subtimings. I figured if I jumped straight into working on subtimings and came across instability, I wouldn't know if the problem was frequency, primaries, or subtimings whereas with this way, I know the frequency and primaries are not the problem. Is this a flawed strategy?
> 
> You want to know something strange? I can post and boot into Windows with 4300, 4266, 4200 MHz CL16, as well as 4000 CL14 yet 4133 nor 4100 MHz will post with CL15. Strange, right?
> 
> *I don't know anything about RTLs (nor IOLs) other than they shouldn't be more than two apart from eachother (eg. 72/73, and 79/81).If my RTLs are all training to the same #, (let alone within two of eachother) like 83/83, 25/25, 75/75, I thought that was great, no??*
> 
> That 4266 16-16-16-36 picture I posted in my previous post has completed 10 TM5 Usmus v3 cycles and is currently on cycle 14 of Anta777 Absolute (10 hrs, 5 mins) without an error. Does that indicate the RTLs are indeed fine or are those numbers still bad?


Look at your pic above, it shows one stick at 73 (73/73) and the other slot at 83 (83/83) for RTL, so most would be 75/77 (PS you need to look at the slots that are populated).
Also the two values are for each rank on the stick you have 16gig sticks that are dual rank, if you had 8gig sticks they are single rank and would show 25/75 for that slot.

CPU-Z is easy way to see how many ranks it listed on SPD tab.


----------



## spin5000

edkieferlp said:


> Look at your pic above, it shows one stick at 73 (73/73) and the other slot at 83 (83/83) for RTL, so most would be 75/77 (PS you need to look at the slots that are populated).
> Also the two values are for each rank on the stick you have 16gig sticks that are dual rank, if you had 8gig sticks they are single rank and would show 25/75 for that slot.
> 
> CPU-Z is easy way to see how many ranks it listed on SPD tab.


I'm not really sure I'm understanding. The RTLs in my pic above are all within two, in fact they're all identical. 75/75 (identical) and 83/83 (identical). Isn't that ideal?


----------



## edkieferlp

spin5000 said:


> I'm not really sure I'm understanding. The RTLs in my pic above are all within two, in fact they're all identical. 75/75 (identical) and 83/83 (identical). Isn't that ideal?


let me try again those numbers your posting are RTL of each rank on same stick, so yeah, they always will be same or should.

You need to look at each line, each line is for each slot , so we have 4 of them with two being populated.
Yor RTL for both sticks are 75 and 83.

Maybe this will help I have single rank memory (8gig) and mine show 25/73 for one slot/DIMM and 25/73 for the other so mine are 73/73 for both sticks.

forget the 25 values ones as there nothing in those slots.


----------



## spin5000

edkieferlp said:


> let me try again those numbers your posting are RTL of each rank on same stick, so yeah, they always will be same or should.
> 
> You need to look at each line, each line is for each slot , so we have 4 of them with two being populated.
> Yor RTL for both sticks are 75 and 83.


Oh. So the RTL for each stick - the 75 and the 83 - should be within two of eachother. So, for eg. 75/75 & 77/77 or 81/81 & 83/83, yes? If that's the case, is it just a simple case of me manually changing them or are you saying they indicate a problem since my MB trained them more than 2 away from each other? And if it is a problem, how are they passing 10 TM5 Usmus v3 and 14 TM5 Anta777 Absolut cycles without an error?


----------



## edkieferlp

spin5000 said:


> Oh. So the RTL for each stick - the 75 and the 83 - should be within two of eachother. So, for eg. 75/75 & 77/77 or 81/81 & 83/83, yes? If that's the case, is it just a simple case of me manually changing them or are you saying they indicate a problem since my MB trained them more than 2 away from each other? And if it is a problem, how are they passing 10 TM5 Usmus v3 and 14 TM5 Anta777 Absolut cycles without an error?


yes you got RTL right now.
You can't manually set RTL on Z690, older platforms you could get them to train tighter and manually editing, now it's just how good the MB trains basically.
I would lower freq a notch or two and see what you get.

Look at what Bscool posted on this.
"Subtimings is where most of the performance comes from. Just my 2 cents I would get subtimings set and see if you can stabilize 4133c15-15-15. If you can then try 4200+ "

I am no expert on training as I come from a much older platform and never messed with sub timings or RTL.


----------



## spin5000

edkieferlp said:


> yes you got RTL right now.
> You can't manually set RTL on Z690, older platforms you could get them to train tighter and manually editing, now it's just how good the MB trains basically.
> I would lower freq a notch or two and see what you get.


I just did that. At 16-16-16-36, it doesn't matter if I run 4266, 4200, 4133, or 4100 MHz, the RTLs stay the exact same at 83/83 and 75/75. It's only when I get down to 4000 MHz (100 and 133 multi) that the RTLs go to 81/81 and 75/75 - still way more than 2 apart though, and that's still at just 16-16-16-36. I've run it at 14-15-14-34 to 20,000 % Karhu (6400% is considered 99.x% stable), 10 cycles TM5 Usmus v3, and 13 cycles TM5 Anta777 Absolut without a single error so how is having the RTLs more than 2 apart unstable when I have them 6 and even 8 apart and completely stable? What is this theory based on? Has this theory been put to test?

BTW. I'm not trying to argue, I'm just trying to learn.



edkieferlp said:


> Look at what Bscool posted on this.
> "Subtimings is where most of the performance comes from. Just my 2 cents I would get subtimings set and see if you can stabilize 4133c15-15-15. If you can then try 4200+ "


Yes, you're correct, the subtimings make a huge difference to performance. 4133 CL15 / 4000 CL14 with tight subs would blow away 4200 and even 4266 CL16 with auto / loose subs. My strategy is to see what sort of RAM frequency and primaries I can run, fully stable ((TM5 Usmus, Anta777 absolut, Karhu, etc.),. After that, work on subtimings. I figured if I jump straight into subtimings and came across instability, I wouldn't know if the problem was frequency, primaries, or subtimings whereas with this way, I know the frequency and primaries are not the problem. Is this a flawed strategy?


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> I thought an increase in CL goes with every 266 MHz of RAM speed therefore I thought 4266 MHz CL15 would be around equivalent to 4000 MHz CL14. Upon testing, though, the following programs all show an increase in performance when using "only" 4200 MHz CL16 over 4000 MHz CL14:
> 
> Aida64
> OCCT
> Geekbench 3
> Passmark Performance Test
> Linpack Extreme
> Y-Cruncher
> I thought 4000 MHz 14-15-14-34 would have for sure been superior to 4200 MHz 16-16-16-36. Does this seem odd to anyone?
> 
> 4266 and 4300 MHz booted into Windows while I used the PC just fine but whenever I restarted my PC with 4300 and 4266, the PC would eventually completely shut off. It would close out of Windows just fine but then when you get to the part where the screen is all black and you're waiting for the Motherboard Logo to come back on, the PC would instead completely shut down and then automatically turn back on again. It would then boot into Windows just fine though as if everything's OK. 4200 MHz is the highest frequency where that strange behavior _didn't_ happen so I guess that's a sign to not use those speeds?





spin5000 said:


> Yes, you're correct, the subtimings make a huge difference to performance. 4133 CL15 and 4000 CL14 with tight subs would blow away 4266 with auto / loose subs. My strategy is to see what sort of RAM frequency and primaries I can run, fully stable ((TM5 Usmus, Anta777 absolut, Karhu, etc.),. After that, work on subtimings. I figured if I jumped straight into working on subtimings and came across instability, I wouldn't know if the problem was frequency, primaries, or subtimings whereas with this way, I know the frequency and primaries are not the problem. Is this a flawed strategy?
> 
> You want to know something strange? I can post and boot into Windows with 4300, 4266, 4200 MHz CL16, as well as 4000 CL14 yet 4133 nor 4100 MHz will post with CL15. Strange, right?
> 
> I don't know anything about RTLs (nor IOLs) other than they shouldn't be more than two apart from eachother (eg. 72/73, and 79/81).If my RTLs are all training to the same #, (let alone within two of eachother) like 83/83, 25/25, 75/75, I thought that was great, no??
> 
> That 4266 16-16-16-36 picture I posted in my previous post has completed 10 TM5 Usmus v3 cycles and is currently on cycle 14 of Anta777 Absolute (10 hrs, 5 mins) without an error. Does that indicate the RTLs are indeed fine or are those numbers still bad?


Sounds like 4,266 MHz is stable for the RAM, but you need to work on the IMC.

Run y-cruncher’s components stress test with all tests enabled and boost VCCSA until it passes. If it still can’t pass up to 1.45V, your Vcore might not be enough.


----------



## bscool

Here is why I would make sure Round trip latency is enabled or on MSI Dynamic for RTL is if you cant boot 4266 with tight rtls it is irrelevant as you loose too much performance so no reason spending hours testing 4266 as an example with RTLs at 75/83. If wont boot with RTL enabled with 4266 rtls 75/77 I would bother trying to get 75/83 stable.

It is because MSI isnt enabling RTL by default like Asus does on z690 from what it looks like. MSI runs other subtiming looser by default, at least on past gens I own both MSI and Asus and MSI run subtimings looser when left on defaults.


----------



## bass junkie xl

12900 ks sp 104 
12900k sp 90 
strix z690 D4 bios 1601 tested it worse then 1503 , on both rigs 12900 ks strix D4 and 12900 k Strix d4 one is 16x2 @ 4133 15-15-15-35 doing 38.9 ns in safe mode the 12900k rig is 8gb x 4 @ 4000 c 15-15-15-35 doing 39.2 ns in safe mode. the new 1601 bios on both rigs needs + 0.020 v more vssa and + 0.015 vcssa on the 8x4 to be stable cleared cmos , flashed older bios re flashed 2 times , wentback to 1501 and needed less vcssa tested with y cruncher and tm5 absoulte 9 hrs each rig evrythign else seels the same vcore wise i need 1.36v for 5.4 ghz all core and 5.1 ghz ring cache ,on the ks and 5.1 all core and 48 ring @ 1.29v on the 12900k reglar sp 90 . 
i went back to 1501


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

spin5000 said:


> Any advice on stabilizing the following?: BIOS voltages set to: VDIMM 1.620v, VCCSA 1.350v VDDQ 1.375v
> 
> Error occurred during cycle 5 of TM5 Usmus. Error #13. I doubt it's temp related as max temps where 39 and 41 degrees C.
> View attachment 2566409


See if setting CWL to 16 helps things. I'm not familiar with Samsung b-die specifically but I've never seen CWL higher than CAS, and in Micron's DDR4 datasheet they specifically mention any setting of CWL higher than CL on their ram will be unstable.


----------



## edkieferlp

Check out this guide for some guidance, it has been updated lately with newer info. It is the best guide IMO for all-round info on DDR4.









MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Just for funsies I cranked RRD FAW RTP and WR down to minimums to see how she flies. Pared 4 off CWL too. Stable enough for non-mission critical HTPC/living room gaming rig use.

So I'm thinking now my best move is to shave what I can off tertiaries before making final adjustments to RFC and REFI. Am I correct in thinking only the _sg and _dg timings apply to my single rank 1 DIMM per channel setup?


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

edkieferlp said:


> Check out this guide for some guidance, it has been updated lately with newer info. It is the best guide IMO for all-round info on DDR4.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper
> 
> 
> C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com


"

Note that dr only affects dual rank sticks, so you can ignore this timing if you have single rank sticks. In the same way, dd only needs to be considered when you run two DIMMs per channel. You can also set them to 0 or 1 if you really want to.


"

Thank you!


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> View attachment 2566472
> 
> Just for funsies I cranked RRD FAW RTP and WR down to minimums to see how she flies. Pared 4 off CWL too. Stable enough for non-mission critical HTPC/living room gaming rig use.
> 
> So I'm thinking now my best move is to shave what I can off tertiaries before making final adjustments to RFC and REFI. Am I correct in thinking only the _sg and _dg timings apply to my single rank 1 DIMM per channel setup?


What memory chips are these, your primary seems a little loose for freq? (tRCD/tRP, tRAS.).


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

edkieferlp said:


> What memory chips are these, your primary seems a little loose for freq? (tRCD/tRP, tRAS.).


Mediocre bin 16gb Micron B. XMP 3600 18-22-22-somethin @ 1.35v. +.05v for 3600 CL16, then +.05v per 100mhz bump. All hell breaks loose when I try to tighten any primary besides CL


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

**** it 🤣


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> Mediocre bin 16gb Micron B. XMP 3600 18-22-22-somethin @ 1.35v. +.05v for 3600 CL16, then +.05v per 100mhz bump. All hell breaks loose when I try to tighten any primary besides CL


ok, RFC can probably do around 600 range 580-631.


----------



## snootaiscool

Pretty much nothing I have done (changing tWRRD_sg, tWRRD_dg, setting latency timings to dynamic, using Buildzoid's 60/48/80 settings on each DIMM, etc) seems to allow me to better train RTLs at DDR4-4000. Also my Z690-A cannot train with 1.5v VDIMM/>1.2v VDDQ and has to rely on 1.5v Eventual Dram Voltage 🙃
Guess I'm stuck accepting 73/73 & 75/75 (which kinda sucks as my Prime-P WIFI D4 did 71/71 73/73 most of the time while largely only needing Round Trip Latency enabled).
It also seems that the point at which the RTLs get worse is at DDR4-3900, but DDR4-3866 has no such issue with maintaining flat 73/73


----------



## Ichirou

MIXEDGREENS said:


> View attachment 2566487
> 
> 
> **** it 🤣


Pretty sure it is a mixture of mediocre IMC and possible BIOS corruption. Try lowering frequency and reflashing BIOS. Also, don’t use latest BIOS.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Ichirou said:


> Pretty sure it is a mixture of mediocre IMC and possible BIOS corruption. Try lowering frequency and reflashing BIOS. Also, don’t use latest BIOS.


It's overnight stable at auto RCD and RP (with 1t even!)

I was just seeing if my tightened secondaries might have magic fairy dusted some extra margin out of my primaries. Why do you think bios is corrupt though? I did update it but properly via uefi m-flash, and am 1 release behind current.


----------



## Ichirou

MIXEDGREENS said:


> It's overnight stable at auto RCD and RP (with 1t even!)
> 
> I was just seeing if my tightened secondaries might have magic fairy dusted some extra margin out of my primaries. Why do you think bios is corrupt though? I did update it but properly via uefi m-flash, and am 1 release behind current.


V1.22 is hands down the best BIOS you can use for the MSI Edge. That one was released in February.

I imagine a similar situation applies to the Pro as well.


----------



## RighteousOne

Is it safe to say that most users/posters on this forum use MSI motherboards as opposed to Asus and others? I see lots MSI related traffic and tools but hardly any for Asus (in my case), unfortunately. Not complaining but just an observation.


----------



## bscool

RighteousOne said:


> Is it safe to say that most users/posters on this forum use MSI motherboards as opposed to Asus and others? I see lots MSI related traffic and tools but hardly any for Asus (in my case), unfortunately. Not complaining but just an observation.


What tools are you looking for? The main things I use are Asrock timing config, memtweakit and Hwinfo64, I set everything in bios as far as timings and voltages.

All the z690 Asus stuff can be found here Z690 Bios and Tools


----------



## RighteousOne

bscool said:


> What tools are you looking for? The main things I use are Asrock timing config, memtweakit and Hwinfo64, I set everything in bios as far as timings and voltages.
> 
> All the z690 Asus stuff can be found here Z690 Bios and Tools


Thanks for the link. I wasn't aware of it. My original post was an observation, really a lament in disguise, that those us with Asus mobos wouldn't be able to get much help here with OC since the most active posters use MSI boards. No judgement against MSI users ofcourse, just that I had hoped more experienced Asus overclockers would be more active on the forum to help us newbies to all things regarding overclocking, whether its ddr4 ram or cpus.


----------



## RighteousOne

Is it normal for a new computer to randomly shutdown/reboot for no apparent reason? No gaming, no overclocking and no loads. Just browsing the net, reading the news this morning, waiting for the JWST telescope images. The only change I see is that I upgraded to version 1601 bios two days ago.


----------



## bscool

RighteousOne said:


> Is it normal for a new computer to randomly shutdown/reboot for no apparent reason? No gaming, no overclocking and no loads. Just browsing the net, reading the news this morning, waiting for the JWST telescope images. The only change I see is that I upgraded to version 1601 bios two days ago.


I know for memory OC the latter ddr4 bioses were not as good as the Nov/December bioses for most on Asus ddr4 MBs.

I havent tried the lastes bios. I have Z690 Apex and Strix d4 and on Strix d4 901 is still one of the best for me. I have seen other users on various Asus MB say the latest bios is not good in the z690 Asus thread.









[OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Tell me you have an Asus board without telling me you have an Asus board... Bios 16xx. Bug still there. Good luck having a stable PC with boards that applies 0.300v to the CPU when minimum working voltage for alder lake is 0.700v. Using the newest hwinfo beta?




www.overclock.net


----------



## acoustic

RighteousOne said:


> Is it normal for a new computer to randomly shutdown/reboot for no apparent reason? No gaming, no overclocking and no loads. Just browsing the net, reading the news this morning, waiting for the JWST telescope images. The only change I see is that I upgraded to version 1601 bios two days ago.


You downgraded to the 1601, you mean. That BIOS is ****ed.


----------



## bscool

RighteousOne said:


> Hi ... new to the forum, overclocking and all things ddr ram related.
> 
> A few ago, I bought 128GB of 3600MHz ddr4 ram (32GBx4) from Newegg, i.e. Corsairs Dominator Platinum RGB (18-22-22-42, 1.35V, CMT128GX4D3600C18) and was stress testing the kit using RAMTest in an Asus TUF GAMING Z690-PLUS WIFI D4 with an i9-12900K processor, running latest 1504 version bios I flashed a few days ago.
> 
> I got 3 results shown below. The kit failed the first time around within 12 minutes. Run the test following day and it failed within 1.5 hours. Last night, I run it all night long and it's not failed for 12 hours until I stopped it. So, I'm confused whether the kit is good, or should I get a replacement from Newegg? Did all of you who run this test (or other even more stringest tests) do it with fans over your ram kits or not?
> 
> In all 3 test cases, the ram temperatures (dram modules 0-3) were approximately ~ 50C, ~54C, ~55C and ~ 51C. The outer two sticks were cooler than the inner two sticks and this is whether the case was open and close to an air conditioner or not.
> 
> View attachment 2565423


Good lord, you know how long it is going to take you to test and tune 128gb of ddr4? I would say weeks to months. Because just your test time alone is close to a day/24hr to run Karhu for 10,000%.

You need to decide if you actually need 128gb and if you do i would run XMP and be Ok with it. If you really want to OC get some 2x16 b die and then you can probabaly do 4000+ with tight timings if you have a good IMC.


----------



## bscool

RighteousOne said:


> Ladies and Gentlemen ... please enlighten me as I'm new to ddr4 overclocking. I understand the desire to ran ddr4 ram as its fastest clock speeds while providing a stable environment to the PC. I understand the need to change voltages and primary timings to make that happen. But I fail to see the need to further tweak extra timings, such as secondary and tertiary timings to get that last extra oomph from the ram. What apps are you running that would justify the crazy amounts of time spent tweaking these secondary and tertiary timings? Can you tell the difference between a system whose secondary/tertiary timings have been optimized versus one that leaves them at their default levels?


Subtimings is were most of the performance comes from BZ just released a video about it. But in realiity outside of benchmarks and fun/hobby you wont notice any difference using the PC from XMP to tune timings. I mean maybe if the placebo effect is strong you can "feel it"


----------



## bscool

RighteousOne said:


> No doubt an excellent reading. I have a 4x32GB (128GB total) Corsair Dominator kit @3600MHz (14-22-22-42) @ Vcc = 1.35v and it has refused so far to run reliably above stock XMP speeds. I really want to hit the 4000MHz target but have failed. To be fair, I'm new to OC rams but have increased all sorts of voltages (Vcc, Vccsa, etc) so far but to no avail. I returned it last week to Newegg for another one, thinking I had a bad module within the kit. Replacement similar kit arrives next week.


Vccsa, vddq and dram are the main ones you need to mess with on z690 for mem OC. But I would say your main issue is 4x32. Going to be a stuggle with 4 dims and even more so with 4x32gb.

z690 is t topology and does best with 2 stick for mem OC.


----------



## RighteousOne

acoustic said:


> You downgraded to the 1601, you mean. That BIOS is ****ed.


Really? Is 1601 viewed as a downgrade? I'd like to know why...


----------



## RighteousOne

bscool said:


> Good lord, you know how long it is going to take you to test and tune 128gb of ddr4? I would say weeks to months. Because just your test time alone is close to a day/24hr to run Karhu for 10,000%.
> 
> You need to decide if you actually need 128gb and if you do i would run XMP and be Ok with it. If you really want to OC get some 2x16 b die and then you can probabaly do 4000+ with tight timings if you have a good IMC.


Yes, I do need that much ram for the work I do. Now, why is OC large ram or 4 sticks so difficult since the z690 mobo is designed to handle 5333MHz overclocked ram via its special routing (Optiplex II)? Also the dominator rams, Corsairs top of the line and most expensive ram btw, is designed using 10+ layer pcbs meant to reduced noise and crosstalk, amongst other things. So, with these two strong positive attributes, why shouldn't it be fairly straightforward to overclock 4x32GB dominator rams?


----------



## bscool

RighteousOne said:


> Yes, I do need that much ram for the work I do. Now, why is OC large ram or 4 sticks so difficult since the z690 mobo is designed to handle 5333MHz overclocked ram via its special routing (Optiplex II)? Also the dominator rams, Corsairs top of the line and most expensive ram btw, is designed using 10+ layer pcbs meant to reduced noise and crosstalk, amongst other things. So, with these two strong positive attributes, why shouldn't it be fairly straightforward to overclock 4x32GB dominator rams?


z690 is t topology and will work best with 2 sticks. Daisy chain works better with 4 sticks but the last gen of daisy chain was z390 that I know of.

You can still OC 4x32. But it seriously is going to take your weeks if not months since you obviously are new to this. I take it you know about this guide? MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper Most of what you need to do is in it.

Since no one else is running 4x32 you will have to go thru and test everything for yourself. Even if you dont tighten subtimings it sounds like you are having issues getting XMP to pass Karhu which is not a good start.

The MB might run 5333 with 2x8 so has no real correlation how 4x8 let alone 4x32 will run.

Video if you want more info about MB topology.

Edit also ram is a lot of market gimmick, saying 10layer special pcb blah blah. But you buy enough and test it it all is very close. More comes down to lotto getting a good bin. Just because it costs more doesnt mean it is better. More likely paying more for the fancy heat spreader and RGB.


----------



## acoustic

RighteousOne said:


> Really? Is 1601 viewed as a downgrade? I'd like to know why...


It's a crappy BIOS, much like the majority of BIOS released after 0807. Performance loss, instability, requiring higher voltages.. plenty of information across different threads to read up on.

I tested 1601 and it was awful. Newer does not necessarily mean better.


----------



## RighteousOne

acoustic said:


> It's a crappy BIOS, much like the majority of BIOS released after 0807. Performance loss, instability, requiring higher voltages.. plenty of information across different threads to read up on.
> 
> I tested 1601 and it was awful. Newer does not necessarily mean better.


Good to know...so is the former 15xx the best one after the 0807?


----------



## bass junkie xl

bios 1601 on 2 strix d4 with 12900k and 12900 ks 16 gb x 2 @ 4133 cl 15 dual rank and 8gb x 4 @ 4000 cl 15 both require +0.020v more vcssa vs 1503 evrything else seems fine i went back to 1503 .


----------



## spin5000

I still don't know what to do with my 2x 16 GB b-die RAM OC'ing. I keep getting apparently terrible RTLs indicating bad stability (and also lowering performance since they affect performance). RTLs are 75/75 and 83/83. Here's the thing though: Karhu = 21,000% 0 errors, TM5 Anta777 Absolut 18 cycles 0 errors, TM5 Usmus v3 = 14 cycles 0 errors. So what's with the terrible RTLs? This is with RAM @ 4200 MHz 16-16-16-36 and adjusted subtimings.

Another thing to point out is the RTLs stay identical at 75/75 and 83/83 with 16-16-16-36 with all the following frequencies: 4300 (highest I can post and boot Windows), 4266, 4200, 4133, 4100. It's only when I go down to 4000 MHz (regardless whether 16-16-16-36 or 14-15-14-28) that the RTLs finally change and get slightly better but get this, they're hardly better at 75/75 and 81/81. The RAM could probably pass 1,000,000% Karhu and 1000 cycles of Anta Absolut at 4000 MHz 16-16-16-36 so the RTLs indicating instability (more than 2 apart) don't seem to make sense.

This is with an MSI Z690 Edge, 12900KS, and 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36 DR B-Die kit. It's also with the BIOS that's apparently either the best or 2nd best for my board.

If I'm getting those bad RTLs even with 4000 MHz 16-16-16-36, which is easy as heck for my system to run, then what's going on? What should I do?


----------



## bscool

spin5000 said:


> I still don't know what to do with my 2x 16 GB b-die RAM OC'ing. I keep getting apparently terrible RTLs indicating bad stability (and also lowering performance since they affect performance). RTLs are 75/75 and 83/83. Here's the thing though: Karhu = 21,000% 0 errors, TM5 Anta777 Absolut 18 cycles 0 errors, TM5 Usmus v3 = 14 cycles 0 errors. So what's with the terrible RTLs? This is with RAM @ 4200 MHz 16-16-16-36 and adjusted subtimings.
> 
> Another thing to point out is the RTLs stay identical at 75/75 and 83/83 with 16-16-16-36 with all the following frequencies: 4300 (highest I can post and boot Windows), 4266, 4200, 4133, 4100. It's only when I go down to 4000 MHz (regardless whether 16-16-16-36 or 14-15-14-28) that the RTLs finally change and get slightly better but get this, they're hardly better at 75/75 and 81/81. The RAM could probably pass 1,000,000% Karhu and 1000 cycles of Anta Absolut at 4000 MHz 16-16-16-36 so the RTLs indicating instability (more than 2 apart) don't seem to make sense.
> 
> This is with an MSI Z690 Edge, 12900KS, and 3600 MHz 16-16-16-36 DR B-Die kit. It's also with the BIOS that's apparently either the best or 2nd best for my board.
> 
> If I'm getting those bad RTLs even with 4000 MHz 16-16-16-36, which is easy as heck for my system to run, then what's going on? What should I do?


Do you have round trip latency enabled or "dynamic" set under the rtls section?

If you do and it is still not training correctly them then I would try another bios. Or just run it like you have it. Doesnt matter unless you are running benchmarks and comparing yours to others.

Edit added pic where you can find settings. I dont have MSI this gen so used z490 which should be similar. They are markey with red check where they should be.


----------



## Netarangi

I've got asus TUF gaming bios version 1504, is it worth downgrading bios for ram overclocking?


----------



## RighteousOne

bscool said:


> Good lord, you know how long it is going to take you to test and tune 128gb of ddr4? I would say weeks to months. Because just your test time alone is close to a day/24hr to run Karhu for 10,000%.
> 
> You need to decide if you actually need 128gb and if you do i would run XMP and be Ok with it. If you really want to OC get some 2x16 b die and then you can probabaly do 4000+ with tight timings if you have a good IMC.


Testing with Karhu at 5000% so far after 10 hours. No errors at 3733MHz so far (3600MHz XMP). Only changed ram voltage from 1.35v to 1.4v. All others are at their default (auto) values, i.e Vddq TX = 1.2v and SA VID (SA voltage?) = 1.1v. DRAM temperatures are 50C-54C, with inner two modules being the warmest at 53C-54C and the outer two the coolest at about 50C. Also, timings are at their default 18-22-22-42 values. I have about 6GB of ram free as Karhu uses up the rest (122GB). All 24 threads are used (Karhu default).

1. Is Karhu at 10,000% with no errors the ultimate goal?
2. Can I use the computer while Karhu is running without messing up the test? Obviously its sluggish as all CPUs are at 1000% usage.
3. Is the probability of hitting 10,000% with zero errors good, i.e 100%?


----------



## RighteousOne

Netarangi said:


> I've got asus TUF gaming bios version 1504, is it worth downgrading bios for ram overclocking?


I would not for now, since one of the fixes to 1504 was DRAM stability. I'm using 1504 as well on my TUF game z690 mobo. See my email above for OC details so far.


----------



## Cam1

I tried 1601 and it works exactly as the previous Bios on my computer.


----------



## edkieferlp

RighteousOne said:


> Testing with Karhu at 5000% so far after 10 hours. No errors at 3733MHz so far (3600MHz XMP). Only changed ram voltage from 1.35v to 1.4v. All others are at their default (auto) values, i.e Vddq TX = 1.2v and SA VID (SA voltage?) = 1.1v. DRAM temperatures are 50C-54C, with inner two modules being the warmest at 53C-54C and the outer two the coolest at about 50C. Also, timings are at their default 18-22-22-42 values. I have about 6GB of ram free as Karhu uses up the rest (122GB). All 24 threads are used (Karhu default).
> 
> 1. Is Karhu at 10,000% with no errors the ultimate goal?
> 2. Can I use the computer while Karhu is running without messing up the test? Obviously its sluggish as all CPUs are at 1000% usage.
> 3. Is the probability of hitting 10,000% with zero errors good, i.e 100%?


Those voltages seem a little low for 3733. I remember for me VDDQ tx/SA VID was like 1.2 and after enabling XMP both went to 1.35v. Now I am on older bios and I think that might of been lowered a bit.
That said I think I would start at min of 1.2-1.3 range for both SA VID and Vddq tx, also I think it best to keep both close in value.

See what others say just with your density seems low to me.


----------



## Ichirou

RighteousOne said:


> Testing with Karhu at 5000% so far after 10 hours. No errors at 3733MHz so far (3600MHz XMP). Only changed ram voltage from 1.35v to 1.4v. All others are at their default (auto) values, i.e Vddq TX = 1.2v and SA VID (SA voltage?) = 1.1v. DRAM temperatures are 50C-54C, with inner two modules being the warmest at 53C-54C and the outer two the coolest at about 50C. Also, timings are at their default 18-22-22-42 values. I have about 6GB of ram free as Karhu uses up the rest (122GB). All 24 threads are used (Karhu default).
> 
> 1. Is Karhu at 10,000% with no errors the ultimate goal?
> 2. Can I use the computer while Karhu is running without messing up the test? Obviously its sluggish as all CPUs are at 1000% usage.
> 3. Is the probability of hitting 10,000% with zero errors good, i.e 100%?


1. Mixture of Karhu, TM5, y-cruncher, and whatever else you want to use.
2. No. You should never multitask during stress tests, as they can contribute to instability and/or cause inaccuracies in test results.
3. Not sure what your question is, but 10K is usually what people consider good enough for Karhu.


----------



## RighteousOne

edkieferlp said:


> Those voltages seem a little low for 3733. I remember for me VDDQ tx/SA VID was like 1.2 and after enabling XMP both went to 1.35v. Now I am on older bios and I think that might of been lowered a bit.
> That said I think I would start at min of 1.2-1.3 range for both SA VID and Vddq tx, also I think it best to keep both close in value.
> 
> See what others say just with your density seems low to me.


These are numbers given to me by HWInfo64, v7.26-4800. Could it be wrong?
Module temps are hovering at 60C now and still no errors yet at 5500% (fingers crossed).


----------



## edkieferlp

RighteousOne said:


> These are numbers given to me by HWInfo64, v7.26-4800. Could it be wrong?
> Module temps are hovering at 60C now and still no errors yet at 5500% (fingers crossed).


I think there fairly accurate as far as software voltage reporting, I have the same MB too.

Just because you can pass a memory test doesn't mean the system is stable in other heavy usage programs. What I would do is not try and pass real high memory test times, but once you see it is fair stable for a time, try other BM tests.
I find Y-cruncher and lin pack extreme real good to see if the overall system is stable at those settings. you can also retest when you think you have good settings for a longer time.
Y-cruncher doesn't need to run hrs on hrs, it generally bugs out fairly quickly if issues arise


----------



## RighteousOne

edkieferlp said:


> I think there fairly accurate as far as software voltage reporting, I have the same MB too.
> 
> Just because you can pass a memory test doesn't mean the system is stable in other heavy usage programs. What I would do is not try and pass real high memory test times, but once you see it is fair stable for a time, try other BM tests.
> I find Y-cruncher and lin pack extreme real good to see if the overall system is stable at those settings. you can also retest when you think you have good settings for a longer time.
> Y-cruncher doesn't need to run hrs on hrs, it generally bugs out fairly quickly if issues arise


Thanks for this ... at the end of the day, I need a fast and stable system but the cost of running 24 hours per test is a pain. I'm at 6500% now (past 15 hours), zero errors and I'll let it run its course to 10,000% hopefully (just so that I may say that I run to 10,000 ). I earlier downloaded tm5. Is that also a program able to quickly sus out instabilities in the system, if any?


----------



## Ichirou

RighteousOne said:


> Thanks for this ... at the end of the day, I need a fast and stable system but the cost of running 24 hours per test is a pain. I'm at 6500% now (past 15 hours), zero errors and I'll let it run its course to 10,000% hopefully (just so that I may say that I run to 10,000 ). I earlier downloaded tm5. Is that also a program able to quickly sus out instabilities in the system, if any?


TM5 with the anta777 ABSOLUT config set to run overnight is typically enough for RAM stability.


----------



## RighteousOne

Ichirou said:


> TM5 with the anta777 ABSOLUT config set to run overnight is typically enough for RAM stability.


Oh wow, thanks... but you've written a bunch of stuff way over my head. What is an "anta777 ABSOLUT" configuration? Sorry for the newbie question...

Also, are there programs able to flesh out immediate instabilities within an hour, for example, or less. Longer term hard to detect instabilities would be the domain of Korhu or TM5.


----------



## bscool

RighteousOne said:


> Testing with Karhu at 5000% so far after 10 hours. No errors at 3733MHz so far (3600MHz XMP). Only changed ram voltage from 1.35v to 1.4v. All others are at their default (auto) values, i.e Vddq TX = 1.2v and SA VID (SA voltage?) = 1.1v. DRAM temperatures are 50C-54C, with inner two modules being the warmest at 53C-54C and the outer two the coolest at about 50C. Also, timings are at their default 18-22-22-42 values. I have about 6GB of ram free as Karhu uses up the rest (122GB). All 24 threads are used (Karhu default).
> 
> 1. Is Karhu at 10,000% with no errors the ultimate goal?
> 2. Can I use the computer while Karhu is running without messing up the test? Obviously its sluggish as all CPUs are at 1000% usage.
> 3. Is the probability of hitting 10,000% with zero errors good, i.e 100%?


Are you sure it is still in gear 1. You dont manually set it bios ususally defaults to gear 2 after 3600 on z690. So check that and Karhu 10,000 is usually what I aim for. Some do more and some less so up to you.

I have used my PC while running Karhu but it is best to not use it.


----------



## bscool

@RighteousOne I also like to use benchmate y cruncher to also test ram/imc/cpu. You could use the 10b for your system. BenchMate

This test doesnt take as long but will require good cooling on the cpu and also lets you see if changes you make help or hurt as it times it. Hit F6 are end of run for more info. Will look like this but my run is 2.5b


----------



## RighteousOne

bscool said:


> Are you sure it is still in gear 1. You dont manually set it bios ususally defaults to gear 2 after 3600 on z690. So check that and Karhu 10,000 is usually what I aim for. Some do more and some less so up to you.
> 
> I have used my PC while running Karhu but it is best to not use it.





bscool said:


> @RighteousOne I also like to use benchmate y cruncher to also test ram/imc/cpu. You could use the 10b for your system. BenchMate
> 
> This test doesnt take as long but will require good cooling on the cpu and also lets you see if changes you make help or hurt as it times it. Hit F6 are end of run for more info. Will look like this but my run is 2.5b


Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?


----------



## edkieferlp

RighteousOne said:


> Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?


Gear1 is not same as CR 1T, command rate 1T is a timing value in the memory timing section.
Gear1 means 1 to 1 ratio of memory controller to memory freq. In bios look around the frequency speed setting for something like this
"Memory Controller : DRAM Frequency Ratio [1:1]" , you want 1 to 1 ratio.

PS, I would run CR 2T, Gear 1 mode and on voltages, I think a good start would be VDIMM= 1.4v, VCCSA = 1.25v and VDDQ TX = 1.3v and see if Y crucnher passes if your ram tests were good.


----------



## spin5000

bscool said:


> Do you have round trip latency enabled or "dynamic" set under the rtls section?
> 
> If you do and it is still not training correctly them then I would try another bios. Or just run it like you have it. Doesnt matter unless you are running benchmarks and comparing yours to others.
> 
> Edit added pic where you can find settings. I dont have MSI this gen so used z490 which should be similar. They are markey with red check where they should be.


I have everything set to auto or default from the stock BIOS. You'd think the stock BIOS would obviously train RAM properly regardless whether it's running JDEC standards, XMP, custom timings, etc... I did some more searching - this MSI board has a ton of RAM options. There's a sub-menu for RAM training. In just the RAM training menu alone there's probably 20 or 30 settings. They're all set to auto (default). One said Round Trip Latency. I changed it from auto to enabled and, what do you know, the RTLs went from 83/83 & 75/75 to 75/75 & 73/73.

So unless you manually go into some obscure Training sub-menu in the BIOS and change 1 specific setting (out of like 30), the motherboard won't train RAM? Seems like a bug to me but that seems to have done the trick. That now leaves me to think, what other of these 30 RAM training settings do I need to change from auto to enabled? There's all sorts of things regardling RTL, IOL, termination, etc. etc. It's all way over my head.


----------



## spin5000

RighteousOne said:


> Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?


The following is not in any particular order and is based on a mix of my opinion and opinions of others that I often see floating around PC sites.

-- "short" = quick, fast test, usually 1- 5 mins
-- "medium" = minimum test, I'd be fairly comfortable if the RAM passes medium without error
-- "long" = when you really want to be extra certain of no RAM errors. Lots of people only use the medium tests (with a few different programs though) and have success that way. Some people even say the long tests are overkill. If you really want to be extra certain, and don't mind the extra time (do it while you sleep, are busy with other things, are out for the day/night, etc.), then do the long tests. Most errors should be picked up with the "medium" tests though. Also, errors _not_ picked up in medium but _picked_ up in "long" can be purely related to heat and nothing else, which can then deceive you into thinking your RAM OC settings are bad, so monitor your RAM temps!

Karhu RAM Test

medium: 6400% (Karhu says 6400% has 99.41% error detection rate)
long: 10,000% - 20,000%
HCI Memtest / Memtest Pro

medium: 400% - 600%
long: 1000 - 2000%
TM5 Anta777 Absolut

medium: 6 cycles
long: 18 - 24 cycles
TM5 Anta777 Extreme

medium: 6 cycles
long: 18 - 24 cycles
TM5 Usmus v3

medium: 6 cycles
long: 12 - 18 cycles
Linpack Xtreme

medium: 10 - 15 runs of each stress test
long: 25 - 50 runs of each stress test
Note: because I have no idea which test to do (I think the #s are 2 GB, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, 30), I just do every one. Eg. 10 runs of 2 GB, 10 runs 4 GB, and so on. The 2 GB tests last like 5 seconds each, the 4 GB like 15 seconds, etc. so they're not too time-consuming. The most time-consuming test (30 GB) is around 5-ish mins each
Y-Cruncher

not sure which medium or long stress tests to run, ask around because this is another great program. See below for using Y-Cruncher for a great _short_ test
OCCT

30 min w/ AVX
30 mins w/ out AVX
Notes

apparently TM5 Usmus v3 and Karhu hit the IMC harder so can potentially detect IMC-related errors quicker
apparently Y-Cruncher can potentially detect VCCSA voltage-related errors quicker
I have seen instances where, during a 6 cycle test, TM5 Extreme would show at least 1 error while both TM5 Absolute and TM5 Usmus v3 didn't show errors therefore I use Extreme alongside other tests rather than replacing Extreme with Absolut.
for a short test to check VCCSA, run Y-Cruncher with the following settings 0 [hit enter], 1 [hit enter], 8 [hit enter]. This test should last around 3-ish mins. If you error/fail this test, consider adjusting VCCSA (up or down) before adjusting any other settings (other voltages, RAM frequency, RAM timings, CPU core, CPU cache, etc.)
me, personally, when I try new RAM settings before I go into the medium or long stress tests, I do some short tests, those being: 1 or 2 of the Y-Cruncher VCCSA tests I explained in my previous point, then 3-5 Linpack Xtreme runs using stress test and the second or third lowest GB option. If I pass both short tests, I then use a few programs to benchmark the new RAM settings to see the speeds, scores, latency, etc.: Programs I use for this are as follows (in no particular order):
Passmark Performance Test (set to 2 tests, short, keep best result, all Memory Tests)
Aida64, the 4 memory tests (I do the latency test 3-5 times and use the best result since it can be really inconsistent)
Intel MLC GUI - just the first screen's bandwidth & latency test, I do it 2 times as the latency test is more consistent than Aida64
Linpack Xtreme: Stress Test, 3 tests of your desire (I choose 3 GB option)
Y-Cruncher: upon starting, hit 0, enter, 1, enter, 8, enter, use the two times as test score
OCCT Memory Benchmark
PyPrime: a nice quick test but good because scales well with everything (like Linpack Xtreme)
Geekbench 3: faster than GB4, use the memory (single- and multi-threaded) scores

I not only do this out of curiosity and excitement to see possible gains in performance but to also see if there are any weird scores. If you have weird test results like lower scores, lower bandwidth, higher latency, compared to your previous, _slower_ RAM settings, then that can indicate an issue (ie. instability). I then go on to the medium stress tests. I personally start with the following 3 in no particular order: TM5 Usmus v3, TM5 Anta777 Absolut, Karhu Ram Test. If all 3 of those give me no errors, then I move on to a medium run of HCI Memtest and medium Linpack Xtreme. If all those pass, I then either move on to the long tests or use my PC as normal and do the long tests when I feel like it (when I'm sleeping, not home, don't need the PC, etc.)
I always have HWInfo open during medium and long stress tests to monitor temps
I always have my case side fans on max, my door open, and WIndow open (if I'm home) to keep the RAM as cool as possible in order to get heat out of the equation as much as possible
If you pass all the medium and long test yet start having instability in games, day-to-day stuff, etc. and you notice that the RAM temps are way higher than during the tests, then you can be 99.9% sure the instability is purely heat related.
I usually have a conservative clock on my CPU and CPU cache (AKA ring, uncore). For eg, if I know I'm stable at 1.300v 5.2 GHz core, 4.9 GHz cache, I'll keep the same VCore but drop cpu clock down 100 MHz and cache down 100-200 MHz in order to get those out of the RAM & IMC equation. If I pass the Y-Cruncher and Linpack Xtreme short along with the medium tests, I then put my CPU and CPU cache back to my normal clocks and then start with the long tests. Some people say to not do this but instead to just always test the RAM with your max/normal CPU clocks from the beginning. They may be right. If you're 100% sure that your CPU and CPU cache clocks are 100% stable then that may indeed be a better strategy. Sometimes a normally stable core or cache clock may need more voltage once you push your RAM harder due to the IMC being under more stress so you could indeed get instability which you may think is from the RAM (since you think you know your CPU core & cache are 100% stable) when it could, in fact, actually be your CPU cache being too high (and possibly just needing a bump in voltage) due to your RAM OC putting more stress on the IMC. That's why I like to back off the CPU & CPU cache clocks 100-200 MHz at first.
P.S. If anything is incorrect, let me know and I'll correct it ASAP


----------



## bscool

RighteousOne said:


> Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?


No idea what you will need for sa and dq. I would try up to 1.35 to 1.4 range if you need to.

Gear 1 is not the same as 1t/cr1. Gear and command rate are 2 different things.


----------



## bscool

spin5000 said:


> I have everything set to auto or default from the stock BIOS. You'd think the stock BIOS would obviously train RAM properly regardless whether it's running JDEC standards, XMP, custom timings, etc... I did some more searching - this MSI board has a ton of RAM options. There's a sub-menu for RAM training. In just the RAM training menu alone there's probably 20 or 30 settings. They're all set to auto (default). One said Round Trip Latency. I changed it from auto to enabled and, what do you know, the RTLs went from 83/83 & 75/75 to 75/75 & 73/73.
> 
> So unless you manually go into some obscure Training sub-menu in the BIOS and change 1 specific setting (out of like 30), the motherboard won't train RAM? Seems like a bug to me but that seems to have done the trick. That now leaves me to think, what other of these 30 RAM training settings do I need to change from auto to enabled? There's all sorts of things regardling RTL, IOL, termination, etc. etc. It's all way over my head.


Yeah that is why ram tuning takes weeks to months to set everything. It is pretty involved especially when starting out and learning all of the timings and voltages.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> Yeah that is why ram tuning takes weeks to months to set everything. It is pretty involved especially when starting out and learning all of the timings and voltages.


Yup, and you need to keep CPU OC separate before running memory OC cause if you do both without enough time in between if you get some random error you won't know if it's CPU OC or your memory OC.
Then your going to be back to doing a lot of testing again.


----------



## Ichirou

RighteousOne said:


> Oh wow, thanks... but you've written a bunch of stuff way over my head. What is an "anta777 ABSOLUT" configuration? Sorry for the newbie question...
> 
> Also, are there programs able to flesh out immediate instabilities within an hour, for example, or less. Longer term hard to detect instabilities would be the domain of Korhu or TM5.


TM5 with the 1usmus config set to 6 cycles is generally enough for a quick but accurate RAM test. 90% of issues get weeded out within the first cycle.


RighteousOne said:


> Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?


On DDR4, VCCSA is safe up to 1.35V, and VDDQ can go as high as you need it to go, as the FIVR rail will trip long before any damage can be done.


spin5000 said:


> I have everything set to auto or default from the stock BIOS. You'd think the stock BIOS would obviously train RAM properly regardless whether it's running JDEC standards, XMP, custom timings, etc... I did some more searching - this MSI board has a ton of RAM options. There's a sub-menu for RAM training. In just the RAM training menu alone there's probably 20 or 30 settings. They're all set to auto (default). One said Round Trip Latency. I changed it from auto to enabled and, what do you know, the RTLs went from 83/83 & 75/75 to 75/75 & 73/73.
> 
> So unless you manually go into some obscure Training sub-menu in the BIOS and change 1 specific setting (out of like 30), the motherboard won't train RAM? Seems like a bug to me but that seems to have done the trick. That now leaves me to think, what other of these 30 RAM training settings do I need to change from auto to enabled? There's all sorts of things regardling RTL, IOL, termination, etc. etc. It's all way over my head.


RTL, just set the mode to Dynamic (or enable RTL Training).
RTT, 80 for Park, and Wr and Nom tend to be somewhere near 40, plus-minus one or two values. For most strong overclocking dies, anyway.









Advanced Timings Configuration


Sheet1 Advanced Timings Configuration,This cheat sheet is intended to assist memory overclockers with the obscure timings usually ignored in the BIOS due to the lack of documentation and empirical testing. Your mileage may vary as environments can differ, so this is only a reference. Be sure to ...




docs.google.com






spin5000 said:


> The following is not in any particular order and is based on a mix of my opinion and opinions of others that I often see floating around PC sites.
> 
> -- "short" = quick, fast test, usually 1- 5 mins
> -- "medium" = minimum test, I'd be fairly comfortable if the RAM passes medium without error
> -- "long" = when you really want to be extra certain of no RAM errors. Lots of people only use the medium tests (with a few different programs though) and have success that way. Some people even say the long tests are overkill. If you really want to be extra certain, and don't mind the extra time (do it while you sleep, are busy with other things, are out for the day/night, etc.), then do the long tests. Most errors should be picked up with the "medium" tests though. Also, errors _not_ picked up in medium but _picked_ up in "long" can be purely related to heat and nothing else, which can then deceive you into thinking your RAM OC settings are bad, so monitor your RAM temps!
> 
> Karhu RAM Test
> 
> medium: 6400% (Karhu says 6400% has 99.41% error detection rate)
> long: 10,000% - 20,000%
> HCI Memtest / Memtest Pro
> 
> medium: 400% - 600%
> long: 1000 - 2000%
> - TM5 Anta777 Absolut (replaced Anta777 Extreme)
> 
> medium: 6 cycles
> long: 18-24 cycles
> - TM5 Usmus v3
> 
> medium: 6 cycles
> long: 12-18 cycles
> Linpack Xtreme
> 
> medium: 10-15 runs of each stress test
> long: 25 - 50 runs of each stress test
> Note: because I have no idea which test to do (I think the #s are 2 GB, 3, 4, 6, 10, 30 or something), I just do every one. Eg. 10 runs of 2 GB, 10 runs 3 GB, and so on. The 2 GB tests last like 5 seconds each, the 3 GB like 15 seconds, etc. so they're not too time-consuming. The most time-consuming test (30 GB) is around 5-ish mins each
> Y-Cruncher
> 
> not sure which medium or long stress tests to run, ask around because this is another great program. See below for using Y-Cruncher for a great _short_ test
> OCCT
> 
> 30 min w/ AVX
> 30 mins w/ out AVX
> Notes
> 
> apparently TM5 Usmus v3 and Karhu hit the IMC harder so can potentially detect IMC-related errors quicker
> apparently Y-Cruncher can potentially detect VCCSA voltage-related errors quicker
> for a short test to check VCCSA, run Y-Cruncher with the following settings 0 [hit enter], 1 [hit enter], 8 [hit enter]. This test should last around 3-ish mins. If you error/fail this test, consider adjusting VCCSA (up or down) before adjusting any other settings (other voltages, RAM frequency, RAM timings, CPU core, CPU cache, etc.)
> me, personally, when I try new RAM settings before I go into the medium or long stress tests, I do some short tests, those being: 1 or 2 of the Y-Cruncher VCCSA tests I explained in my previous point, then 3-5 Linpack Xtreme runs using stress test and the second or third lowest GB option. If I pass both short tests, I then use a few programs to benchmark the new RAM settings to see the speeds, scores, latency, etc.: Programs I use for this are as follows (in no particular order):
> Passmark Performance Test (set to 2 tests, short, keep best result, all Memory Tests)
> Aida64, the 4 memory tests (I do the latency test 3-5 times and use the best result since it can be really inconsistent)
> Intel MLC GUI - just the first screen's bandwidth & latency test, I do it 2 times as the latency test is more consistent than Aida64
> Linpack Xtreme: Stress Test, 3 tests of your desire (I choose 3 GB option)
> Y-Cruncher: upon starting, hit 0, enter, 1, enter, 8, enter, use the two times as test score
> OCCT Memory Benchmark
> PyPrime: a nice quick test but good because scales well with everything (like Linpack Xtreme)
> Geekbench 3: faster than GB4, use the memory (single- and multi-threaded) scores
> 
> I not only do this out of curiosity and excitement to see possible gains in performance but to also see if there are any weird scores. If you have weird test results like lower scores, lower bandwidth, higher latency, compared to your previous, _slower_ RAM settings, then that can indicate an issue (ie. instability). I then go on to the medium stress tests. I personally start with the following 3 in no particular order: TM5 Usmus v3, TM5 Anta777 Absolut, Karhu Ram Test. If all 3 of those give me no errors, then I move on to a medium run of HCI Memtest and medium Linpack Xtreme. If all those pass, I then either move on to the long tests or use my PC as normal and do the long tests when I feel like it (when I'm sleeping, not home, don't need the PC, etc.)
> I always have HWInfo open during medium and long stress tests to monitor temps
> I always have my case side fans on max, my door open, and WIndow open (if I'm home) to keep the RAM as cool as possible in order to get heat out of the equation as much as possible
> If you pass all the medium and long test yet start having instability in games, day-to-day stuff, etc. and you notice that the RAM temps are way higher than during the tests, then you can be 99.9% sure the instability is purely heat related.
> I usually have a conservative clock on my CPU and CPU cache (AKA ring, uncore). For eg, if I know I'm stable at 1.300v 5.2 GHz core, 4.9 GHz cache, I'll keep the same VCore but drop cpu clock down 100 MHz and cache down 100-200 MHz in order to get those out of the RAM & IMC equation. If I pass the Y-Cruncher and Linpack Xtreme short along with the medium tests, I then put my CPU and CPU cache back to my normal clocks and then start with the long tests. Some people say to not do this but instead to just always test the RAM with your max/normal CPU clocks from the beginning. They may be right. If you're 100% sure that your CPU and CPU cache clocks are 100% stable then that may indeed be a better strategy. Sometimes a normally stable core or cache clock may need more voltage once you push your RAM harder due to the IMC being under more stress so you could indeed get instability which you may think is from the RAM (since you think you know your CPU core & cache are 100% stable) when it could, in fact, actually be your CPU cache being too high (and possibly just needing a bump in voltage) due to your RAM OC putting more stress on the IMC. That's why I like to back off the CPU & CPU cache clocks 100-200 MHz at first.
> P.S. If anything is incorrect, let me know and I'll correct it ASAP


Just run y-cruncher's component stress test with all options enabled, and you pretty much have a rock stable PC if it can even pass one loop.
And the test takes only like 20 minutes. No other stress test even comes close for the CPU (and cache, IMC).

For RAM, TM5 anta777 ABSOLUT overnight is enough to be 99% stable. Though Karhu 10K is a good plus if you're willing to pay for it. But generally not necessary.
If you only want to be game stable, 1sumus set to six cycles is enough for the RAM. But do have some sort of GPU stress test running as well, in that case.


----------



## spin5000

I lowered my VDIMM from it's 100% stable 1.6v to 1.55v and used different tests for a max of 3 mins to see if any would catch instability extremely quickly, the following are my results:

TM5 Usmus v3: error found @ 1:00 min
TM5 Anta777 Superlight: error found @ 1:40min
TM5 Anta777 Extreme: error found @ 1:18 min
TM5 Anta777 Absolute: 0 errors
Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: different result numbers indicating potential instability (even though LX says 0 errors). I consider this a success because @ 1.6v, I get all identical result #s
Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): error found (test failed)
Karhu Ram Test: 0 errors
OCCT w/ out AVX: 0 errors
OCCT w/ AVX: 0 errors
HCI Memtest: 0 errors

I then increased voltage to 1.58v and did longer tests with the following results:

TM5 Usmus v3, 6 cycles: 0 errors
TM5 Anta777 Absolut, 6 cycles: 0 errors
TM5 Anta777 Extreme, 6 cycles: 2 errors found
Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: see previous test, exact same result
Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): 0 errors (test completed)

At VDIMM 1.58v, only TM5 Anta777 Extreme and arguably Linpack Xtreme found errors. I'm definitely going to keep using TM5 Extreme alongside Absolut rather than replace Extreme with Absolut like most people seem to have done. Maybe in long tests (10-20 runs) or tests where it's not just a simple matter of not having enough VDIMM, TM5 Absolut is superior to TM5 Extreme, however, there are still situations where TM5 Extreme exposes errors where TM5 Absolut doesn't. So it's not like Absolut has made Extreme obsolete; Extreme definitely still has a part to play based on my tests.


----------



## GeneO

spin5000 said:


> I lowered my VDIMM from it's 100% stable 1.6v to 1.55v and used different tests for a max of 3 mins to see if any would catch instability extremely quickly, the following are my results:
> 
> TM5 Usmus v3: error found @ 1:00 min
> TM5 Anta777 Superlight: error found @ 2:13 min
> TM5 Anta777 Extreme: error found @ 1:40 min
> TM5 Anta777 Absolute: 0 errors
> Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: different result numbers indicating potential instability (even though LX says 0 errors). I consider this a success because @ 1.6v, I get all identical result #s
> Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): error found (test failed)
> Karhu Ram Test: 0 errors
> OCCT w/ out AVX: 0 errors
> OCCT w/ AVX: 0 errors
> 
> I then increased voltage to 1.58v and did longer tests with the following results:
> 
> TM5 Usmus v3, 6 cycles: 0 errors
> TM5 Anta777 Absolut, 6 cycles: 0 errors
> TM5 Anta777 Extreme, 6 cycles: 2 errors found
> Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: see previous test, exact same result
> Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): 0 errors (test completed)
> 
> At VDIMM 1.58v, only TM5 Anta777 Extreme and arguably Linpack Xtreme found errors. I'm definitely going to keep using TM5 Extreme alongside Absolut rather than replace Extreme with Absolut like most people seem to have done. Maybe in long tests (10-20 runs) or tests where it's not just a simple matter of not having enough VDIMM, TM5 Absolut is superior to TM5 Extreme, however, there are still situations where TM5 Extreme exposes errors where TM5 Absolut doesn't. So it's not like Absolut has made Extreme redundant; Extreme definitely still has a part to play based on my tests.


Well thanks for this! Will run the gamut. I had replaced extreme with Absolut myself.


----------



## RighteousOne

spin5000 said:


> I lowered my VDIMM from it's 100% stable 1.6v to 1.55v and used different tests for a max of 3 mins to see if any would catch instability extremely quickly, the following are my results:
> 
> TM5 Usmus v3: error found @ 1:00 min
> TM5 Anta777 Superlight: error found @ 2:13 min
> TM5 Anta777 Extreme: error found @ 1:40 min
> TM5 Anta777 Absolute: 0 errors
> Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: different result numbers indicating potential instability (even though LX says 0 errors). I consider this a success because @ 1.6v, I get all identical result #s
> Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): error found (test failed)
> Karhu Ram Test: 0 errors
> OCCT w/ out AVX: 0 errors
> OCCT w/ AVX: 0 errors
> HCI Memtest: 0 errors
> 
> I then increased voltage to 1.58v and did longer tests with the following results:
> 
> TM5 Usmus v3, 6 cycles: 0 errors
> TM5 Anta777 Absolut, 6 cycles: 0 errors
> TM5 Anta777 Extreme, 6 cycles: 2 errors found
> Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: see previous test, exact same result
> Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): 0 errors (test completed)
> 
> At VDIMM 1.58v, only TM5 Anta777 Extreme and arguably Linpack Xtreme found errors. I'm definitely going to keep using TM5 Extreme alongside Absolut rather than replace Extreme with Absolut like most people seem to have done. Maybe in long tests (10-20 runs) or tests where it's not just a simple matter of not having enough VDIMM, TM5 Absolut is superior to TM5 Extreme, however, there are still situations where TM5 Extreme exposes errors where TM5 Absolut doesn't. So it's not like Absolut has made Extreme obsolete; Extreme definitely still has a part to play based on my tests.


Where does one find these TM5 configuration files, namely Anta777 Superlight/Extreme/Absolut and usmus? I try running TM5 and it blocks me saying something like "Can't run AWE module without Admin privileges". I made TM5.exe to run as admin but still the stubborn dialogue box persists.


----------



## GeneO

RighteousOne said:


> Where does one find these TM5 configuration files, namely Anta777 Superlight/Extreme/Absolut and usmus? I try running TM5 and it blocks me saying something like "Can't run AWE module without Admin privileges". I made TM5.exe to run as admin but still the stubborn dialogue box persists.











GitHub - integralfx/MemTestHelper: C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## Ichirou

RighteousOne said:


> Where does one find these TM5 configuration files, namely Anta777 Superlight/Extreme/Absolut and usmus? I try running TM5 and it blocks me saying something like "Can't run AWE module without Admin privileges". I made TM5.exe to run as admin but still the stubborn dialogue box persists.











1usmus Error Diagnosis


Sheet1 1usmus_v3,Usage: Run TM5 with 1usmus (six cycles) to diagnose and correct errors, and then run anta777 ABSOLUT (overnight) for a final confirmation,ERROR #7,MirrorMove 2Mb [Mode0,P0],SEE ERROR #11 - If this error happens with Errors #1 and/or #11, it is most likely not enough VDIMM ERROR #0




docs.google.com




The links are in there.

As for that error, restart your PC.


----------



## spin5000

What's better for RTLs? 75/75 and 73/73 or 75/75 and 75/75? I have to turn training on for my MSI Edge DDR4 or else it barely trains RTLs which is weird so now every time I make a change in the BIOS, even if it's just CPU vCore, the RTLs may change. It's always between the 2 sets of #s listed above.


----------



## bscool

spin5000 said:


> What's better for RTLs? 75/75 and 73/73 or 75/75 and 75/75? I have to turn training on for my MSI Edge DDR4 or else it barely trains RTLs which is weird so now every time I make a change in the BIOS, even if it's just CPU vCore, the RTLs may change. It's always between the 2 sets of #s listed above.


Lower RTLs "should" be better for performance. But you need to check all of them which only show in bios or using memtweak it because they could train somethjing like 75/73/75 and 75/75/75.

But more important is make sure both are stable as I have seen where chaning rtls even 1 tick will cause instability in memory tests. Screenshot of memtweak it so you can see there are 3 rtls per channel when using DR.

Once you have found the rlts that are stable/perform best and you dont want them to drift/train turn off/disble memory training(memory fast boot) in the bios or it will continue to happen.

Link to pic from z490 but should be same/similar on z690 Z490 Tomahawk "Manually" setting RTL/IO-L help...


----------



## Ichirou

spin5000 said:


> What's better for RTLs? 75/75 and 73/73 or 75/75 and 75/75? I have to turn training on for my MSI Edge DDR4 or else it barely trains RTLs which is weird so now every time I make a change in the BIOS, even if it's just CPU vCore, the RTLs may change. It's always between the 2 sets of #s listed above.


In the RTL section, change it from Auto to Dynamic Mode. That's all you need to do.


----------



## massivex

This is kind of odd. If the timings are changed within Windows I can pass HCI (%2000+), TM5 (Absolut) with the four following timings set at 6:

tRDRD_dr 6
tWRWR_dg 6
tWRWR_dr 6
tWRRD_dr 6

However, if I set in BIOS, it will only let me boot with two of the timings tWRWR_dg and tWRRD_dr. The other two timings will have to be raised to 7 to boot.

This is on Asus Z690 Strix D4, and 2x16GB B-Die DR kit @ 3900 15-15-14-28. I regularly use BIOS 0901 but for this I've tried like 6 different BIOS versions from 0707 to 1504 to no avail. Tried cranking up VCCSA, VDDQTX, VDIMM but nope...

Anyone got any ideas or should I just forget about it lol thanks


----------



## edkieferlp

massivex said:


> This is kind of odd. If the timings are changed within Windows I can pass HCI (%2000+), TM5 (Absolut) with the four following timings set at 6:
> 
> tRDRD_dr 6
> tWRWR_dg 6
> tWRWR_dr 6
> tWRRD_dr 6
> 
> However, if I set in BIOS, it will only let me boot with two of the timings tWRWR_dg and tWRRD_dr. The other two timings will have to be raised to 7 to boot.
> 
> This is on Asus Z690 Strix D4, and 2x16GB B-Die DR kit @ 3900 15-15-14-28. I regularly use BIOS 0901 but for this I've tried like 6 different BIOS versions from 0707 to 1504 to no avail. Tried cranking up VCCSA, VDDQTX, VDIMM but nope...
> 
> Anyone got any ideas or should I just forget about it lol thanks


I guess MB has trouble with training when those are all set to 6, just run it as you have with two 6 and two 7, you're not going to see a difference in anything meaningful.


----------



## acoustic

massivex said:


> This is kind of odd. If the timings are changed within Windows I can pass HCI (%2000+), TM5 (Absolut) with the four following timings set at 6:
> 
> tRDRD_dr 6
> tWRWR_dg 6
> tWRWR_dr 6
> tWRRD_dr 6
> 
> However, if I set in BIOS, it will only let me boot with two of the timings tWRWR_dg and tWRRD_dr. The other two timings will have to be raised to 7 to boot.
> 
> This is on Asus Z690 Strix D4, and 2x16GB B-Die DR kit @ 3900 15-15-14-28. I regularly use BIOS 0901 but for this I've tried like 6 different BIOS versions from 0707 to 1504 to no avail. Tried cranking up VCCSA, VDDQTX, VDIMM but nope...
> 
> Anyone got any ideas or should I just forget about it lol thanks


Very likely a training issue. Setting lower than 7 on many DR/DG timings will actually cause performance drops, not increases. Make sure to test timing changes and make sure performance is increasing, as lower timings aren't always better. I forget the reason why, but this was talked about heavily a year ago or so.. it's why 7 is what you see people typically run.


----------



## edkieferlp

^ +1

If you're on Intel, tune the tertiaries one group at a time.
My suggestions:

TimingSafeTightExtremetRDRD_sg/dg/dr/dd8/4/8/87/4/7/76/4/6/6tWRWR_sg/dg/dr/dd8/4/8/87/4/7/76/4/6/6

For tWRRD_sg/dg, see step 3. For tWRRD_dr/dd, drop them both by 1 until you get instability or performance degrades.
For tRDWR_sg/dg/dr/dd, drop them all by 1 until you get instability or performance degrades. You can usually run them all the same, e.g., 9/9/9/9.
Setting these too tight can cause system freezes.

Note that dr only affects dual rank sticks, so you can ignore this timing if you have single rank sticks. In the same way, dd only needs to be considered when you run two DIMMs per channel. You can also set them to 0 or 1 if you really want to.
For dual rank setups (see notes on ranks):
tRDRD_dr/dd can be lowered a step further to 5 for a large bump in read bandwidth.
tWRWR_sg 6 can cause write bandwidth regression over tWRWR_sg 7, despite being stable."


MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper



"


----------



## massivex

acoustic said:


> Very likely a training issue. Setting lower than 7 on many DR/DG timings will actually cause performance drops, not increases. Make sure to test timing changes and make sure performance is increasing, as lower timings aren't always better. I forget the reason why, but this was talked about heavily a year ago or so.. it's why 7 is what you see people typically run.


I'm glad it was you whom replied to my post, I recognize your username. I actually have been reading a lot of posts specifically by you in this thread, albeit at this moment my head's a mush (bloody 'rona wiped the last 2 braincells I had) and I can't exactly remember why I was interested in your posts! Are you by any chance also running 12700k on an Asus Z690 Strix D4 with a not-so-good IMC that can't do over 3900 frequency no matter what, and you ended up running 3800CL14? If that's you, then I'm literally in the exact same situation. 4000 is out of the question, 3900-14-15-15-28 passed %1,500 HCI on Auto subtimings, but once I tighten them just a bit, it always errors eventually, usually somewhere between %400 to %1000, same story when I tried it with 3866CL14. So, I'm left to choose from either 3900-15-15-14-28 or 3800-14-15-14-28 which both work fine with pretty tight timings. 

I'll be honest I actually spent all my time just trying to get each and every sub-timing as low as possible and then stress testing meticulously without actually checking its impact on performance. What would you recommend for testing impact on performance then? 
For what it's worth I just passed %1,400 on HCI and 3 rounds of TM5 Absolut config with tWRRD_dd 5 (and it boots with that value). I will definitely start checking for positive/negative/neutral performance impact of the timings soon. 
Thanks 🙏


----------



## massivex

edkieferlp said:


> ^ +1
> 
> If you're on Intel, tune the tertiaries one group at a time.
> My suggestions:
> 
> TimingSafeTightExtremetRDRD_sg/dg/dr/dd8/4/8/87/4/7/76/4/6/6tWRWR_sg/dg/dr/dd8/4/8/87/4/7/76/4/6/6
> 
> For tWRRD_sg/dg, see step 3. For tWRRD_dr/dd, drop them both by 1 until you get instability or performance degrades.
> For tRDWR_sg/dg/dr/dd, drop them all by 1 until you get instability or performance degrades. You can usually run them all the same, e.g., 9/9/9/9.
> Setting these too tight can cause system freezes.
> 
> Note that dr only affects dual rank sticks, so you can ignore this timing if you have single rank sticks. In the same way, dd only needs to be considered when you run two DIMMs per channel. You can also set them to 0 or 1 if you really want to.
> For dual rank setups (see notes on ranks):
> tRDRD_dr/dd can be lowered a step further to 5 for a large bump in read bandwidth.
> tWRWR_sg 6 can cause write bandwidth regression over tWRWR_sg 7, despite being stable."
> 
> 
> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper
> 
> 
> 
> "


Ah yes, quoting straight from the Bible, nice haha. Any suggestions for apps to test performance other than Aida64 (which I'm not the most fond of)? From a quick check it seems that tWRWR_dg 6 did actually improve write speed in Aida64. I don't know about the other timings yet, will have to check. It's a little troublesome when you're connecting to the PC from TeamViewer on your phone lulz.


----------



## edkieferlp

massivex said:


> Ah yes, quoting straight from the Bible, nice haha. Any suggestions for apps to test performance other than Aida64 (which I'm not the most fond of)? From a quick check it seems that tWRWR_dg 6 did actually improve write speed in Aida64. I don't know about the other timings yet, will have to check. It's a little troublesome when you're connecting to the PC from TeamViewer on your phone lulz.


I think you get a different answer depending on user but purely bandwidth and latency I like Intels MLC it is very repeatable and gives results according to load.

Other ones I use are Y-cruncher and linpack extreme, just make sure cooling is good for last one.


----------



## Ichirou

acoustic said:


> Very likely a training issue. Setting lower than 7 on many DR/DG timings will actually cause performance drops, not increases. Make sure to test timing changes and make sure performance is increasing, as lower timings aren't always better. I forget the reason why, but this was talked about heavily a year ago or so.. it's why 7 is what you see people typically run.


I can train tWRWR and tRDRD at 5 with only one specific BIOS version for the MSI Edge, and even then, it hammers the IMC _hard_.
Needs a lot more VDIMM and VCCSA to stabilize it. So I stick with 6.

The performance improvement is great though. Fun stuff. 4,133 MHz.


----------



## bennmann

slightly undervolted 12400F, max package TDP goes up to ~75 watts, around ~80C core temps in load. stock cooler, 1070 GTX GPU. happy enough with these-cruncher numbers

MSI z690-p motherboard refuses to accept manual SA voltages and every method to flash the bios and update i've tried seems to require a non-F CPU to push video output in m-flash mode to a monitor (i guess i could try it blind)

there is no flash button on this board, but it's cheap, i'm cheap, and maybe in a year or two i will upgrade to a 13700K or used 12700K and flash the board then, or one of those cheaper used B660 with BLCK controllers


----------



## maniakpfs

Sprawiedliwy said:


> Dobrze wiedzieć... więc czy były 15xx jest najlepszy po 0807?
> [/CYTAT]
> That's right, but I use the 801 bios
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/m94H9sI


----------



## acoustic

massivex said:


> I'm glad it was you whom replied to my post, I recognize your username. I actually have been reading a lot of posts specifically by you in this thread, albeit at this moment my head's a mush (bloody 'rona wiped the last 2 braincells I had) and I can't exactly remember why I was interested in your posts! Are you by any chance also running 12700k on an Asus Z690 Strix D4 with a not-so-good IMC that can't do over 3900 frequency no matter what, and you ended up running 3800CL14? If that's you, then I'm literally in the exact same situation. 4000 is out of the question, 3900-14-15-15-28 passed %1,500 HCI on Auto subtimings, but once I tighten them just a bit, it always errors eventually, usually somewhere between %400 to %1000, same story when I tried it with 3866CL14. So, I'm left to choose from either 3900-15-15-14-28 or 3800-14-15-14-28 which both work fine with pretty tight timings.
> 
> I'll be honest I actually spent all my time just trying to get each and every sub-timing as low as possible and then stress testing meticulously without actually checking its impact on performance. What would you recommend for testing impact on performance then?
> For what it's worth I just passed %1,400 on HCI and 3 rounds of TM5 Absolut config with tWRRD_dd 5 (and it boots with that value). I will definitely start checking for positive/negative/neutral performance impact of the timings soon.
> Thanks 🙏


Sorry to get back to you late; been busy!

I do own an average/below-average 12700K, but I'm on an ASUS TUF D4, not a STRIX. I do run 3800CL14 with tight subtimings - right now I've moved to 3800 15-15-15-30 to reduce vDIMM down to 1.45v, to shave a few degrees off my temps. With summer in full swing, I noticed rising water temp, and with hotter water means my top rad blowing warmer air on the RAM.

There's a variety of tests you can use that are superior to AIDA64. I really like Intel Memory Latency Checker (quick Google will pull it up), and TM5 1usmus default (the speed that you complete the test). I find both are much more consistent without nearly as much run-to-run variance.

Truthfully the last couple weeks/months, I've just been enjoying the PC and actually gaming on it, rather than tweaking. I spent quite a bit of time working on OCs and forgot to actually fire any games up for a while.. lol!


----------



## cameronmc88

Currently stable i7 12700k and Z690 MSI Edge DDR4 w/ G Skill Flare X 3200mhz CL14 16gb, tested with TM5 + Extreme Profile.
Is there anything you guys would tweak or lower any of the voltages?


----------



## acoustic

What's your DIMM temps under TM5?

Try bringing tRFC to 260-280; try 270 first and then adjust from there and tRAS to 30. If that works..

TWRRD_SG/DG should be +/- 5 iirc from DDR4 spec. Try 26/21 or 27/22

Take a look at MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper

There's some very good learning in there


----------



## edkieferlp

cameronmc88 said:


> View attachment 2567546
> 
> 
> Currently stable i7 12700k and Z690 MSI Edge DDR4 w/ G Skill Flare X 3200mhz CL14 16gb, tested with TM5 + Extreme Profile.
> Is there anything you guys would tweak or lower any of the voltages?


try tFAW 24 >16, you already have tRRD_L /S tight.


----------



## acoustic

These are my current 24/7 settings for Summer. Dropped from 3800 14-14-14-28 to 3800 15-15-15-28 to reduce vDIMM down to 1.45v, just to buffer the temps a bit. Running great as usual


----------



## cameronmc88

acoustic said:


> These are my current 24/7 settings for Summer. Dropped from 3800 14-14-14-28 to 3800 15-15-15-28 to reduce vDIMM down to 1.45v, just to buffer the temps a bit. Running great as usual


----------



## Ichirou

cameronmc88 said:


> View attachment 2567546
> 
> 
> Currently stable i7 12700k and Z690 MSI Edge DDR4 w/ G Skill Flare X 3200mhz CL14 16gb, tested with TM5 + Extreme Profile.
> Is there anything you guys would tweak or lower any of the voltages?


Use BIOS V1.22 if you aren't already and try boosting VCCSA to 1.35V and running 4,000 MHz. 

Don't be afraid to test your RAM up to 1.60V as well.

Take notes before changing BIOSes.


----------



## cameronmc88

Ichirou said:


> Use BIOS V1.22 if you aren't already and try boosting VCCSA to 1.35V and running 4,000 MHz.
> 
> Don't be afraid to test your RAM up to 1.60V as well.
> 
> Take notes before changing BIOSes.


Why so high on the VCCSA?, in the DDR memory guide on reddit it suggests 1.25V VCCSA for 4000mhz.. btw what about VDDQ? I know buildzoid said its not just a renamed VCCIO but I can't find any info about VDDQ on the memory guide.


----------



## acoustic

Ichirou said:


> Use BIOS V1.22 if you aren't already and try boosting VCCSA to 1.35V and running 4,000 MHz.
> 
> Don't be afraid to test your RAM up to 1.60V as well.
> 
> Take notes before changing BIOSes.


Testing 1.60v is useless since you'd need dedicated cooling for the RAM to run it. Even 1.55v is rough during the summer. Most users aren't strapping fans to their DIMMs. DDR5 I'm going to put my sticks under water I think.



cameronmc88 said:


> Why so high on the VCCSA?, in the DDR memory guide on reddit it suggests 1.25V VCCSA for 4000mhz.. btw what about VDDQ? I know buildzoid said its not just a renamed VCCIO but I can't find any info about VDDQ on the memory guide.


1.35v VCCSA is fine. It's worth testing it if you haven't.

VDDQ is fine. Above 1.50v it doesn't really do anything due to LoadLine and the FIVR rail maxing at 1.60v. When you set 1.50v, it's really running closer to 1.60v, according to what Shamino told me when Z690 first came out.

You can't do anything wrong with VDDQ since it's a protected rail.


----------



## cameronmc88

I see some users putting VDDQ same as VCCSA or some much higher, in the DDR4 guide it says VCCIO used to be good within .50mv of VCCSA.. is it the same for these?


----------



## acoustic

VDDQ and VCCIO have nothing to do with each other.

Some users find VDDQ at 1.35v to work, others find 1.4/1.45/1.5v.. it's all based off of your specific setup. Have to figure it out for yourself. I find typically 1.50v is the sweet spot but that doesn't apply to every system.


----------



## Ichirou

cameronmc88 said:


> Why so high on the VCCSA?, in the DDR memory guide on reddit it suggests 1.25V VCCSA for 4000mhz.. btw what about VDDQ? I know buildzoid said its not just a renamed VCCIO but I can't find any info about VDDQ on the memory guide.


Because this is Z690, not older generations. On Gear 1, especially with a weaker CPU, you need a lot more VCCSA.

VDDQ isn't VCCIO. It's basically another kind of voltage. But there is no unsafe voltage, as the FIVR rail will trip if it gets too high. Meaning you'll never be able to damage it. It just won't boot.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

acoustic said:


> VDDQ is fine. Above 1.50v it doesn't really do anything due to LoadLine and the FIVR rail maxing at 1.60v. When you set 1.50v, it's really running closer to 1.60v, according to what Shamino told me when Z690 first came out.
> 
> You can't do anything wrong with VDDQ since it's a protected rail.


Is there any way to meaningfully interact with the FIVR? Mem controller scaling is giving me flashbacks to Haswell and I'd love to see if some of this is related to a FIVR needing more input volts or different LLC.

This ****ing 12700k has stock ddr4-2133 vSA VID of .911v, VID .933v at 3200, can run 3600 2dimm SR at said .933 voltage. 22mv for the whole range. And suddenly I need +50mv for 3733, +120 for 3866, and >+200mv for 4000. It doesn't make sense.


----------



## jigit_razgon

I can't turn off PPD in memtweakit - It can't apply any changes (tried op link version and newer). I have realtime timing turned on.


----------



## bscool

@jigit_razgon ppd is controlled by txp on z590/z690

Also tppd is different than ppd. The little I have tested it didnt improve performance much lowering txp to 4 and made it harder to stabilize.

On z690 Strix d4 it sets txp to 7 or 8 depending on the memory kit I have installed. SR or DR b die and Team and Gskill, Team set it at 8 and gskill 7.









Intel® Core™ Processors Technical Resources


Intel® Core™ processors technical resources list includes applications notes, datasheets, packing information, product briefs, and more.




www.intel.com


----------



## jigit_razgon

@bscool Thanks, but my main problem is I cannot control timings by memtweakit despite realtiming on and using latest version of memtweakit


----------



## bscool

jigit_razgon said:


> @bscool Thanks, but my main problem is I cannot control timings by memtweakit despite realtiming on and using latest version of memtweakit


OK I am not sure, try this one if it doesnt work I dont know. MemTweakIt 20210910.zip

It might be the same one you have, this is the version I have and works on z690 Apex and Strix d4.

Edit found a newer version also MemTweakIt_20220317.zip


----------



## bscool

@jigit_razgon I didnt see that you are on an Asrock MB. I dont know if Asus memtweakit works with Asrock. I have heard people say you can control timings with Asrock timings config when used with an Asrock MB. 

I dont know if it is true as I havent had an Asrock MB in years.


----------



## jigit_razgon

bscool said:


> OK I am not sure, try this one if it doesnt work I dont know. MemTweakIt 20210910.zip
> 
> It might be the same one you have, this is the version I have and works on z690 Apex and Strix d4.
> 
> Edit found a newer version also MemTweakIt_20220317.zip


I tried exactly this version and latest one but pressing apply reverts all changes in timings. So I probably have to play with hxd and reveal these settings in uefi.


----------



## Webbmaster

del


----------



## Antsu

acoustic said:


> Most users aren't strapping fans to their DIMMs.


Did I accidentally type stockclock.net in my browser? With all the love; If you aren't willing to cool your DIMMs for more performance, I honestly don't know what you are doing on this forum.


----------



## maniakpfs

Webbmaster said:


> Got some G.SKILL Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 CL16-16-16-36 1.40V 32GB (2x16GB) F4-4000C16D-32GTRSA
> It can't work at default 4000MHz without errors in tm5 or Aida64 stress memory test on auto settings at my motherboard Gigabyte Z490 VISION G (rev. 1.0) on Intel i9-10900KF can only run in 2T at 39000mhz without any errors!
> I tried higher voltage till 1.5V, and SA 1.350, VCCCIO 1.270 and changed it to 1T->Errors. Touch from auto - fpr TRFC or TREFI... Errors.
> Try 2T in full auto 4000 - Errors.
> 
> I attached Windows1 with Hyper-V off, same with W10 hyper-V is on-could not switch it off.
> And my old memory stick 3200->3500 in Windows11 results to compare.
> 
> What are my results-options to make it work or work faster or return? Keep it or may be return it?!
> 
> PS. Plus need some help - attach my BIOS memory settings - not sure about what to put:
> Memory timing mode - Fixed or Dynamic.
> Realtime memory timing?
> Memory Boot mode?
> Channel-rank interleaving!?
> I tried G.SKILL site RAM Configurator - they have other timings for my mb - DDR4-4000 CL19-19-19-39 1.35V and not my!
> 
> 3500Mhz Cruicial Ballistic->
> View attachment 2567952
> 
> 
> 
> in Windows 11 no HYPER-V
> View attachment 2567954
> 
> 
> in Windows 10 with Hyper-V working
> View attachment 2567953
> 
> 
> View attachment 2567956


Read it for sure this knowledge will help you








MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## postem

Hi good people, can you provide me some insight?
Im running a ballistix kit 16x2 DR, original 16-18-18-35 Kit @ 1.39v at 4000 but with some secondaries tightened. I can post at 4100, i know the memory can go further but, when i use the settings below, memtest86 give me errors pretty quickly.
12900K tuf z690 bios 1600

I read people say it needs more VCCSA, but i cant find the control on bios to change vccsa. I know i can tune a bit more secondaries and tertiaries, but im trying right now to make it stable at 4100 and beyond if possible.

1. VCCSA: I cant even read a vccsa alone on hwinfo, let alone change it in bios, its like the setting isnt there. Hwinfo says the SA power is calculated by the SVID value, since im using Auto does it mean i cant have it as a manual setting?
2. VDDQTX: its auto but i reckon this is a safe value i guess
3. DRAM is 1.39v, i know this memory doesnt scale very well with extra voltage but i guess i can apply 1,45 or more

So far AIDA is giving me 48ns, not that i care much about AIDA, im checking it against pyprime and i got better numbers from current than xmp.

Im really interested in finding if the IMC is able to do a higher frequency before considering to purchase some 32 B die kit, or if its useless for this purpose maybe im gonna exchange for DDR5


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> Hi good people, can you provide me some insight?
> Im running a ballistix kit 16x2 DR, original 16-18-18-35 Kit @ 1.39v at 4000 but with some secondaries tightened. I can post at 4100, i know the memory can go further but, when i use the settings below, memtest86 give me errors pretty quickly.
> 12900K tuf z690 bios 1600
> 
> I read people say it needs more VCCSA, but i cant find the control on bios to change vccsa. I know i can tune a bit more secondaries and tertiaries, but im trying right now to make it stable at 4100 and beyond if possible.
> 
> 1. VCCSA: I cant even read a vccsa alone on hwinfo, let alone change it in bios, its like the setting isnt there. Hwinfo says the SA power is calculated by the SVID value, since im using Auto does it mean i cant have it as a manual setting?
> 2. VDDQTX: its auto but i reckon this is a safe value i guess
> 3. DRAM is 1.39v, i know this memory doesnt scale very well with extra voltage but i guess i can apply 1,45 or more
> 
> So far AIDA is giving me 48ns, not that i care much about AIDA, im checking it against pyprime and i got better numbers from current than xmp.
> 
> Im really interested in finding if the IMC is able to do a higher frequency before considering to purchase some 32 B die kit, or if its useless for this purpose maybe im gonna exchange for DDR5
> 
> View attachment 2568102


Stabilizing 4,100+ MHz on Gear 1 is 80% based on IMC lottery. The other 20% is boosting voltages.
You're going to need to test other BIOS versions. VCCSA is literally like, right under Vcore in the BIOS.

Micron B/E-die scales with voltage. It's just certain timings that do not.
Try VCCSA at 1.35V, VDDQ at 1.50V, and VDIMM at 1.55V.

Essentially, the settings in my signature.


----------



## Webbmaster

_What are my results: seems quite ok(medium), so what to try to make it faster? *b-die Samsung** Revision B1 8layers
G.SKILL Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 CL16-16-16-36 1.40V 32GB (2x16GB) F4-4000C16D-32GTRSA*_
Tried
*4000 Mhz *- _*Voltage 1.5V, VCCSA 1.24V VCCCIO 1.2V* stable_
*4100 Mhz -* _*Voltage 1.5V, VCCSA 1.24V VCCCIO 1.2V* stable
*Got Erorrs 4133 Mhz - **Voltage 1.51V, added till VCCSA 1.25V added VCCCIO 1.21V -** (couldn't boot at 1.5V)*
Seems 2T is only possible, what is better tighten then?
Anybody with similar modules welcome to share.

PS. Work at default 4000MHz without errors in tm5 or Aida64 stress memory test on auto settings at my motherboard Gigabyte Z490 VISION G (rev. 1.0) + Intel i9-10900KF with *Voltage 1.5V, VCCSA 1.25V VCCCIO 1.2V*

EXTRA Question-
Read many DDR4-FAQs but with BIOS parameters in GYGABYTE Need some help - attach my BIOS memory settings - not sure about what to put:_
Memory timing mode - Fixed or Dynamic.
Realtime memory timing?
Memory Boot mode?
Channel-rank interleaving!?
*Don't touch FSB* *100MHz ->133Mhz?*


----------



## Netarangi

postem said:


> Hi good people, can you provide me some insight?
> Im running a ballistix kit 16x2 DR, original 16-18-18-35 Kit @ 1.39v at 4000 but with some secondaries tightened. I can post at 4100, i know the memory can go further but, when i use the settings below, memtest86 give me errors pretty quickly.
> 12900K tuf z690 bios 1600
> 
> I read people say it needs more VCCSA, but i cant find the control on bios to change vccsa. I know i can tune a bit more secondaries and tertiaries, but im trying right now to make it stable at 4100 and beyond if possible.
> 
> 1. VCCSA: I cant even read a vccsa alone on hwinfo, let alone change it in bios, its like the setting isnt there. Hwinfo says the SA power is calculated by the SVID value, since im using Auto does it mean i cant have it as a manual setting?
> 2. VDDQTX: its auto but i reckon this is a safe value i guess
> 3. DRAM is 1.39v, i know this memory doesnt scale very well with extra voltage but i guess i can apply 1,45 or more
> 
> So far AIDA is giving me 48ns, not that i care much about AIDA, im checking it against pyprime and i got better numbers from current than xmp.
> 
> Im really interested in finding if the IMC is able to do a higher frequency before considering to purchase some 32 B die kit, or if its useless for this purpose maybe im gonna exchange for DDR5
> 
> View attachment 2568102


Hey, same board as you. Vccsa is CPU System Agent Voltage on this board.

Good luck posting above 3900mhz 1:1


----------



## bscool

Webbmaster said:


> _What are my results: seems quite ok(medium), & try work faster or ? Keep it or may be return it?! Will try to make it higher then 4000Mhz!  *b-die Samsung** Revision B1 8layers*
> 
> Read many DDR4-FAQs but with BIOS parameters in GYGABYTE Need some help - attach my BIOS memory settings - not sure about what to put:_
> 
> Memory timing mode - Fixed or Dynamic.
> Realtime memory timing?
> Memory Boot mode?
> Channel-rank interleaving!?
> *Don't touch FSB* *100MHz ->133Mhz?*
> 
> _PS. this is all about *G.SKILL Trident Z Royal DDR4-4000 CL16-16-16-36 1.40V 32GB (2x16GB) F4-4000C16D-32GTRSA* - work at default 4000MHz without errors in tm5 or Aida64 stress memory test on auto settings at my motherboard Gigabyte Z490 VISION G (rev. 1.0) on Intel i9-10900KF only with *Voltage 1.5V
> (For now - only run in 2T! I tried higher voltage ->1.5V, and SA 1.350, VCCCIO 1.270 but nope.*_


You will probably get more replies in this thread _Official_ Intel DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread

This one is for z690 ddr4. But the memory kit you have is good. The weak link is your MB. But make the best of it, outside of benchmarks it doesnt matter. Tighten your subtimings and you will be good to go.

Cant help on most of those setting as I havent used Gigabyte since z390. But they should be fine on auto. Subtimings is what you need to work on latency on z590 with 10th gen cpu should be able to hit in the upper 38 to 42ns range I would guess with your MB. Cache speed also has a big impact on latency. Should be able to run 45 to 48 as a estimate on cache.

You need to use Asrock timing config to show your subtimings if you want help with them. I think 4.0.9 work on z590 https://download.asrock.com/Utility/Formula/TimingConfigurator(v4.0.9).zip

Also forget about 1t with DR b die and 4 dim MB. 2t is fine.


----------



## Webbmaster

bscool said:


> You will probably get more replies in this thread _Official_ Intel DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread
> 
> This one is for z690 ddr4. But the memory kit you have is good. The weak link is your MB. But make the best of it, outside of benchmarks it doesnt matter. Tighten your subtimings and you will be good to go.
> 
> Cant help on most of those setting as I havent used Gigabyte since z390. But they should be fine on auto. Subtimings is what you need to work on latency on z590 with 10th gen cpu should be able to hit in the upper 38 to 42ns range I would guess with your MB. Cache speed also has a big impact on latency. Should be able to run 45 to 48 as a estimate on cache.
> 
> You need to use Asrock timing config to show your subtimings if you want help with them. I think 4.0.9 work on z590 https://download.asrock.com/Utility/Formula/TimingConfigurator(v4.0.9).zip
> 
> Also forget about 1t with DR b die and 4 dim MB. 2t is fine.


Thank you very much, ( yes, this mb is quite bad, only Asus in future), will follow your guidance + feel much better now ;-) Mostly already forgot about 1T, will tighten from dusk till dawn!


----------



## forart.it

Hi everyone, just finished to assemble, upgrade and configure our "new" (everything from Whareouse) platform: *Gigabyte Z690 UD DDR4 + i5 12600 + 2xF4-4000C18D-16GVK G.Skill Ripjaws V kits*

XMP 4000 works at 1st try, Windows 11 installed without issues.

More tests will come.


----------



## postem

Netarangi said:


> Hey, same board as you. Vccsa is CPU System Agent Voltage on this board.
> 
> Good luck posting above 3900mhz 1:1


Hey, thank you i found it.
I was already stable with my micron memory at 4000MT, even with 12700K. I have zero errors with it, but going under primaries or after 4000 was generally giving me memory errors.
Increasing SA voltage gave me more stability but im still with errors at 4133mt. Gonna try to dial down to 4100 and see, maybe increase primaries, and increase even further to 4200 or 4300 to see what the IMC can sustain before purchasing another B die kit. If it goes nice enough i will probably delay the purchase of a z790 board + ddr5.


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> Hey, thank you i found it.
> I was already stable with my micron memory at 4000MT, even with 12700K. I have zero errors with it, but going under primaries or after 4000 was generally giving me memory errors.
> Increasing SA voltage gave me more stability but im still with errors at 4133mt. Gonna try to dial down to 4100 and see, maybe increase primaries, and increase even further to 4200 or 4300 to see what the IMC can sustain before purchasing another B die kit. If it goes nice enough i will probably delay the purchase of a z790 board + ddr5.


On 12th Gen, you want to be binning CPUs for IMC, not RAM. You're not going to magically be able to run at a higher frequency with a better binned kit. It's _strictly _IMC-dependent this time around. But since 13th Gen is just around the corner, no real point to binning CPUs anymore. Better off just buying a 13th Gen chip.


----------



## postem

Ichirou said:


> On 12th Gen, you want to be binning CPUs for IMC, not RAM. You're not going to magically be able to run at a higher frequency with a better binned kit. It's _strictly _IMC-dependent this time around. But since 13th Gen is just around the corner, no real point to binning CPUs anymore. Better off just buying a 13th Gen chip.


Yeah, I know I just didn't tried too much to increase the frequency, I'm just throwing memory with relaxed timings to see how much this Imc scales, so I can decide if I still try to get a better memory kit or not, under ddr5 Imc frequency isn't even near the limit, so other factors limit total frequency.


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> Yeah, I know I just didn't tried too much to increase the frequency, I'm just throwing memory with relaxed timings to see how much this Imc scales, so I can decide if I still try to get a better memory kit or not, under ddr5 Imc frequency isn't even near the limit, so other factors limit total frequency.


For DDR5, it seems the general consensus is that the motherboards are one of the main bottlenecks for frequency overclocking.
But even at 7,000+ MHz, people struggle to stabilize their chips due to IMC.


----------



## postem

Ichirou said:


> For DDR5, it seems the general consensus is that the motherboards are one of the main bottlenecks for frequency overclocking.
> But even at 7,000+ MHz, people struggle to stabilize their chips due to IMC.


Yeah, i guess much of the reasons are related to motherboards, since its the first generation of DDR5 boards, but still 7000 would be a gear 2, 3500/2 so a 1750mhz signal on iMC. I guess motherboards on general, and the memory will hold you when gettting around 7000MT


----------



## acoustic

Antsu said:


> Did I accidentally type stockclock.net in my browser? With all the love; If you aren't willing to cool your DIMMs for more performance, I honestly don't know what you are doing on this forum.


You're right! I don't know what I'm doing here either.


----------



## 2500k_2

Raptor lake. Gear1


----------



## massivex

I could use some advice/help, would appreciate if anyone has some experience with running ~1.6v vDIMM. I was initially under the impression that 1.6v on AlderLake couple with 2x16 dual rank b-die is ezpz especially when dimm voltage doesn't exceed 46~47c at most
.
Bit of a background story: I was initially trying to stabilize 3900 CL14 but eventually HCI would spit out a single error anywhere between %200~%1000... I kept thinking it was the timings so I loosened them up... Until I was driven insane and completely loosened the timings and still eventually got an error in HCI, always a single error, that can sometimes only show up %800+.
I then decided to test solely the vDIMM, starting from 1.60v going down in 5~10mv decrements, (I already knew that 1.5v was 72+ hours hci memtestpro stable with 3900 CL15). And then; Finally!!! Turns out all vDIMM over 1.562v end up spitting an error at some point.. sheesh! That was the culprit all along!

My questions are:
- Is this an absolute coincidence that my kit requires 1.556v at 3900CL14 with Auto subtimings and 1.562v with tuned subtimings, and I just happen to get an error running anything above 1.562v regardless of the frequency/cl?

- Is this error related to the CPU IMC or the DIMMs themselves? And if it's related to the DIMMs, does that mean that even if I get a better CPU IMC, I still won't be able to run any config requiring over 1.562v?

Anyway these are my specs and current tuning that can pass HCI all day (finally!)
12700k, Asus Z690-A Strix D4 (BIOS 0901), GSkill TridentZ Neo 2x16GB 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v (XMP).
VCCSA 1.2v, VDDQ TX 1.35v, DRAM 1.562v

Sorry for the lack luster of screenshots but I'm on my phone, this is the current tuning:


----------



## edkieferlp

massivex said:


> I could use some advice/help, would appreciate if anyone has some experience with running ~1.6v vDIMM. I was initially under the impression that 1.6v on AlderLake couple with 2x16 dual rank b-die is ezpz especially when dimm voltage doesn't exceed 46~47c at most
> .
> Bit of a background story: I was initially trying to stabilize 3900 CL14 but eventually HCI would spit out a single error anywhere between %200~%1000... I kept thinking it was the timings so I loosened them up... Until I was driven insane and completely loosened the timings and still eventually got an error in HCI, always a single error, that can sometimes only show up %800+.
> I then decided to test solely the vDIMM, starting from 1.60v going down in 5~10mv decrements, (I already knew that 1.5v was 72+ hours hci memtestpro stable with 3900 CL15). And then; Finally!!! Turns out all vDIMM over 1.562v end up spitting an error at some point.. sheesh! That was the culprit all along!
> 
> My questions are:
> - Is this an absolute coincidence that my kit requires 1.556v at 3900CL14 with Auto subtimings and 1.562v with tuned subtimings, and I just happen to get an error running anything above 1.562v regardless of the frequency/cl?
> 
> - Is this error related to the CPU IMC or the DIMMs themselves? And if it's related to the DIMMs, does that mean that even if I get a better CPU IMC, I still won't be able to run any config requiring over 1.562v?
> 
> Anyway these are my specs and current tuning that can pass HCI all day (finally!)
> 12700k, Asus Z690-A Strix D4 (BIOS 0901), GSkill TridentZ Neo 2x16GB 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v (XMP).
> VCCSA 1.2v, VDDQ TX 1.35v, DRAM 1.562v
> 
> Sorry for the lack luster of screenshots but I'm on my phone, this is the current tuning:


I have no experience with high VDIMM but Biuldziod has mentioned in many vids that some MB won't train after x voltage and some have workaround for it in bios. I think he said ASUS does have workaround but I don't know, maybe watch some of his vids or wait for others that do have first-hand info.


----------



## postem

massivex said:


> I could use some advice/help, would appreciate if anyone has some experience with running ~1.6v vDIMM. I was initially under the impression that 1.6v on AlderLake couple with 2x16 dual rank b-die is ezpz especially when dimm voltage doesn't exceed 46~47c at most
> .
> Bit of a background story: I was initially trying to stabilize 3900 CL14 but eventually HCI would spit out a single error anywhere between %200~%1000... I kept thinking it was the timings so I loosened them up... Until I was driven insane and completely loosened the timings and still eventually got an error in HCI, always a single error, that can sometimes only show up %800+.
> I then decided to test solely the vDIMM, starting from 1.60v going down in 5~10mv decrements, (I already knew that 1.5v was 72+ hours hci memtestpro stable with 3900 CL15). And then; Finally!!! Turns out all vDIMM over 1.562v end up spitting an error at some point.. sheesh! That was the culprit all along!
> 
> My questions are:
> - Is this an absolute coincidence that my kit requires 1.556v at 3900CL14 with Auto subtimings and 1.562v with tuned subtimings, and I just happen to get an error running anything above 1.562v regardless of the frequency/cl?
> 
> - Is this error related to the CPU IMC or the DIMMs themselves? And if it's related to the DIMMs, does that mean that even if I get a better CPU IMC, I still won't be able to run any config requiring over 1.562v?
> 
> Anyway these are my specs and current tuning that can pass HCI all day (finally!)
> 12700k, Asus Z690-A Strix D4 (BIOS 0901), GSkill TridentZ Neo 2x16GB 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v (XMP).
> VCCSA 1.2v, VDDQ TX 1.35v, DRAM 1.562v
> 
> Sorry for the lack luster of screenshots but I'm on my phone, this is the current tuning:


What kind of latency are you getting?


----------



## Ichirou

2500k_2 said:


> Raptor lake. Gear1
> View attachment 2568215


Nice core overclock. Loose timings, but 4,400 MHz stable is very promising regardless!


massivex said:


> I could use some advice/help, would appreciate if anyone has some experience with running ~1.6v vDIMM. I was initially under the impression that 1.6v on AlderLake couple with 2x16 dual rank b-die is ezpz especially when dimm voltage doesn't exceed 46~47c at most
> .
> Bit of a background story: I was initially trying to stabilize 3900 CL14 but eventually HCI would spit out a single error anywhere between %200~%1000... I kept thinking it was the timings so I loosened them up... Until I was driven insane and completely loosened the timings and still eventually got an error in HCI, always a single error, that can sometimes only show up %800+.
> I then decided to test solely the vDIMM, starting from 1.60v going down in 5~10mv decrements, (I already knew that 1.5v was 72+ hours hci memtestpro stable with 3900 CL15). And then; Finally!!! Turns out all vDIMM over 1.562v end up spitting an error at some point.. sheesh! That was the culprit all along!
> 
> My questions are:
> - Is this an absolute coincidence that my kit requires 1.556v at 3900CL14 with Auto subtimings and 1.562v with tuned subtimings, and I just happen to get an error running anything above 1.562v regardless of the frequency/cl?
> 
> - Is this error related to the CPU IMC or the DIMMs themselves? And if it's related to the DIMMs, does that mean that even if I get a better CPU IMC, I still won't be able to run any config requiring over 1.562v?
> 
> Anyway these are my specs and current tuning that can pass HCI all day (finally!)
> 12700k, Asus Z690-A Strix D4 (BIOS 0901), GSkill TridentZ Neo 2x16GB 4000 16-16-16-36 1.4v (XMP).
> VCCSA 1.2v, VDDQ TX 1.35v, DRAM 1.562v
> 
> Sorry for the lack luster of screenshots but I'm on my phone, this is the current tuning:


G Skill heatspreaders are hot garbage. Use some fans on the RAM.


----------



## massivex

edkieferlp said:


> I have no experience with high VDIMM but Biuldziod has mentioned in many vids that some MB won't train after x voltage and some have workaround for it in bios. I think he said ASUS does have workaround but I don't know, maybe watch some of his vids or wait for others that do have first-hand info.


I've probably listened (not actively watched) to dozens of hours of Buildzoid, he throws gems of info here and there, I should probably write 'em down like a good student otherwise I got the memory of a fish. The motherboard does actually train at 1.6v vDIMM, what I did was use my 3900 CL15 config already tuned, which only requires 1.46v vDIMM but also has been tested with 1.5v vDIMM for 72+ hours, so I knew that 1.5v has got to work... So using 3900 CL15 I then started from 1.6v all the way down until it stopped getting errors at 1.56v. Highest temps on the hotter DIMM was 47c so I'm not sure if this is a temprature related issue or what... All I did was simply run HCI MemTestPro different vDIMM on 16 threads (e-cores off), 'low priority threads' unchecked of course, at 1800 per thread. I do however recall Buildzoid mentioning "voltage tolerance", he reffered to it a number of times in his older 'ram shopping list' videos, something along the lines of how when buying 1.5v+ XMP kits, at least you know they have the voltage tolerance for that. But maybe it is just a matter of getting the temp down...will have to see after I install the RAM block.



postem said:


> What kind of latency are you getting?


Err, I'll have to get back to you on that later on. I previously ran the exact same config but tCL 15, when I tested in safe mode at P-49/C-46 the lowest consistent result I got was 45.7ns, had 45.6ns once but never managed to see it again. I once tested for the heck of it at 51/48 (yeah right I wish, my CPU can't do that) at 3900 CL14 and IIRC I saw 44.8ns or was it 44.9ns.. (in safe mode of course). 50/47 is a more realistic stable I can achieve, so couple that with 3900CL14, probably about 45.xx ns, don't think I'll get sub 45 unless I up the cache.



Ichirou said:


> Nice core overclock. Loose timings, but 4,400 MHz stable is very promising regardless!
> 
> G Skill heatspreaders are hot garbage. Use some fans on the RAM.


Ah ya are the TridentZ Neos that bad huh? I turned the RGB off of course to reduce the temps a bit. I'm still waiting to on a couple of tools and a 3rd radiator to shift the entire build from a budget air CPU cooler to water cool the CPU/GPU/RAM with 3x 360mm rads. The way I have set up right now is an air chunky budget air cooler and two 140mm fans around it, but the fans are not directly above the RAM like you can do with an AIO/water cooling cuz the air cooler is blocking it, currently hight temps I've seen this summer when stress testing is 46c lights off, and 47~48c with lights on. A couple months ago when it was still cold I saw 37c when stress testing but I wasn't tuning the RAM back then.
I also bought this ram fan cooler as a backup plan in case I decided not to water cool the RAM, but currently I don't have the room to install it unless I switch to water cooling. You know what I found odd? A couple of months back when I consulted on watercooling subreddit, posting a picture of how I'd like my loop to be with 3x 360mm, soft tubing epdm and CPU/RAM/GPU blocks, literally half the comments were just "you don't need to water cool the RAM!!!" and "there's absolutely no benefit to water cooling the ram IT'S PURELY FOR LOOKS" instead of actually helping me out, sort of almost wished I never included a RAM block in the diagram. But after fiddling for over a month with this kit (first time ever tuning the RAM), I could REALLY appreciate if the dimms will be under 40c even in the hottest of summer and not having to worry about the temps.
Edit: I just saw your thread a couple of days ago asking about a 'set and forget' thermal paste on in the watercooling section and I literally just picked up today from the mail the Noctua NT-H2 10g. I was pondering the exact same question as you, just didn't bother to post it, but upon a bit of goggling decided to get the NT-H2 as well before I saw that thread. Before the Noctua I used 30g tube of Kingpin KPx but I had the exact same worries as you now that I'm switching to water cooling and all I want is something more reliable/sustainable long term, as the thought of draining the loop is a bit more daunting (especially for a first timer) than simply removing the CPU heatsinks and repasting... only time will tell how the NT-H2 will hold up


----------



## bscool

@massivex I have tested a dozen or more kits of SR and DR on Strix d4 and they all need a little different voltages. Too much or too little and they will give errors in Karhu or fail y cruncher.

I use the stock Gskill heatsink with a Phantek T30 120mm fan on them and it keeps my ram temps below 40c while running Karhu.

Aslo there is variance from kit to kit. My weakest can only do 4000c16-16-16 and best 4266c15-16-16.


----------



## bscool

Also test how high your IMC can boot/clock. Example if it can only do 4000c16-16-16 vs 4266c16-16-16.

The reason is the close you are to the IMC limit the harder it is to get stable. Use 1.35 to 1.45 sa/vddq to find IMC limit. 

I need 1.35v on sa/vddq to run 4133c15-15-15 DR b die Karhu and y cruncher stable. 1.4v on each for 4266c15-16-16.


----------



## Netarangi

bscool said:


> Also test how high your IMC can boot/clock. Example if it can only do 4000c16-16-16 vs 4266c16-16-16.
> 
> The reason is the close you are to the IMC limit the harder it is to get stable. Use 1.35 to 1.45 sa/vddq to find IMC limit.
> 
> I need 1.35v on sa/vddq to run 4133c15-15-15 DR b die Karhu and y cruncher stable. 1.4v on each for 4266c15-16-16.


I can't get anything stable above 3866mhz with a 12700kf even with 1.45 vcssa. Seeing everyone here get 4000mhz makes me jealous 😩


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> Ah ya are the TridentZ Neos that bad huh? I turned the RGB off of course to reduce the temps a bit. I'm still waiting to on a couple of tools and a 3rd radiator to shift the entire build from a budget air CPU cooler to water cool the CPU/GPU/RAM with 3x 360mm rads. The way I have set up right now is an air chunky budget air cooler and two 140mm fans around it, but the fans are not directly above the RAM like you can do with an AIO/water cooling cuz the air cooler is blocking it, currently hight temps I've seen this summer when stress testing is 46c lights off, and 47~48c with lights on. A couple months ago when it was still cold I saw 37c when stress testing but I wasn't tuning the RAM back then.
> I also bought this ram fan cooler as a backup plan in case I decided not to water cool the RAM, but currently I don't have the room to install it unless I switch to water cooling. You know what I found odd? A couple of months back when I consulted on watercooling subreddit, posting a picture of how I'd like my loop to be with 3x 360mm, soft tubing epdm and CPU/RAM/GPU blocks, literally half the comments were just "you don't need to water cool the RAM!!!" and "there's absolutely no benefit to water cooling the ram IT'S PURELY FOR LOOKS" instead of actually helping me out, sort of almost wished I never included a RAM block in the diagram. But after fiddling for over a month with this kit (first time ever tuning the RAM), I could REALLY appreciate if the dimms will be under 40c even in the hottest of summer and not having to worry about the temps.
> Edit: I just saw your thread a couple of days ago asking about a 'set and forget' thermal paste on in the watercooling section and I literally just picked up today from the mail the Noctua NT-H2 10g. I was pondering the exact same question as you, just didn't bother to post it, but upon a bit of goggling decided to get the NT-H2 as well before I saw that thread. Before the Noctua I used 30g tube of Kingpin KPx but I had the exact same worries as you now that I'm switching to water cooling and all I want is something more reliable/sustainable long term, as the thought of draining the loop is a bit more daunting (especially for a first timer) than simply removing the CPU heatsinks and repasting... only time will tell how the NT-H2 will hold up


Design issues. The heatspreaders on all but the Ripjaws fully enclose the sticks, meaning no air gets through. You can _only_ cool the heatspreaders, not the dies.
You only need to watercool the DIMMs directly if you are pushing over 1.60V. Below that, you can get away with some fans.

FWIW, when your DIMMs are on water, they're virtually never hot. You can touch the heatspreaders when they're being stress tested and you'll wonder if the RAM's even running or not. They're _that_ cool. And I've tested up to 1.70V under water. It's like night and day. Heat isn't even a concern anymore.

Didn't use quality thermal pads or paste like some people do. Just the generic pads that came with the heatspreaders and waterblock. Was more than enough.


----------



## postem

Netarangi said:


> I can't get anything stable above 3866mhz with a 12700kf even with 1.45 vcssa. Seeing everyone here get 4000mhz makes me jealous 😩


What memory kit? Except from the first bios, i get away with 4000 on all tuf bios, without effort or using a fixed SA voltage. 12700K was a little crappier, but cant rule out bios was worse


----------



## Ichirou

.


----------



## Netarangi

postem said:


> What memory kit? Except from the first bios, i get away with 4000 on all tuf bios, without effort or using a fixed SA voltage. 12700K was a little crappier, but cant rule out bios was worse


I have this kit, I have latest bios and have tried the one before this one, both same results.

Gear 1 CR 1 - Can boot 3467mhz cl14 maximum.

Gear 1 CR2 - 3867mhz cl14 maximum stable.

Gear 2 CR1 - Can boot up to 5000mhz with something like cl21. Only tried this for fun so didn't tighten anything down.

Current daily is cl14 3800mhz gear mode 1 cr2. Lowest latency I've got is 43ns.

How do you guys get sub 35ns? Surely I can't do much more here. Is my hardware actually _that trash?








_


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> I have this kit, I have latest bios and have tried the one before this one, both same results.
> 
> Gear 1 CR 1 - Can boot 3467mhz cl14 maximum.
> 
> Gear 1 CR2 - 3867mhz cl14 maximum stable.
> 
> Gear 2 CR1 - Can boot up to 5000mhz with something like cl21. Only tried this for fun so didn't tighten anything down.
> 
> Current daily is cl14 3800mhz gear mode 1 cr2. Lowest latency I've got is 43ns.
> 
> How do you guys get sub 35ns? Surely I can't do much more here. Is my hardware actually _that trash?
> 
> View attachment 2568296
> _


You can't break the 40ns barrier with a 12th Gen chip right now.

The closest people got with golden IMCs was 4,300 CL14, and that was still 40.# ns.

Sub-40ns is for older generations of Intels.


----------



## bscool

Netarangi said:


> I have this kit, I have latest bios and have tried the one before this one, both same results.
> 
> Gear 1 CR 1 - Can boot 3467mhz cl14 maximum.
> 
> Gear 1 CR2 - 3867mhz cl14 maximum stable.
> 
> Gear 2 CR1 - Can boot up to 5000mhz with something like cl21. Only tried this for fun so didn't tighten anything down.
> 
> Current daily is cl14 3800mhz gear mode 1 cr2. Lowest latency I've got is 43ns.
> 
> How do you guys get sub 35ns? Surely I can't do much more here. Is my hardware actually _that trash?
> 
> View attachment 2568296
> _


Unless they are using bclk OC which skews Aida64 latency no way anyone is getting 35ns on z690 for daily mem OC.

Also 12700 and 12600k usually have higher latency if they are running lower cache clocks. No idea if other difference with them account for higher latency in aida/Intel Latency Checker. But if you are doing 43ns with a 12700k that is very good.


----------



## MotomEniac

Netarangi said:


> I can't get anything stable above 3866mhz with a 12700kf even with 1.45 vcssa. Seeing everyone here get 4000mhz makes me jealous 😩


It was exactly my scenario with 12700kf, I have tried two motherboards (MSI A-Pro and Asus TUF) with no success. My best result was 3800 cl14, also. Then I bought 12900K and achieved 4100 cl14. I think that i7 Alder Lake has lower ASIC quality as a trend, compared to i9. So I'm quite expecting IMC and\or overclocking stability issues with i7.


----------



## postem

MotomEniac said:


> It was exactly my scenario with 12700kf, I have tried two motherboards (MSI A-Pro and Asus TUF) with no success. My best result was 3800 cl14, also. Then I bought 12900K and achieved 4100 cl14. I think that i7 Alder Lake has lower ASIC quality as a trend, compared to i9. So I'm quite expecting IMC and\or overclocking stability issues with i7.


Indeed, vcore alone difference from 12700K to 12900K is brutal on average. IMC is a hit or miss, my old 12700K managed to run 4000mt with some relaxed timings


----------



## Netarangi

MotomEniac said:


> It was exactly my scenario with 12700kf, I have tried two motherboards (MSI A-Pro and Asus TUF) with no success. My best result was 3800 cl14, also. Then I bought 12900K and achieved 4100 cl14. I think that i7 Alder Lake has lower ASIC quality as a trend, compared to i9. So I'm quite expecting IMC and\or overclocking stability issues with i7.


Yeah I've been thinking of buying i9 but will wait for next gen


----------



## sdmf74

Whats the newest version of asrock timing configurator? V4.0.13 link in this thread is reporting the file is corrupt (unless im doing something wrong). Also could having VMP turned on in "turn windows features on or off" cause memtweakit & timing configurator to report strange values?
I uninstalled memtweakit cause it was reporting very low incorrect memory/FSB etc values & wanted to try timing configurator for the first time, it seems that is what everybody is using these days anyway.

I read a post from Asrock that said windows 11 users needed to turn off memory integirty because of virtualization however memory integrity IS disabled already which led me to wondering if VMP could cause issues as well?


----------



## bscool

sdmf74 said:


> Whats the newest version of asrock timing configurator? V4.0.13 link in this thread is reporting the file is corrupt (unless im doing something wrong). Also could having VMP turned on in "turn windows features on or off" cause memtweakit & timing configurator to report strange values?
> I uninstalled memtweakit cause it was reporting very low incorrect memory/FSB etc values & wanted to try timing configurator for the first time, it seems that is what everybody is using these days anyway.
> 
> I read a post from Asrock that said windows 11 users needed to turn off memory integirty because of virtualization however memory integrity IS disabled already which led me to wondering if VMP could cause issues as well?


What MB do you have? You need the right versions of Asrock or memtweakit for your platform. z390, z490, z590, z690 etc need different verisions.

The one in this thread is for z690.

Link for z590 https://download.asrock.com/Utility/Formula/TimingConfigurator(v4.0.9).zip









MemTweakIt.exe


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com


----------



## sdmf74

Yes I completely forgot to mention its Z590 hero sorry. I downloaded V4.0.9 & its telling me my dram frequency is 694 even though the timings all seem to be correct. HWinfo64 shows correct ram speed. im gonna check soemthing & reboot.......


----------



## bscool

sdmf74 said:


> Yes I completely forgot to mention its Z590 hero sorry. I downloaded V4.0.9 & its telling me my dram frequency is 694 even though the timings all seem to be correct. HWinfo64 shows correct ram speed. im gonna check soemthing & reboot.......


If you had another version installed you might need to uninstall or reboot. I am using the version I linked on z590 Apex and they work for me on Windows 10 not sure how they work on Windows 11.


----------



## sdmf74

Yeah its not VMP, its disabled & Im still seeing 694mhz in timing config. I uninstalled memtweakit with revo uninstaller as to not leave any files/folders behind, rebooted then installed timing config & this is the first time I have EVER used timing configurator so IDK. Could be a windows 11 thing but its not core isolation as Asrock suggested so still stumped


----------



## forart.it

OK, we've "played" a bit with our 4 x F4-4000C18-8GVK (2 x F4-4000C18D-16GVK kits) modules settings and here are performances results:


forart.it said:


> *XMP 4000**DDR 3200**DDR 3400**DDR 3600**DDR 3600**DDR 3600*MHz2000​1600​1700​1800​1800​1800​Gear2​1​1​1​1​1​CR1​2​2​2​2​*1*​CL-RCD-RP-RAS18-22-22-42​18-22-22-42​18-22-22-42​18-22-22-42​*16-20-20-39*​*16-20-20-39*​Read (MB/s) ¹54876​47950​49034​51625​52063​52016​Write (MB/s) ¹56813​47403​50597​53658​53584​53730​Copy (MB/s) ¹54785​47197​49909​52497​52962​53324​Latency (ns) ¹75.2​66.8​63.6​61.1​58.6​58.0​Read ²1111.29​955.25​1012.95​1071.78​1081.04​1077.83​Write ²1092.18​914.08​966.84​1027.45​1031.21​1026.48​Combined ²1145.19​978.53​1040.67​1101.66​1117.48​1104.75​Memory Mark ³3658​3727​3860​3934​4025​4018​Read Uncached ³25297​25180​26509​27442​27515​27927​Read Cached ³36286​36222​36243​35829​36181​34388​Write ³18681​17134​17945​19101​19478​19307​Latency ³41​37​35​35​33​33​Threaded ³53093​44600​47159​49587​50104​50141​Database Operations ³6666​6466​6854​7015​6945​6941​
> 
> ¹ = AIDA64 v6.75
> ² = OCCT v11.0.11
> ³ = PerformanceTest 10.2 x86 Build 1008


Now questions are:

what's the best setting for A/V editing usage in your opinion?
does CR1 improves performances?
can you suggest better settings ?
Thanks in advance to all that can/would help.

EDIT: forgot to share modules specs


Spoiler: AIDA64 Memory Module Properties




Module NameG Skill RipjawsV F4-4000C18-8GVKModule Size8 GB (1 rank, 16 banks)Module TypeUnbuffered DIMMMemory TypeDDR4 SDRAMMemory Speed (XMP)DDR4-4000 (2000 MHz)Memory SpeedDDR4-2133 (1066 MHz)Module Width64 bitModule Voltage (XMP)1.35 VModule Voltage1.2 VError Detection MethodNoneDRAM ManufacturerSK hynixDRAM Stepping00hSDRAM Die Count1Memory Timings
MHzCL-RCD-RP-RASRC-RFC1-RFC2-RFC4-RRDL-RRDS-CCDL-FAW2000 (XMP)​18-22-22-42​64-700-520-320-10-4-48​1066​16-15-15-36​50-374-278-171-6-4-6-23​1066​15-15-15-36​50-374-278-171-6-4-6-23​1018​14-14-14-34​48-357-265-163-6-4-6-22​945​13-13-13-32​45-331-246-152-6-4-6-20​872​12-12-12-29​41-306-227-140-5-4-5-19​800​11-11-11-27​38-280-208-128-5-3-5-17​727​10-10-10-24​34-255-190-117-4-3-5-16​
Extreme Memory Profilev2.0Profile NameEnthusiast (Certified)Memory SpeedDDR4-4000 (2000 MHz)Voltage1.35 VRecommended DIMMs Per Channel2


----------



## sdmf74

Another thing I forgot to mention CPU-z also was showing wierd values just like memtweakit was (when I had it installed) and I updated cpu-z to newest version & its fixed now, no more funky incorrect values so I wonder if its just a version incompatability with Asrock TC/Z590/win11


----------



## bscool

sdmf74 said:


> Another thing I forgot to mention CPU-z also was showing wierd values just like memtweakit was (when I had it installed) and I updated cpu-z to newest version & its fixed now, no more funky incorrect values so I wonder if its just a version incompatability with Asrock TC/Z590/win11


Maybe post in the z590 thread and ask. 

I see @Imprezzion has z590 MB with Win 11 so maybe he knows. *Official* Intel DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread


----------



## sdmf74

I believe I got it resolved. I changed a few things but I had Intel virtualization enabled in the bios which seems to have been causing Asrock TC to report false values. Thanks for the help!


----------



## GeneO

bscool said:


> What MB do you have? You need the right versions of Asrock or memtweakit for your platform. z390, z490, z590, z690 etc need different verisions.
> 
> The one in this thread is for z690.
> 
> Link for z590 https://download.asrock.com/Utility/Formula/TimingConfigurator(v4.0.9).zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MemTweakIt.exe
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com


4.0.13 works fine on my Z590 (Hero). In fact, 4.0.9 quit working correctly on beta Windows 11 22H2 (reports bizarre numbers). And I have virtualization disabled.


----------



## maniakpfs

GeneO said:


> 4.0.13 works fine on my Z590 (Hero). In fact, 4.0.9 quit working correctly on beta Windows 11 22H2 (reports bizarre numbers). And I have virtualization disabled.
> 
> View attachment 2568444


You can upgrade your memories. You have a very good ram 


http://imgur.com/gpUvwGq


----------



## Bugmanscj

Hey all: My timings below on a decent (for me as a newbie) overclock on a Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690 and I5-12600K with 2x16gb ram at 4133mhz ( G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35) with Bios 1601 (SA 1.30v, Vddq 1.40v, Dram 1.50 with 16-16-16-38). I'm getting Latency of 56.7ns and read 61078. The memory is not cooled by anything at this point, but Prime95 is pushing dram temps to 50C, so don't wish to push voltage any higher. Northbridge is 3900mhz. Any suggestions for tightening these up for better latency and without adding heat to the sticks?

Thanks for all the info in this thread that got me this far.


----------



## MotomEniac

I have memory and MB very similar to yours, this is my everyday setup. What throws on me, is that you have very high secondaries(tFAW, tWR, tWTR_s\l). If your mem is so hot, i would not touch tREFI and probably set tRFC not to low(~350), rest should not affect temps so much


----------



## Bugmanscj

Thanks, will check on those. Secondaries were set to auto until I got the frequency at max 4133mhz. Now time to play with the secondaries.


----------



## Bugmanscj

Ok, here is where I ended up with slight changes to voltage.

Board: Asus Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690
Bios: 1601 (latest of this posting)
CPU: I5-12600K
Ram: G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35 2x16gb samsung b-die (32gb total ram) @ 4133mhz
Voltages: SA 1.30v, Vddq 1.40v, Dram 1.51 with 16-16-16-36. I'm getting Latency of 52.1ns and read 63451 (very pleased with those numbers)

For testing purposes I've cooled the memory with an old cpu fan cobbled near the top of the sticks, works for now but will get something better. While Prime95 testing the dram temps were under 45C, and I will not increase voltages, but will work on lowering some (SA, Vddq). Northbridge is currently 3900mhz and will conduct some CPU overclocks down the road. Dram settings below. Let me know if you have any questions. Great thread here....


----------



## GeneO

You might wantto try trtp = 6 = half of twr


----------



## Netarangi

Bugmanscj said:


> Ok, here is where I ended up with slight changes to voltage.
> 
> Board: Asus Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690
> Bios: 1601 (latest of this posting)
> CPU: I5-12600K
> Ram: G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35 2x16gb samsung b-die (32gb total ram) @ 4133mhz
> Voltages: SA 1.30v, Vddq 1.40v, Dram 1.51 with 16-16-16-36. I'm getting Latency of 52.1ns and read 63451 (very pleased with those numbers)
> 
> For testing purposes I've cooled the memory with an old cpu fan cobbled near the top of the sticks, works for now but will get something better. While Prime95 testing the dram temps were under 45C, and I will not increase voltages, but will work on lowering some (SA, Vddq). Northbridge is currently 3900mhz and will conduct some CPU overclocks down the road. Dram settings below. Let me know if you have any questions. Great thread here....
> 
> View attachment 2568593


I have same board as you, 12700kf and also b die.

Twtr_L 6
Twtr_s 1
Tfaw 12
Trrdl and s to 3
Tcke 0
Trfc can probably go alot lower, mine is 220
Your secondaries can also go alot lower, will send timing screenshot later

I don't have any temp issues whatsoever and I don't use a fan on my ram. Should be fine for you unless you live somewhere hot.


----------



## MotomEniac

Bugmanscj said:


> Ok, here is where I ended up with slight changes to voltage.


This is good solid point to stay, i would say, you will not get a lot of performance tuning further, except easy ones tRTP and tRFC(this is more potent).

I warn you that you find proper performance and stability checking tools, when you read comments like this: 


Netarangi said:


> Twtr_L 6
> Twtr_s 1
> Tfaw 12
> Trrdl and s to 3
> Tcke 0
> Trfc can probably go alot lower, mine is 220


As you can go wrong way and make your performance and stability worse.


----------



## edkieferlp

Netarangi said:


> I have same board as you, 12700kf and also b die.
> 
> Twtr_L 6
> Twtr_s 1
> Tfaw 12
> Trrdl and s to 3
> Tcke 0
> Trfc can probably go alot lower, mine is 220
> Your secondaries can also go alot lower, will send timing screenshot later
> 
> I don't have any temp issues whatsoever and I don't use a fan on my ram. Should be fine for you unless you live somewhere hot.


Does setting tFAW to lower than 16 do anything, I thought 16 was the lowest real value even if bios lets you enter a lower one. Pretty sure Biuldziod always mentions this.


----------



## acoustic

Anytime I see max tREFI for a 24/7 OC, I always shudder. Unless you're keeping the sticks under 40c, it's just not worth the risk of data corruption that you won't know about until it's too late. Even at 40c, who knows. It's a silent killer!

Great for benching though, obviously.


----------



## Bugmanscj

acoustic said:


> Anytime I see max tREFI for a 24/7 OC, I always shudder. Unless you're keeping the sticks under 40c, it's just not worth the risk of data corruption that you won't know about until it's too late. Even at 40c, who knows. It's a silent killer!



Yeah, well it wasn't long term stable as it turned out. Reduced tREFI to auto until I work out the bugs....No pun intended...


----------



## Bugmanscj

Netarangi said:


> I don't have any temp issues whatsoever and I don't use a fan on my ram. Should be fine for you unless you live somewhere hot.


Does North Carolina in the summer count as HOT!?


----------



## Bugmanscj

This is my stable version. Edited. Sorry for the mistakes so updated.

*Board:* Asus Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690
*Bios: *1601 (latest of this posting)
*CPU*: I5-12600K
*Ram:* G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35 2x16gb samsung b-die (32gb total ram)
*Voltages:* SA 1.25v, Vddq 1.40v, Dram 1.50
*Timings:* 15-16-16-34 @ 4000mhz. 

I'm getting Latency of 48.0ns and 58272 bandwidth on MLC. My earlier version wasn't stable.


----------



## edkieferlp

Bugmanscj said:


> This is my stable version.
> 
> 
> *Board:* Asus Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690
> *Bios: *1601 (latest of this posting)
> *CPU*: I5-12600K
> *Ram:* G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35 2x16gb samsung b-die (32gb total ram) @ 4133mhz
> *Voltages:* SA 1.31v, Vddq 1.40v, Dram 1.52 with 16-16-16-35. I'm getting Latency of 52.6ns and read 62370. My earlier version wasn't stable.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2568668


Looks good.
Are those results from AIDA memory tests?
I think you are doing better than your results show, try Intel MLC, it is a much better tester.


----------



## Bugmanscj

edkieferlp said:


> Are those results from AIDA memory tests?
> I think you are doing better than your results show, try Intel MLC, it is a much better tester.


Yes from AIDA. I've run MLC but what measurement represents the single latency equivalent I should reference? There are a bunch....


----------



## edkieferlp

Bugmanscj said:


> Yes from AIDA. I've run MLC but what measurement represents the single latency equivalent I should reference? There are a bunch....


the last one of 20, use the GUI version.. GitHub - FarisR99/IMLCGui: Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI Just add exe in the MLC folder with the rest of the files and run it.








These results are for 12600k (P-50, 50, 49,49, 48, 47)/ E-38/ring 40 with some Micron E @3866.

PS: I was running 51, 51, 50, 49, 48, 48/E-38 /Ring-40 but lower it cause hot weather and not noticing any difference in gaming but no issues either way.


----------



## Bugmanscj

Thanks, will check it out.


----------



## Ichirou

Bugmanscj said:


> This is my stable version.
> 
> 
> *Board:* Asus Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690
> *Bios: *1601 (latest of this posting)
> *CPU*: I5-12600K
> *Ram:* G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35 2x16gb samsung b-die (32gb total ram) @ 4133mhz
> *Voltages:* SA 1.31v, Vddq 1.40v, Dram 1.52 with 16-16-16-35. I'm getting Latency of 52.6ns and read 62370. My earlier version wasn't stable.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2568668


Very nice IMC for a 12600K.


----------



## Cam1

Bugmanscj said:


> This is my stable version.
> 
> 
> *Board:* Asus Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690
> *Bios: *1601 (latest of this posting)
> *CPU*: I5-12600K
> *Ram:* G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35 2x16gb samsung b-die (32gb total ram) @ 4133mhz
> *Voltages:* SA 1.31v, Vddq 1.40v, Dram 1.52 with 16-16-16-35. I'm getting Latency of 52.6ns and read 62370. My earlier version wasn't stable.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2568668


Would you mind sharing your Bios file ? 
I have a similar setup i would try it on my computer !


----------



## Bugmanscj

Cam1 said:


> Would you mind sharing your Bios file ?
> I have a similar setup i would try it on my computer !


It won't let me post it. Send me a PM


----------



## 2500k_2

12500


----------



## acoustic

tREFI beyond 65535 does nothing on DRR4


----------



## Netarangi

2500k_2 said:


> 12500
> View attachment 2568775


What is that trefi? Lol

Got an aida64 screenshot?


----------



## Ichirou

Netarangi said:


> What is that trefi? Lol
> 
> Got an aida64 screenshot?


tREFI beyond 65536 does nothing on DDR4.


----------



## 2500k_2

Netarangi said:


> What is that trefi? Lol
> 
> Got an aida64 screenshot?











on 12900k ( cpu trotle on this board xD)


----------



## Netarangi

2500k_2 said:


> View attachment 2568791
> 
> on 12900k ( cpu trotle on this board xD)
> View attachment 2568792


Very nice that you can run that in gear 1 cr1.

My 12700kf doesn't boot above 3400 without cr2. Bad imc but good cores.


----------



## maniakpfs

[CYTAT="Bugmanscj, post: 29018571, członek: 672450"]
Ok, tutaj skończyłem z niewielkimi zmianami napięcia.

Płyta: Asus Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690
Bios: 1601 (ostatni z tego wpisu)
Procesor: I5-12600K
Ram: G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35 2x16gb samsung b-die (całkowita pamięć RAM 32gb) przy 4133mhz
Napięcia: SA 1,30 V, Vddq 1,40 V, Dram 1,51 z 16-16-16-36. Otrzymuję opóźnienie 52,1ns i czytam 63451 (bardzo zadowolony z tych liczb)

Do celów testowych ochłodziłem pamięć starym wentylatorem procesora wybrukowanym w górnej części drążków, na razie działa, ale dostanę coś lepszego. Podczas gdy Prime95 testował dram temps były poniżej 45C i nie będę zwiększał napięć, ale popracuję nad obniżeniem niektórych (SA, Vddq). Northbridge ma obecnie 3900 MHz i spowoduje pewne przetaktowanie procesora. Ustawienia dram poniżej. Daj mi znać, jeśli masz jakieś pytania. Świetny wątek tutaj ....

View attachment 2568593

[/CYTAT]

Your oc of memory is from the ass of the party. First RAM max clock and voltages, second timings, then third timings, and finally the first, then TREFi and TRFC


----------



## Bugmanscj

maniakpfs said:


> Your oc of memory is from the *ass of the party*


Must be a UK thing...Is "ass of the party" a compliment


----------



## Bugmanscj

On my 4133mhz memory overclock above, I'm getting different results between TM5 Extreme [email protected] (ran for 3hrs error free) and Prime95 which had numerous "Fatal Error: Rounding" errors. Is there any guidance on the discrepancy or is that the only error Prime95 spits out? I have a fully tested out 4000mhz version (CL15 vs CL16 4133mhz) I may go to anyhow for a daily, but just interested in knowing why if anyone has had experience with that error. Online it mentions too low CPU voltage (I do have a mild overclock by core 5.1ghz


----------



## Ichirou

Bugmanscj said:


> On my 4133mhz memory overclock above, I'm getting different results between TM5 Extreme [email protected] (ran for 3hrs error free) and Prime95 which had numerous "Fatal Error: Rounding" errors. Is there any guidance on the discrepancy or is that the only error Prime95 spits out? I have a fully tested out 4000mhz version (CL15 vs CL16 4133mhz) I may go to anyhow for a daily, but just interested in knowing why if anyone has had experience with that error. Online it mentions too low CPU voltage (I do have a mild overclock by core 5.1ghz


TM5 isn't really great at testing IMC voltage (VCCSA/VCCIO). That's why P95 might be throwing errors. Gotta use y-cruncher for that.
If you can pass the main test with maximum memory allocated, you have a stable IMC voltage setting.


----------



## acoustic

TM5 does jack all for IMC testing. HCI MemTest, Y-Cruncher, even Karhu are all better options.

TM5 is arguably one of the best for specifically testing DRAM. After that.. other apps fill the voids.


----------



## edkieferlp

acoustic said:


> TM5 does jack all for IMC testing. HCI MemTest, Y-Cruncher, even Karhu are all better options.
> 
> TM5 is arguably one of the best for specifically testing DRAM. After that.. other apps fill the voids.


Yup, I noticed I could tweak memory and my settings most of time passed memtest86 (USB boot one) but Y-cruncher in min shows stability, its a good all around test to pass.


----------



## KedarWolf

Amazon.com: EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N, 121-AL-E699-KR, LGA 1700, Intel Z690, PCIe Gen5, SATA 6Gb/s, 2.5Gb/s LAN, WiFi6E/BT5.2, USB 3.2 Gen2x2, M.2, U.2, EATX, Intel Motherboard : Electronics


Buy EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N, 121-AL-E699-KR, LGA 1700, Intel Z690, PCIe Gen5, SATA 6Gb/s, 2.5Gb/s LAN, WiFi6E/BT5.2, USB 3.2 Gen2x2, M.2, U.2, EATX, Intel Motherboard: Motherboards - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases



www.amazon.com





40% off today. $499.99


----------



## Ichirou

KedarWolf said:


> Amazon.com: EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N, 121-AL-E699-KR, LGA 1700, Intel Z690, PCIe Gen5, SATA 6Gb/s, 2.5Gb/s LAN, WiFi6E/BT5.2, USB 3.2 Gen2x2, M.2, U.2, EATX, Intel Motherboard : Electronics
> 
> 
> Buy EVGA Z690 DARK K|NGP|N, 121-AL-E699-KR, LGA 1700, Intel Z690, PCIe Gen5, SATA 6Gb/s, 2.5Gb/s LAN, WiFi6E/BT5.2, USB 3.2 Gen2x2, M.2, U.2, EATX, Intel Motherboard: Motherboards - Amazon.com ✓ FREE DELIVERY possible on eligible purchases
> 
> 
> 
> www.amazon.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 40% off today. $499.99


Damn, sounds like EVGA's preparing for Z790 and trying to liquidate then


----------



## Simyoda

Hi People. I have been referred here from a friend to help with some XMP Profile issues I've been having with my new build.

MSI Z690 DDR4 PRO A
Intel 12th Gen I7 12700k
TEAMGROUP T-EXPERT Create 128GB 4x32GB
Latest BIOS AMI BIOS7D25v172022-07-04 

MSI just released a Thunderbolt 4 Expansion card for this board and others and I've been trying to configure it to use with an Audio Interface (UAD Apollo Twin X TB3) for the last 2 days!. It's strange. when I don't have the Interface plugged in It seems to cope with XMP Profile 1 but Won't recognize the Interface. I get an O.C Genie message saying I have to load the last good config or load BIOS defaults. 

But if i don't use the XMP Profile my RAM slows to 2400MHZ and the Interface is read. I have support tickets for MSI and Universal Audio in the waiting but if anyone has some advice on here it would be awesome (also to learn!). Really learnt a lot from building this machine and my friend has told me to upload my Thiaphoon Burner screenshot. Great to join here! Look forward to chatting to anyone who might have some advice. Hoping just to get the RAM to run at 3600mhz. Not too worried about OC'ing as it's going to be used for audio production/sampling libraries and composing,etc. Cheers and all the best, Simon


----------



## Netarangi

Simyoda said:


> Hi People. I have been referred here from a friend to help with some XMP Profile issues I've been having with my new build.
> 
> MSI Z690 DDR4 PRO A
> Intel 12th Gen I7 12700k
> TEAMGROUP T-EXPERT Create 128GB 4x32GB
> Latest BIOS AMI BIOS7D25v172022-07-04
> 
> MSI just released a Thunderbolt 4 Expansion card for this board and others and I've been trying to configure it to use with an Audio Interface (UAD Apollo Twin X TB3) for the last 2 days!. It's strange. when I don't have the Interface plugged in It seems to cope with XMP Profile 1 but Won't recognize the Interface. I get an O.C Genie message saying I have to load the last good config or load BIOS defaults.
> 
> But if i don't use the XMP Profile my RAM slows to 2400MHZ and the Interface is read. I have support tickets for MSI and Universal Audio in the waiting but if anyone has some advice on here it would be awesome (also to learn!). Really learnt a lot from building this machine and my friend has told me to upload my Thiaphoon Burner screenshot. Great to join here! Look forward to chatting to anyone who might have some advice. Hoping just to get the RAM to run at 3600mhz. Not too worried about OC'ing as it's going to be used for audio production/sampling libraries and composing,etc. Cheers and all the best, Simon


Don't use xmp. Manually type in the primary timings, frequency and voltages from your xmp profile. If it doesn't boot, up the voltage by 0.01 and try again up to about 1.45v (not sure what voltage your xmp sets). If that doesn't boot try one step down on the frequency.

Report back once you've done the above.

Not saying xmp is bad, just saying don't use it in this instance so you can diagnose.


----------



## Ichirou

Simyoda said:


> Hi People. I have been referred here from a friend to help with some XMP Profile issues I've been having with my new build.
> 
> MSI Z690 DDR4 PRO A
> Intel 12th Gen I7 12700k
> TEAMGROUP T-EXPERT Create 128GB 4x32GB
> Latest BIOS AMI BIOS7D25v172022-07-04
> 
> MSI just released a Thunderbolt 4 Expansion card for this board and others and I've been trying to configure it to use with an Audio Interface (UAD Apollo Twin X TB3) for the last 2 days!. It's strange. when I don't have the Interface plugged in It seems to cope with XMP Profile 1 but Won't recognize the Interface. I get an O.C Genie message saying I have to load the last good config or load BIOS defaults.
> 
> But if i don't use the XMP Profile my RAM slows to 2400MHZ and the Interface is read. I have support tickets for MSI and Universal Audio in the waiting but if anyone has some advice on here it would be awesome (also to learn!). Really learnt a lot from building this machine and my friend has told me to upload my Thiaphoon Burner screenshot. Great to join here! Look forward to chatting to anyone who might have some advice. Hoping just to get the RAM to run at 3600mhz. Not too worried about OC'ing as it's going to be used for audio production/sampling libraries and composing,etc. Cheers and all the best, Simon


Try BIOS version 1.24U2 instead.

Also, 4x32 GB is going to be hard to run. If all else fails, manually set it to Gear Mode 2 instead of 1.
It's a little bit lower than the XMP option in advanced mode.


----------



## Simyoda

Thanks so much for your responses. When I try these things I will report back for sure. Have a great day. Cheers Simon.


----------



## KyKo.

Simyoda said:


> Hi People. I have been referred here from a friend to help with some XMP Profile issues I've been having with my new build.
> 
> MSI Z690 DDR4 PRO A
> Intel 12th Gen I7 12700k
> TEAMGROUP T-EXPERT Create 128GB 4x32GB
> Latest BIOS AMI BIOS7D25v172022-07-04
> 
> MSI just released a Thunderbolt 4 Expansion card for this board and others and I've been trying to configure it to use with an Audio Interface (UAD Apollo Twin X TB3) for the last 2 days!. It's strange. when I don't have the Interface plugged in It seems to cope with XMP Profile 1 but Won't recognize the Interface. I get an O.C Genie message saying I have to load the last good config or load BIOS defaults.
> 
> But if i don't use the XMP Profile my RAM slows to 2400MHZ and the Interface is read. I have support tickets for MSI and Universal Audio in the waiting but if anyone has some advice on here it would be awesome (also to learn!). Really learnt a lot from building this machine and my friend has told me to upload my Thiaphoon Burner screenshot. Great to join here! Look forward to chatting to anyone who might have some advice. Hoping just to get the RAM to run at 3600mhz. Not too worried about OC'ing as it's going to be used for audio production/sampling libraries and composing,etc. Cheers and all the best, Simon



hello
*Simyoda*

my suggestions is to put manually the Dram voltage
and also before that to clean up the BIOS

First you need to clear CMOS
for to do that
turn off PC
turn off power supply
press the power button for two seconds
short JBAT1 pin header for 10 seconds
turn on the power supply
press the PC power button
hold the delete key of keyboard to go on UEFI AMI BIOS (you see the default settings and parameters is back ) clear CMOS doesn't affect profiles who you have save.
choose your XMP profile
and add manually the XMP memory voltage
press F10
press enter to reboot and training


----------



## postem

Bugmanscj said:


> This is my stable version.
> 
> 
> *Board:* Asus Tuf gaming plus wifi Z690
> *Bios: *1601 (latest of this posting)
> *CPU*: I5-12600K
> *Ram:* G.Skill 3600CL14-15-15-35 2x16gb samsung b-die (32gb total ram) @ 4133mhz
> *Voltages:* SA 1.31v, Vddq 1.40v, Dram 1.52 with 16-16-16-35. I'm getting Latency of 52.6ns and read 62370. My earlier version wasn't stable.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2568668


Something is wrong your timings are much better than mine, 16-19-19-40 4000 with barely tuned secondaries and I always get under 50ns on tuf z690


----------



## Bugmanscj

postem said:


> Something is wrong your timings are much better than mine, 16-19-19-40 4000 with barely tuned secondaries and I always get under 50ns on tuf z690


I edited my original as there were some errors. See my updated post...

(2) [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock | Page 203 | Overclock.net


----------



## Simyoda

KyKo. said:


> hello
> *Simyoda*
> 
> my suggestions is to put manually the Dram voltage
> and also before that to clean up the BIOS
> 
> First you need to clear CMOS
> for to do that
> turn off PC
> turn off power supply
> press the power button for two seconds
> short JBAT1 pin header for 10 seconds
> turn on the power supply
> press the PC power button
> hold the delete key of keyboard to go on UEFI AMI BIOS (you see the default settings and parameters is back ) clear CMOS doesn't affect profiles who you have save.
> choose your XMP profile
> and add manually the XMP memory voltage
> press F10
> press enter to reboot and training
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2569116
> View attachment 2569117


I followed this example and the system boots fine without the Thunderbolt Apollo Twin X plugged in. As soon as I put the interface in it crashes the bios and pushes the RAM back to a default of 2400mhz.

I inputed the numbers you gave me in the pic example. XMP 1 works when I don’t have the Audio Interface plugged in but I built the system and bought the new TB4 card hoping to use it.

I haven’t tried the inputting everything manually yet though. I also can’t seem to find the BIOS version that was recommended above. There was a Google drive link to it in this thread but I think the file has been deleted.

MSI told me to clear cmos, load optimized defaults and download latest MSI center and get the Thunderbolt driver but during live update it didn’t exist.

im worried that an older bios might make the TB4 card not work at all? I’m no expert but the RAM seems to work fine otherwise so I guess that’s ok.

when I tried to find and set it to gear 2 it only gave me a 1/2 option. It said 2400mhz-2500mhz? Does that just mean it will be the same speed I had after the crash? I couldn’t find one that said gear 2. I’m probably out of my depth here. Sorry for the noob twenty question factor.

Universal Audio have not yet replied on there end. Got a film score to do so I’m running out of time! Cheers for the help in advance. It would take me a while to get through this thread it’s massive! Thanks Simon


----------



## Ichirou

Simyoda said:


> I followed this example and the system boots fine without the Thunderbolt Apollo Twin X plugged in. As soon as I put the interface in it crashes the bios and pushes the RAM back to a default of 2400mhz.
> 
> I inputed the numbers you gave me in the pic example. XMP 1 works when I don’t have the Audio Interface plugged in but I built the system and bought the new TB4 card hoping to use it.
> 
> I haven’t tried the inputting everything manually yet though. I also can’t seem to find the BIOS version that was recommended above. There was a Google drive link to it in this thread but I think the file has been deleted.
> 
> MSI told me to clear cmos, load optimized defaults and download latest MSI center and get the Thunderbolt driver but during live update it didn’t exist.
> 
> im worried that an older bios might make the TB4 card not work at all? I’m no expert but the RAM seems to work fine otherwise so I guess that’s ok.
> 
> when I tried to find and set it to gear 2 it only gave me a 1/2 option. It said 2400mhz-2500mhz? Does that just mean it will be the same speed I had after the crash? I couldn’t find one that said gear 2. I’m probably out of my depth here. Sorry for the noob twenty question factor.
> 
> Universal Audio have not yet replied on there end. Got a film score to do so I’m running out of time! Cheers for the help in advance. It would take me a while to get through this thread it’s massive! Thanks Simon


Just use the older BIOS. Newer is not always better. You can find it on MSI's website under the support section and BIOS files. It's labeled differently from exactly 1.24U2.

You gotta download them all, go into the flash menu, and look for the version description of the BIOS files there. 

Choose 1/2 for the Gear Mode. That's Gear 2. 

Manually select 3,600 MHz in the frequency option. The rest should be pre-configured for you if you've enabled XMP. Test. 

If that still fails, scroll down to CPU SA Voltage, set it to Override Mode, and plug in 1.35V. Retest.


----------



## Bloax

https://dl.dropbox.com/s/0hluyzetaq7akmf/PROA_DDR4.124U2.zip


here's your 124U2 BIOS sir
same shape it was sent to me way back when

not a real config, had only one usable stick of my old ripjaws 2x8 3200 14-14-14 - but I found it cute enough to repost








trp 12 trfc 270 might run, too

I should try that in my barrage of silly post-CPU contact frame tests


----------



## Simyoda

Bloax said:


> https://dl.dropbox.com/s/0hluyzetaq7akmf/PROA_DDR4.124U2.zip
> 
> 
> here's your 124U2 BIOS sir
> same shape it was sent to me way back when
> 
> not a real config, had only one usable stick of my old ripjaws 2x8 3200 14-14-14 - but I found it cute enough to repost
> View attachment 2569178
> 
> trp 12 trfc 270 might run, too
> 
> I should try that in my barrage of silly post-CPU contact frame tests


Thanks so much for that Bloax! I got a response from MSI support today. They have given me a link to their latest Z690 PRO DDR4 BIOS to try and then see if I can enable XMP. If it doesn’t work they said I could try upping the Dram a bit and see if that helps. Not exactly sure how to do that! They didn’t give meany instructions but they have been good so far

At least I have a few options to try. Although I have a film director wanting score demos and my memory might have to stay at 2400mhz this week!

Here is the link to the BIOS. I hope I’m not breaking forum rules by posting it or something. Don’t want to cause any trouble. Thanks again to everyone here who is educating me on here. Cheers Simon

E7D25IMS.7z


----------



## Ichirou

Simyoda said:


> Thanks so much for that Bloax! I got a response from MSI support today. They have given me a link to their latest Z690 PRO DDR4 BIOS to try and then see if I can enable XMP. If it doesn’t work they said I could try upping the Dram a bit and see if that helps. Not exactly sure how to do that! They didn’t give meany instructions but they have been good so far
> 
> At least I have a few options to try. Although I have a film director wanting score demos and my memory might have to stay at 2400mhz this week!
> 
> Here is the link to the BIOS. I hope I’m not breaking forum rules by posting it or something. Don’t want to cause any trouble. Thanks again to everyone here who is educating me on here. Cheers Simon
> 
> E7D25IMS.7z


You still haven't tested out Gear 2 yet. Which is the 1/2 option you saw. It might help you with running 128 GB of RAM.


----------



## Simyoda

Ichirou said:


> You still haven't tested out Gear 2 yet. Which is the 1/2 option you saw. It might help you with running 128 GB of RAM.


Just tried it then. It booted into Windows 11 and the interface works. MSI center says it’s at 2394mhz though. Is that correct? Thanks for the message. Cheers Simon.


----------



## Ichirou

Simyoda said:


> Just tried it then. It booted into Windows 11 and the interface works. MSI center says it’s at 2394mhz though. Is that correct? Thanks for the message. Cheers Simon.


Probably not. You will need to manually set the frequency yourself in the BIOS to your XMP frequency.


----------



## Bloax

Hey look, my CPU bracket with a cute little bear quality seal came.








after a bunch of micro-turns to make things worse (if things work First Try, just accept it unless you have curiosity to satisfy), eventually things got better/back to working fine again.

Distance to tJMax +4 @ 220-240 W after a repaste, not bad for a seven-month-pre-bent CPU.
Maximum memeory frequency is back to where it used to be (around 4200 < x < 4250)
Memeory controller still has a hard latency wall around 7.25ish ns on tCL/tRCD, that much hasn't changed.

installation was honestly piss-easy on my already flipped horizontal system, though I can't guarantee that you'll have the same kind of one-and-done luck lol


















Currently just sifting through BCLK wackiness, after doing +1 on procODT (27.6 -> 25.7 ??) and +0.02v ""cpu aux"" (memeory input voltage, 1.8v)

LATER:








ok it's behaving itself


----------



## KyKo.

Bloax said:


> Hey look, my CPU bracket with a cute little bear quality seal came.
> View attachment 2569473
> 
> after a bunch of micro-turns to make things worse (if things work First Try, just accept it unless you have curiosity to satisfy), eventually things got better/back to working fine again.
> 
> Distance to tJMax +4 @ 220-240 W after a repaste, not bad for a seven-month-pre-bent CPU.
> Maximum memeory frequency is back to where it used to be (around 4200 < x < 4250)
> Memeory controller still has a hard latency wall around 7.25ish ns on tCL/tRCD, that much hasn't changed.
> 
> installation was honestly piss-easy on my already flipped horizontal system, though I can't guarantee that you'll have the same kind of one-and-done luck lol
> 
> View attachment 2569474
> 
> View attachment 2569475
> 
> 
> Currently just sifting through BCLK wackiness, after doing +1 on procODT (27.6 -> 25.7 ??) and +0.02v ""cpu aux"" (memeory input voltage, 1.8v)
> 
> LATER:
> View attachment 2569527
> 
> ok it's behaving itself


This is 2×8 16GB Viper Steel 4400CL19 ?


----------



## Bloax

KyKo. said:


> This is 2×8 16GB Viper Steel 4400CL19 ?


4000C16, the 4400C19 require ODT Write Delay 1 and (as far as I'm aware) cap out at tWR 10 instead of tWR 8 - usually(?) also a higher RDWR requirement.


----------



## damnson90

Hey guys,

I am new to memory OC on Intel. I built my new rig last week and after setting it up I started memory OC right away. I want it for gaming mainly and thus want to get a good boost which is usable daily. I am talking about a 12700K on an MSI Z690 Edge Wifi. And now comes the tricky part (atleast from what I read on forums) - I want to OC 4X8 Patriot Viper Steel 4400 CL 19. And I am currently hard stuck. I can´t get it to run at 4000 CL 15, which is my goal at the moment. Of course I use this Guide as my baseline, but no matter what software I use I get tons of errors. Right now my method of choice is TM5 1usmus profile to trouble shoot with the error code list that was gathered and posted on this forum.

But there comes another barrier. A lot of the stuff on that list includes explanations I know from OCing my Ram on Ryzen, but I can´t find these options on my MSI board. 
I can´t find the equivalent for the folliwing: procODT, SCL, CkeDrvStr, CADBUS, RTT, cLDO_VDDP, tPHYRDL, AddCmdDrvStr, CSOdtDrvStren

Do I assume right that the VCCSA is the equivalent to VSOC? 

Currently I am running VCCSA of 1.35V, VDDQ of 1.2V, DRAM Voltage of 1.5V










Don´t be confused I Just upped TRP up to 19 to see what the culprit of all those errors is, because at 15-19-19 I get 0 errors on the 1usmus TM5 run. Right now I got 30+ errors with 15-15-19. Another thing I noticed, was that when I set both tRAS and tRFC manually the errors increase massively (80+ errors). They drop when I set both to auto. Before that I tried both to loosen them or directly got them with the formulas from the guide. So a lot of the stuff is still on Auto.

Is using the 1usmus profile a valid method? I only used it because it offers the only semblance of predictability and problem solving potential (with the table!!!) for someone with so little knowledge XD

I hope you guys can help me, even if you just outright say "Seems like your IMC sucks, loosen your timings or downclock it one or two steps!" On that note what CL would I have to use on say 3800 or 3900 to get the same latency as 4000 CL 15? I really just want this for gaming, but 4000 CL 15 seems like a nice achievement if possible on my 8x4. 

Oh and before I forget. I am completely air cooling and I have no acitve fans on my Ram. These days I have ambient temps between 27-32 C.Unfortunately I don´t know how to measure the temps of my Dimms, since they don´t show up in HWINFO for me. I assume an IR thermometer on the outside of the Dimms is not sufficient? XD Is 1.5V even sustainable for daily use on these Dimms without active cooling?


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> Hey guys,
> 
> I am new to memory OC on Intel. I built my new rig last week and after setting it up I started memory OC right away. I want it for gaming mainly and thus want to get a good boost which is usable daily. I am talking about a 12700K on an MSI Z690 Edge Wifi. And now comes the tricky part (atleast from what I read on forums) - I want to OC 4X8 Patriot Viper Steel 4400 CL 19. And I am currently hard stuck. I can´t get it to run at 4000 CL 15, which is my goal at the moment. Of course I use this Guide as my baseline, but no matter what software I use I get tons of errors. Right now my method of choice is TM5 1usmus profile to trouble shoot with the error code list that was gathered and posted on this forum.
> 
> But there comes another barrier. A lot of the stuff on that list includes explanations I know from OCing my Ram on Ryzen, but I can´t find these options on my MSI board.
> I can´t find the equivalent for the folliwing: procODT, SCL, CkeDrvStr, CADBUS, RTT, cLDO_VDDP, tPHYRDL, AddCmdDrvStr, CSOdtDrvStren
> 
> Do I assume right that the VCCSA is the equivalent to VSOC?
> 
> Currently I am running VCCSA of 1.35V, VDDQ of 1.2V, DRAM Voltage of 1.5V
> 
> View attachment 2569591
> 
> 
> Don´t be confused I Just upped TRP up to 19 to see what the culprit of all those errors is, because at 15-19-19 I get 0 errors on the 1usmus TM5 run. Right now I got 30+ errors with 15-15-19. Another thing I noticed, was that when I set both tRAS and tRFC manually the errors increase massively (80+ errors). They drop when I set both to auto. Before that I tried both to loosen them or directly got them with the formulas from the guide. So a lot of the stuff is still on Auto.
> 
> Is using the 1usmus profile a valid method? I only used it because it offers the only semblance of predictability and problem solving potential (with the table!!!) for someone with so little knowledge XD
> 
> I hope you guys can help me, even if you just outright say "Seems like your IMC sucks, loosen your timings or downclock it one or two steps!" On that note what CL would I have to use on say 3800 or 3900 to get the same latency as 4000 CL 15? I really just want this for gaming, but 4000 CL 15 seems like a nice achievement if possible on my 8x4.
> 
> Oh and before I forget. I am completely air cooling and I have no acitve fans on my Ram. These days I have ambient temps between 27-32 C.Unfortunately I don´t know how to measure the temps of my Dimms, since they don´t show up in HWINFO for me. I assume an IR thermometer on the outside of the Dimms is not sufficient? XD Is 1.5V even sustainable for daily use on these Dimms without active cooling?


Have you tried older bioses? I have seen many say the older bioses are better on MSI. I think the Febuary bios is suppose to be good.

@Ichirou has the same board and ran 4x8 b die for a while so he should be able to give you more info.

Edit vddq might need to be a bit higher or try it and way from 1.35 to 1.5v.

As far as I know many of those other things your asking about are AMD.

Also probably easier to get 2t stable and tighten timings and then try for 1t later with 4x8.


----------



## damnson90

bscool said:


> Have you tried older bioses? I have seen many say the older bioses are better on MSI. I think the Febuary bios is suppose to be good.
> 
> @Ichirou has the same board and ran 4x8 b die for a while so he should be able to give you more info.
> 
> Edit vddq might need to be a bit higher or try it and way from 1.35 to 1.5v.
> 
> As far as I know many of those other things your asking about are AMD.
> 
> Also probably easier to get 2t stable and tighten timings and then try for 1t later with 4x8.


So far I haven´t tried out older bioses yet. I might look into it. I tried to raise VDDQ according to the guide with a max of 1.35 V (the guide said 1.25-1.35V are safe Voltages for Alder Lake daily use). Weirdly my PC does not boot with anything above 1.20V on VDDQ, when 15-15-15 are locked in @4000.

As for the AMD terms: I thought there had to be an equivalent for Intel for every one of them.Weird. How does this work with going to 2t for tuning and then going back to 1t? Just like that? Because I heard 2t is pretty bad for gaming...big loss on latency. So I did not bother so far. A friend told me just to get the best I can get on 1t for gaming.

For now my kit seems to like 15-16-16 @4000. Not a single error so far. Of course I have not set tRAS and tRFC yet. I will have to see about that.


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> So far I haven´t tried out older bioses yet. I might look into it. I tried to raise VDDQ according to the guide with a max of 1.35 V (the guide said 1.25-1.35V are safe Voltages for Alder Lake daily use). Weirdly my PC does not boot with anything above 1.20V on VDDQ, when 15-15-15 are locked in @4000.
> 
> As for the AMD terms: I thought there had to be an equivalent for Intel for every one of them.Weird. How does this work with going to 2t for tuning and then going back to 1t? Just like that? Because I heard 2t is pretty bad for gaming...big loss on latency. So I did not bother so far. A friend told me just to get the best I can get on 1t for gaming.
> 
> For now my kit seems to like 15-16-16 @4000. Not a single error so far. Of course I have not set tRAS and tRFC yet. I will have to see about that.


The difference in 1t and 2t on z690 ddr4 is tiny. What is your latency in MLC or Aida64? If you are in the 45ns range you are doing good 1t or 2t.

Not like you lose a game because of 1t. 🙃


----------



## Ichirou

@damnson90
First and foremost, since you don't have a 12900KS, swap to BIOS version 1.22 from February for the Edge. Every other BIOS was just worse from my experience.

From what I've seen, people managed to achieve 4,000 flat-15 on Z690 with 4x8 GB Samsung B-die, but primarily on the ASUS Strix.
When I tried to do the same myself on the Edge, I got stuck at 4,000 16-18-18-XX. But I was mixing two kits of 2x8 GB together, not one single kit, so that might influenced results.
With only 2x8 GB instead of 4x8 GB, both kits could do 14-15-15-XX just fine.

1T should be easy with Single Rank kits. You might have to boost VDIMM or VCCSA. I never had any issue with 1T on the Edge using Single Rank DIMMs.
VDIMM up to 1.60V is safe for Samsung B-die as long as it doesn't throw errors. Proper testing procedure is six cycles of 1usmus and an overnight run of anta777 ABSOLUT.
VDDQ has no unsafe value, but you don't need to boost it unless you get low voltage errors that cannot be corrected by VDIMM.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> @damnson90
> First and foremost, since you don't have a 12900KS, swap to BIOS version 1.22 from February for the Edge. Every other BIOS was just worse from my experience.
> 
> From what I've seen, people managed to achieve 4,000 flat-15 on Z690 with 4x8 GB Samsung B-die, but primarily on the ASUS Strix.
> When I tried to do the same myself on the Edge, I got stuck at 4,000 16-18-18-XX. But I was mixing two kits of 2x8 GB together, not one single kit, so that might influenced results.
> With only 2x8 GB instead of 4x8 GB, both kits could do 14-15-15-XX just fine.
> 
> 1T should be easy with Single Rank kits. You might have to boost VDIMM or VCCSA. I never had any issue with 1T on the Edge using Single Rank DIMMs.
> VDIMM up to 1.60V is safe for Samsung B-die as long as it doesn't throw errors. Proper testing procedure is six cycles of 1usmus and an overnight run of anta777 ABSOLUT.
> VDDQ has no unsafe value, but you don't need to boost it unless you get low voltage errors that cannot be corrected by VDIMM.


Did you ever try 2t with the 4x8? 

I was just curious if that mattered on being able to reduce timings. I would think 4000cc15-15-15 2t as example would outperform 4000c16-18-18 1t with all sub timings tight on both.


----------



## KyKo.

OC 4X8 Patriot Viper Steel 4400 CL 19









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


Did I get lucky with my memory controller on my 12700KF? I managed to stabilise 4133 (albeit with 1.4 SA) which was surprising to me. I’m only running 4000 though because 1.4 SA is a bit too high for my tastes What did you use to determine stability? I've found that y-cruncher is necessary to...




www.overclock.net


----------



## damnson90

Ichirou said:


> @damnson90
> First and foremost, since you don't have a 12900KS, swap to BIOS version 1.22 from February for the Edge. Every other BIOS was just worse from my experience.
> 
> From what I've seen, people managed to achieve 4,000 flat-15 on Z690 with 4x8 GB Samsung B-die, but primarily on the ASUS Strix.
> When I tried to do the same myself on the Edge, I got stuck at 4,000 16-18-18-XX. But I was mixing two kits of 2x8 GB together, not one single kit, so that might influenced results.
> With only 2x8 GB instead of 4x8 GB, both kits could do 14-15-15-XX just fine.
> 
> 1T should be easy with Single Rank kits. You might have to boost VDIMM or VCCSA. I never had any issue with 1T on the Edge using Single Rank DIMMs.
> VDIMM up to 1.60V is safe for Samsung B-die as long as it doesn't throw errors. Proper testing procedure is six cycles of 1usmus and an overnight run of anta777 ABSOLUT.
> VDDQ has no unsafe value, but you don't need to boost it unless you get low voltage errors that cannot be corrected by VDIMM.


I installed the BIOS from February (From their page) now and right away the OC experience is better. With the newest BIOS I often even had to CMOS clear to get it to post again. With this older BIOS after three post tries it just throws you back into the BIOS. I started from scratch since it did not take on my profile from the newest BIOS. Right now I am up to Step 3 of the thightening timings chapter of the OC guide and I already have better latency than after step 6 before. Now I have 54.6 ns on AIDA and 52.4 on MLC. Before I had 55.2 on AIDA and 53.2 on MLC.

Can you tell me if there is an inherent benefit to flat latencies? Wouldn´t for example 14-15-15 be even better than 15-15-15? My Dimms are Dual Rank kits (Atleast I think, because when I lowered tRDRD_DR to 5 I went to max reads 64000 of 64000 on 4000. I think that setting would do nothing for single rank).

@bscool so far I did not test in 2n CR. I wanna see how far I can get with 1n. But I will try it if I hit a wall again. I am kinda done with wasting too much time running against a wall...did that for the last three days instead of communicating with you guys XD Which helped me out a lot already!

@KyKo.THANK YOU! I will use this if I get stuck again!


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> I installed the BIOS from February (From their page) now and right away the OC experience is better. With the newest BIOS I often even had to CMOS clear to get it to post again. With this older BIOS after three post tries it just throws you back into the BIOS. I started from scratch since it did not take on my profile from the newest BIOS. Right now I am up to Step 3 of the thightening timings chapter of the OC guide and I already have better latency than after step 6 before. Now I have 54.6 ns on AIDA and 52.4 on MLC. Before I had 55.2 on AIDA and 53.2 on MLC.
> 
> Can you tell me if there is an inherent benefit to flat latencies? Wouldn´t for example 14-15-15 be even better than 15-15-15? My Dimms are Dual Rank kits (Atleast I think, because when I lowered tRDRD_DR to 5 I went to max reads 64000 of 64000 on 4000. I think that setting would do nothing for single rank).
> 
> @bscool so far I did not test in 2n CR. I wanna see how far I can get with 1n. But I will try it if I hit a wall again. I am kinda done with wasting too much time running against a wall...did that for the last three days instead of communicating with you guys XD Which helped me out a lot already!
> 
> @KyKo.THANK YOU! I will use this if I get stuck again!


Dont stress too much over 14-15-15 v 15-15-15 or 1t vs 2t subtimings is were 99% of the performance is.

But try it all becaus that is a big part of the fun trying all the different setups and comparing them 

Edit also OS has a big impact on latency so if you have stuff running in the back ground that can add 4 to 8ns + latency. You probably already know that but mentioning it in case.


----------



## edkieferlp

You don't need to get primaries supper low, tightening the other sub timing can get you in the 45ns ish range.
I get that with Micron E with primary stock timings(16, 18, 18, 38, 2T) @3866 .

Also, the ring affects latency too so bump that up.


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Did you ever try 2t with the 4x8?
> 
> I was just curious if that mattered on being able to reduce timings. I would think 4000cc15-15-15 2t as example would outperform 4000c16-18-18 1t with all sub timings tight on both.


Yeah, it was on 2T... I imagine that the mixed kits contributed, so I can't 100% rule out that flat-15 wouldn't work with a single batch kit.


damnson90 said:


> I installed the BIOS from February (From their page) now and right away the OC experience is better. With the newest BIOS I often even had to CMOS clear to get it to post again. With this older BIOS after three post tries it just throws you back into the BIOS. I started from scratch since it did not take on my profile from the newest BIOS. Right now I am up to Step 3 of the thightening timings chapter of the OC guide and I already have better latency than after step 6 before. Now I have 54.6 ns on AIDA and 52.4 on MLC. Before I had 55.2 on AIDA and 53.2 on MLC.
> 
> Can you tell me if there is an inherent benefit to flat latencies? Wouldn´t for example 14-15-15 be even better than 15-15-15? My Dimms are Dual Rank kits (Atleast I think, because when I lowered tRDRD_DR to 5 I went to max reads 64000 of 64000 on 4000. I think that setting would do nothing for single rank).
> 
> @bscool so far I did not test in 2n CR. I wanna see how far I can get with 1n. But I will try it if I hit a wall again. I am kinda done with wasting too much time running against a wall...did that for the last three days instead of communicating with you guys XD Which helped me out a lot already!
> 
> @KyKo.THANK YOU! I will use this if I get stuck again!


All dies except for Micron B-die are Dual Rank when the sticks are 16 GB instead of 8 GB.


----------



## damnson90

Alright I have settled for these settings now (screenshot). Could not get 15-15-15 to run. Not with 2t and not with @KyKo. settings. Kinda disappointed that I could not go below 50ns (on AIDA...I get 42.1 ns in MCL though) with it, even with 4,7 Ghz ring and disabled e-cores (50.4 ns with ring OC and 52.3 ns without ring OC). Maybe I will try for 3800 15-15-15, which hopefully will run easier. A shame about the bandwidth, but I prioritize gaming. I find it strange how big the difference between 15-15-15 and 15-16-16 seems to be when I look at @KyKo. results. Does the 12900K make the difference in ns?


----------



## Ichirou

damnson90 said:


> Alright I have settled for these settings now (screenshot). Could not get 15-15-15 to run. Not with 2t and not with @KyKo. settings. Kinda disappointed that I could not go below 50ns (on AIDA...I get 42.1 ns in MCL though) with it, even with 4,7 Ghz ring and disabled e-cores (50.4 ns with ring OC and 52.3 ns without ring OC). Maybe I will try for 3800 15-15-15, which hopefully will run easier. A shame about the bandwidth, but I prioritize gaming. I find it strange how big the difference between 15-15-15 and 15-16-16 seems to be when I look at @KyKo. results. Does the 12900K make the difference in ns?
> 
> View attachment 2569699


Max out tREFI (set it to 65536)


----------



## edkieferlp

Oh, my comment on the latency test was with MCL not AIDA, I don't run that at all.
I think that sounds about right with your results.


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> Alright I have settled for these settings now (screenshot). Could not get 15-15-15 to run. Not with 2t and not with @KyKo. settings. Kinda disappointed that I could not go below 50ns (on AIDA...I get 42.1 ns in MCL though) with it, even with 4,7 Ghz ring and disabled e-cores (50.4 ns with ring OC and 52.3 ns without ring OC). Maybe I will try for 3800 15-15-15, which hopefully will run easier. A shame about the bandwidth, but I prioritize gaming. I find it strange how big the difference between 15-15-15 and 15-16-16 seems to be when I look at @KyKo. results. Does the 12900K make the difference in ns?
> 
> View attachment 2569699


Latency difference is probably more with your OS. There is not a 5ns difference between 12900k and 12700k. Maybe 1..5ns depends more on cache clock.

I have seen 12700k in the 45-46ns(aida64) range dont remember exact timings and clocks. But in the 4000c15-15-15 range


Screen from someone I helped tune 12700k 2x16 d bie

https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/931712437424619610/936817895692972072/unknown.png



https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/931712437424619610/936815599470936074/unknown.png



Edit also on aida64 you might need to run it a few times as one time might show 50, then 48 then 52 then 46.


----------



## St1tchFix

Hello everyone.

Running currently a 12400F on a MSI Z690-A board with some 2x16Gb 3600 CL18 Micron 8Gbit Rev.E.

Because of the blocked voltage i cannot run them in 3600 even with 1.55 voltage. Currently i run them at 3500 CL15 19 17 37. Everything is fine and stable, but, i have a lot of latency like 59ms with 55GB of R/W/C , is this normal, could someone help me check my settings ? Does this come from the SA voltage ?

Thanks


----------



## damnson90

Ichirou said:


> Max out tREFI (set it to 65536)


out of 10 tries with max tREFI the best one was 50.0 ns in AIDA. Seems like I hit a wall XD


----------



## edkieferlp

St1tchFix said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> Running currently a 12400F on a MSI Z690-A board with some 2x16Gb 3600 CL18 Micron 8Gbit Rev.E.
> 
> Because of the blocked voltage i cannot run them in 3600 even with 1.55 voltage. Currently i run them at 3500 CL15 19 17 37. Everything is fine and stable, but, i have a lot of latency like 59ms with 55GB of R/W/C , is this normal, could someone help me check my settings ? Does this come from the SA voltage ?
> 
> Thanks


Post a screen of your current setting so we can see.

What VCCSA voltage are you limited too?
can you do even 1.20?


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> out of 10 tries with max tREFI the best one was 50.0 ns in AIDA. Seems like I hit a wall XD


If you are on Windows 11 do you have core isolation on? https://www.thewindowsclub.com/wp-c...rity-not-enabled.png?ezimgfmt=ng:webp/ngcb191

I mean it probably wont matter in actual use but something is going on since your at 50ns when you should be closer to 46 to 47 from what I can see with your timings and clock on cache.

Do you have software for mouse, keyboard, rgb software, game launchers, MSI Dragon Center etc running in the background?


----------



## damnson90

bscool said:


> If you are on Windows 11 do you have core isolation on? https://www.thewindowsclub.com/wp-c...rity-not-enabled.png?ezimgfmt=ng:webp/ngcb191
> 
> I mean it probably wont matter in actual use but something is going on since your at 50ns when you should be closer to 46 to 47 from what I can see with your timings and clock on cache.
> 
> Do you have software for mouse, keyboard, rgb software, game launchers, MSI Dragon Center etc running in the background?


Nope...closed it all down with process lasso and then closed down process lasso aswell.

EDIT: @bscool sorry did forget to answer that -> no I am on Windows 10. I finally got 49,8 ns, I forgot that Windows Defender was still enabled. Still far away from 46 ns XD I dialed down tREFI to 60000 though because of fear of data corruption.

@Ichirou my system successfully passed a 6 cycle 1usmus TM5...what I found weird was that it took way less than before maxing tREFI -> before it took 56 minutes for 6 cycles now it did it in 43 minutes is that normal or maybe due to instability?

ABSOLUT did not run for me. When I select it and start TM5, it resets to default TM5 settings, which runs for about 6 minutes.


----------



## Ichirou

St1tchFix said:


> Hello everyone.
> 
> Running currently a 12400F on a MSI Z690-A board with some 2x16Gb 3600 CL18 Micron 8Gbit Rev.E.
> 
> Because of the blocked voltage i cannot run them in 3600 even with 1.55 voltage. Currently i run them at 3500 CL15 19 17 37. Everything is fine and stable, but, i have a lot of latency like 59ms with 55GB of R/W/C , is this normal, could someone help me check my settings ? Does this come from the SA voltage ?
> 
> Thanks


Is that on Gear 1?


----------



## St1tchFix

Hello, yes in gear 1 here the settings.


----------



## Ichirou

St1tchFix said:


> Hello, yes in gear 1 here the settings.
> 
> View attachment 2569710


Aside from raising tREFI to 65536, I don't think there's anything else you can really do.
It might really just be a frequency limitation at 3,500 MHz.
Have you tried tightening tCL even further by raising VDIMM.

Having a locked VCCSA will definitely weigh on your ability to overclock the RAM. Not much you can do.


----------



## damnson90

I just noticed something in the OC Guide.









I don´t know if this is due to me having 8x4 sticks but if you look at my last screenshot, my RTLs are way more apart than 2. Is this bad? Also when opening MSI Dragon Power I get an error that says "Encountered an improper argument". Is that because of the older BIOS?


----------



## St1tchFix

Ichirou said:


> Aside from raising tREFI to 65536, I don't think there's anything else you can really do.
> It might really just be a frequency limitation at 3,500 MHz.
> Have you tried tightening tCL even further by raising VDIMM.
> 
> Having a locked VCCSA will definitely weigh on your ability to overclock the RAM. Not much you can do.


i already tried to tighten more tCL and raised VDIMM to 1.55, don't wanted to go above that.


----------



## Bloax

on locked system agent voltages you're basically ****ed on DDR4



St1tchFix said:


> Hello, yes in gear 1 here the settings.
> 
> View attachment 2569710


i like the casual wtr_l 5 wtr_s -1
very human design, very easy to use


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> I just noticed something in the OC Guide.
> View attachment 2569725
> 
> 
> I don´t know if this is due to me having 8x4 sticks but if you look at my last screenshot, my RTLs are way more apart than 2. Is this bad? Also when opening MSI Dragon Power I get an error that says "Encountered an improper argument". Is that because of the older BIOS?


That is for older platforms about rtls, on z690 you cannot set them manually, well not easily.

Use Round trip latency orin the rtl section to "dynamic" to tighten them on MSI. Asus tightens them by default/auto on newer bioses..You can also use memtweakit to see all rtls in windows. MemTweakIt_20220317.zip

Asrock only shows 2 of them and with 4 dims or DR b die there are 3 on each channel you want them lined up on each channel ideally. Like in the screenshot.


----------



## pitter

Any suggestions for decrease latency more ? my ram is 4000-16-16-16-36 i just change it to 15-15-15-32 with 1.5 Dram , everything else is default , i've read ram oc bible etc , if anyone knows and wants to help me message me please


----------



## edkieferlp

pitter said:


> Any suggestions for decrease latency more ? my ram is 4000-16-16-16-36 i just change it to 15-15-15-32 with 1.5 Dram , everything else is default , i've read ram oc bible etc , if anyone knows and wants to help me message me please
> 
> View attachment 2569737
> View attachment 2569738


tREFI could be raised by at least a factor of 2x-3x.
Did you manually set tWR to 11?, tRTP could probably go lower 6-8 and maybe your tRAS a tiny bit, I think 28 is like optimal for B die but see what others say.


----------



## bscool

pitter said:


> Any suggestions for decrease latency more ? my ram is 4000-16-16-16-36 i just change it to 15-15-15-32 with 1.5 Dram , everything else is default , i've read ram oc bible etc , if anyone knows and wants to help me message me please
> 
> View attachment 2569737
> View attachment 2569738


I dont know how good bios 1720 is on Strix d4. I know a lot of people have issues with in in the Asus thread but if it works for you use it. 

I know 901 and 1504 are good. These timings should be a good start for you at 4000.

dram 1.55v, sa/vvdq 1.35v to starts and adjust up or down as needed.


----------



## pitter

edkieferlp said:


> tREFI could be raised by at least a factor of 2x-3x.
> Did you manually set tWR to 11?, tRTP could probably go lower 6-8 and maybe your tRAS a tiny bit, I think 28 is like optimal for B die but see what others say.


i dont know how twr is 11 , i didnt change it


----------



## edkieferlp

pitter said:


> i dont know how twr is 11 , i didnt change it


My bad, it probably is really 12, I forgot memtweakit sets WR like that if tWCL is -1 of tCL.
Asrock timing config would show 12 as Bscool pic shows


----------



## damnson90

bscool said:


> That is for older platforms about rtls, on z690 you cannot set them manually, well not easily.
> 
> Use Round trip latency orin the rtl section to "dynamic" to tighten them on MSI. Asus tightens them by default/auto on newer bioses..You can also use memtweakit to see all rtls in windows. MemTweakIt_20220317.zip
> 
> Asrock only shows 2 of them and with 4 dims or DR b die there are 3 on each channel you want them lined up on each channel ideally. Like in the screenshot.


Thank you! I activated both and my Ram got unstable immediately, but weirdly enough the last three changes that introduced instability all were solved by increasing tCKE by 1 XD now it looks like this:









I find it so weird, because the guide does not mention tCKE once iirc.

And yes I had to lower tREFI because even 60000 got unstable for me.

But really: Thank you for the tip about dynamic RTL/round trip latency (is it harmful to have both because you mentioned I should choose only one?). It finally got me consistently under 50 ns. I have reached 49.5 ns. This makes me think about other options that I maybe have missed, which potentially harm my latency. I hope it is okay for you guys if I dump a link to my BIOS screens in here. Maybe you see something, where you say "Ah that is your culprit!":


http://imgur.com/a/RbZiCgK


Thank you guys for all the help so far!

EDIT: And no, the VCore offset does not harm my latency. I also tested without it.


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> Thank you! I activated both and my Ram got unstable immediately, but weirdly enough the last three changes that introduced instability all were solved by increasing tCKE by 1 XD now it looks like this:
> View attachment 2569755
> 
> 
> I find it so weird, because the guide does not mention tCKE once iirc.
> 
> And yes I had to lower tREFI because even 60000 got unstable for me.
> 
> But really: Thank you for the tip about dynamic RTL/round trip latency (is it harmful to have both because you mentioned I should choose only one?). It finally got me consistently under 50 ns. I have reached 49.5 ns. This makes me think about other options that I maybe have missed, which potentially harm my latency. I hope it is okay for you guys if I dump a link to my BIOS screens in here. Maybe you see something, where you say "Ah that is your culprit!":
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/RbZiCgK
> 
> 
> Thank you guys for all the help so far!
> 
> EDIT: And no, the VCore offset does not harm my latency. I also tested without it.


You might need to bump up a voltage a bit with the RTLs tighter. Dram or sa/vddq. But it wont hurt anything have RTL enabled and dynamic they do the same thing.

What is ODT finetune 15? Or does it set that by default. I am on Asus for z690 so never seen that.

I have z490/z590 MSI Mb but dont remember seeing it or never messed with it if it is there.

Edit also i can see your RLTs are off. You really should look at them in memtweakit but I can see they are off from Asrock. I guess if it is stable it is ok but usully they should be the same on cha like 69/69/69 and chb 69/69/69 or cb 71/71/71.

I can see yours are something like chA 67/69/69 and CHb 69/69/69 so it might cause stability issues.. When they are off like that it usually means you need a little more voltage dram or SA usually.

Also to get them to train you will need to change a timing or memory clock to 3886 reboot and then back to bios and 4000 and go into Windows and use memtweakit to see if that a aligned. Just changing voltage probably wont train them again.


----------



## Ichirou

damnson90 said:


> Thank you! I activated both and my Ram got unstable immediately, but weirdly enough the last three changes that introduced instability all were solved by increasing tCKE by 1 XD now it looks like this:
> View attachment 2569755
> 
> 
> I find it so weird, because the guide does not mention tCKE once iirc.
> 
> And yes I had to lower tREFI because even 60000 got unstable for me.
> 
> But really: Thank you for the tip about dynamic RTL/round trip latency (is it harmful to have both because you mentioned I should choose only one?). It finally got me consistently under 50 ns. I have reached 49.5 ns. This makes me think about other options that I maybe have missed, which potentially harm my latency. I hope it is okay for you guys if I dump a link to my BIOS screens in here. Maybe you see something, where you say "Ah that is your culprit!":
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/RbZiCgK
> 
> 
> Thank you guys for all the help so far!
> 
> EDIT: And no, the VCore offset does not harm my latency. I also tested without it.


tCKE should always be dropped like a rock. If tREFI makes your RAM unstable, chances are, it's overheating.
Do you have a fan on the RAM? If not, there's your culprit.


----------



## KyKo.

damnson90 said:


> Thank you! I activated both and my Ram got unstable immediately, but weirdly enough the last three changes that introduced instability all were solved by increasing tCKE by 1 XD now it looks like this:
> View attachment 2569755
> 
> 
> I find it so weird, because the guide does not mention tCKE once iirc.
> 
> And yes I had to lower tREFI because even 60000 got unstable for me.
> 
> But really: Thank you for the tip about dynamic RTL/round trip latency (is it harmful to have both because you mentioned I should choose only one?). It finally got me consistently under 50 ns. I have reached 49.5 ns. This makes me think about other options that I maybe have missed, which potentially harm my latency. I hope it is okay for you guys if I dump a link to my BIOS screens in here. Maybe you see something, where you say "Ah that is your culprit!":
> 
> 
> http://imgur.com/a/RbZiCgK
> 
> 
> Thank you guys for all the help so far!
> 
> EDIT: And no, the VCore offset does not harm my latency. I also tested without it.





Patriot Viper Steel 4400 need CPU aux voltage 1.910 for 4000 1.900 for 3800
CPU 1.8 voltage let on auto
CPU SA voltage mode (overwrite mode)

tWTR_L 10 (if tWRRDSG is 30 then 30-tCWL14-6(Viper Steel 4400value)=10 / if tWRRDSG is 28 then tWTR_L 8

ODT Write Delay(CHA) set manual 1 (Viper Steel 4400value)
ODT Write Delay(CHB) set manual 1 -.-

tCKE 11


----------



## pitter

bscool said:


> I dont know how good bios 1720 is on Strix d4. I know a lot of people have issues with in in the Asus thread but if it works for you use it.
> 
> I know 901 and 1504 are good. These timings should be a good start for you at 4000.
> 
> dram 1.55v, sa/vvdq 1.35v to starts and adjust up or down as needed.


Thanks i will try , about your cpu overclock you used 1.3 Vcore and what LLC ?


----------



## bscool

pitter said:


> Thanks i will try , about your cpu overclock you used 1.3 Vcore and what LLC ?


You have to test it i have 3 different 12900k/kf/ks and they all need different voltages. I use llc5 to llc6 usually if doing a static OC.

Depending on CPU and clock of say 52 to 53 all core need 1.32 to 1.38 roughly in bios. It will take good cooling to keep that cool.

I use y cruncher to test stablitly so if using something like r23 you can use less voltage most likely.


----------



## Tergon123

pitter said:


> Any suggestions for decrease latency more ? my ram is 4000-16-16-16-36 i just change it to 15-15-15-32 with 1.5 Dram , everything else is default , i've read ram oc bible etc , if anyone knows and wants to help me message me please
> 
> View attachment 2569737
> View attachment 2569738












Here is my setup so you can compare numbers this is Gskill F4-4000C16D-16GTRSA Samsung B-die, running at 1.45 volts in Bios.


----------



## St1tchFix

Bloax said:


> on locked system agent voltages you're basically ****ed on DDR4
> 
> 
> i like the casual wtr_l 5 wtr_s -1
> very human design, very easy to use


What do you mean by this ?


----------



## bscool

St1tchFix said:


> What do you mean by this ?


Your tWR_S and tWR_L 5 and 429XXX.

tWRRD sg and dg control them or that is how most set them. You should raise them. Will cause stability issues or make it harder to get stable.



Timing​Safe​Tight​Extreme​tWTRS tWTRL​4 12​4 10​4 8​tCWL1​tCL​tCL - 1​tCL - 2​


On Intel, tWTRS/L should be left on auto and controlled with tWRRD_dg/sg, respectively. Dropping tWRRD_dg by 1 will drop tWTRS by 1. Likewise, with tWRRD_sg. Once they're as low as you can go, manually set tWTRS/L.
On Intel, changing tCWL will affect tWRRD_dg/sg and thus tWTR_S/L. If you lower tCWL by 1, you need to lower tWRRD_dg/sg by 1 to keep the same tWTR values. Note that this might also affect tWR per the relationship described earlier."









MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## umea

random off topic question, any of yall running the 4000cl14 kit? whether SR or DR. curious about how it works on alder lake


----------



## bscool

umea said:


> random off topic question, any of yall running the 4000cl14 kit? whether SR or DR. curious about how it works on alder lake


Yeah i have the 4000c14 DR and they work fine with Strix d4.


----------



## umea

bscool said:


> Yeah i have the 4000c14 DR and they work fine with Strix d4.


what ya running it at? can i see your timings?


----------



## damnson90

bscool said:


> You might need to bump up a voltage a bit with the RTLs tighter. Dram or sa/vddq. But it wont hurt anything have RTL enabled and dynamic they do the same thing.
> 
> What is ODT finetune 15? Or does it set that by default. I am on Asus for z690 so never seen that.
> 
> I have z490/z590 MSI Mb but dont remember seeing it or never messed with it if it is there.
> 
> Edit also i can see your RLTs are off. You really should look at them in memtweakit but I can see they are off from Asrock. I guess if it is stable it is ok but usully they should be the same on cha like 69/69/69 and chb 69/69/69 or cb 71/71/71.
> 
> I can see yours are something like chA 67/69/69 and CHb 69/69/69 so it might cause stability issues.. When they are off like that it usually means you need a little more voltage dram or SA usually.
> 
> Also to get them to train you will need to change a timing or memory clock to 3886 reboot and then back to bios and 4000 and go into Windows and use memtweakit to see if that a aligned. Just changing voltage probably wont train them again.


From what I gathered finetuneODT is the equivalent to procODT on Intel. When I used 1usmus TM5 profile I had an error at #12 and one of the fixes from the spreadsheet said "increase procODT" setting finetune ODT to 15 fixed that error.

I did that with resetting it via downclocking and then back up...it aligned to 69/69 69/69 and I lost about 1.5ns. When I later rebooted again it retrained itself back to 69/67 and I got the 1.5ns faster again. Really weird. I did not change anything in the BIOS in between. But according to the guide a difference of 2 in between them is totally fine. Just not more. I tried more SA and more VDDQ up until it would not boot anymore due to overvoltage I assume. No change in the RTLs. So I am gonna stay with it I think.

Also memtweakit is buggy for me (Screenshot). It is cut off at the top for me and no the buttons are not invisibly still there. I can´t swtich to other timings. But that is no problem for me. I can see them in my BIOS (MSI shows them).












Ichirou said:


> tCKE should always be dropped like a rock. If tREFI makes your RAM unstable, chances are, it's overheating.
> Do you have a fan on the RAM? If not, there's your culprit.


Well I guess I am unlucky then. Anything below tCKE means tons of errors for me. And like I said in my first post, I have no acitve cooling for my Ram. There is not really any clearance I think for it. The Noctua NH-D15 does not really allow for it. The only way I could see, would be mounting a thin fan to the backplate of my 3080. But then I would assume that I have problems with the airflow of my case, as in the other components would suffer for it. Not worth it for 0.5 ns (That is what I got for tREFI 40000-> Maxing it out) imo.




KyKo. said:


> Patriot Viper Steel 4400 need CPU aux voltage 1.910 for 4000 1.900 for 3800
> CPU 1.8 voltage let on auto
> CPU SA voltage mode (overwrite mode)
> 
> tWTR_L 10 (if tWRRDSG is 30 then 30-tCWL14-6(Viper Steel 4400value)=10 / if tWRRDSG is 28 then tWTR_L 8
> 
> ODT Write Delay(CHA) set manual 1 (Viper Steel 4400value)
> ODT Write Delay(CHB) set manual 1 -.-
> 
> tCKE 11


Like I already said. Your settings unfortunately don´t work at all for me. Even only with the settings you mentioned I get tons of errors.
My settings: TM5 1usmus 6 cycles -> 0 errors / TM5 antha Extreme -> 0 errors
Your settings: TM5 1usmus 6 cycles -> 0 errors / TM antha Extreme -> 180+ errors
Also with your settings I lose 1 ns in both MCL and AIDA64.
And the weird thing is most problems seem to stem from putting tCKE below 13. When I put in your settings with tCKE 13 I get "only" about 40+ errors.

I think the only thing that would allow me to achieve more/better stats, maybe even 15-15-15 would be to go into Rtts (I left them all at auto, except for when I tried Kykos settings for 4000 15-15-15). But from what I hear that can be the trickiest and longest lasting part of Mem OC. And tbh I am pretty tired of it for now. I basically haven´t used my PC for anything than OCing and benchmarking since I bought it. I haven´t even played on this machine for a minute yet, even though I went from a Vega 56 to a 3080.XD I finally wanna see the power!


----------



## bscool

umea said:


> what ya running it at? can i see your timings?


From 4133 to 4266.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> From 4133 to 4266.


In the 4266 y-cruncher pic, your running ring =45x with E cores 4200?
Is that daily stable or just for benchmarks?


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> In the 4266 y-cruncher pic, your running ring =45x with E cores 4200?
> Is that daily stable or just for benchmarks?


Those are all daily stable.

Edit plus that is a KS, the other screens are with KF.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> Those are all daily stable.
> 
> Edit plus that is a KS, the other screens are with KF.


Ah, yes, much better binned chip.


----------



## KyKo.

damnson90 said:


> From what I gathered finetuneODT is the equivalent to procODT on Intel. When I used 1usmus TM5 profile I had an error at #12 and one of the fixes from the spreadsheet said "increase procODT" setting finetune ODT to 15 fixed that error.
> 
> I did that with resetting it via downclocking and then back up...it aligned to 69/69 69/69 and I lost about 1.5ns. When I later rebooted again it retrained itself back to 69/67 and I got the 1.5ns faster again. Really weird. I did not change anything in the BIOS in between. But according to the guide a difference of 2 in between them is totally fine. Just not more. I tried more SA and more VDDQ up until it would not boot anymore due to overvoltage I assume. No change in the RTLs. So I am gonna stay with it I think.
> 
> Also memtweakit is buggy for me (Screenshot). It is cut off at the top for me and no the buttons are not invisibly still there. I can´t swtich to other timings. But that is no problem for me. I can see them in my BIOS (MSI shows them).
> 
> View attachment 2569798
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well I guess I am unlucky then. Anything below tCKE means tons of errors for me. And like I said in my first post, I have no acitve cooling for my Ram. There is not really any clearance I think for it. The Noctua NH-D15 does not really allow for it. The only way I could see, would be mounting a thin fan to the backplate of my 3080. But then I would assume that I have problems with the airflow of my case, as in the other components would suffer for it. Not worth it for 0.5 ns (That is what I got for tREFI 40000-> Maxing it out) imo.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Like I already said. Your settings unfortunately don´t work at all for me. Even only with the settings you mentioned I get tons of errors.
> My settings: TM5 1usmus 6 cycles -> 0 errors / TM5 antha Extreme -> 0 errors
> Your settings: TM5 1usmus 6 cycles -> 0 errors / TM antha Extreme -> 180+ errors
> Also with your settings I lose 1 ns in both MCL and AIDA64.
> And the weird thing is most problems seem to stem from putting tCKE below 13. When I put in your settings with tCKE 13 I get "only" about 40+ errors.
> 
> I think the only thing that would allow me to achieve more/better stats, maybe even 15-15-15 would be to go into Rtts (I left them all at auto, except for when I tried Kykos settings for 4000 15-15-15). But from what I hear that can be the trickiest and longest lasting part of Mem OC. And tbh I am pretty tired of it for now. I basically haven´t used my PC for anything than OCing and benchmarking since I bought it. I haven´t even played on this machine for a minute yet, even though I went from a Vega 56 to a 3080.XD I finally wanna see the power!




maybe because we have different processor i9 12900k / i7 12700k different motherboard different bios


----------



## Ichirou

damnson90 said:


> Well I guess I am unlucky then. Anything below tCKE means tons of errors for me. And like I said in my first post, I have no acitve cooling for my Ram. There is not really any clearance I think for it. The Noctua NH-D15 does not really allow for it. The only way I could see, would be mounting a thin fan to the backplate of my 3080. But then I would assume that I have problems with the airflow of my case, as in the other components would suffer for it. Not worth it for 0.5 ns (That is what I got for tREFI 40000-> Maxing it out) imo.


Shift the second fan on the NH-D15 higher; it doesn't need to be installed all the way down.
There are various mini fans you could jerry-rig right on top of the RAM sticks. There's enough clearance for it. Just needs you to actually care enough to do so.
Also, venting the heat from the GPU away from the RAM can help. Use cardboard or something.


----------



## umea

bscool said:


> From 4133 to 4266.


thanks! i really wish i grabbed the DR kit back when it was at ~400 right before it sold out for good. seems like a super fun kit to mess with. appreciate your replies!


----------



## damnson90

Hmmm...I now tested with OCCT and I get errors on it even though TM5 on various profiles was stable. I think it is really about the heat. I had one run with tREFI on Auto running through with 0 errors for 30 minutes. But on another run I had an error at minute 13. I guess it is time to say goodbye to 4000 CL15-16-16. For some reason though I think I don´t have a program that produces this kind of heat on my Ram like OCCT does. Since I don´t have sensors for my memory I used an IR thermometer and even there the Dimms went from 32-35 C to 41-43 C on the outside. Even playing games for an hour never produced this kind of heat. I wonder what would and if I am safe just using it with my settings.


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> Hmmm...I now tested with OCCT and I get errors on it even though TM5 on various profiles was stable. I think it is really about the heat. I had one run with tREFI on Auto running through with 0 errors for 30 minutes. But on another run I had an error at minute 13. I guess it is time to say goodbye to 4000 CL15-16-16. For some reason though I think I don´t have a program that produces this kind of heat on my Ram like OCCT does. Since I don´t have sensors for my memory I used an IR thermometer and even there the Dimms went from 32-35 C to 41-43 C on the outside. Even playing games for an hour never produced this kind of heat. I wonder what would and if I am safe just using it with my settings.


Have you tried running something like y cruncher pi2.5b?

I usually run y cruncher first before spending hours running memory test as it is easy to pass memtests and then fail something like y cruncher in seconds.

I like BenchMate for y cruncher but you can run the cmd line version also.


----------



## Ichirou

damnson90 said:


> Hmmm...I now tested with OCCT and I get errors on it even though TM5 on various profiles was stable. I think it is really about the heat. I had one run with tREFI on Auto running through with 0 errors for 30 minutes. But on another run I had an error at minute 13. I guess it is time to say goodbye to 4000 CL15-16-16. For some reason though I think I don´t have a program that produces this kind of heat on my Ram like OCCT does. Since I don´t have sensors for my memory I used an IR thermometer and even there the Dimms went from 32-35 C to 41-43 C on the outside. Even playing games for an hour never produced this kind of heat. I wonder what would and if I am safe just using it with my settings.


Slap a fan on it.........


----------



## damnson90

bscool said:


> Have you tried running something like y cruncher pi2.5b?
> 
> I usually run y cruncher first before spending hours running memory test as it is easy to pass memtests and then fail something like y cruncher in seconds.
> 
> I like BenchMate for y cruncher but you can run the cmd line version also.


Thanks I will try that!



Ichirou said:


> Slap a fan on it.........


I tried to install a low profile fan now...I would have to permanently take of the side panel (The Noctua Fan would stand over). That is unfortunately no option for me. I don´t wanna hear my system work XD


----------



## Ichirou

damnson90 said:


> I tried to install a low profile fan now...I would have to permanently take of the side panel (The Noctua Fan would stand over). That is unfortunately no option for me. I don´t wanna hear my system work XD


Use some cardboard to redirect the heat from the GPU away from the RAM.
Also, you can install a mini fan to the sides of the RAM, not necessarily on top. The air will still blow through the sticks.


----------



## damnson90

Ichirou said:


> Use some cardboard to redirect the heat from the GPU away from the RAM.
> Also, you can install a mini fan to the sides of the RAM, not necessarily on top. The air will still blow through the sticks.


Alright! I will look for a fitting fan then.

@bscool Damn...I used the config file from the guide for y-cruncher...error found after 127 seconds...problem is that I don´t know what´s wrong XD


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> Alright! I will look for a fitting fan then.
> 
> @bscool Damn...I used the config file from the guide for y-cruncher...error found after 127 seconds...problem is that I don´t know what´s wrong XD


Some voltage or timing. Good times  Probably a voltage would be my guess.Dram, sa or vddq.

Edit could be cpu OC though so run cpu at stock or ram at stock also can help figure out which one.


----------



## damnson90

bscool said:


> Some voltage or timing. Good times  Probably a voltage would be my guess.Dram, sa or vddq.
> 
> Edit could be cpu though so run cpu at stock or ram at stock also can help figure out which one.


Hmmm it is getting into territory I start not being comfortable anymore. DRAM is at 1.52V, VDDQ is at 1.36V and SA is at 1.35V. And as I see it I can´t through a OCCT AVX2 test because of the heat anyways XD. Maybe I should try 16-17-17 to get less heat. Does CR matter for heat? Can I lower voltage through that? Because I still run it at 1n


----------



## edkieferlp

damnson90 said:


> Hmmm it is getting into territory I start not being comfortable anymore. DRAM is at 1.52V, VDDQ is at 1.36V and SA is at 1.35V. And as I see it I can´t through a OCCT AVX2 test because of the heat anyways XD. Maybe I should try 16-17-17 to get less heat. Does CR matter for heat? Can I lower voltage through that? Because I still run it at 1n


What does your CPU OC look like, freq and all core Vcore load?
Sounds like you might need Vcore bumped up.


----------



## bscool

damnson90 said:


> Hmmm it is getting into territory I start not being comfortable anymore. DRAM is at 1.52V, VDDQ is at 1.36V and SA is at 1.35V. And as I see it I can´t through a OCCT AVX2 test because of the heat anyways XD. Maybe I should try 16-17-17 to get less heat. Does CR matter for heat? Can I lower voltage through that? Because I still run it at 1n


2t should be easier to get stable. It always has been for me. RTLs will also be slightly looser with 2t. I would try it anyway, 2t and see.


----------



## damnson90

edkieferlp said:


> What does your CPU OC look like, freq and all core Vcore load?
> Sounds like you might need Vcore bumped up.


Oh wow...that might be it...I forgot to take off the negative Offset. Currently had 1.25V baseline with a -0.15V offset. e cores are turned off. AVX 512 is activated via BIOS. And I left the cores on auto. So basically maxing out at 4.7 Ghz atm. Thought I would keep the surrounding cool to keep the Ram a little bit more stable. XD


----------



## Bugmanscj

damnson90 said:


> I tried to install a low profile fan now...I would have to permanently take of the side panel (The Noctua Fan would stand over). That is unfortunately no option for me. I don´t wanna hear my system work X


I bought two Noctua NF-A6x25 PWM fans and zip tied them together and placed them over the ram sticks. Works great...


----------



## damnson90

Yup @edkieferlp was right on the money...I passed the y-cruncher test with no problems this time.


----------



## Tergon123

damnson90 said:


> Alright! I will look for a fitting fan then.
> 
> @bscool Damn...I used the config file from the guide for y-cruncher...error found after 127 seconds...problem is that I don´t know what´s wrong XD












This how I kool my ram with a 140mm fan, had it just sitting on top of the GPU but in the heat I often open my case, and it got wobble a bit, so used from Velcro strip to hold it in place perfect now.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Decided to push my crap tier Micron Rev. B to its absolute limit. 3600 MT/s C18 @ 1.35v stock. Was surprisingly able to stabilize 4800 C19 @ 1.65v. Going to run it as daily since this setup actually beats out gear 1 4000MT/s C16 in y-cruncher and just get a better set if this burns out.

Some notes:
"Real 1N" beat normal 1N in AIDA latency by a full ns.
tRAS = 3x CAS is good.

Gear 2 has its place for DDR4 if you can clock the RAM high enough.


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> View attachment 2569959
> 
> 
> Decided to push my crap tier Micron Rev. B to its absolute limit. 3600 MT/s C18 @ 1.35v stock. Was surprisingly able to stabilize 4800 C19 @ 1.65v. Going to run it as daily since this setup actually beats out gear 1 4000MT/s C16 in y-cruncher and just get a better set if this burns out.
> 
> Some notes:
> "Real 1N" beat normal 1N in AIDA latency by a full ns.
> tRAS = 3x CAS is good.
> 
> Gear 2 has its place for DDR4 if you can clock the RAM high enough.


But Look at the latency your 10ns slower than what you can do in gear1. Yes BW is up higher but I guess depends on app you use.
In games I am pretty sure the gear1 will win.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

edkieferlp said:


> But Look at the latency your 10ns slower than what you can do in gear1. Yes BW is up higher but I guess depends on app you use.
> In games I am pretty sure the gear1 will win.


I’ll go into more depth later today but what it comes down to is loaded latency which is where the 4800 shines. Beats out the lower speed by over 20ns. I’m guessing that’s why ddr5 benchmarks better despite worse idle latency.


----------



## Ichirou

MIXEDGREENS said:


> I’ll go into more depth later today but what it comes down to is loaded latency which is where the 4800 shines. Beats out the lower speed by over 20ns. I’m guessing that’s why ddr5 benchmarks better despite worse idle latency.


It all boils down to use-case. If you aren't a gamer, high bandwidth can have its uses. If you are a gamer, then you want the tightest latency always.
The people with "better scores" on DDR5 don't test gaming. They only test synthetics.
A strong IMC with a strong Gear 1 DDR4 overclock still beats any strong DDR5 overclock right now, for gaming.
But in synthetics, it'll lose, simply because they put more weight towards bandwidth.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Ichirou said:


> It all boils down to use-case. If you aren't a gamer, high bandwidth can have its uses. If you are a gamer, then you want the tightest latency always.
> The people with "better scores" on DDR5 don't test gaming. They only test synthetics.
> A strong IMC with a strong Gear 1 DDR4 overclock still beats any strong DDR5 overclock right now, for gaming.
> But in synthetics, it'll lose, simply because they put more weight towards bandwidth.


Y'all keep talking about bandwidth but I'm talking about loaded latency.










I read up on exactly what Intel's latency check is measuring. First figure is total worst case, 100% load on all but 1 core then pinging RAM with the lone idle core, and last figure is ideal situation/idle latency. At higher loads the higher frequency tune actually gains the upper hand in outright latency. Haven't had a chance to do much benchmarking but I'm wide open to suggestions, especially ones that can track and report frametimes and max/min FPS since I'm sure that will be where the interesting data lies.


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> Y'all keep talking about bandwidth but I'm talking about loaded latency.
> 
> View attachment 2570069
> 
> 
> I read up on exactly what Intel's latency check is measuring. First figure is total worst case, 100% load on all but 1 core then pinging RAM with the lone idle core, and last figure is ideal situation/idle latency. At higher loads the higher frequency tune actually gains the upper hand in outright latency. Haven't had a chance to do much benchmarking but I'm wide open to suggestions, especially ones that can track and report frametimes and max/min FPS since I'm sure that will be where the interesting data lies.


why are your gear1 timings so loose, for freq around 3800-4000 should be able to do 16, 18, 18, 38, Here my mild tuned Micron.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

edkieferlp said:


> why are your gear1 timings so loose, for freq around 3800-4000 should be able to do 16, 18, 18, 38, Here my mild tuned Micron.
> View attachment 2570103





MIXEDGREENS said:


> my crap tier Micron Rev. B


Rcd and rp will not budge on absolute latency. Cas won’t scale down with voltage as well as expected either. No great loss if I burn it out. 

And notice how my relatively loose timings at 4800 still have lower latency than yours from one tier higher up.


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> Rcd and rp will not budge on absolute latency. Cas won’t scale down with voltage as well as expected either. No great loss if I burn it out.
> 
> And notice how my relatively loose timings at 4800 still have lower latency than yours from one tier higher up.


Yes, I see that but 10k question is what workloads/app run like that, I don't think any games do but again I think it comes down to what apps you prioritize usage with the system.

Here a recent review of DDR5 and you can see here how DDR4 compares to lower speed DDR5 (4800), not the same thing exactly but probably close.








Colorful vengeance to the power of five - Corsair Vengeance RGB DDR5-6000 CL36 2x 16 GB kit Review with Teardown and Overclocking | Page 8 | igor'sLAB


Vengeance RGB RAM modules were already available with DDR4 and now the colorful eye-catchers from Corsair have finally been relaunched with DDR5. Besides a sophisticated design with impressive RGB…




www.igorslab.de


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

edkieferlp said:


> 10k question is what workloads/app run like that,


No idea but at least I know that if one is it’ll benefit from better latency and bandwidth than it would otherwise. I mostly thought people would just find this interesting since I have yet to read about anyone putting time into a ddr4 gear 2 tune and going anymore in depth than idle latency. Didn’t expect it to be controversial lol


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> No idea but at least I know that if one is it’ll benefit from better latency and bandwidth than it would otherwise. I mostly thought people would just find this interesting since I have yet to read about anyone putting time into a ddr4 gear 2 tune and going anymore in depth than idle latency. Didn’t expect it to be controversial lol


Its not controversial, we are just replying our opinions.
There have been others that did post gear2 high freq too, I am not going to try and track down post but I know of this vid and his opinion on it. All testing is good


----------



## Ichirou

@MIXEDGREENS It's entirely based on use-case, as we've mentioned. You need to do independent field testing with your own software/games.
Benchmarks with third-party software is not going to help you.

All we can say is that based on our personal experience and historical empirical evidence, lower latency is always better for gaming. That's one known guarantee.
And that tends to boil down to the fact that the vast majority of games simply cannot use every bit of bandwidth you throw at it. They cap off around the 4,000 MHz area.

But outside of gaming, that's another thing altogether. Different programs will respond differently.

Edit: Think of it like max speed/acceleration on a car. Low latency = higher acceleration. High bandwidth = higher top speed.
But as you've experienced with driving, not everything is always about higher top speed. There are speed limits that cap how much you can capitalize on.

If your road (software/game) only allows up to X km/h (up to X MB/s bandwidth), you'll be forced to stay under that amount regardless of how high your top speed (bandwidth limit) is. So acceleration (latency) becomes more important in that regard.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Have made decent progress with detailed reporting of 3d benchmarks. Problem at the moment is having to manually start and stop recording of benchmark data which is obviously a no-go for comparison.



edkieferlp said:


> Its not controversial, we are just replying our opinions.
> There have been others that did post gear2 high freq too, I am not going to try and track down post but I know of this vid and his opinion on it. All testing is good


Picked up a few timing tips from him; thanks. His vSA volts are insane though. Gear 2 means at 4800 MT/s the MC is only operating at 1200mhz. Mine is perfectly stable at stock volts.

edit: his suggestion of tXP set at 4 drastically negatively impacted my performance, so grain of salt to be taken with blanket timing suggestions


Ichirou said:


> bandwidth


We are talking past each other and it's going to drive me crazy.


----------



## Ichirou

MIXEDGREENS said:


> We are talking past each other and it's going to drive me crazy.


You were trying to say that performance is better in Gear 2 so long as the frequency is clocked high enough, but that is not always true. It depends entirely on use-case.
You need to decide whether you need more bandwidth or more latency based on whatever it is you use your system for. And the limits for those differ depending on which gear mode it is you use.

Hence, claiming the latency is lower on Gear 2 so long as the RAM is clocked high enough is not true as it never has been.
But some programs might react differently because of the increased bandwidth limit.


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> View attachment 2570159
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Picked up a few timing tips from him; thanks. His vSA volts are insane though. Gear 2 means at 4800 MT/s the MC is only operating at 1200mhz. Mine is perfectly stable at stock volts.
> 
> edit: his suggestion of tXP set at 4 drastically negatively impacted my performance, so grain of salt to be taken with blanket timing suggestions


He is very experienced with ram OC but yeah I would dial back some of his voltages for 24/7 use.

On his recommending values, he is talking the avg stick, you seem to have really bad sticks as I suggested primaries that should of worked, just like his so it all depends on HW.

So because your timings need to be so loose, you may find gear2 works better even in games but for most, it is the other way around.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

Ichirou said:


> You were trying to say that performance is better in Gear 2 so long as the frequency is clocked high enough, but that is not always true. It depends entirely on use-case.
> You need to decide whether you need more bandwidth or more latency based on whatever it is you use your system for. And the limits for those differ depending on which gear mode it is you use.
> 
> Hence, claiming the latency is lower on Gear 2 so long as the RAM is clocked high enough is not true as it never has been.
> But some programs might react differently because of the increased bandwidth limit.


I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and try to explain this one more time.










I am speaking strictly in terms of observed numbers. Higher frequency RAM incurs a lower latency penalty as CPU load increases, apparently to the point that sufficiently high clocks at sufficiently high load can overcome the latency penalty of gear 2.


----------



## david azulay

Crucial Ballistix 2 X 16 32GB kit 3600mhz cl16/18/18/38
oc to 5066mhz cl 19/23/23/43 gear 2
cpu 12700k oc 5100mhz avx512
ring 4700mhz
dram 1.55v
vddq 1.45v
vccsa 1.3v
Y Ccruncher avx512 5.1ghz all p core
65.254s
mobo asus prime z690 d4
ODT 80-48-0


----------



## KyKo.

david azulay said:


> Crucial Ballistix 2 X 16 32GB kit 3600mhz cl16/18/18/38
> oc to 5066mhz cl 19/23/23/43 gear 2
> cpu 12700k oc 5100mhz avx512
> ring 4700mhz
> dram 1.55v
> vddq 1.45v
> vccsa 1.3v
> Y Ccruncher avx512 5.1ghz all p core
> 65.254s
> mobo asus prime z690 d4
> ODT 80-48-0


latency ???


----------



## david azulay

KyKo. said:


> latency ???


51


----------



## tps3443

I have always ran lower frequency in Gear 1. I never could get good performance out of Gear 2. Maybe it’s different with 12th Gen and Z690

But I just stick to 4000CL14 Gear 1 with 2x16 at 1T on my 11th Gen cpu. It seems like the bandwidth is sufficient enough, and the latency is really low.


----------



## david azulay

tps3443 said:


> I have always ran lower frequency in Gear 1. I never could get good performance out of Gear 2. Maybe it’s different with 12th Gen and Z690
> 
> But I just stick to 4000CL14 Gear 1 with 2x16 at 1T on my 11th Gen cpu. It seems like the bandwidth is sufficient enough, and the latency is really low.


gear 1 3733 cl14/18/18/34 1t
avx512 vs p+e avx2


----------



## tps3443

david azulay said:


> gear 1 3733 cl14/18/18/34 1t
> avx512 vs p+e avx2


You can run your Gear (1) memory faster though right?

So I’d say the comparison may not be realistic. Who knows, Gear (2) may be faster for you.


----------



## tps3443

Maybe I could give it a shot with my 11th Gen chip, and see how it compares. You’ll probably destroy me


Any particular settings to run on this benchmark?


----------



## david azulay

tps3443 said:


> Your Gear (1) memory is not the most optimized.
> So I’d say the comparison is not realistic. Gear (2) may be faster for you.
> 
> But what if you run faster gear (1) speeds with much lower timings?


what are you talking about
I bet you that you will not reach lower timings than mine Not in G2 or G2
I am currently 18th in the world in overclocking for DDR4 memories in HWBOT And I make sure that all my overclocks comply with one rule VCCSA MAX 1.3V Because I rely on an overclock that will be 100 percent stable not only for the benchmark 
My computer is not used for gaming It is used for electronics (PSU Design) circuits simulations in LTSPICE and the like


----------



## tps3443

david azulay said:


> what are you talking about
> I bet you that you will not reach lower timings than mine Not in G2 or G2
> I am currently 18th in the world in overclocking for DDR4 memories in HWBOT And I make sure that all my overclocks comply with one rule VCCSA MAX 1.3V Because I rely on an overclock that will be 100 percent stable not only for the benchmark
> My computer is not used for gaming It is used for electronics (PSU Design) circuits simulations in LTSPICE and the like


My apologies. I worded that wrong previously, and I did edit the post and fix it.

My words came out wrong is all. I thought you were showing a comparison of Gear (1) and Gear (2).


----------



## david azulay

tps3443 said:


> My apologies. I worded that wrong previously, and I did edit the post and fix it.
> 
> my words came out wrong is all. What I meant to say was, maybe a higher frequency Gear (1) would help out more is all compared to Gear (2).


Crucial Ballistix is a singal rank micron b die with my cpu gear 1 max is 3900mhz
And as I mentioned earlier I am really not ready to pass VCCSA Above 1.3 volts 
So I prefer to be on frequency 3733 T1 with the tightest timings 
latency on gear 1 is 42ns
keeping the processor safe for the long term


----------



## edkieferlp

tps3443 said:


> My apologies. I worded that wrong previously, and I did edit the post and fix it.
> 
> My words came out wrong is all. I thought you were showing a comparison of Gear (1) and Gear (2).


His timings are pretty tight IMO for Micron.
Alderlake IMC tops out like 3800-4000, depending on chip with higher in general to 12900k, 12700k and 12600k tend to max lower.

I run Micron E die and I hit max around 3867, I could maybe go a step higher but it is not an easy step.


----------



## edkieferlp

david azulay said:


> Crucial Ballistix is a singal rank micron b die with my cpu gear 1 max is 3900mhz
> And as I mentioned earlier I am really not ready to pass VCCSA Above 1.3 volts
> So I prefer to be on frequency 3733 T1 with the tightest timings
> latency on gear 1 is 42ns
> keeping the processor safe for the long term


your Y-cruncher with 3733 in gear 1 with 8P cores, was that set to AVX512, I see in dropdown it was auto, I don't know if you need to set it to AVX512 or it does it auto once E cores are disabled.

You kill my scores in Y-cruncher as I get like high 90's seconds results ([email protected] P5.0-4.7/E 3.8/ring 4.0).


----------



## david azulay

edkieferlp said:


> your Y-cruncher with 3733 in gear 1 with 8P cores, was that set to AVX512, I see in dropdown it was auto, I don't know if you need to set it to AVX512 or it does it auto once E cores are disabled.
> 
> You kill my scores in Y-cruncher as I get like high 90's seconds results ([email protected] P5.0-4.7/E 3.8/ring 4.0).


custom bios 1603 with micro code 15 avx512 
with the lazy cores disabled 
the ring No problem 47 
with frequency for processor 5.1 

with the lazy cores not disabled I'm on 
P51
E39
RING 40

Y Ccruncher 
on auto Once the lazy cores disable Chooses INTEL CANNON LAKE AVX512 
I usually set everything manually But I forgot in the picture The result is the same

in gear 2 On a daily basis,
I am on a 100.100 ratio 5000 MHz CL18/23/23/43 
100 percent stable in all.
Excellent performance
The max I got from these memories is 5400 MHz But it is not worth it in terms of the VCCSA 5400 MHz is 1.4V Even if pigs fly, I will not put such a volt for 24/7


----------



## edkieferlp

david azulay said:


> custom bios 1603 with micro code 15 avx512
> with the lazy cores disabled
> the ring No problem 47
> with frequency for processor 5.1
> 
> with the lazy cores not disabled I'm on
> P51
> E39
> RING 40
> 
> Y Ccruncher
> on auto Once the lazy cores disable Chooses INTEL CANNON LAKE AVX512
> I usually set everything manually But I forgot in the picture The result is the same
> 
> in gear 2 On a daily basis,
> I am on a 100.100 ratio 5000 MHz CL18/23/23/43
> 100 percent stable in all.
> Excellent performance
> The max I got from these memories is 5400 MHz But it is not worth it in terms of the VCCSA 5400 MHz is 1.4V Even if pigs fly, I will not put such a volt for 24/7


Ok, I never tried to disable E core but I am on TUF Z690 bios 0.707 so if I did I would have AVX512, my microcode is 15 or less (I don't remember offhand).
On VCCSA, mine defaulted to 1.35v with XMP but after tweaking timings I am at like 1.27v now, VDIMM is 1.37v.

I was running 51, 51, 50, 49, 48, 48 on P cores but lowered them down just to save a little heat in summer, I really don't notice a diff (P-50, 50, 49, 49, 48, 47).


----------



## david azulay

edkieferlp said:


> Ok, I never tried to disable E core but I am on TUF Z690 bios 0.707 so if I did I would have AVX512, my microcode is 15 or less (I don't remember offhand).
> On VCCSA, mine defaulted to 1.35v with XMP but after tweaking timings I am at like 1.27v now, VDIMM is 1.37v.
> 
> I was running 51, 51, 50, 49, 48, 48 on P cores but lowered them down just to save a little heat in summer, I really don't notice a diff (P-50, 50, 49, 49, 48, 47).











crucial ballistix 32gb kit ddr4 3600mhz cl16 Overclock to 5067Mhz


crucial ballistix 32gb kit ddr4 3600mhz cl16 Overclock to 5067Mhz cl19 19/23/23/48stress test For memories on the 5067 MHz frequency




www.youtube.com


----------



## tps3443

For some reason AVX 512 forces a 5.2Ghz limitation on Intel 11th gen so unfortunately, I cannot run it any faster than that.


----------



## Ichirou

tps3443 said:


> I have always ran lower frequency in Gear 1. I never could get good performance out of Gear 2. Maybe it’s different with 12th Gen and Z690
> 
> But I just stick to 4000CL14 Gear 1 with 2x16 at 1T on my 11th Gen cpu. It seems like the bandwidth is sufficient enough, and the latency is really low.


4000 CL14 Gear 1 is insanely good for that generation


----------



## tps3443

Ichirou said:


> 4000 CL14 Gear 1 is insanely good for that generation


Well, I guess I was just kinda wondering why other people were not running higher Gear (1) speeds with 12th Gen. 12th Gen has a better IMC.


----------



## acoustic

tps3443 said:


> Well, I guess I was just kinda wondering why other people were not running higher Gear (1) speeds with 12th Gen. 12th Gen has a better IMC.


Not exactly. 12900K's can hit 4000 GR1 for the most part, but 12700K is usually hitting a wall around 3800-3866. My 12700K capped at 3800 @ 1.3v SA. 3900 would post, same with 4000, but was impossible to stabilize. Most 12600Ks had an even harder time.

The IMC on 12th gen was binned pretty hard between chips. There's few golden 12700/12600 that can hit 4000, but they're exceptions.


----------



## tps3443

acoustic said:


> Not exactly. 12900K's can hit 4000 GR1 for the most part, but 12700K is usually hitting a wall around 3800-3866. My 12700K capped at 3800 @ 1.3v SA. 3900 would post, same with 4000, but was impossible to stabilize. Most 12600Ks had an even harder time.
> 
> The IMC on 12th gen was binned pretty hard between chips. There's few golden 12700/12600 that can hit 4000, but they're exceptions.


Ohhh ok, thanks. I was misinformed then. Reddit had me thinking any 12600K can do 4K Gear 1 with dual rank sticks.


----------



## Ichirou

tps3443 said:


> Ohhh ok, thanks. I was misinformed then. Reddit had me thinking any 12600K can do 4K Gear 1 with dual rank sticks.


No, that's just Buildzoid and his misguided and ignorant belief that the IMCs are not binned because his _one_ 12600K could do 4,000+ while his _one_ 12900K could not.


----------



## acoustic

tps3443 said:


> Ohhh ok, thanks. I was misinformed then. Reddit had me thinking any 12600K can do 4K Gear 1 with dual rank sticks.


First mistake was believing Reddit haha


----------



## david azulay

Crucial Ballistix 2 X 16 32GB kit 3600mhz cl16/18/18/38
oc to 5000mhz cl 18/23/23/43 gear 2
cpu 12700k oc 5200mhz avx512
ring 4700mhz
dram 1.55v
vddq 1.45v
vccsa 1.3v
Y Ccruncher avx512 5.2 ghz all p core
65.5s
mobo asus prime z690 d4
ODT 80-48-0 

latency 48ns


----------



## Kryuger

Heads up for anyone using the Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4.

The latest BIOS (F7) breaks Ring Ratio overclocking and forces a constant down bin, regardless if the down bin setting is enabled or disabled.

Might have been a bad update on my side, but downgrading to F20a has fixed the issue. Haven't been able to confirm if anyone else has the same bug, but I've contacted Gigabyte about it and will await their response. The last time I contacted Gigabyte support, I got told I didn't know how to read the part number of my RAM and they implied I was stupid. I wont be expecting any miracles.


----------



## edkieferlp

Kryuger said:


> Heads up for anyone using the Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4.
> 
> The latest BIOS (F7) breaks Ring Ratio overclocking and forces a constant down bin, regardless if the down bin setting is enabled or disabled.
> 
> Might have been a bad update on my side, but downgrading to F20a has fixed the issue. Haven't been able to confirm if anyone else has the same bug, but I've contacted Gigabyte about it and will await their response. The last time I contacted Gigabyte support, I got told I didn't know how to read the part number of my RAM and they implied I was stupid. I wont be expecting any miracles.


That sounds like the same issues with ASUS 1720 bios, they claim it is the new micro-code, supposedly an update to that will happen to fix it.


----------



## tps3443

Is it just me or was Gear (2) DDR4 garbage on Z590 and Z690 when they first launched. Now I
feel like it’s totally different.

Has anyone else noticed this?


----------



## Ichirou

tps3443 said:


> Is it just me or was Gear (2) DDR4 garbage on Z590 and Z690 when they first launched. Now I
> feel like it’s totally different.
> 
> Has anyone else noticed this?


It's still garbage on Z690, but some programs don't benefit from low latency as opposed to high bandwidth, and vice versa.
It all depends on use-case.


----------



## postem

Hi good people, im on 12900K, and using now an Asgard bragi v3 B die, found for cheap on aliexpress.
Following some recommendations on this thread i managed to make this 3600 C14 memory to run 4133 C16 stable @ 1.45v, and im working on minor timings.

I have however one question: someone suggested that to use BCLK:RAM = 100:133, and this managed to help me stabilize memory. What this setting effectively do? As far as i understand, its multiplying the memory cycle from BCLK, but this effectively makes IMC runs slower x RAM frequency (like a partial gear down) or its just clocking side?


----------



## acoustic

postem said:


> Hi good people, im on 12900K, and using now an Asgard bragi v3 B die, found for cheap on aliexpress.
> Following some recommendations on this thread i managed to make this 3600 C14 memory to run 4133 C16 stable @ 1.45v, and im working on minor timings.
> 
> I have however one question: someone suggested that to use BCLK:RAM = 100:133, and this managed to help me stabilize memory. What this setting effectively do? As far as i understand, its multiplying the memory cycle from BCLK, but this effectively makes IMC runs slower x RAM frequency (like a partial gear down) or its just clocking side?


Just clocking side. 100:133 is usually easier to run with no performance loss.


----------



## david azulay

Crucial Ballistix 2 X 16 32GB kit 3600mhz cl16/18/18/38
oc to 5000mhz cl 18/23/23/43 gear 2 
full bios setting photo
mobo asus prime z690 d4 bios 1603 with avx512 micro cod 15 
cpu intel i7 12700k


----------



## edkieferlp

david azulay said:


> Crucial Ballistix 2 X 16 32GB kit 3600mhz cl16/18/18/38
> oc to 5000mhz cl 18/23/23/43 gear 2
> full bios setting photo
> mobo asus prime z690 d4 bios 1603 with avx512 micro cod 15
> cpu intel i7 12700k


Hi, What does the "training profile= ASUS user profile" and RxDFe setting do.
On the ODT RTT I am curious how you get these values from, I don't see what default is in my bios. I have seen posts from others, even older chipsets and it does seem 80/48/x is popular values but I could never figure out even the best way to test.

Be careful with VRM switching freq when going up, I remember stability problems when going up (800+), I kind of remember stock working well..


----------



## david azulay

edkieferlp said:


> Hi, What does the "training profile= ASUS user profile" and RxDFe setting do.
> On the ODT RTT I am curious how you get these values from, I don't see what default is in my bios. I have seen posts from others, even older chipsets and it does seem 80/48/x is popular values but I could never figure out even the best way to test.
> 
> Be careful with VRM switching freq when going up, I remember stability problems when going up (800+), I kind of remember stock working well..


*On-die termination*
*is termination resistor for impedance matching*
the value increases or decreases signal reflections.
DRAM memory module architectures include line termination resistors on the motherboard .
The signal that propagates along the stub to the DRAM will be reflected back onto the signal line
ntroducing unwanted noise into the signal.
On-Die Termination shifts the termination resistors from the motherboard to the DRAM die itself. These resistors can better suppress signal reflections, providing much better a signal-to-noise ratio in the memory. This allows for much higher clock speeds at much lower voltages.
The *DRAM Termination* BIOS option controls the impedance value of the DRAM on-die termination resistors.
A lower impedance value improves the resistor’s ability to absorb signal reflections and thus improve signal quality. However, this comes at the expense of a smaller voltage swing for the signal, and higher power consumption.
he proper amount of impedence depends on the memory type and the number of DIMMs used.


ODT R TT(NOM) Values
The device is capable of providing three different termination values
RTT(Park)
RTT(NOM)
RTT(WR)
The nominal termination value, R TT(NOM) , is programmed in MR1.
A separate value, RTT(WR) 
may be programmed in MR2 to enable a unique R TT value when
ODT is enabled during WRITE operations.
The R TT(WR) value can be applied during
WRITE commands even when R TT(NOM) is disabled.
A third R TT value, RTT(Park)
is programed in MR5. RTT(Park) provides a termination value when the ODT signal is LOW.

RxDfe
Decision Feedback Equalization


----------



## edkieferlp

david azulay said:


> *On-die termination*
> *is termination resistor for impedance matching*
> the value increases or decreases signal reflections.
> DRAM memory module architectures include line termination resistors on the motherboard .
> The signal that propagates along the stub to the DRAM will be reflected back onto the signal line
> ntroducing unwanted noise into the signal.
> On-Die Termination shifts the termination resistors from the motherboard to the DRAM die itself. These resistors can better suppress signal reflections, providing much better a signal-to-noise ratio in the memory. This allows for much higher clock speeds at much lower voltages.
> The *DRAM Termination* BIOS option controls the impedance value of the DRAM on-die termination resistors.
> A lower impedance value improves the resistor’s ability to absorb signal reflections and thus improve signal quality. However, this comes at the expense of a smaller voltage swing for the signal, and higher power consumption.
> he proper amount of impedence depends on the memory type and the number of DIMMs used.
> 
> 
> ODT R TT(NOM) Values
> The device is capable of providing three different termination values
> RTT(Park)
> RTT(NOM)
> RTT(WR)
> The nominal termination value, R TT(NOM) , is programmed in MR1.
> A separate value, RTT(WR)
> may be programmed in MR2 to enable a unique R TT value when
> ODT is enabled during WRITE operations.
> The R TT(WR) value can be applied during
> WRITE commands even when R TT(NOM) is disabled.
> A third R TT value, RTT(Park)
> is programed in MR5. RTT(Park) provides a termination value when the ODT signal is LOW.
> 
> RxDfe
> Decision Feedback Equalization


Thanks for info, so it seems ODT RTT values would help when high freq from memory is holding you back and not IMC (in your case of gear2 probably help a lot)
Watching that vid it seems RxDFe would be more on the helpful side.


----------



## david azulay

edkieferlp said:


> Thanks for info, so it seems ODT RTT values would help when high freq from memory is holding you back and not IMC (in your case of gear2 probably help a lot)
> Watching that vid it seems RxDFe would be more on the helpful side.


Try the setting RxDFe enable or disable
As I showed in the picture
This setting can help with high frequencies
But on the other hand can introduce propagation errors
this setting is more effecting in DDR5 ram


----------



## maniakpfs

acoustic said:


> Not exactly. 12900K's can hit 4000 GR1 for the most part, but 12700K is usually hitting a wall around 3800-3866. My 12700K capped at 3800 @ 1.3v SA. 3900 would post, same with 4000, but was impossible to stabilize. Most 12600Ks had an even harder time.
> 
> The IMC on 12th gen was binned pretty hard between chips. There's few golden 12700/12600 that can hit 4000, but they're exceptions.


Not true, I rather have 12600k 12700k 12900kf at home and they all run on my asus strix z690D4 motherboard at 4133mhz


----------



## acoustic

maniakpfs said:


> Not true, I rather have 12600k 12700k 12900kf at home and they all run on my asus strix z690D4 motherboard at 4133mhz
> View attachment 2571379


So your 2 chips somehow negate the average, and you posted a pic of the 12900KF lol.

Alrighty.


----------



## maniakpfs

acoustic said:


> So your 2 chips somehow negate the average, and you posted a pic of the 12900KF lol.
> 
> Alrighty.


I'm using it now so . do you want 12600k?


----------



## postem

david azulay said:


> Crucial Ballistix 2 X 16 32GB kit 3600mhz cl16/18/18/38
> oc to 5000mhz cl 18/23/23/43 gear 2
> cpu 12700k oc 5200mhz avx512
> ring 4700mhz
> dram 1.55v
> vddq 1.45v
> vccsa 1.3v
> Y Ccruncher avx512 5.2 ghz all p core
> 65.5s
> mobo asus prime z690 d4
> ODT 80-48-0
> 
> latency 48ns


what bandwidth?


----------



## david azulay

postem said:


> what bandwidth?


----------



## maniakpfs

postem said:


> jaka przepustowość?
> [/CYTAT]


----------



## postem

very nice you are convincing me of not getting a z790 with ddr5 next year


----------



## postem

how are you getting this bandwidth with 4133?


----------



## maniakpfs

postem said:


> jak uzyskujesz tę przepustowość z 4133?
> [/CYTAT]
> 
> 
> postem said:
> 
> 
> 
> jak uzyskujesz tę przepustowość z 4133?
> [/CYTAT]
Click to expand...

What do you have ? You tried a different bios now 12700k look


----------



## postem

maniakpfs said:


> What do you have ? You tried a different bios now 12700k look
> 
> View attachment 2571450
> View attachment 2571450


I was thinking the copy bandwidth is way higher, but you are OCing the ring? im on 4133 around 64-65GB/s


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> I was thinking the copy bandwidth is way higher, but you are OCing the ring? im on 4133 around 64-65GB/s


I have similar results with Micron B-die. (Check signature.)


----------



## maniakpfs

postem said:


> I was thinking the copy bandwidth is way higher, but you are OCing the ring? im on 4133 around 64-65GB/s


Show your numbers !


----------



## opheen




----------



## ViTosS

postem said:


> very nice you are convincing me of not getting a z790 with ddr5 next year


While you have DDR4 doing 43-44ns latency (almost the same of DDR5 7800Mhz CL32) and 70GB/s, in DDR5 side you have almost 130GB/s and the same latency... There is no way DDR4 will be able to compete with future DDR5s. The best DDR4 I saw and that @Ichirou bought from was from Carillo, 4300CL14 1T and still wasn't able to do more than 368fps in SOTTR.


----------



## opheen

DDR5 is faster than DDR4 alrdy, But ddr4 is the easyest and cheapest way to get good performance.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> While you have DDR4 doing 43-44ns latency (almost the same of DDR5 7800Mhz CL32) and 70GB/s, in DDR5 side you have almost 130GB/s and the same latency... There is no way DDR4 will be able to compete with future DDR5s. The best DDR4 I saw and that @Ichirou bought from was from Carillo, 4300CL14 1T and still wasn't able to do more than 368fps in SOTTR.


I was scammed on Carillo's chip as well, as it was not capable of booting 4,300 MHz with Samsung B-die no matter what I tried. I only managed to do with a different chip.
He must have swapped in another chip prior to sending it off to me. It makes sense, since he deleted his post and all traces of it soon after to hide that fact.
I ended up selling it back out for only a $50 loss overall, so it's not a big deal, but it was certainly a waste of time and energy.
@Falkentyne


----------



## postem

ViTosS said:


> While you have DDR4 doing 43-44ns latency (almost the same of DDR5 7800Mhz CL32) and 70GB/s, in DDR5 side you have almost 130GB/s and the same latency... There is no way DDR4 will be able to compete with future DDR5s. The best DDR4 I saw and that @Ichirou bought from was from Carillo, 4300CL14 1T and still wasn't able to do more than 368fps in SOTTR.


I agree with you however as far as I see people are struggling to get 6400mt so it's probably 1 to 2 years to get there


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> I was scammed on Carillo's chip as well, as it was not capable of booting 4,300 MHz with Samsung B-die no matter what I tried. I only managed to do with a different chip.
> He must have swapped in another chip prior to sending it off to me. It makes sense, since he deleted his post and all traces of it soon after to hide that fact.
> I ended up selling it back out for only a $50 loss overall, so it's not a big deal, but it was certainly a waste of time and energy.
> @Falkentyne
> Damn I didn't know that





postem said:


> I agree with you however as far as I see people are struggling to get 6400mt so it's probably 1 to 2 years to get there


Actually if you have two things: SK Hynix (doesn't even need to be A-Die) DDR5 and MSI Unify-X or EVGA Dark or Apex from 2022 fabrication date, your chances of getting 6800-7200 are really high, I honestly never seen someone with that combo that didn't manage to OC to 6800+Mhz...


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> Damn I didn't know that


Yeah, I got scammed. He claimed it was his 4,300 CL14 1T stable chip, but it wasn't. It was just some generic 12900K.
The SP was as promised, but the IMC was nowhere near as strong as he claimed.
I sold it back out quickly and managed to mitigate my losses, so it doesn't bother me as much in retrospect.
FWIW, I got that so-called "binned" chip (back then) after shipping for around $1,050 USD.


----------



## postem

ViTosS said:


> Actually if you have two things: SK Hynix (doesn't even need to be A-Die) DDR5 and MSI Unify-X or EVGA Dark or Apex from 2022 fabrication date, your chances of getting 6800-7200 are really high, I honestly never seen someone with that combo that didn't manage to OC to 6800+Mhz...


What about temps it's manageable or needs constantly cooling?


----------



## ViTosS

postem said:


> What about temps it's manageable or needs constantly cooling?


Most people I see using those frequencies are using watercooled DIMMs, but I think if you have on air and proper heatsink with a fan pointed to it you can cool enough and be able to use high voltages normally, at least I can cool my RAM up to 1.60v without any problem with a fan pointed directly to it even in hot days. I think DDR5 should be the same.


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> What about temps it's manageable or needs constantly cooling?


You're not going to be able to do it without at least some fans blowing on the sticks.


----------



## tps3443

Has anyone had a chip that can run 4000+ Gear (1) on a 2 Dimm motherboard, but not run these speeds on a 4 dimm motherboard?

I’ve found a really amazing deal on a brand new Asus Z590 Maximus Extreme motherboard, and there are a few features I’d like to try on it. But it is (4) dimm slots. My Z590 Dark is 2 dimm slots, I’m worried memory overclocking will take a hit.

Any thoughts?


----------



## maniakpfs

opheen said:


> View attachment 2571514


You can test the MT5 anta 777 4h VDDQ TX 1.27v ?


----------



## Ichirou

tps3443 said:


> Has anyone had a chip that can run 4000+ Gear (1) on a 2 Dimm motherboard, but not run these speeds on a 4 dimm motherboard?
> 
> I’ve found a really amazing deal on a brand new Asus Z590 Maximus Extreme motherboard, and there are a few features I’d like to try on it. But it is (4) dimm slots. My Z590 Dark is 2 dimm slots, I’m worried memory overclocking will take a hit.
> 
> Any thoughts?


I don't think anyone here will know, since people have moved on from Z590, and 4,000 Gear 1 is rare to begin with on that platform.

You might have to buy, try, refund.


----------



## postem

Ichirou said:


> You're not going to be able to do it without at least some fans blowing on the sticks.


Just for comparision, DDR4 B die gonna suffer from same issues? Unfortunally my Asgard cheapo bdie doesnt have temp sensor, but i was having 20c room temperature at 4133 stable, but yesterday we had a sharp hot day 30c+, suddenly i started having memory issues.


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> Just for comparision, DDR4 B die gonna suffer from same issues? Unfortunally my Asgard cheapo bdie doesnt have temp sensor, but i was having 20c room temperature at 4133 stable, but yesterday we had a sharp hot day 30c+, suddenly i started having memory issues.


Loosen the primaries and other heat-sensitive timings, and you'll be fine. Don't run VDIMM so high.
It's much easier to get performance out of DDR4 Gear 1 than DDR5 top-end.

But really, any person looking to overclock their memory should be investing in a proper cooling solution. Bare RAM isn't really a solution.


----------



## opheen

maniakpfs said:


> You can test the MT5 anta 777 4h VDDQ TX 1.27v ?


----------



## maniakpfs

opheen said:


> DDR5 is faster than DDR4 alrdy, But ddr4 is the easyest and cheapest way to get good performance.





opheen said:


> View attachment 2571730



2h is not 4h but ok you have top ddr4. Try 4133mhz cl15 1.6v cl14 1.67v


----------



## opheen

maniakpfs said:


> 2h is not 4h but ok you have top ddr4. Try 4133mhz cl15 1.6v cl14 1.67v


I have Fully tested them so many times now that i feel confident that it will do with a quick round with TM5 and Karhu to possibly uncover if there is something wrong, after expressing a bit with sub timings , and they are watercooled so temps are now issue , i can boot 4133 but it is so highly unstable that I don't bother trying to stabilize it..


----------



## tps3443

maniakpfs said:


> 2h is not 4h but ok you have top ddr4. Try 4133mhz cl15 1.6v cl14 1.67v


What are you implying the 1.6V and 1.67V is for? Memory voltage?


----------



## ItsCash

Just got my 4400 C19 Patriot Vipers in the mail, checked the Taiphoon Burner specs and sure enough B-Die (Single Rank). I have the 12700K and Msi z690 DDR4 Edge. Anyone have any luck getting it to overclock for better latency? If so, could use a starting point. TIA.


----------



## Ichirou

ItsCash said:


> Just got my 4400 C19 Patriot Vipers in the mail, checked the Taiphoon Burner specs and sure enough B-Die (Single Rank). I have the 12700K and Msi z690 DDR4 Edge. Anyone have any luck getting it to overclock for better latency? If so, could use a starting point. TIA.


Pretty much copy my settings verbatim, and use BIOS version 1.22 (released in February). Most likely won't need to change much if anything at all.
Saved you a few weeks of time.


----------



## tps3443

Ichirou said:


> Pretty much copy my settings verbatim, and use BIOS version 1.22 (released in February). Most likely won't need to change much if anything at all.
> Saved you a few weeks of time.
> View attachment 2571786



It seems like you’d have lower latency than this no? Can you explain this?

Also, how hot does your memory gets during this stability testing?


----------



## Ichirou

tps3443 said:


> It seems like you’d have lower latency than this no? Can you explain this?
> 
> Also, how hot does your memory gets during this stability testing?


CPU was just left on Auto at the time of the screenshot. It improved later on when I actually optimized things further. 

As for temps, no idea, since no sensor. But I cool it with fans. It's not meant to be run bare.


----------



## Nono31

*I decrease 12700k latency to 45.7ns. Was the max with 3900mhz 13 13 13 28.*


----------



## Nono31

Its very hard to lower. Myself i xan push more than 4000mhz the imc. In comparaison my 10900k is actually at 37.5ns and he will push lower in few days.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

I dont know why buildzoid is always **** talking micron. I brought the high voltage dumpster fire to gear 1, bottomed out most of the secondaries no sweat, and am running into the 40ns range.

1.65 vdimm 1.45 vddq 1.45 vsa lol


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> I dont know why buildzoid is always **** talking micron. I brought the high voltage dumpster fire to gear 1, bottomed out most of the secondaries no sweat, and am running into the 40ns range.
> 
> 1.65 vdimm 1.45 vddq 1.45 vsa lol
> View attachment 2571916


He's in love with Samsung B die 

Is that Micron B dies, you needed to loosen primaries that much to get 4089mhz?


----------



## maniakpfs

[CYTAT="Nono31, post: 29030097, członek: 669205"]
Bardzo trudno ją obniżyć. Ja xan push ponad 4000mhz imc. Dla porównania, mój 10900k ma w rzeczywistości 37,5 ns i za kilka dni zejdzie niżej.
[/CYTAT]

On 10900k 34 is best my


----------



## Agent-A01

MIXEDGREENS said:


> I dont know why buildzoid is always **** talking micron. I brought the high voltage dumpster fire to gear 1, bottomed out most of the secondaries no sweat, and am running into the 40ns range.
> 
> 1.65 vdimm 1.45 vddq 1.45 vsa lol
> View attachment 2571916


Simply because B-die is just that much better. Good b-die = 42ns with way less voltage


----------



## Nono31

maniakpfs said:


> [CYTAT="Nono31, post: 29030097, członek: 669205"]
> Bardzo trudno ją obniżyć. Ja xan push ponad 4000mhz imc. Dla porównania, mój 10900k ma w rzeczywistości 37,5 ns i za kilka dni zejdzie niżej.
> [/CYTAT]
> 
> On 10900k 34 is best my


Very nice👍
What setup do you have?
I have done this in 4400 c15 16 16 32 with cache 5100. I will test 2 dims board. Wait and see


----------



## edkieferlp

Agent-A01 said:


> Simply because B-die is just that much better. Good b-die = 42ns with way less voltage


while that is true as far as benchmarks go, you can get good latency with micron.
I get 44ns at 3867 with basically stock voltages.
Vdim = 1.37
SA= 1.27
VDDQ tx =1.35

normal apps you won't notice a difference IMO.

Plus side I never worry about memory temps even when the room is 85F.
I didn't even try to lower primary timings just 2nd and 3rd timings.


----------



## bass junkie xl

I have a kit of team group extreme 4133 c18 1.40v xmp kit 8 GB x 4 single rank 
they do 4000 c 15-15-15-35 1.55v and pass tm5 ab 12 hrs 
there doing 
43.2 NS in Adia 64 
RTL/I'll train 69/71/69/71 
all is good 

but my 2 kits of 
g.skill Royal 4000 c16 xmp @ same timings train 71/73 71/73. if I lower to 14-15-15-35 
@ 4000 I get 69/71 69/71 
the single rank 8gb x 4 @ 4000 c15 gets 0.4 NS latency lower then the dual ranks @ 4000 c14. that normal ? they pass tm5 ab for 12 hrs 

my main rig has 12900 ks sp [email protected] 54 all core 5.1 ring with 4133 MHz, gear 1 
15-15-15-35 @ 1.55 does 39.1 NS in Intel latency test and 41.9 NS in Adia 64 and passes 12 hr tm5 absolute. 

is there any way to get dual rank to train as tight as single rank 8gb x 4 ? I have tried evrything . 

once in blue moon I can train 71/71 71/71 on the 4133 c 15-15-215-35 1.55v dual rank royals 4000 c16 kit gear 1 and that lowers latency by 0.5 NS down. to less then 42 NS in Adia 64 . 

4133 c 15 on 12900k isn't stable.gear 1 
4000 c14 and c 15 pass both with single rank 8gb x4 and 16 x2 GB on the 12900k rig 

12900ks rig can do the same but up to 4133 15 and get lower latency then the 4000 c14 does.


----------



## Nono31

No thats not possible to get dual rank as tight as single rank is. Usually you can reach a lower frequency than single rank.


----------



## KyKo.

3 hours is it enough on y-cruncher HNT test for to be sure if this overclocking is stable ?


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

edkieferlp said:


> He's in love with Samsung B die
> 
> Is that Micron B dies, you needed to loosen primaries that much to get 4089mhz?


Yessir 16gbit 2133 downbin. 3600 18-22-22-42 xmp. I actually downscaled my timings from my painstakingly tested 4800 overclock, except I calculated for 4133 which my MC apparently cant quite handle. Wanted to test 'best foot forward' of both gear 1 and 2 with the same ram. 

But yeah its pretty much value bin chip quality so the only way for me to have some fun is crank up the volts and see how she flies.


----------



## edkieferlp

MIXEDGREENS said:


> Yessir 16gbit 2133 downbin. 3600 18-22-22-42 xmp. I actually downscaled my timings from my painstakingly tested 4800 overclock, except I calculated for 4133 which my MC apparently cant quite handle. Wanted to test 'best foot forward' of both gear 1 and 2 with the same ram.
> 
> But yeah its pretty much value bin chip quality so the only way for me to have some fun is crank up the volts and see how she flies.


Ok, believe it or not I looked for Crucial Ballistix 3600 (16, 18, 18, 38) as I had good results with their DDR3 ones and the price is very good.


----------



## MIXEDGREENS

edkieferlp said:


> Ok, believe it or not I looked for Crucial Ballistix 3600 (16, 18, 18, 38) as I had good results with their DDR3 ones and the price is very good.


Oh wow you're right. I price comparison shopped for CPU, motherboard, GPU, PSU, and SSD before saying "**** it" and going for instant gratification through best buy. Literally everything but RAM. Just picked up the best 32 gig kit they had in stock. And now this puts me in the ludicrous position of considering spending more money on ram that's technically already obsolete that I would only ever notice in benchmarks... which means I'm considering the even more ludicrous idea of putting that $170 towards a DDR5 MB and kit... which I would still only ever notice in benchmarks


----------



## Ichirou

KyKo. said:


> 3 hours is it enough on y-cruncher HNT test for to be sure if this overclocking is stable ?
> 
> View attachment 2571940


y-cruncher's Component Stress Test _with all tests enabled_ is required to make sure your CPU and IMC are stable.
To test your RAM, you gotta use TM5 with anta777 ABSOLUT.


----------



## Agent-A01

edkieferlp said:


> while that is true as far as benchmarks go, you can get good latency with micron.
> I get 44ns at 3867 with basically stock voltages.
> Vdim = 1.37
> SA= 1.27
> VDDQ tx =1.35
> 
> normal apps you won't notice a difference IMO.
> 
> Plus side I never worry about memory temps even when the room is 85F.
> I didn't even try to lower primary timings just 2nd and 3rd timings.


I was referring to 32GB kits, micron cannot get that low(that I've ever seen). 
8GB sticks are easy enough to get low though. B-die 8GB sticks are even easier to tweak too.

Also with active cooling(3x noctua fans) I reach about 33c max under mem tests so even summer heat won't affect it.
They are more temperature sensitive though, above 42-45c~ is where it may get finicky on some sticks.


----------



## ItsCash

Ichirou said:


> Pretty much copy my settings verbatim, and use BIOS version 1.22 (released in February). Most likely won't need to change much if anything at all.
> Saved you a few weeks of time.
> View attachment 2571786


Just getting to testing your settings, what voltage are you running this at? Trying on the newest BIOS, as I just put this build together and not having any luck, so far. Is the newest BIOS not any good for memory overclocking?


----------



## Ichirou

ItsCash said:


> Just getting to testing your settings, what voltage are you running this at? Trying on the newest BIOS, as I just put this build together and not having any luck, so far. Is the newest BIOS not any good for memory overclocking?


It's all on the right side of the screenshot.
Unless you have a 12900KS (or Raptor Lake), there is no reason to use any BIOS on the Edge apart from 1.22. It's hands-down the absolute best BIOS you could possibly use.


----------



## Skunk0001

Ichirou said:


> there is no reason to use any BIOS on the Edge apart from 1.22. It's hands-down the absolute best BIOS you could possibly use


Maybe for your setup, but its certainly not for me. With 4x 8GB B-Die 1.22 isn't capable of doing the same clocks/timings as I can get with 1.44, while also being much more likely to get stuck in a timing/boot loop, or even needing a CMOS reset.

I've not tried 1.40, as 1.44 works as well as I could expect, but I imagine it would be comparable to 1.44. (Minor) downside is that you need to mod in an older Microcode for AVX512, but that takes literally minutes to do at the most.


----------



## Kryuger

Kryuger said:


> Heads up for anyone using the Z690 Aorus Elite DDR4.
> 
> The latest BIOS (F7) breaks Ring Ratio overclocking and forces a constant down bin, regardless if the down bin setting is enabled or disabled.
> 
> Might have been a bad update on my side, but downgrading to F20a has fixed the issue. Haven't been able to confirm if anyone else has the same bug, but I've contacted Gigabyte about it and will await their response. The last time I contacted Gigabyte support, I got told I didn't know how to read the part number of my RAM and they implied I was stupid. I wont be expecting any miracles.


Today, Gigabyte have provided me with a new BIOS (F20b). It does not fix the issue unfortunately. Some notable changes in the new beta BIOS:


Ring Ratio now has a value for Max Ring Ratio and Min Ring Ratio.
OCTVB is under Advanced CPU Settings and offers an all-sync or per-core value (It also works unlike F20a).
Voltages for VDDQ and DRAM are now at the bottom.
There's a non-working menu inside the Advanced Memory Settings. This indicates that the Round Trip Latency Optimisation might be soon, and should allow for Gigabyte users with high speed DDR4 memory to have aligned RTL values.
F20a, the working BIOS, uses Intel MCU 22. Both F7 and F20b use Intel MCU 23, which is the microcode that I believe is responsible for forcing a down bin of the Ring Ratio to 36, regardless of OC values set, or if Ring Down Bin is disabled under Advanced CPU Settings.

Will be nice to have greater memory performance if they really are adding the RTL optimisations. I remember this menu on my old Z490 Aorus.

EDIT: I've taken MCU 22 from F20a and placed it inside F20b and the Ring Ratio works correctly.


----------



## Ichirou

Skunk0001 said:


> Maybe for your setup, but its certainly not for me. With 4x 8GB B-Die 1.22 isn't capable of doing the same clocks/timings as I can get with 1.44, while also being much more likely to get stuck in a timing/boot loop, or even needing a CMOS reset.
> 
> I've not tried 1.40, as 1.44 works as well as I could expect, but I imagine it would be comparable to 1.44. (Minor) downside is that you need to mod in an older Microcode for AVX512, but that takes literally minutes to do at the most.


With 4x8 GB Samsung B-die Single Rank, I only managed 4,000 MHz 16-18-18-XX-1T. Unless you can do 15-15-15-XX-1T on V1.44, there isn't really an improvement.
Flat-15 seems to be easily achievable on the ASUS Strix though. But I haven't really tested it all too much since 32 GB isn't my end goal.


----------



## bass junkie xl

anyone try out the new asus strix bios 2004 ? i know 1704 was garbo , a few users saids reverting back from 2004 to older wasnt working .


----------



## maniakpfs

Nono31 said:


> Very nice👍
> What setup do you have?
> I have done this in 4400 c15 16 16 32 with cache 5100. I will test 2 dims board. Wait and see


im have 4400mhz cl15-15-15-15-35 on apex z 490


----------



## Cam1

bass junkie xl said:


> anyone try out the new asus strix bios 2004 ? i know 1704 was garbo , a few users saids reverting back from 2004 to older wasnt working .


Just flashed and same settings as preview bios works fine for me on 2004 with the last ME.


----------



## maniakpfs

KyKo. said:


> 3 hours is it enough on y-cruncher HNT test for to be sure if this overclocking is stable ?
> 
> View attachment 2571940


Try intel burn test on very high 4gb 30 rounds. Will do the same job


----------



## opheen




----------



## ItsCash

Ichirou said:


> It's all on the right side of the screenshot.
> Unless you have a 12900KS (or Raptor Lake), there is no reason to use any BIOS on the Edge apart from 1.22. It's hands-down the absolute best BIOS you could possibly use.










Looks Like I went from High 60 in latency to Mid 40's with your settings, couldn't copy them completely had to clear CMOS couple times but once I got it stable its been GREAT, Thanks for the heads up in the right direction!!


----------



## Ichirou

ItsCash said:


> View attachment 2573776
> Looks Like I went from High 60 in latency to Mid 40's with your settings, couldn't copy them completely had to clear CMOS couple times but once I got it stable its been GREAT, Thanks for the heads up in the right direction!!


Glad to hear it


----------



## Nono31

ItsCash said:


> View attachment 2573776
> Looks Like I went from High 60 in latency to Mid 40's with your settings, couldn't copy them completely had to clear CMOS couple times but once I got it stable its been GREAT, Thanks for the heads up in the right direction!!


I am absolutly amazed by frequency of North bridge with e core on.
I see like me you are limited to 4000mhz imc with 12700k.


----------



## jambazz

*F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW vs F4-4000C16D-32GVKA --- SR vs DR B-die experiment*

I had read so much good about the DR B-die kits, that I decided it was time for an upgrade. Well, after testing this kit, I am returning it, saving my $ for a 300hz 1440P monitor instead.

The goal of the upgrade was to gain better 0.1/1%/AVG FPS in PUBG, which is the only game I play. The better tuned Dual Rank kit, however, did not produce a noticeable better score.
I tested FPS with RivaTuner benchmark, comparing saved demo gameplay for 1-2 minutes in different scenarios where I am not maxed (<300 FPS) out and not GPU bound.

Also I've included some synthetic benchmarks from AIDA64, 7-zip, SuperPI, and y-cruncher.

It surprised me how the lesser tuned kit did just as good as the new b-die DR kit, and really how much better Read speed the old SR kit has compared to the DR kit.

Windows 10 Home 21H2
E-cores disabled
Power Plan=Balanced
vddq 1.51
vdd 1.5
sa volt 1.268









SR |||||||||||||||||| DR


----------



## bass junkie xl

jambazz said:


> *F4-4266C19D-16GTZKW vs F4-4000C16D-32GVKA --- SR vs DR B-die experiment*
> 
> I had read so much good about the DR B-die kits, that I decided it was time for an upgrade. Well, after testing this kit, I am returning it, saving my $ for a 300hz 1440P monitor instead.
> 
> The goal of the upgrade was to gain better 0.1/1%/AVG FPS in PUBG, which is the only game I play. The better tuned Dual Rank kit, however, did not produce a noticeable better score.
> I tested FPS with RivaTuner benchmark, comparing saved demo gameplay for 1-2 minutes in different scenarios where I am not maxed (<300 FPS) out and not GPU bound.
> 
> Also I've included some synthetic benchmarks from AIDA64, 7-zip, SuperPI, and y-cruncher.
> 
> It surprised me how the lesser tuned kit did just as good as the new b-die DR kit, and really how much better Read speed the old SR kit has compared to the DR kit.
> 
> Windows 10 Home 21H2
> E-cores disabled
> Power Plan=Balanced
> vddq 1.51
> vdd 1.5
> sa volt 1.268
> 
> 
> View attachment 2573840
> SR |||||||||||||||||| DR
> View attachment 2573841
> 
> 
> View attachment 2573838
> 
> 
> View attachment 2573839
> 
> 
> View attachment 2573842
> 
> View attachment 2573843



great comparison i have seen ans tested my self including frame chasers on your tube anything less then like 44-46 ns is pretty much the same fps long as your 44-45 ns range and geting 62k read any better is pretty much single % fps gains . i tried 4133 cl 15-15-15-28 gear 1 doing 3k faster against your scores and less then 42ns vs 4000 c15 . c 15 c16 and fps was the same by single digits . gamingfps wise . 

long as your 62k read and 46ns or less your game fps with pretty much maxed out ( give or take a few % )


----------



## jambazz

bass junkie xl said:


> great comparison i have seen ans tested my self including frame chasers on your tube anything less then like 44-46 ns is pretty much the same fps long as your 44-45 ns range and geting 62k read any better is pretty much single % fps gains . i tried 4133 cl 15-15-15-28 gear 1 doing 3k faster against your scores and less then 42ns vs 4000 c15 . c 15 c16 and fps was the same by single digits . gamingfps wise .
> 
> long as your 62k read and 46ns or less your game fps with pretty much maxed out ( give or take a few % )


Yeah, I've also seen frame chasers comparison of fast DDR4 vs the fastest DDR5 on the planet: The Fastest Memory On The Planet. - YouTube 
But how about SR vs DR, have you made any observations yourself?


----------



## bass junkie xl

jambazz said:


> Yeah, I've also seen frame chasers comparison of fast DDR4 vs the fastest DDR5 on the planet: The Fastest Memory On The Planet. - YouTube
> But how about SR vs DR, have you made any observations yourself?


8gb x 4 sticks of team group extreme @ 4133 18-18-18-38 xmp @ 4000 15-15-15-35 gear 1 @ 1.55v trains 69/71 69/71 scores 42.9 ns in adia 64 while dual rank g.skill 16gb x 2 of 4400 c17 xmp @ 4000 c 15-15-15-35 1.57v trains 71/73 71/73 wich is slightly higher latency to 69/71 69 /71 rtl/iol like the single ranks i have to run the dual rank @ 4000 14-15-15-35 then it trains 69/71 69/71 

both on a 12900 ks @ 5.4 ghz all core with 5.1 ring e cores off on a3090 ti liquid cooled @ 1080 p low ere the same fps even in arma 3 yet another arma benchmark with in 1-2 % or less of eachother


----------



## F0bzZ

Hey all, this is my first post. I recently learned about the importance of getting the latency down to improve gaming performance. I've always just used XMP. After learning about it I bought myself a B-die kit and would like to tune it as best as I can. Is there a guide that anyone can offer up?


----------



## acoustic

F0bzZ said:


> Hey all, this is my first post. I recently learned about the importance of getting the latency down to improve gaming performance. I've always just used XMP. After learning about it I bought myself a B-die kit and would like to tune it as best as I can. Is there a guide that anyone can offer up?


This is a very good start









MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## F0bzZ

acoustic said:


> This is a very good start
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper
> 
> 
> C# WPF to automate HCI MemTest. Contribute to integralfx/MemTestHelper development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com


Thank you!


----------



## F0bzZ

I've been playing around with the RAM bios settings over the last few days and I've observed something odd, wonder if anyone can tell me if this is normal. I have a Gigabyte Z690 Gaming X DDR4 mobo and one of the things I've noticed is that as I'm pushing settings that work and test successfully, once I push past that setting on my next boot, if its unstable and I go back into the bios and set everything back to the way it was when it was working, it no longer works. I have to clear CMOS and then get my way back up to the settings that worked. Is this normal?


----------



## Ichirou

F0bzZ said:


> I've been playing around with the RAM bios settings over the last few days and I've observed something odd, wonder if anyone can tell me if this is normal. I have a Gigabyte Z690 Gaming X DDR4 mobo and one of the things I've noticed is that as I'm pushing settings that work and test successfully, once I push past that setting on my next boot, if its unstable and I go back into the bios and set everything back to the way it was when it was working, it no longer works. I have to clear CMOS and then get my way back up to the settings that worked. Is this normal?


Yes, since Gigabyte is Gigatrash. 
Swap the board out if you can.


----------



## F0bzZ

Ichirou said:


> Yes, since Gigabyte is Gigatrash.
> Swap the board out if you can.


 damn, so it's a gigabyte thing? first time i buy one too. lol.


----------



## Ichirou

F0bzZ said:


> damn, so it's a gigabyte thing? first time i buy one too. lol.


Yes, very much so. They're targeting the budget non-overclocking crowd. You get what you pay for.


----------



## solon

sometimes it happens to me too


----------



## F0bzZ

Are most people turning off the E cores? Does it lower latency?


----------



## Ichirou

F0bzZ said:


> Are most people turning off the E cores? Does it lower latency?


No. And no. 
Only boosting the cache decreases latency. 
But disabling the E-cores allows you to raise the cache higher, so that's something to consider.


----------



## F0bzZ

Ichirou said:


> No. And no.
> Only boosting the cache decreases latency.
> But disabling the E-cores allows you to raise the cache higher, so that's something to consider.


Thanks. Appreciate it.


----------



## edkieferlp

F0bzZ said:


> Thanks. Appreciate it.


Just know you can also raise the ring too if E cores are enabled. With E cores disabled you maybe could raise the ring to somewhere in the range of 4.7 to 4.9 or so and with E cores enabled range would be lower but around 4.1- 4.4 which is still a decent bump from the stock 3.6

PS: I leave E cores enabled on my 12600k.


----------



## KedarWolf

Are you a human?







www.newegg.com





Dark Kingpin $449.99 on Newegg right now.

Same price on Amazon and EVGA websites too.


----------



## KedarWolf

Deleted


----------



## EarlZ

I am using Asrock Timing config 4.0.13 and it detects my memory channels as single. DIMMs slots populated are A2 and B2 on an Asus Strix D4. Is this a detection bug?

EDIT: Aida64 does show it as dual channel and I noticed that everyone else with the same motherboard is detecting it as dual channel. What could be causing this issue and is my ram really running on single channel?


----------



## GeneO

EarlZ said:


> I am using Asrock Timing config 4.0.13 and it detects my memory channels as single. DIMMs slots populated are A2 and B2 on an Asus Strix D4. Is this a detection bug?
> 
> EDIT: Aida64 does show it as dual channel and I noticed that everyone else with the same motherboard is detecting it as dual channel. What could be causing this issue and is my ram really running on single channel?



?? In your attachment AIDA identifies it as dual channel. You would not be able to get a read speed of 54000 if it were not. Looks setup right to me.


----------



## EarlZ

GeneO said:


> ?? In your attachment AIDA identifies it as dual channel. You would not be able to get a read speed of 54000 if it were not. Looks setup right to me.


Sorry for the confusion. I meant that Asrock Timing config detects my memory as single channel while I see a lot of screenshots from users of the same software version & motherboard showing "Dual" I recently downloaded AIDA64 and did not know what kinds of read speeds to expect. Thanks for confirming.


----------



## edkieferlp

EarlZ said:


> Sorry for the confusion. I meant that Asrock Timing config detects my memory as single channel while I see a lot of screenshots from users of the same software version & motherboard showing "Dual" I recently downloaded AIDA64 and did not know what kinds of read speeds to expect. Thanks for confirming.


Asrock Timing config should read dual, it does for me with my TUF Z690/Micron E die 16gig kit.


----------



## EarlZ

edkieferlp said:


> Asrock Timing config should read dual, it does for me with my TUF Z690/Micron E die 16gig kit.


It should but its not on my end and hence I asked the question?


----------



## Raisingx

I'm in a pickle after updating the motherboard bios!

I have no idea how to tweak the memory and I've been using the XMP profile without any problems for almost an year now until I've decided to update the bios(2004 version), which doesn't allow to revert to the previous one (there was no warning when I downloaded it!)

Here's my system:

12900k
Asus Z690 TUF WIFI D4
F4-4400C17D-32GTZRTrident Z RGB DDR4-4400 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)

If I choose the XMP 2.0 option it does a bunch of boot loops and forces me back to the bios screen, the best I could do was pick XMP and then reduce to 3600mhz which will work, but not more than that..

Is there anything I could try to do manually? Thanks!


----------



## Ichirou

Raisingx said:


> I'm in a pickle after updating the motherboard bios!
> 
> I have no idea how to tweak the memory and I've been using the XMP profile without any problems for almost an year now until I've decided to update the bios(2004 version), which doesn't allow to revert to the previous one (there was no warning when I downloaded it!)
> 
> Here's my system:
> 
> 12900k
> Asus Z690 TUF WIFI D4
> F4-4400C17D-32GTZRTrident Z RGB DDR4-4400 CL17-18-18-38 1.50V 32GB (2x16GB)
> 
> If I choose the XMP 2.0 option it does a bunch of boot loops and forces me back to the bios screen, the best I could do was pick XMP and then reduce to 3600mhz which will work, but not more than that..
> 
> Is there anything I could try to do manually? Thanks!


You got screwed over just like everyone else here who went to BIOS 2004. Nobody expected it to be a permanent update.
Paging @bscool


----------



## Raisingx

Ichirou said:


> You got screwed over just like everyone else here who went to BIOS 2004. Nobody expected it to be a permanent update.
> Paging @bscool


Are they aware of this? Hope a fix is on the way..


----------



## bscool

Raisingx said:


> Are they aware of this? Hope a fix is on the way..


They will probably get it fixed eventually but my guess is they will be more focused on 13th gen optimizations.

The only thing I can say to try is setting sa at 1.3 to 1.35v and vddq 1.35 to 1.5v and then adjust them down when you find something that is stable,

Gear 1 will give better performance than gear 2 for most uses and benchmarks.

Edit and for gear 1 make sure your using 2t, auto should be 2t in gear 1 but incase you try to run gear 1 and 1t with DR b die doubt it will work.



We'll be back.


----------



## Raisingx

bscool said:


> They will probably get it fixed eventually but my guess is they will be more focused on 13th gen optimizations.
> 
> The only thing I can say to try is setting sa at 1.3 to 1.35v and vddq 1.35 to 1.5v and then adjust them down when you find something that is stable,
> 
> Gear 1 will give better performance than gear 2 for most uses and benchmarks.
> 
> Edit and for gear 1 make sure your using 2t, auto should be 2t in gear 1 but incase you try to run gear 1 and 1t with DR b die doubt it will work.
> 
> 
> 
> We'll be back.


Thanks!

Got halfway there, now at XMP settings on 4000mhz 1T but anything more won't work, using those maximum voltages and 2T doesn't seem to make a difference if I try anything more than 4000mhz..


----------



## bscool

Raisingx said:


> Thanks!
> 
> Got halfway there, now at XMP settings on 4000mhz 1T but anything more won't work, using those maximum voltages and 2T doesn't seem to make a difference if I try anything more than 4000mhz..


By default it will set gear 2 past 3600 if you are not manually setting it/gear 1.

So that is why 1t and 2t isn't making a difference.


----------



## bhav

When I got my Asrock Z690 itx/ax, I didn't know about gears, so I just OCed to 4800CL17 and left it, only tested lower clocks up to 3800CL13 which also works fine. Latency is rubbish at 65ns because of gear 2, but I can't be bothered changing it as I'm getting the new board soon and the Asrock board isn't happy with changing ram settings after a stable profile has been set.

My micron e die ran at G1 4000CL15 on the current setup, which is what it will be running after the new setup is done, and I'll drop the micron b die back down to gear 1 on the new board and 13900k shortly after, but will also test for 4800CL16 / 5000+CL18 at gear 2 for fun.

I only just found out from other threads here that DDR5 is fine for gear 2 because it does something twice, so it treats gear 2 like gear 1, but I don't get then how the current kit ran up up 4600CL15 on 10900k as that didn't have gears?

Thank you gears for crippling my micron B die.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> When I got my Asrock Z690 itx/ax, I didn't know about gears, so I just OCed to 4800CL17 and left it, only tested lower clocks up to 3800CL13 which also works fine. Latency is rubbish at 65ns because of gear 2, but I can't be bothered changing it as I'm getting the new board soon and the Asrock board isn't happy with changing ram settings after a stable profile has been set.
> 
> My *micron e die ran at G1 4000CL15 *on the current setup, which is what it will be running after the new setup is done, and I'll drop the micron b die back down to gear 1 on the new board and 13900k shortly after, but will also test for 4800CL16 / 5000+CL18 at gear 2 for fun.
> 
> I only just found out from other threads here that DDR5 is fine for gear 2 because it does something twice, so it treats gear 2 like gear 1, but I don't get then how the current kit ran up up 4600CL15 on 10900k as that didn't have gears?
> 
> Thank you gears for crippling my micron B die.


What CPU were you running 4000 CL15?
If you can do that on Z690 your doing good IMO.


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> What CPU were you running 4000 CL15?
> If you can do that on Z690 your doing good IMO.


Actually I might have messed up, I can't find the E die screenshot, must have accidentally deleted it.

In my B die screenshots, 3800CL13 was running with the same memory clock and IMC frequency so G1, and I have a screenshot where I tested the b die 4000CL16, but the memory controller was half. I tested 4000CL15 on the e die the same way.

I had gear left on auto so that means it was going to gear 2 in the 4000 Mhz tests. So I don't think I tested 4000 G1 as I didn't know what gear was when I bought the board and spent a while stressing both kits.

And I oop. So I only have 3800CL13 G1 confirmed, the 4000 tests had set to G2 as it was on auto.

Looks like I did mess up, 4000CL14G1 is no boot, only 3800CL13 on the b die :x

Thats on 12600k, so it can only do 3800G1. So it looks like 3733CL14 when I use it with the e die, not 4000CL15. The e die kit does 3733CL14, 4000CL15, 4200CL16 at 1.5v then stops scaling, but its dual rank and a 3+ year old cheap 3200CL16 kit so +1000 at stock CL! It cost £150 while 2x16 3200CL14 samsung B die was £320, the only problem being worse latency on micron.

So I'm 110% not buying a 13700k, only the 13900k for a better IMC. Looks like 4000+ G1 results I see everywhere are mostly 12900k.

Well I'm back to running 3800CL13 G1 now after having left it at 4800CL17 G2 for the last few months. I'll test and tighten the secondaries and see what the latency is after. It sucks cos I dont need 16 e cores. just the IMC.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Actually I might have messed up, I can't find the E die screenshot, must have accidentally deleted it.
> 
> In my B die screenshots, 3800CL13 was running with the same memory clock and IMC frequency so G1, and I have a screenshot where I tested the b die 4000CL16, but the memory controller was half. I tested 4000CL15 on the e die the same way.
> 
> I had gear left on auto so that means it was going to gear 2 in the 4000 Mhz tests. So I don't think I tested 4000 G1 as I didn't know what gear was when I bought the board and spent a while stressing both kits.
> 
> And I oop. So I only have 3800CL13 G1 confirmed, the 4000 tests had set to G2 as it was on auto.
> 
> Looks like I did mess up, 4000CL14G1 is no boot, only 3800CL13 on the b die :x
> 
> Thats on 12600k, so it can only do 3800G1. So it looks like 3733CL14 when I use it with the e die, not 4000CL15. The e die kit does 3733CL14, 4000CL15, 4200CL16 at 1.5v then stops scaling, but its dual rank and a 3+ year old cheap 3200CL16 kit so +1000 at stock CL! It cost £150 while 2x16 3200CL14 samsung B die was £320, the only problem being worse latency on micron.
> 
> So I'm 110% not buying a 13700k, only the 13900k for a better IMC. Looks like 4000+ G1 results I see everywhere are mostly 12900k.
> 
> Well I'm back to running 3800CL13 G1 now after having left it at 4800CL17 G2 for the last few months. I'll test and tighten the secondaries and see what the latency is after. It sucks cos I dont need 16 e cores. just the IMC.


I wasn't looking for a pic, just wanted to know the system specs.

We don't know how good the 13x00 IMC is, they might of improved it but yes on 12x00 the 12900k has the best chance of 4000+ in G1.


----------



## bhav

Its actually good that you asked though because it made me look at the results again and notice that my 4000 tests had been running at G2.

With the 13th gen, the video that was posted of an early leak showed the 13900k running a golden bin SP value (I think its called SP, might be something else), and it only did +100 over stock. This indicates that 13700ks will be running on failed 13900k silicon so they likely wont have as good overclocks or IMC.

I'm currently down to 13-17-17-32-550 timings. 16-16 in the middle ones and 500 on the big one don't boot, 525 and lower tras might. iirc I think the tras on this kit can do 28 at sub 4000.

I got gimpy middle values though, its meant to be a 4400 19-19-19 kit, but needs 19-20-20 for 4400 to boot. It wasn't enough reason to RMA though as another kit might not have done well in other timings or clocks.

And no, neither 30 tras or 525 whatever it is work, running 13-17-17-32-540 for an hour in memtest now. I dont bother with any other timings, just also the 65535 thing.

Ok so 2x16 micron B die is crap in gear 1. 3800CL13 is only 59k read and a whopping 59ns latency! (with secondaries all tuned).

4800CL17 G2 was 75k read 64ns latency. Looks like I'll have to use it in gear 2 for best results, unless I can get to 4133G1 on the 13900k, but then the new board might also manage 5000+ CL18.


----------



## bhav

Oooof I may have gotten 4800CL16 working, I bumped the SA to 1.4v dram to 1.65 first and instant errors. 1.7v Dram and 10 mins no errors.

The SA can be lowered, but 1.7v dram is back in business.

Please don't tell me that MSI lock their DDR4 boards to 1.6v, I needed a custom bios from Asrock support to go over 1.6v.










So it is an hour+ stable, but it wasn't at 16-22-22, I just cant be asked to wait another hour for the screenshot.

Crap latency though, 67ns.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Oooof I may have gotten 4800CL16 working, I bumped the SA to 1.4v dram to 1.65 first and instant errors. 1.7v Dram and 10 mins no errors.
> 
> The SA can be lowered, but 1.7v dram is back in business.
> 
> Please don't tell me that MSI lock their DDR4 boards to 1.6v, I needed a custom bios from Asrock support to go over 1.6v.
> 
> View attachment 2576770
> 
> 
> So it is an hour+ stable, but it wasn't at 16-22-22, I just cant be asked to wait another hour for the screenshot.
> 
> Crap latency though, 67ns.


Your latency seems high for the ram settings, what does Intel MLC give for latency?


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> Your latency seems high for the ram settings, what does Intel MLC give for latency?


Its because its SR ram and not samsung b die. Micron b die has much worse secondary and tertiary timings, and with 2x16 SR you dont get interleaving.

At 3800 G1 13-17-17-32-550-T1 its still only 59ns latency, those are the only timings I bother with and the 65535 one. 525 and 30 didnt work at 3800, G1 maxes at 3800 on my 12600k IMC, and at 4800 its 680 on that timing, less causing errors.

On Z490 it was 41.9ns at 4500 15-22-22 (going up to 4600CL15) because no gears with that generation. Its gear 2 introduction that killed this ram. Other users still get 35ns or less on Z490 with samsung B die.

Micron B die is rubbish at around 4000 unless you use 4x16 to regain interleaving. The only thing its for is pushing high clocks and aggressive timings.

Its just the highest overclocking 16 Gb sticks on DDR4.

G skill 2x16 DR are also up to 4800CL18 now so these resultts aren't much, but the samsung costs £400 so not worth it, this ram isnt worth it at full price for £350, it was just an extra toy to buy when it reduced to £180 and sold out everywhere.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Its because its SR ram and not samsung b die. Micron b die has much worse secondary and tertiary timings, and with 2x16 SR you dont get interleaving.
> 
> At 3800 G1 13-17-17-32-550-T1 its still only 59ns latency, those are the only timings I bother with and the 65535 one. 525 and 30 didnt work at 3800, G1 maxes at 3800, and at 4800 its 680 on that timing, less causing errors.
> 
> On Z490 it was 41.9ns at 4500 15-22-22 (going up to 4600CL15) because no gears with that generation. Its gear 2 introduction that killed this ram. Other users still get 35ns or less on Z490 with samsung B die.
> 
> Micron B die is rubbish at around 4000 unless you use 4x16 to regain interleaving. The only thing its for is pushing high clocks and aggressive timings.
> 
> Its just the highest overclocking 16 Gb sticks on DDR4.
> 
> G skill 2x16 DR are also up to 4800CL18 now so these resultts aren't much, but the samsung costs £400 so not worth it, this ram isnt worth it at full price for £350, it was just an extra toy to buy when it reduced to £180 and sold out everywhere.


Ok, well I am running single bank Mircon E 8gig sticks at 3867 with stock primaries (16, 18, 18, 38, 599 CR2) tweaked 2nd/3rd timings on a TUF Z690 wifi D4 MB, latency in Intel MLC is 44ms.
CPU= [email protected] 51, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47 / 3x 39, 38 / ring 40.

I think you should be able to get into mid 40's latency.


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> Ok, well I am running single bank Mircon E 8gig sticks at 3867 with stock primaries (16, 18, 18, 38, 599 CR2) tweaked 2nd/3rd timings on a TUF Z690 wifi D4 MB, latency in Intel MLC is 44ms.
> CPU= [email protected] 51, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47 / 3x 39, 38 / ring 40.
> 
> I think you should be able to get into mid 40's latency.


Oh indeed SR Micron B die should do much better than SR E die, I'll look for Intel MLC.

Ok well I downloaded it but now idea how to use it, any advice?

I forgot that TRAS <52 at 4800 on this kit eventually throws out errors, even if its been stable for an hour sometimes. Might be why 16-22-22 was erroring, but I just needed another bios flashback to bring the Tras back to 52 so I really ought to stop but I don't think I will.

Onwards to 16-22-22-52 and another 50 bios flashbacks!

Why. Do. I. Do. This?


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Oh indeed SR Micron B die should do much better than SR E die, I'll look for Intel MLC.
> 
> Ok well I downloaded it but now idea how to use it, any advice?
> 
> I forgot that TRAS <52 at 4800 on this kit eventually throws out errors, even if its been stable for an hour sometimes. Might be why 16-22-22 was erroring, but I just needed another bios flashback to bring the Tras back to 52 so I really ought to stop but I don't think I will.
> 
> Onwards to 16-22-22-52 and another 50 bios flashbacks!
> 
> Why. Do. I. Do. This?


Use this GUI version , if you already DL Intel MLC from Intel site then just place the GUI.exe in that folder (where Intel MLC.exe is) and run it, if not then follow the instructions on the GUI github page. It just needs to be in same dir to make it easy.








GitHub - FarisR99/IMLCGui: Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI


Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> Use this GUI version , if you already DL Intel MLC from Intel site then just place the GUI.exe in that folder (where Intel MLC.exe is) and run it, if not then follow the instructions on the GUI github page. It just needs to be in same dir to make it easy.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> GitHub - FarisR99/IMLCGui: Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI
> 
> 
> Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com


Still won't work, I put MLC.tgz from intel in the same folder, go to configure, browse to it, and nothing when I try to run it.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Still won't work, I put MLC.tgz from intel in the same folder, go to configure, browse to it, and nothing when I try to run it.


you have to unzip that tgz file, there actually 2 unzipping needed (you need the mlc.exe)

7.zip worked for me.


----------



## bhav

Got it working, a bit better, 61.9ns.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Got it working, a bit better, 61.9ns.


Is that the 4800 gear2 setup?

Are you running latency tests with stuff running in the background, best to reboot fresh and then run it, don't have RGB/fan software running, or any monitoring programs?
That should get you low values.

Anyway, MLC is a much better latency tester than AIDA


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> Is that the 4800 gear2 setup?
> 
> Are you running latency tests with stuff running in the background, best to reboot fresh and then run it, don't have RGB/fan software running, or any monitoring programs?
> That should get you low values.


It was the current 4800CL16 and background apps were closed, no rgb software but I need razer junk running for my wireless kb and mouse. I'll try after a clean restart in a bit.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> It was the current 4800CL16 and background apps were closed, no rgb software but I need razer junk running for my wireless kb and mouse. I'll try after a clean restart in a bit.


ok, that's not to bad for gear2, maybe post pic of Asrock tunning configurator so we can see the timings.


----------



## Ichirou

Gear 2 just sucks for DDR4 on Z690. It’s not the same as Z590 where you could offset the latency hit with a high enough frequency overclock.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Gear 2 just sucks for DDR4 on Z690. It’s not the same as Z590 where you could offset the latency hit with a high enough frequency overclock.


It does, but unfortunately we can't all get to 4133CL14 right now 

My 3800 13-17-17-32 G1 only 59ns latency 

Need 13900k!

If I get a 13900k that wont even 4000 G1 ...


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> It does, but unfortunately we can't all get to 4133CL14 right now
> 
> My 3800 13-17-17-32 G1 only 59ns latency
> 
> Need 13900k!
> 
> If I get a 13900k that wont even 4000 G1 ...


If the 13900K turns out to have a better IMC than the one I have now, I'll sell you my binned 12900KF with its golden IMC, if you're interested.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> If the 13900K turns out to have a better IMC than the one I have now, I'll sell you my binned 13900KF with its golden IMC, if you're interested.


I assume you mean 12900KF which I'm not interested in, only 13th gen.

Most if not all the 13900ks should be goldenish bins.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I assume you mean 12900KF which I'm not interested in, only 13th gen.
> 
> Most if not all the 13900ks should be goldenish bins.


Yeah, 12900KF. Typo.
We'll see once the 13th Gen arrives in people's hands.


----------



## TweaknFreak

After a lot of digging and looking around, got the board to boot above 3600 MTs. Only looking to get the memory tuned for better performance not gonna go chasing records. What can I do to improve this further?

Processor12700KF @ stockMotherboardGigabyte Z690 Aorus PRO DDR4 @ BIOS version F20bRAMViper Steel 8x2GB 4000 CL19Fan over RAMNope










PS: ATC wouldnt run, so forced to use MemTweakIt. 
Edit: updated to the latest BIOS.


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> ok, that's not to bad for gear2, maybe post pic of Asrock tunning configurator so we can see the timings.


Oh right, as I mentioned I can't be asked with those timings. thats likely why. I'm done with the ram tweaking for now until I get the z790, was just tweaking further yesterday to see what it might possibly do on the new board.


----------



## slash621

Anyone have any new advice on overclocking a kit like CMT64GX4M4K3600C16 (16x4 GB dual rank Samsung B-Die)? Back in the day I checked in here but that was bios 707 and I had to use 16-18-18-36-54 at 2T and 1.5V to get them to work. Any new advice? I'm on the latest Z690-A Strix DDR4 BIOS with a 12900KS.


----------



## Ichirou

slash621 said:


> Anyone have any new advice on overclocking a kit like CMT64GX4M4K3600C16 (16x4 GB dual rank Samsung B-Die)? Back in the day I checked in here but that was bios 707 and I had to use 16-18-18-36-54 at 2T and 1.5V to get them to work. Any new advice? I'm on the latest Z690-A Strix DDR4 BIOS with a 12900KS.


Are you sure it is Samsung B-die? Corsair tends to use Micron most of the time.


----------



## bhav

I just saw some results on reddit from a user that tried going from 2x8 to 4x8 micron e die SR, the results were worse after putting in 4 sticks. I had assumed they were 16 Gb dual rank for such to happen but nope.

Unless you need the capacity, it seems that 4 sticks just wants to be difficult for everyone.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Gear 2 just sucks for DDR4 on Z690. It’s not the same as Z590 where you could offset the latency hit with a high enough frequency overclock.


So check this, somehow after I closed all the background apps the first time, its now working even when they were left open:










Its not in the low 40s like what G1 can achieve, but bandwidth result goes up to 75.5k.

I'm happy with G2 now.

Igorslab review showed 4800CL18 to be significantly better than 5333CL20 across all games as well, and youtube side by sides showing 4800CL21 D4 beating 4800CL36 D5 by a lot more.

So I'm not really too bothered about G1 anymore.

I do a slight bclk bump to 100.25 to round the numbers up to what they should be, but I've been doing that for a while now.


----------



## acoustic

bhav said:


> So check this, somehow after I closed all the background apps the first time, its now working even when they were left open:
> 
> 
> 
> Its not in the low 40s like what G1 can achieve, but bandwidth result goes up to 75.5k.
> 
> I'm happy with G2 now.
> 
> Igorslab review showed 4800CL18 to be significantly better than 5333CL20 across all games as well, and youtube side by sides showing 4800CL21 D4 beating 4800CL36 D5 by a lot more.
> 
> So I'm not really too bothered about G1 anymore.
> 
> I do a slight bclk bump to 100.25 to round the numbers up to what they should be, but I've been doing that for a while now.


Can you test it in real-world usage? Props to you for putting the time in and going against the status-quo


----------



## bhav

acoustic said:


> Can you test it in real-world usage? Props to you for putting the time in and going against the status-quo


You can check this for now if you want









DDR5, is that you? - Kingston Fury Renegade DDR4-5333 CL20 2x 8 GB RAM kit test with teardown and overclocking | igor'sLAB


As CPUs become faster and faster, the main memory must be able to keep up with the volume of data to not become a bottleneck. For the same reason, the upcoming generation of Intel CPUs will also rely…




www.igorslab.de





4800CL18 and 5333CL20 compared, but nothing else in the comparisons, all G2 results.

I'll be waiting for the Z790 before bothering with testing in games.

Turns out those stick are Hynix based, but entirely too late to be worth buying now.

Also 5333CL20 only about 1000 higher bandwidth than the highest I currently get, 4800CL18 seems to be the ideal setting for D4G2, unless you can get 5000+ under CL20.

Feels like I'm the only person in the world running D4G2, but the Ballistix Max 4400CL19 kits sold out everywhere when they went on sale, though I suppose most people just run them at XMP on pre alderlake setups.

Crucial basically cleared them out at £180 and stopped producing more when DDR5 launched.


----------



## Exilon

I'm running that 2x16GB Ballistix Max 4400CL19 kit right here. 4000 is the max in gear1 for my 12900K and performance is better with G1 + CL16 by like 5% in Warhammer 2/3 RTS.


----------



## Exilon

Can you run the full MLC test in admin mode through command prompt like I did? I want to see where our configurations cross over on the latency vs bandwidth table.


----------



## bhav

Exilon said:


> I'm running that 2x16GB Ballistix Max 4400CL19 kit right here. 4000 is the max in gear1 for my 12900K and performance is better with G1 + CL16 by like 5% in Warhammer 2/3 RTS.
> 
> View attachment 2577587


The cas latency is really high for that ram, it should be able to do 14 with 1.6v without issue, even 13 if its a good bin.

4400-4600 G2 you could run at CL15-16.

And 4800CL17-18 is easily doable, depending on motherboard 5000+.

Oh you wanted me to run the full latency test, I just went AAAEETTRRRGGHHH when I saw that poor ram at those timings. Will do it now.










Heres mine, dont know how to do it in the command prompt. Yours looks better.

Now about that 2T


----------



## Exilon

Yeah, they're running at 1.4v right now


----------



## bhav

Exilon said:


> Yeah, they're running at 1.4v right now


Reading about what inject delay is it says more cores matter, and mine is basically crap. Bigger difference between top and bottom numbers = better,

'This test is intended to give an estimate of the latency under load for different "background" memory bandwidth "load" levels. The specific values of bandwidth for each level of "injection delay" are going to be impossible to predict -- what you are looking for in the results is how much the average load latency increases as the DRAM bandwidth utilization increases. In your case, under the heaviest load (zero injection delay), the latency only increases from the minimum value of 82 ns to 130 ns. This is a very small increase in latency under maximum load. For the Xeon Gold 6142 I see the latency increase from 80 ns to 175 ns (at max load), and for the Xeon Platinum 8160 I see the latency increase from 73 ns to 234 ns (at max load). 

Your latency increase under load is relatively small because you don't have enough cores to push the DRAM bandwidth to saturation -- the highest bandwidth value in your results is just under 60% of peak BW, while the Xeon Gold 6142 (16 core) and Xeon Platinum 8160 (24 core) deliver maximum bandwidths of about 87% of peak.'

Ok so I dont actually understand that.


----------



## Exilon

bhav said:


> Reading about what inject delay is it says more cores matter, and mine is basically crap. Bigger difference between top and bottom numbers = better,


My interpretation is that once the bandwidth column flatlines, you're just measuring how many cores are waiting for the memory controller instead of how long it would service at X bandwidth. Yours flatlines at 73GB/s and mine at 59GB/s

Your system latency is better at around 50GB/s and higher.


----------



## Slickman

I want to purchase an MSI Edge or Asus TUF DDR4 motherboard. My current ram is F4-4000C17Q-32GTRG, 32GB(4x8) at 4000 CL17. Will either board allow for me to just turn on XMP and have the ram work at that speed? Want to pair with a 13700K.


----------



## Ichirou

Slickman said:


> I want to purchase an MSI Edge or Asus TUF DDR4 motherboard. My current ram is F4-4000C17Q-32GTRG, 32GB(4x8) at 4000 CL17. Will either board allow for me to just turn on XMP and have the ram work at that speed? Want to pair with a 13700K.


Yes. Both of them will. And the CPU IMC should be strong enough.


----------



## magnusavr

I need some help getting latency down on my new raptor lake. Asus Z690-A with gskill royale b die in gear 1. Latest BIOS (2301) and MEI Firmware installed.

Currently testing with SA 1.2 and VDIM 1.45 VDDQ 1.35

Latency seems to be jumping from around 53-56. Changing a lot of the secondary timings does not seem to help on latency... Then again, I am not that good at secondary...

I tried CL16 but that does not work (failing training). I tried tRDRD_sg 6 but that throws out error in TM5.










Note: AIDA64 is reporting timings wrong


----------



## edkieferlp

magnusavr said:


> I need some help getting latency down on my new raptor lake. Asus Z690-A with gskill royale b die in gear 1. Latest BIOS (2301) and MEI Firmware installed.
> 
> Currently testing with SA 1.2 and VDIM 1.45 VDDQ 1.35
> 
> Latency seems to be jumping from around 53-56. Changing a lot of the secondary timings does not seem to help on latency... Then again, I am not that good at secondary...
> 
> I tried CL16 but that does not work (failing training). I tried tRDRD_sg 6 but that throws out error in TM5.
> 
> View attachment 2577651
> 
> 
> Note: AIDA64 is reporting timings wrong


You sure your in gear1?
Cause SA = 1.2 seems low for 4100.
Show us the memory tab in CPU-Z.


----------



## bhav

As predicted, all these tech sites running 4000 G2 in their comparisons won't even approve new accounts for someone to simply explain on their forums what gear is and how to set it.

Its like a unification of the dumb unwilling to learn anything new.

When they do get some replies on their youtube videos about gear 1, they just reply 'thats how it is when activating XMP so we test it how people at home would be using it'.

'4000CL15 / 4800CL18??? THATS ONLY 1% OF RAM, NO ONE AT HOME HAS THAT! Do they even know about DR vs SR?


----------



## Ichirou

magnusavr said:


> I need some help getting latency down on my new raptor lake. Asus Z690-A with gskill royale b die in gear 1. Latest BIOS (2301) and MEI Firmware installed.
> 
> Currently testing with SA 1.2 and VDIM 1.45 VDDQ 1.35
> 
> Latency seems to be jumping from around 53-56. Changing a lot of the secondary timings does not seem to help on latency... Then again, I am not that good at secondary...
> 
> I tried CL16 but that does not work (failing training). I tried tRDRD_sg 6 but that throws out error in TM5.
> 
> View attachment 2577651
> 
> 
> Note: AIDA64 is reporting timings wrong


VCCSA is too low.


----------



## magnusavr

Nono31 said:


> ease 12700k latency to 45.7ns. Was the max with 3900mhz 13 13 13 28.





edkieferlp said:


> You sure your in gear1?
> Cause SA = 1.2 seems low for 4100.
> Show us the memory tab in CPU-Z.


----------



## magnusavr

Ichirou said:


> VCCSA is too low.


I will test 1.25 then


----------



## edkieferlp

magnusavr said:


> View attachment 2577698


That is gear1.
I would try SA = 1.3 and work your way down noting performance and stability.
Can this pass Y- cruncher, that is a good quick test.


----------



## magnusavr

edkieferlp said:


> That is gear1.
> I would try SA = 1.3 and work your way down noting performance and stability.
> Can this pass Y- cruncher, that is a good quick test.


It did pass this. I will try to tune more in an hour when the kid is sleeping


----------



## Nono31

magnusavr said:


> I need some help getting latency down on my new raptor lake. Asus Z690-A with gskill royale b die in gear 1. Latest BIOS (2301) and MEI Firmware installed.
> 
> Currently testing with SA 1.2 and VDIM 1.45 VDDQ 1.35
> 
> Latency seems to be jumping from around 53-56. Changing a lot of the secondary timings does not seem to help on latency... Then again, I am not that good at secondary...
> 
> I tried CL16 but that does not work (failing training). I tried tRDRD_sg 6 but that throws out error in TM5.
> 
> View attachment 2577651
> 
> 
> Note: AIDA64 is reporting timings wrong


Can you give me the exact ram model?


----------



## Netarangi

We got batch L234E047 here in NZ

Opps wrong thread lol


----------



## postem

someone already tested ddr4 raptor lake imc?


----------



## Ichirou

postem said:


> someone already tested ddr4 raptor lake imc?


Not really. Not enough sample size to give a clear verdict on quality.
Some people have managed 4,300 MHz Gear 1 stable with looser primaries, though.


----------



## magnusavr

postem said:


> someone already tested ddr4 raptor lake imc?


I am testing atm 13900K. But not sure it reacts so much to secondary timings as it should. Fighting latency. Maybe early bios for it? People said I gave to little SA for 4100 (1.2v). But it was TM5 stable with 1.2. Gonna test 1.25v soon.

I also managed to make it post 4200 with SA 1.2v . But gave a lot of errors in TM5. My new chip:


----------



## magnusavr

Nono31 said:


> Can you give me the exact ram model?


*F4-4400C17D-32GTRS. The memory chips are not water-cooled. Neither do they have a dedicated fan.*


----------



## magnusavr

Ichirou said:


> VCCSA is too low.


Going from TM5 stable SA 1.2V to 1.25v did not help much if at all... Perhaps the 2301 bios is not read for 13900k and memory tuning yet.










also set:
MRC Fast boot: disabled
MCH Full check: disabled
Round Trip latency: enabled


----------



## Nono31

Ok for start put Vsa at 1.35v and Vdram at 1.6v.
Increase V core at 1.4v at llc3 or max 4.
Check cpu and memory temp. 
Ideal memory temp close to 30°, try to stay below 40°. Put a fan if possible if not the case or think to watercool solution. Your setup deserves a good cooling for the memory. 
Test the max dram frequency you can achieve and we wil see the next after.


----------



## Nono31

And of course the bios has its importance.


----------



## bscool

I don't have 13th gen CPU yet but saw on Discord Aida64 latency is bugged. If people want to compare aida64 to ILM with 13th gen it might be helpful.

The one guy who tested saw around 10ns difference. Probably some run to run variance and he was also on win 11, I see a lower latency on Win10 when I compared them recently on 12th gen ddr5.









Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui


Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.




github.com


----------



## Ichirou

magnusavr said:


> I am testing atm 13900K. But not sure it reacts so much to secondary timings as it should. Fighting latency. Maybe early bios for it? People said I gave to little SA for 4100 (1.2v). But it was TM5 stable with 1.2. Gonna test 1.25v soon.
> 
> I also managed to make it post 4200 with SA 1.2v . But gave a lot of errors in TM5. My new chip:
> View attachment 2577747


@Falkentyne SP 122 :O

Also, with DDR4 Gear 1, you'll find yourself testing all the way up to 1.40-1.45V sometimes. But 1.35V is max safe daily.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

bscool said:


> I don't have 13th gen CPU yet but saw on Discord Aida64 latency is bugged. If people want to compare aida64 to ILM with 13th gen it might be helpful.
> 
> The one guy who tested saw around 10ns difference. Probably some run to run variance and he was also on win 11, I see a lower latency on Win10 when I compared them recently on 12th gen ddr5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui
> 
> 
> Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com


You mean that, the intel tool ?


----------



## bscool

PhoenixMDA said:


> You mean that, the intel tool ?
> View attachment 2577760


Yes, Those results looked bugged/off to me.

IML 20000 should be just a bit lower for latency than Aida

Can you try that IML gui I posted it is portable. See if it shows the same


----------



## magnusavr

bscool said:


> I don't have 13th gen CPU yet but saw on Discord Aida64 latency is bugged. If people want to compare aida64 to ILM with 13th gen it might be helpful.
> 
> The one guy who tested saw around 10ns difference. Probably some run to run variance and he was also on win 11, I see a lower latency on Win10 when I compared them recently on 12th gen ddr5.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui
> 
> 
> Intel Memory Latency Checker GUI. Contribute to FarisR99/IMLCGui development by creating an account on GitHub.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> github.com


If Aida64 latency is bugged I might have wasted my time. never used Intel MLC. Is this the correct commands? If so, which is the comparable number from MLC I should see in Aida64?


----------



## bscool

magnusavr said:


> If Aida64 latency is bugged I might have wasted my time. never used Intel MLC. Is this the correct commands? If so, which is the comparable number from MLC I should see in Aida64?
> 
> View attachment 2577761


Something is weird. those results on IML are way off.


----------



## bscool

Here I posted some ddr4 and ddr5 IML results with 12th gen so you can see what they should look like.



https://www.overclock.net/attachments/iml-4133c15-e-core-on-png.2555630/





https://www.overclock.net/attachments/iml-4133c15-e-core-of-png.2555631/











ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


Some things I've noticed going from 0807 to 1304. I also now have this AVX bug where I will downclock to 4.9 from my synced 5.2 in y-cruncher, but I would only drop to 5.1 in LinX so the bug isn't even consistent. AVX 512 is disabled. Can't boot 3900MHz on my ram with the same voltages. Reading...




www.overclock.net


----------



## magnusavr

bscool said:


> Something is weird. those results on IML are way off.


Here with the GUI version


----------



## Falkentyne

magnusavr said:


> I am testing atm 13900K. But not sure it reacts so much to secondary timings as it should. Fighting latency. Maybe early bios for it? People said I gave to little SA for 4100 (1.2v). But it was TM5 stable with 1.2. Gonna test 1.25v soon.
> 
> I also managed to make it post 4200 with SA 1.2v . But gave a lot of errors in TM5. My new chip:
> View attachment 2577747


Z690 board? That SP is very likely bugged.
You would have to test this on Z790 to be certain.

Sometimes you can reset the SP by doing three cmos clears with CPU removal.
Before you do anything else, manually update your Intel Management Engine firmware to the newest version (I do NOT have the link).

After ME is updated:

First, power off and unplug/turn off the PSU in the back.

Then clear CMOS by pressing the clear CMOS button for 30 seconds (or shorting the jumper 30s).

Then, plug in the PSU/switch WITHOUT the CPU installed. Power on. Nothing will happen. Power off again. Unplug and clear cmos 30 seconds AGAIN.

Then finally, reinsert the CPU, install cooler, thermal paste, then flip the PSU switch on, then clear CMOS AGAIN without powering on the system.

Finally, power the system on. The SP "should" Be reset.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

bscool said:


> Yes, Those results looked bugged/off to me.
> 
> IML 20000 should be just a bit lower for latency than Aida
> 
> Can you try that IML gui I posted it is portable. See if it shows the same


I know i have testet bevor^^


----------



## bscool

magnusavr said:


> Here with the GUI version
> 
> View attachment 2577765


Hmmm strange, thanks for testing. I wonder what the deal is. Oh he is on a z790 MB with 13th gen. I wonder if that is the difference and why IML is showing such weird for you guys.

I like it though. Aida64 always gets hate now IML not the hero 🤣

Funny how life goes


----------



## bscool

Here are his(from discord user) 13th gen z790 ddr4 Aida64 vs IML results

Edit not my pics.


----------



## magnusavr

Falkentyne said:


> Z690 board? That SP is very likely bugged.
> You would have to test this on Z790 to be certain.
> 
> Sometimes you can reset the SP by doing three cmos clears with CPU removal.
> Before you do anything else, manually update your Intel Management Engine firmware to the newest version (I do NOT have the link).
> 
> After ME is updated:
> 
> First, power off and unplug/turn off the PSU in the back.
> 
> Then clear CMOS by pressing the clear CMOS button for 30 seconds (or shorting the jumper 30s).
> 
> Then, plug in the PSU/switch WITHOUT the CPU installed. Power on. Nothing will happen. Power off again. Unplug and clear cmos 30 seconds AGAIN.
> 
> Then finally, reinsert the CPU, install cooler, thermal paste, then flip the PSU switch on, then clear CMOS AGAIN without powering on the system.
> 
> Finally, power the system on. The SP "should" Be reset.


Latest ME firmware is installed: 16.1.25.1917. Bios 2301. I think I already cleared cmos about 3-4 times. Latest ME firmware solved a lot of issues. It solved M2_1 drive missing and posting on higher memory frequencies in gear 1.

Reinserting the CPU is not happening. System is stable. Just trying to tweak some memory. I don't care what the SP say


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Here are his 13th gen z790 ddr4 results


You upgraded to the Z790 Strix? Or engineering sample?


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> You upgraded to the Z790 Strix? Or engineering sample?


Not mine  from discord


----------



## Ichirou

bscool said:


> Not mine  from discord


Ah. Borrowed?


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> Ah. Borrowed?


No they are another's users pics he posted. I probably shouldn't have posted them. Didn't ask permission, I will ask forgiveness


----------



## PhoenixMDA

magnusavr said:


> Latest ME firmware is installed: 16.1.25.1917. Bios 2301. I think I already cleared cmos about 3-4 times. Latest ME firmware solved a lot of issues. It solved M2_1 drive missing and posting on higher memory frequencies in gear 1.
> 
> Reinserting the CPU is not happening. System is stable. Just trying to tweak some memory. I don't care what the SP say


I had the same if you reinstall the cpu after you had make the ME Update, the you get the correkt SP.
I had bevor with bios 2103 SP119 and SP92 after reinstall.
My other CPU was Sp99 much better imc arround 150mhz.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

bscool said:


> Here are his(from discord user) 13th gen z790 ddr4 Aida64 vs IML results
> 
> Edit not my pics.


Thats Stock Timings .....there is more possible.🧐


----------



## bscool

PhoenixMDA said:


> Thats Stock Timings .....


Not mine. whatever he set, he cant boot higher.

He is just getting the hang of z790.

The reason I brought it up was the difference in Aida64 vs IML.

It looks like IML bugged for z690 ddr4/


----------



## PhoenixMDA

I dont know but i think its to low....


----------



## Falkentyne

magnusavr said:


> Latest ME firmware is installed: 16.1.25.1917. Bios 2301. I think I already cleared cmos about 3-4 times. Latest ME firmware solved a lot of issues. It solved M2_1 drive missing and posting on higher memory frequencies in gear 1.
> 
> Reinserting the CPU is not happening. System is stable. Just trying to tweak some memory. I don't care what the SP say


You can see what @PhoenixMDA said. you have to remove and reinstall the CPU after the update to get the correct SP.
It will ruin the prediction as it is so auto vcore or calibration will be completely off but it's your choice.


----------



## edkieferlp

On IMC I have gotten real weird results too (way to low latency). this happened when I first setup the version 3.9 and then 3.9a.
I ran 3.9, got good results, switched exe's and ran the 3.9a and got bogus results.
rebooted the system and all was good from that point on.

PS: I was using it with the GUI mod.

Make sure you have all the right files with mlc.exe in there, should work right.


----------



## bhav

Just tried to see if I could get 3733CL12 to boot, it wont 

I used 1.6v ram and 1.3v SA, but usually if more SA would work, it should still boot at that much and cough up a load of errors.

The voltage limit of 1.6v is lame, and the extra voltage on my custom bios barely does anything. As I heard even on MSI boards, setting it higher doesn't work during memory training to stabilise lower timings.


----------



## Exilon

bscool said:


> Hmmm strange, thanks for testing. I wonder what the deal is. Oh he is on a z790 MB with 13th gen. I wonder if that is the difference and why IML is showing such weird for you guys.
> 
> I like it though. Aida64 always gets hate now IML not the hero 🤣
> 
> Funny how life goes


Funnily enough, AIDA seems to have problems handling 13th gen's L2 + L3 sizes which is causing the +3-5ns RAM latency people are seeing on it.

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1584112064360255488


----------



## Ichirou

Exilon said:


> Funnily enough, AIDA seems to have problems handling 13th gen's L2 + L3 sizes which is causing the +3-5ns RAM latency people are seeing on it.
> 
> __ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1584112064360255488


Hm. They struggled a little with the 12th Gen as well back then.

Is Intel MLC accurate, at least?


----------



## Exilon

3.9a should be accurate as long as you run with admin permissions so it can disable prefetch... but I don't have my chip on hand to test yet.


----------



## bscool

Did a comparison on Win11 vs Win 10 on Aida64 to help someone in another thread Ill post results her just for s

I did a fresh install on a spare ssd I had did all Win11 updates and drivers(disabled as much as I could from start up and auto run within OS).

Win11 is on left and Win 10 on right all same setting just rebooting and switching OS.

You can see Win11 performance worse overall in Aida64 anyway. Also Win11 has much more run to run variance on Aida than Win 10 for me.

Maybe Ill do IML too.

CPU OC is Asus AI OC.


----------



## magnusavr

Falkentyne said:


> You can see what @PhoenixMDA said. you have to remove and reinstall the CPU after the update to get the correct SP.
> 
> It will ruin the prediction as it is so auto vcore or calibration will be completely off but it's your choice.




Hi Falkentyne,

I am just tuning the memory. I am not overclocking the CPU in any way. Running with Asus multicore enhancement: Disabled - Enforce all limints

Don't think this will apply to me in any way then? Perhaps a bios down the road will solve the SP readout.


----------



## Fissa

I see people reporting here 5.8ghz all core at 1.28v vcore? Sounds like you have trouble reading your true voltages. Probably setting vcore to 1.28v and using some crazy llc setting to bring that number higher.

I need 1.42v for 5.7ghz all core with 2 core boost to 6ghz.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> Did a comparison on Win11 vs Win 10 on Aida64 to help someone in another thread Ill post results her just for s
> 
> I did a fresh install on a spare ssd I had did all Win11 updates and drivers(disabled as much as I could from start up and auto run within OS).
> 
> Win11 is on left and Win 10 on right all same setting just rebooting and switching OS.
> 
> You can see Win11 performance worse overall in Aida64 anyway. Also Win11 has much more run to run variance on Aida than Win 10 for me.
> 
> Maybe Ill do IML too.
> 
> CPU OC is Asus AI OC.


Be interesting if you could run some quick BM, like CPU-Z benchmark, Y-cruncher etc to see any real performance diff.

FWIW, In Win10 I found this setting help with core scheduling, hidden power plan (set to Prefer performant processors )

Heterogeneous thread scheduling policy (93b8b6dc-0698-4d1c-9ee4-0644e900c85d)
Description
Specify what thread scheduling policy to use on heterogeneous systems.
Possible values
All processors - Schedule to any available processor.
Performant processors - Schedule exclusively to more performant processors.
Prefer performant processors - Schedule to more performant processors when possible.
Efficient processors - Schedule exclusively to more efficient processors.
Prefer efficient processors - Schedule to more efficient processors when possible.
Automatic - Let the system choose an appropriate policy.

If anyone disables E cores then don't bother.


----------



## bscool

edkieferlp said:


> Be interesting if you could run some quick BM, like CPU-Z benchmark, Y-cruncher etc to see any real performance diff.
> 
> FWIW, In Win10 I found this setting help with core scheduling, hidden power plan (set to Prefer performant processors )
> 
> Heterogeneous thread scheduling policy (93b8b6dc-0698-4d1c-9ee4-0644e900c85d)
> Description
> Specify what thread scheduling policy to use on heterogeneous systems.
> Possible values
> All processors - Schedule to any available processor.
> Performant processors - Schedule exclusively to more performant processors.
> Prefer performant processors - Schedule to more performant processors when possible.
> Efficient processors - Schedule exclusively to more efficient processors.
> Prefer efficient processors - Schedule to more efficient processors when possible.
> Automatic - Let the system choose an appropriate policy.
> 
> If anyone disables E cores then don't bother.


I know there are issues with Win11 and score in 3dmark scores for the CPU section. I saw guys on hwbot discord compare Win10 to Win11.

They were using 13th gen CPU so not sure if it applies to 12th gen also. I dont have the desire to test more.

Ill use Win10 most likely as I prefer it overall. Not that Win11 is bad Im just so use to Win10 it is easier for me to use.

Edit maybe I will do some more "easy" bench comparisons. Depends how bored I get waiting for 13900k.


----------



## edkieferlp

bscool said:


> I know there are issues with Win11 and score in 3dmark scores for the CPU section. I saw guys on hwbot discord compare Win10 to Win11.
> 
> They were using 13th gen CPU so not sure if it applies to 12th gen also. I dont have the desire to test more.
> 
> Ill use Win10 most likely as I prefer it overall. Not that Win11 is bad Im just so use to Win10 it is easier for me to use.


Yeah, I am on Win10 to and will stay for a while now that most all apps work correctly.


----------



## bhav

I flipped. OC3D just posted 2 more replies to my youtube comments using their 'people at home' excuse.










'non non K' blah.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> I flipped. OC3D just posted 2 more replies to my youtube comments using their 'people at home' excuse.
> 
> View attachment 2577940
> 
> 
> 'non non K' blah.


Yeah, I watched one of his reviews (DDR4 vs DDR5 - i5 13600k vs 13900k) and I commented he was in gear2 mode with DDR4, I think he was using 4000+ DDR4. but if he used 3600 it would of defaulted to gear1 AFAIK.


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> Yeah, I watched one of his reviews (DDR4 vs DDR5 - i5 13600k vs 13900k) and I commented he was in gear2 mode with DDR4, I think he was using 4000+ DDR4. but if he used 3600 it would of defaulted to gear1 AFAIK.


Thats the exact video. 'We just hit XMP like people at home!' is every response.

Then the comment I replied to 'we recommend buying new GPU / CPU instead of ram for people at home / gears is confusing for people' and such rubbish.

TIL I am not a 'person at home'. If gears doesn't confuse you, you aren't a human.


----------



## edkieferlp

Yup, I am not sure what's up with him but lately, I tend to just skim over his review, seems all these you-tube reviews dumb down their reviews to much.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I flipped. OC3D just posted 2 more replies to my youtube comments using their 'people at home' excuse.
> 
> View attachment 2577940
> 
> 
> 'non non K' blah.


Lol, yikes. Chances are he'll remove your reply and ban you now. (Yes, that's doable on YouTube)


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> Yup, I am not sure what's up with him but lately, I tend to just skim over his review, seems all these you-tube reviews dumb down their reviews to much.


'Buy a 13900k and RTX 4090 right now, so fast, so vrooom. And pair it with 3600CL16 or 6000CL32 and just hit XMP because you're a person at home'. That poor poor PC.

Also just realizing their channel / site is called OC3D, and they do exactly zero OC and just run everything at stock


----------



## Nono31

@magnusavr 
How far did you push imc?


----------



## Nono31

About aida64, IMO don't care about if this is the most precise software. I use it to check if timing are better in relative performance and not in absolut. That's the way to use it.


----------



## bhav

Also having to deal with the fallout of 'misinformation' from these videos, lots of new PC builders that don't know anything about ram think its better to buy new DDR4 3600CL16 for a 13900k build because these videos show its better than XMP DDR5 and say DDR5 costs too much.

'If you dont already have DDR4, buy DDR5 at current prices'.

No cos video says DDR4 better.

This is why I've been asking so long for proper tuned vs tuned.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Also having to deal with the fallout of 'misinformation' from these videos, lots of new PC builders that don't know anything about ram think its better to buy new DDR4 3600CL16 for a 13900k build because these videos show its better than XMP DDR5 and say DDR5 costs too much.
> 
> 'If you dont already have DDR4, buy DDR5 at current prices'.
> 
> No cos video says DDR4 better.
> 
> This is why I've been asking so long for proper tuned vs tuned.


I think it comes down to what is the use of the system. Some programs run better with more BW and most games run better with less latency.

DDR5 hasn't surpassed DDR4 in latency yet, I think you would need 8k speeds and not to lose timings.

As for reviewers doing tests, it is probably too time-consuming for them to do it and get good views.


----------



## neteng101

edkieferlp said:


> Yup, I am not sure what's up with him but lately, I tend to just skim over his review, seems all these you-tube reviews dumb down their reviews to much.


Noobtubers - all the reviews are pretty near worthless cause they don't compare tuned systems at peak performance. Memory tuning is so much more than XMP... to say just use XMP is a major noob level mistake.


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> I think it comes down to what is the use of the system. Some programs run better with more BW and most games run better with less latency.
> 
> DDR5 hasn't surpassed DDR4 in latency yet, I think you would need 8k speeds and not to lose timings.
> 
> As for reviewers doing tests, it is probably too time-consuming for them to do it and get good views.


But you can buy Kingston Fury 2x16 4800 which I'm pretty sure is hynix ICs for the same price as 2x16 3600CL16, and manually overclock it. But then I suppose most people aren't overclocking the ram.

DDR4 only worth buying if its much cheaper.

Also if the reviewers don't want to overclock the ram, they shouldn't have OC in their name.


----------



## bass junkie xl

bhav said:


> But you can buy Kingston Fury 2x16 4800 which I'm pretty sure is hynix ICs for the same price as 2x16 3600CL16, and manually overclock it. But then I suppose most people aren't overclocking the ram.
> 
> DDR4 only worth buying if its much cheaper.
> 
> Also if the reviewers don't want to overclock the ram, they shouldn't have OC in their name.


you really like gear 2 dont you lol


----------



## bhav

bass junkie xl said:


> you really like gear 2 dont you lol


Not really, I absolutely hate gear 2 for DDR4, which has nothing to do with the post you quoted.

I preferred my 10900k hitting 4800 pre gears.

Not my fault intel decided to completely butcher the DDR4 IMC all the way to barely functionaal around 4000 in gear 1 and the only way to hit high ram OC now is using G2.

I like high OCs, gears has nothing to do with it.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Done....


----------



## ViTosS

bhav said:


> Not really, I absolutely hate gear 2 for DDR4, which has nothing to do with the post you quoted.
> 
> I preferred my 10900k hitting 4800 pre gears.
> 
> Not my fault intel decided to completely butcher the DDR4 IMC all the way to barely functionaal around 4000 in gear 1 and the only way to hit high ram OC now is using G2.
> 
> I like high OCs, gears has nothing to do with it.


Maybe G1 and G2 was the only way to go in the architeture changes for 12900k, 13900k, I mean, for the IPC huge changes and etc, I don't know I'm not an Intel engineer, but for sure it was the best and only option to go.


----------



## ViTosS

PhoenixMDA said:


> Done....
> View attachment 2578028


You using that insane bin RAM kit you showed me in the past for 10900k? I think 4600CL16 or something like that isn't it?


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> You using that insane bin RAM kit you showed me in the past for 10900k? I think 4600CL16 or something like that isn't it?


I had 4600CL15 on my 10900k, its actually not hard as long as you get a proper IMC and use stupid amounts of voltage


----------



## ViTosS

bhav said:


> I had 4600CL15 on my 10900k, its actually not hard as long as you get a proper IMC


Nice, my kit is 3600CL15 1.35v XMP, 2x8GB so should be better than DR for OC at least. But the max I could get in 4 DIMM motherboard was 4400CL16, I could get flat 16s instead of 16-17-17 but for some reason I couldn't stabilize with tFAW at 16 or 18 or 20, only and possible way to use tFAW at 16 is 16-17-17 on primaries.


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> Nice, my kit is 3600CL15 1.35v XMP, 2x8GB so should be better than DR for OC at least. But the max I could get in 4 DIMM motherboard was 4400CL16, I could get flat 16s instead of 16-17-17 but for some reason I couldn't stabilize with tFAW at 16 or 18 or 20, only was to use 16 on tFAW is 16-17-17.


Yep I was using 2 slot asus strix back then, they were the best boards for DDR4 OCs. My kit is the 2x16 SR micron stuff, does the same clocks and CL as 2x8 samsung b die, but worse on all other timings.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> You using that insane bin RAM kit you showed me in the past for 10900k? I think 4600CL16 or something like that isn't it?


It says on the Benchmate reachout that it is a 4000 CL14 kit.
But any kit can do 4,300 CL14, really. Just gotta pump the VDIMM and hope VCCSA is enough.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> It says on the Benchmate reachout that it is a 4000 CL14 kit.
> But any kit can do 4,300 CL14, really. Just gotta pump the VDIMM and hope VCCSA is enough.


Idk what are the margins that either the IMC is the responsible for good CL or the RAM itself, hard to tell, but I remember he showed me 4600Mhz CL16 on Apex for Z490 and 10900k if I'm not wrong, not every kit can achieve that, even on Apex, and also 32GB... Well considering my kit atm can get 4400CL16 on 10900k (4 DIMM slot mobo) at 1.56v I hope if I have a golden IMC I can get 4300 CL14 or 15, again, not sure if the IMC at the moment that I have on 10900k is the limiting factor or my RAM, hard to tell like I said.


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> Idk what are the margins that either the IMC is the responsible for good CL or the RAM itself, hard to tell, but I remember he showed me 4600Mhz CL16 on Apex for Z490 and 10900k if I'm not wrong, not every kit can achieve that, even on Apex, and also 32GB... Well considering my kit atm can get 4400CL16 on 10900k at 1.56v I hope if I have a golden IMC I can get 4300 CL14 or 15, again, not sure if the IMC at the moment that I have on 10900k is the limiting factor or my RAM, hard to tell like I said.


It depends on if its early DDR4 or mid to end gen DDR4. The latter everyone is doing 4133CL14+ now after they realized that 1.6v+ vdimm won't blow their ram up.

My mid gen e dies stop scaling at 4200CL16 1.52v. Anything after that is basically 4200CL14.

My current kit also has temp sensors. 1.7+v 4600-4800 doesnt even get it to 60c.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

ViTosS said:


> You using that insane bin RAM kit you showed me in the past for 10900k? I think 4600CL16 or something like that isn't it?


Yes^^
The 2 lucky Sticks of 2 4000C14 kit^^, they make [email protected],59V


----------



## Nono31

bhav said:


> It depends on if its early DDR4 or mid to end gen DDR4. The latter everyone is doing 4133CL14+ now after they realized that 1.6v+ vdimm won't blow their ram up.
> 
> My mid gen e dies stop scaling at 4200CL16 1.52v. Anything after that is basically 4200CL14.
> 
> My current kit also has temp sensors. 1.7+v 4600-4800 doesnt even get it to 60c.


4200c14 is the wall.


----------



## Nono31

If we can put t1 command rate, it will be perfect.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

bhav said:


> It depends on if its early DDR4 or mid to end gen DDR4. The latter everyone is doing 4133CL14+ now after they realized that 1.6v+ vdimm won't blow their ram up.
> 
> My mid gen e dies stop scaling at 4200CL16 1.52v. Anything after that is basically 4200CL14.
> 
> My current kit also has temp sensors. 1.7+v 4600-4800 doesnt even get it to 60c.


My old selected Kit (3200c14Bin) the best of 6Kits (does 4700Cl17-17) need for 4000c14-14 over 1,57V and that is really good.
My 4000c14 selected Bin 1,5V Bios.
Z690 is dram voltage=*MC *voltage(like IO Voltage) you cant regulate the memory controller voltage seperate.
So i think it can be risk to raise up Vdimm to high, at 1,65V Red in Bios.


----------



## bscool

Edit


----------



## bhav

Nono31 said:


> 4200c14 is the wall.


It might be like how my kit manages to run 4600CL15 and 4800CL16 barely stable and manage to get through benchmarks, but still error after a while.

At that point have to use the next setting down, 4533 / 4700, or 4800CL17.

+200 MT usually breaks even with -1 CL, but no 4700 option on my current board. Ignoring gears, I just like to push the ram and my 12600k wont boot at 4000G1.


----------



## Nono31

bhav said:


> It might be like how my kit manages to run 4600CL15 and 4800CL16 barely stable and manage to get through benchmarks, but still error after a while.
> 
> At that point have to use the next setting down, 4533 / 4700, or 4800CL17.
> 
> +200 MT usually breaks even with -1 CL, but no 4700 option on my current board. Ignoring gears, I just like to push the ram and my 12600k wont boot at 4000G1.


In my exeprience the best frequency cl i reach without errors.
3900c13 2t
4200c14 1t
4667c16 2t ok cause my imc can't push higher without errors.
I can push with my kit +300mhz for cl+1


----------



## bhav

Well wow, the OC3D didn't ban me for my rant, but said 'saying that is just for people who hit XMP, I can't test everything on day 1, I'm just one person'.

I'll leave him alone, just about every other comment on the video is already blasting him over this lol.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Well wow, the OC3D didn't ban me for my rant, but said 'saying that is just for people who hit XMP, I can't test everything on day 1, I'm just one person'.
> 
> I'll leave him alone, just about every other comment on the video is already blasting him over this lol.


I can see his point as now there is so much HW to test/review but again it should be tested properly, this is a you-tube "viewer count" based thing.
It is rare you have CPU from both AMD and Intel with GPU from now all three vendors come out within weeks,, but again it still boils down to the same testing problems (dumbed down to much for "masses").

The other thing even I notice coming from a Z77 based system, the MB have so many options and various ways to OC, just on a MB would need many reviews to test it all properly and each vender does thing a little differently.
It really amazing at the flexibility of modern bios now.

Edit: this guy does great job.


https://skatterbencher.com/



I must of watched his "whats new" for Alder-lake vid over 10 times before messing with bios much.


----------



## bhav

edkieferlp said:


> I can see his point as now there is so much HW to test/review but again it should be tested properly


Thing is setting gear 1 would have taken up how much time? 5 seconds?

Its more like he had no idea what it was until people started telling him.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Thing is setting gear 1 would have taken up how much time? 5 seconds?
> 
> Its more like he had no idea what it was until people started telling him.


Sure, IMO what he should of done or do is have that vid out (out of box review) but later have tweaked ram review DDR4 vers DDR5 but i know that will likely not happen.

Hell you have hard time finding reviews that go into detail of ram timing options other than primaries (even that is rare).


----------



## magnusavr

Nono31 said:


> @magnusavr
> How far did you push imc?


Sorry have not gotten around to it yet.


----------



## bhav

Just checked the manufacture date on my ballistix max while trying to educate a 'hardly any ram can do 4000CL14' person, week 53 2020.

I now have a curiosity on what the oldest date on 4000+CL14 capable sticks is.

So many people will have a 4000CL14 capable kit in their PC and not even know it cos all they do is use XMP.

Hmm, gonna see what my highest clock I can reach on CL14 is, but it will be in gear 2 on my junk IMC, will start with 4400.

Well my ram is weird, 3800CL13 and 4533CL15 both rock stable, 4200CL14 no boot. No option for 4133 on my board, and 4000 is boring.


----------



## QSS-5

Any suggestions on how I can improve my timings? I feel like twrrd_SG and _DG are too lose?


----------



## bhav

So I actually tried to tune all those other timings, I enabled the post boot memory tuning option in bios, and tried to change one of the timings from 51 to 50 in XTU.

It still doesn't work and sets it back to 51 lol.

Junk mobo.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> So I actually tried to tune all those other timings, I enabled the post boot memory tuning option in bios, and tried to change one of the timings from 51 to 50 in XTU.
> 
> It still doesn't work and sets it back to 51 lol.
> 
> Junk mobo.


Most boards can't support post-boot timing changes right now. Or only on selective timings.
You're better off just doing changes in the BIOS.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Most boards can't support post-boot timing changes right now. Or only on selective timings.
> You're better off just doing changes in the BIOS.


tRC defaalt is at 69, I tried manually changing it to 64 and 68 in the bios, its still 69 in CPU-Z.

Junk mobo.


----------



## imrevoau

QSS-5 said:


> Any suggestions on how I can improve my timings? I feel like twrrd_SG and _DG are too lose?


tWRRD_sg should do 28 and dg should do 24.


----------



## dracktw

ayone has asrock timing configurator for 13th ddr4 boards?


----------



## bscool

dracktw said:


> ayone has asrock timing configurator for 13th ddr4 boards?











*Official* Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


amazon had it in stock afaik 309usd now. just not sure which batch. Only one I can find is G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB Series (Intel XMP) 32GB (2 x 16GB) 288-Pin SDRAM DDR5 6600 CL34-40-40-105 1.40V Dual Channel Desktop Memory F5-6600J3440G16GA2-TZ5RK (Matte Black) at Amazon.com Part# doesn't...




www.overclock.net


----------



## davids40

✋ very happy with my Z690 DDR4


----------



## MikeS3000

Impressed with this 13900k.


----------



## bhav

davids40 said:


> ✋ very happy with my Z690 DDR4


Thats good but somethings up with that latency, should still be sub 48 at 4000CL16 G1.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

.


----------



## Nono31

MikeS3000 said:


> Impressed with this 13900k.


Fps benchmark ?


----------



## davids40

bhav said:


> Thats good but somethings up with that latency, should still be sub 48 at 4000CL16 G1.



how to improve latency ? thanks


----------



## bhav

davids40 said:


> how to improve latency ? thanks


Well Aida give inaccurate reads compared to Intel MLC, but that one is much harder to use. One thing that helps is to close all background apps, everything from steam to GPU drivers and wireless software, or alternatively to run the test in safe mode.


----------



## edkieferlp

bhav said:


> Thats good but somethings up with that latency, should still be sub 48 at 4000CL16 G1.


maybe his WRWR_sg and RDRD_sg can do 7 instead of 8. RTP 8 not sure how much that would help.


----------



## MikeS3000

Nono31 said:


> Fps benchmark ?


I haven't done a bunch of FPS benchmarks. I game on a 1440p ultrawide so I don't know how much of a difference memory tuning will make.


----------



## Skunk0001

QSS-5 said:


> Any suggestions on how I can improve my timings? I feel like twrrd_SG and _DG are too lose?
> 
> 
> View attachment 2578834


That's pretty impressive for 4 sticks, nice work.

What voltages you using? VDIMM, VCCSA, VDDQ?


----------



## Krzych04650

13900KF, Z690 Tomahawk, 4x8 Viper Steel 4400CL19.








1.35 VCCSA, 1.60 VDDQ, 1.5 VDIMM.

I don't think I have a very good IMC because anything higher than 4000 just cannot be stabilized on 4 sticks no matter what, but it looks decent otherwise, I think. One question though, I see that those RTLs are higher than typical, but why I cannot change them in BIOS? They do not apply when I change them.


----------



## Skunk0001

Krzych04650 said:


> 13900KF, Z690 Tomahawk, 4x8 Viper Steel 4400CL19.
> View attachment 2579248
> 
> 1.35 VCCSA, 1.60 VDDQ, 1.5 VDIMM.
> 
> I don't think I have a very good IMC because anything higher than 4000 just cannot be stabilized on 4 sticks no matter what, but it looks decent otherwise, I think. One question though, I see that those RTLs are higher than typical, but why I cannot change them in BIOS? They do not apply when I change them.


If you enable 'Round Trip Latency' in the DRAM Training Configuration then the board should train better values.









Others have said that changing the 'Latency Timing Setting Mode' to 'Dynamic' in 'Advanced DRAM Configuration\Latency Timing Configuration tRTL/tIOL' would also make the board train them, but personally I just set training to enabled as above and leave the 'Latency Timing Setting Mode' on 'Auto' as it works for me.


----------



## bhav

Krzych04650 said:


> 13900KF, Z690 Tomahawk, 4x8 Viper Steel 4400CL19.
> View attachment 2579248
> 
> 1.35 VCCSA, 1.60 VDDQ, 1.5 VDIMM.
> 
> I don't think I have a very good IMC because anything higher than 4000 just cannot be stabilized on 4 sticks no matter what, but it looks decent otherwise, I think. One question though, I see that those RTLs are higher than typical, but why I cannot change them in BIOS? They do not apply when I change them.



I'm sure its the Vdimm that should be 1.6v, the VDDQ shouldn't be necessary, unless I have them mixed up but I think I'm right.

Its confusing when all motherboards have different names for each setting.


----------



## Krzych04650

Skunk0001 said:


> If you enable 'Round Trip Latency' in the DRAM Training Configuration then the board should train better values.
> 
> Others have said that changing the 'Latency Timing Setting Mode' to 'Dynamic' in 'Advanced DRAM Configuration\Latency Timing Configuration tRTL/tIOL' would also make the board train them, but personally I just set training to enabled as above and leave the 'Latency Timing Setting Mode' on 'Auto' as it works for me.


Got something like this








Does it matter that the values on the first one do not match?


----------



## Skunk0001

Krzych04650 said:


> Got something like this
> View attachment 2579263
> 
> Does it matter that the values on the first one do not match?


Not as far as I'm concerned. To my knowledge as long as they are within 1-2 of each other, then all is well. Those values look good to me, _much _better than you had before, and about as good as I usually see from when people post their z690 DDR4 timings.

Sometimes the values will change from (cold) boot to boot, but once its trained values you are happy with you can lock them in by manually setting the values to what they have currently trained to.


----------



## Krzych04650

Skunk0001 said:


> Not as far as I'm concerned. To my knowledge as long as they are within 1-2 of each other, then all is well. Those values look good to me, _much _better than you had before, and about as good as I usually see from when people post their z690 DDR4 timings.
> 
> Sometimes the values will change from (cold) boot to boot, but once its trained values you are happy with you can lock them in by manually setting the values to what they have currently trained to.


Timings done then, this was one last thing I didn't know how to fix, the rest is on the edge of stability. Thank you.


----------



## Netarangi

Is it best to have ram fan blowing at or away from the ram? I don't have a sensor so I can't test the difference


----------



## bhav

Netarangi said:


> Is it best to have ram fan blowing at or away from the ram? I don't have a sensor so I can't test the difference


blowing at the ram worked for me, I just plonked a 140mm on top of the AIO mount.


----------



## Zero989

Netarangi said:


> Is it best to have ram fan blowing at or away from the ram? I don't have a sensor so I can't test the difference


blowing directly on, yields about -20c difference at LOW rpm (~1000) on bare ddr4


----------



## Netarangi

bhav said:


> blowing at the ram worked for me, I just plonked a 140mm on top of the AIO mount.


Thank you!

And yeah my AIO hoses getting in the way too


----------



## bhav

Netarangi said:


> Thank you!
> 
> And yeah my AIO hoses getting in the way too


Meh, hoses schmoses:










Also not sure where I can put the external 240mm fan frame after getting the new case, it should fit somewhere I hope.

Also tested another run with 4800CL16 trying a VDDQ bump, still didn't work and got an error at 15 mins. 1.72v vdimm and only 49c on the ram though at lower autumn ambient temps.

Trying out 17-22-22 too currently.

4700 16-22-22 would work, but no option for that on my board.


----------



## bscool

Krzych04650 said:


> Got something like this
> View attachment 2579263
> 
> Does it matter that the values on the first one do not match?


To see all rtls (on DR) you need to look in bios or use memtweakit. There are 3 if when using DR(2x16 DR or 4x8). Ideally they all line up on each channel like 69/69/69 and 71/71/71. Usually I have found when they vary like 69/71/71 and 71/71/73 as an example it means you are on the edge of stability for either IMC or you need more voltage on SA/VDDQ or Dram can also help so they train more aligned. But in the end if it is stable is all that really matters.

Link shows a pic of memtweakit









[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


Hello everyone. Running currently a 12400F on a MSI Z690-A board with some 2x16Gb 3600 CL18 Micron 8Gbit Rev.E. Because of the blocked voltage i cannot run them in 3600 even with 1.55 voltage. Currently i run them at 3500 CL15 19 17 37. Everything is fine and stable, but, i have a lot of...




www.overclock.net


----------



## bhav

This seems to be going well so far, I already tried 1.35v SA before but it didn't seem to be as stable with 22-22, so maybe the VDDQ is helping a little.

If it passes an hour will try CL16 with 1.4v VDDQ after.


----------



## GeneO

Netarangi said:


> Is it best to have ram fan blowing at or away from the ram? I don't have a sensor so I can't test the difference


Have mine blowing in. 50mm fan cable tied to my AIO pump connectors. I plan to put two on there. Fans speed controlled by temperature of probe stuck into the RAM.


----------



## bhav

I used to have an antec spotcool fan to use for ram cooling, its lost somewhere at my dad's house and I couldn't find it when I moved.

No idea why they stopped making those, it screwed into a MB standoff hole.

Passed an hour at 17-22-22, trying 16-22-22 with even more vddq (1.4v).

And it already errored. NVM with that then.

17-22-22 with less voltage test now.


----------



## Krzych04650

bscool said:


> To see all rtls (on DR) you need to look in bios or use memtweakit. There are 3 if when using DR(2x16 DR or 4x8). Ideally they all line up on each channel like 69/69/69 and 71/71/71. Usually I have found when they vary like 69/71/71 and 71/71/73 as an example it means you are on the edge of stability for either IMC or you need more voltage on SA/VDDQ or Dram can also help so they train more aligned. But in the end if it is stable is all that really matters.


Unfortunately it isn't stable. Got some random bluescreens, even disk corruption. Everything was stable before that. I will just leave it as it was since I cannot really measure any difference in any of the games I am using for testing.


----------



## yzonker

I couldn't win the CPU/IMC lottery if my life depended on it. Got a new 13900k, MSI Edge mobo. I can't find a way to even get it to post above 3600 in gear 1 (posts in gear 2). I've tried up to 1.45v SA, 1.4v CPU VDDQ, and super loose timings. Nada. 

Are there any other settings/voltages that might help?

So I went ahead and started optimizing 3600. Bummer too, I went with DDR4 this time because I knew I had a decent b-die kit. I've had this kit running as high as 4000 on my Ryzen system.


----------



## bscool

yzonker said:


> I couldn't win the CPU/IMC lottery if my life depended on it. Got a new 13900k, MSI Edge mobo. I can't find a way to even get it to post above 3600 in gear 1 (posts in gear 2). I've tried up to 1.45v SA, 1.4v CPU VDDQ, and super loose timings. Nada.
> 
> Are there any other settings/voltages that might help?
> 
> So I went ahead and started optimizing 3600. Bummer too, I went with DDR4 this time because I knew I had a decent b-die kit. I've had this kit running as high as 4000 on my Ryzen system.
> 
> View attachment 2579377


What bios are you using, the latest? 

I dont think I have seen anyone that could not do at least 4000 in gear 1 so far on 13th gen.


----------



## yzonker

bscool said:


> What bios are you using, the latest?
> 
> I dont think I have seen anyone that could not do at least 4000 in gear 1 so far on 13th gen.


Yes, the latest bios. Yea seems like it works for everyone else. 😕


----------



## bscool

yzonker said:


> Yes, the latest bios. Yea seems like it works for everyone else. 😕


Might just be since 13th gen is so new really picky about sa/vddq etc. Newer bioses should help.

I have z690 Strix d4 and mem oc was easy with 12th gen, sucked when first released. I put in 13th gen and it was a nightmare again. Very picky needs exact right sa/vddq set or wont boot above 3600 gear 1.

Once I figured out right sa/vddq and dram I could boot 4300 in gear 1.

Sa from 1.35 to 1.4, vddq from 1.35 to 1.5 and dram 1.5 to 1.55. But SA and VDDQ are picky as might like them the same or might like SA lower or vddq higher than SA..


----------



## bhav

Going to try a bclk push, see if I can get to 4900CL17. 5000CLanything doesn't work.

Does bclk overclock onZ690 mess with anything other than CPU and ram clocks?










Seems to be working, going to see if the VDDQ increase allows for 5000 as I didn't change it before.

I stabilized 5000 18-23-23 for about 13 mins then tried to push higher.

5066 / 5200 are both no boot all the way up to 1.4v SA and 1.6v VDDQ.

5000CL17 is no boot.

5000 18-22-22 errors in under a minute.

So back to 5000 18-23-23, 1.6v vdimm, 1.4v vddq, 1.4v SA, if it passes an hour it should be stable with less SA.


----------



## bhav

Stupid fracking asrock motherboard 5000 still wont work, but 4900 works at the exact same settings I was using for 4800 with an SA bump from 1.25 to 1.35. I still don't think the vddq is actually doing a single thing!

Definitely blocked by the board at this point and not the ram, HURRY UP ATX CASE SO I CAN USE MAH NEW MOBO 

New 24/ 7


----------



## Krzych04650

yzonker said:


> I couldn't win the CPU/IMC lottery if my life depended on it. Got a new 13900k, MSI Edge mobo. I can't find a way to even get it to post above 3600 in gear 1 (posts in gear 2). I've tried up to 1.45v SA, 1.4v CPU VDDQ, and super loose timings. Nada.
> 
> Are there any other settings/voltages that might help?
> 
> So I went ahead and started optimizing 3600. Bummer too, I went with DDR4 this time because I knew I had a decent b-die kit. I've had this kit running as high as 4000 on my Ryzen system.
> 
> View attachment 2579377


Try higher VDDQ, 1.4 is not going to get you far on average IMC, especially on dual rank which is a lot heavier. For me with 4x8 B-die sticks 1.4 VDDQ cannot stabilize 3800, 1.5 cannot stabilize 4000 and 1.6 VDDQ can do 4000 stable with very tight tune, so that was the key. Try 1.35 VCCSA, 1.6 VDDQ and 1.5 VDIMM. VCCSA at 1.45 shouldn't be necessary and actually could be detrimental, and you cannot run that daily anyway. Also don't push primary timings too hard when you are trying higher speeds.


----------



## yzonker

Krzych04650 said:


> Try higher VDDQ, 1.4 is not going to get you far on average IMC, especially on dual rank which is a lot heavier. For me with 4x8 B-die sticks 1.4 VDDQ cannot stabilize 3800, 1.5 cannot stabilize 4000 and 1.6 VDDQ can do 4000 stable with very tight tune, so that was the key. Try 1.35 VCCSA, 1.6 VDDQ and 1.5 VDIMM. VCCSA at 1.45 shouldn't be necessary and actually could be detrimental, and you cannot run that daily anyway. Also don't push primary timings too hard when you are trying higher speeds.


Partial success. 1.6v VDDQ was the magic. Managed to post at 3900, but haven't gotten 4000 yet. Tried 100 and 133. No luck on either. SA 1.4 didn't work either. BTW I never intended to run 1. 45 SA like I mentioned originally, was just trying stuff to try to get a post.


----------



## Krzych04650

yzonker said:


> Partial success. 1.6v VDDQ was the magic. Managed to post at 3900, but haven't gotten 4000 yet. Tried 100 and 133. No luck on either. SA 1.4 didn't work either. BTW I never intended to run 1. 45 SA like I mentioned originally, was just trying stuff to try to get a post.


Yea it really seems like VDDQ is the key. I had it at 1.5 originally and spent a lot of time trying to stabilize things to no avail, and then bumping it up to 1.6 fixed all of my problems just like that. Going higher than 1.6 didn't help any further though. Same for VDIMM, although this one is going to be dependent on the kit, but it is pretty clear that it is not the RAM itself that is the limitation here, but IMC.


----------



## yzonker

Krzych04650 said:


> Yea it really seems like VDDQ is the key. I had it at 1.5 originally and spent a lot of time trying to stabilize things to no avail, and then bumping it up to 1.6 fixed all of my problems just like that. Going higher than 1.6 didn't help any further though.


And that shows how fickle it is though. 133, 1.35 SA, 1.5 VDDQ got me to 4000 (1.6v won't post)! Obviously need to see what timings I can run. Thanks so much for your help.


----------



## yzonker

That seems to about the limit at this point (4266). Much happier. It did eventually crash running Karhu, so I think I'll fall back to 4133 and tune from there.


----------



## KyKo.

Krzych04650 said:


> 13900KF, Z690 Tomahawk, 4x8 Viper Steel 4400CL19.
> View attachment 2579248
> 
> 1.35 VCCSA, 1.60 VDDQ, 1.5 VDIMM.
> 
> I don't think I have a very good IMC because anything higher than 4000 just cannot be stabilized on 4 sticks no matter what, but it looks decent otherwise, I think. One question though, I see that those RTLs are higher than typical, but why I cannot change them in BIOS? They do not apply when I change them.












[Official] Intel Z690 / Z790 DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock


Did I get lucky with my memory controller on my 12700KF? I managed to stabilise 4133 (albeit with 1.4 SA) which was surprising to me. I’m only running 4000 though because 1.4 SA is a bit too high for my tastes What did you use to determine stability? I've found that y-cruncher is necessary to...




www.overclock.net


----------



## bhav

Looks like the 4900 17-22-22-48-680 is right on the edge of stability, taking it up to 4920 starts erroring immediately.

Lower timings would work, but theres pretty much zero headroom left for frequency on my Asrock board anyway.

At 4800 latency vairied around 52.5-55, and bandwitth 73-75k, with the lower latency / higher bandwidth only being in about 1/10 tests.

Now I get 52.x latency and 75k+ bandwidth in the majority tests, the worst I got so far was 74.5k / 53.7 .

And trfc 680 is a no go, trying 700. And yes, trfc 700 is fine, 17-22-22-48-1T still not an issue.


----------



## yzonker

I'm having lots of fun with this. I had 4133CL15 pass 1.5hrs of Karhu. Thought I was on the home stretch, but then discovered y-cruncher BBP would fail within a minute and blue screen.

Turns out the VDDQ TX of 1.5v is too low, but 4133 won't post at 1.6v. Now testing at 1.58v which is the highest I can go and still post. Just got past 2 cycles of BBP and FFT (the 2 that were failing before) and still typing this message. 

Feels like I almost need a separate training voltage for VDDQ TX similar to the training/after training mem voltages.

Here's what I've got for 4133CL15 right now anyway.

SA: 1.35v
VDDQTX: 1.58v
VDDQ (mem): 1.55v


----------



## bhav

So a funny thing I realized, I still have better latency and not too bad bandwidth compared to 7200 DDR5 results.

Can't wait to push the ram on my MSI Z790, wonder if it will be possible to hit 100 Gb/s and sub 50ns latency with DDR4 in G2.


----------



## Krzych04650

I think I am finished, cannot tighten anything more. 

13900KF, VCCSA 1.35, VDDQ 1.6, VDIMM 1.5, 4x8 Viper Steel 4400C19

Not as impressive as some others I've seen with 4300 DR, but what to do if IMC is just not up to task, more than 4000 is just not happening. 









I will do some gaming benchmarks with some basic 4000C16 with random timings against this full tune later.


----------



## bhav

Unfortunately 4 sticks is very hard to OC, especially at G1 without a top 1% IMC.

I'll test shortly if the VDDQ increase allows me to get 4000 G1 to work on my crap IMC 12600k.


----------



## bhav

Here we go then, needed to raise the tras to 50, passed 3 x 60 min tests.


----------



## ViTosS

bhav said:


> View attachment 2579611
> 
> 
> Here we go then, needed to raise the tras to 50, passed 3 x 60 min tests.


Is this OCCT RAM test any good for RAM? Why not use TM5 or Karhu or HCI?


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> Is this OCCT RAM test any good for RAM? Why not use TM5 or Karhu or HCI?


Because OCCT works and doesn't kill your IMC. You just have to run it for several hours and people are generally too lazy to do that.


----------



## ViTosS

bhav said:


> Because OCCT works and doesn't kill your IMC. You just have to run it for several hours and people are generally too lazy to do that.


I see... Have you tried Gear 1 OC? I doubt it Gear 2 can be better for DDR4.


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> I see... Have you tried Gear 1 OC? I doubt it Gear 2 can be better for DDR4.


Gear 1 is IMC dependant, I lost the lottery on my 12600k, only 3800CL13 G1 will work. 4000G1 is no boot. My latency at 3800 G1 13-17-17-32 was still higher than this.

I am going to extensively test G1 vs G2 once I have the MSI board setup.

In tests that were already carried out previously by others, at 4k the only noticeable difference was less than 1 second faster turn times in Civ 6 with gear 1 vs gear 2, but the gear 2 was not pushed as high as I am doing.

I also have no idea how to test for minimum frames, will just try to figure it out as I go along.


----------



## X909

On my setup (TUF D4, 2103) + 13900k + G.Skill3200C14 DR B-Die I found out, that post even at 3200 isn't possbile when MCH full check is enabled. Disabling it allows post until 4333... crazy. And my current test setting at 3200C14 is 11h karhu stable.. but it doesn't post with MCH full check enabled.


----------



## yzonker

Not the tightest timings ever, but better than being stuck at 3600. Passes 20min ycruncher stress tests and stable in Karhu. Thanks again for the help.


----------



## bscool

.


yzonker said:


> Not the tightest timings ever, but better than being stuck at 3600. Passes 20min ycruncher stress tests and stable in Karhu. Thanks again for the help.
> 
> View attachment 2579652


Looks like you dont have round trip latency enabled or rtls section set to "dynamic" will tighten rtls if you want better performance and tighter rtls. Unless it is not stable with them set and you tried it.


----------



## yzonker

bscool said:


> .
> 
> Looks like you dont have round trip latency enabled or rtls section set to "dynamic" will tighten rtls if you want better performance and tighter rtls. Unless it is not stable with them set and you tried it.


Better? I enabled something that looked like it might be what you described.


----------



## bscool

yzonker said:


> Better? I enabled something that looked like it might be what you described.
> 
> View attachment 2579659


Yep see your rtls now are 71 and 73. it should reduce latency a bit.

If you have stablitly issues you need to look at all 3 rtls either in bios or using memtweakit and if they are off like 71/73/71 and 73/75/73 as an example that usually means on the edge of stability or needs more voltage on sa, vddq or dram can help.

Ideally they will all be the same on each channel like 71/71/71 and 73/73/73 or 73/73/73 and 73/73/73 etc.

Example pic


----------



## yzonker

bscool said:


> Yep see your rtls now are 71 and 73. it should reduce latency a bit.
> 
> If you have stablitly issues you need to look at all 3 rtls either in bios or using memtweakit and if they are off like 71/73/71 and 73/75/73 as an example that usually means on the edge of stability or needs more voltage on sa, vddq or dram can help.
> 
> Ideally they will all be the same on each channel like 71/71/71 and 73/73/73 or 73/73/73 and 73/73/73 etc.
> 
> Example pic


Ok thanks. Seems to still be stable. Passed ycruncher again and it's coming up on an hour in Karhu. Performance did go up a bit. I've been using the Timespy CPU test to track performance as I go. It moved up about 200 pts with that change. It has some run to run variance, but that change resulted in the highest score I've seen so far, so most likely an improvement.


----------



## bhav

Well I can't run the 4900 ram settings alongside 4 Ghz e core and / or cache.

Testing 3.9, then seeing which one it is that wont work at 4.0, I would think most likely the cache?

3.9 was still unstable, 3800 looking stable, so +100 ram for -200 cache ... is that even worth it?

Oh maybe adjust the FIVR voltage for cache.


----------



## Lune

yzonker said:


> Better? I enabled something that looked like it might be what you described.
> 
> View attachment 2579659


What did you enable? I'm on MSI as well but no clue what it's called on MSI boards.


----------



## bscool

Lune said:


> What did you enable? I'm on MSI as well but no clue what it's called on MSI boards.


From above post [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock

*Latency Timing Setting Mode* to *Dynamic *should tighten them otherwise under Dram Training Config there is *Round Trip Latency*, set to *enabled*, Either one should do a similar function.

I am going by memory from z590 since I dont have z690 MSI.


----------



## yzonker

bscool said:


> From above post [Official] Intel Z690 / DDR4 Daily Memory Overclock
> 
> *Latency Timing Setting Mode* to *Dynamic *should tighten them otherwise under Dram Training Config there is *Round Trip Latency*, set to *enabled*, Either one should do a similar function.
> 
> I am going by memory from z590 since I dont have z690 MSI.


Yea I did the first one.


----------



## bhav

Tried to bump the e cores back to 4.0, cache still at 3.8, and instability came back.

Now trying to mess with FIVR voltages - E core L2 voltage and Ring Voltage, but I have no idea what they do.

Taking L2 voltage to 1.3v stabilised 4.0 e cores, next to try bring the cache back to 4.0.


----------



## Krzych04650

Damn, voltage tolerances are so incredibly tight with this. I was playing around with volts to see where the low and roll-off points are, and it turns out that my memory overclock only works when VDDQ is between 1.6 and 1.610 and VDIMM is between 1.50 and 1.52. Anything lower or higher and it doesn't post. I punched in those 1.6/1.5 values kind of randomly when I was setting this up, so I guess I got quite lucky. I could have spent hours just looking for them and I doubt I would be so patient to try every value with 0.01 increments.

VCCSA is a weird one though, basically anything between 1.2 and 1.45 works and different points have varying degrees of stability, it feels like it would have kind of a wavy curve.


----------



## Exilon

bhav said:


> Tried to bump the e cores back to 4.0, cache still at 3.8, and instability came back.
> 
> Now trying to mess with FIVR voltages - E core L2 voltage and Ring Voltage, but I have no idea what they do.
> 
> Taking L2 voltage to 1.3v stabilised 4.0 e cores, next to try bring the cache back to 4.0.


Try manual L2 instead of adaptive voltage. You should be able to get ring to 4.2 with 1.3


----------



## bhav

Exilon said:


> Try manual L2 instead of adaptive voltage. You should be able to get ring to 4.2 with 1.3


It is on manual.


----------



## 2500k_2

4400 boot in Windows but it throws errors


----------



## Racing Skoop

CPU: i9-12900K
Motherboard: MSI MPG Z690 EDGE WIFI DDR4 - Bios 7D31v191
Memory: F4-4000C16D-32GTZRA - F4-4000C16D-32GTZRA - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
Only memory overclock done
Bios settings:
SA and VDDQ 1.35 volt, DRAM 1,62 volt, Round Trip Latency enabled and timings changes (see Asrock Timings screenshot)
All the rest like CPU voltages and Uncore frequency,.... left on default
Active DDR4 cooling from Corsair (very old product, but still working)


----------



## Exilon

12900K -> 13900K swap out, same memory kit but 4000CL16 -> 4300CL17 due to higher gear 1 limit.


----------



## JoeRambo

Exilon said:


> 12900K -> 13900K swap out, same memory kit but 4000CL16 -> 4300CL17 due to higher gear 1 limit.


Some real nice results, looking forward to same swap. Is Uncore freq the same?

My 8P8T 3800C15 setup with fixed 4.5Ghz Uncore does the following, so 13900K is gonna be real nice step forward:


----------



## Groove2013

Final frequency and timings.


----------



## Exilon

JoeRambo said:


> Some real nice results, looking forward to same swap. Is Uncore freq the same?
> 
> My 8P8T 3800C15 setup with fixed 4.5Ghz Uncore does the following, so 13900K is gonna be real nice step forward:
> View attachment 2580065


No, uncore for 12900K was 4.3 with E-cores on and the 13900K has 5.0 with E-cores on


----------



## JoeRambo

Exilon said:


> No, uncore for 12900K was 4.3 with E-cores on and the 13900K has 5.0 with E-cores on


Yeah, figured some of those L3 range gains have to come from higher uncore clocks. Still very impressive work by Intel, let's not forget 13900K has two more stops on the ring for E-Core clusters that should increase average latency.


----------



## earphonelnwshop

Can anyone tell me the difference between these 2 models besides the color?

z690 edge / z690 edge ti


----------



## Groove2013

earphonelnwshop said:


> Can anyone tell me the difference between these 2 models besides the color?
> 
> z690 edge / z690 edge ti
> 
> View attachment 2580103
> 
> View attachment 2580102


just white color for China.


----------



## Antsu

Nobody on Z790-A D4 STRIX? The latest BIOS on ASUS website is from September and feels very rough. Anything similar to 12th gen release where Shamino was releasing frequent BIOS updates on the Z690 Owners thread?


----------



## Exilon

Antsu said:


> Nobody on Z790-A D4 STRIX? The latest BIOS on ASUS website is from September and feels very rough. Anything similar to 12th gen release where Shamino was releasing frequent BIOS updates on the Z690 Owners thread?








RaptorLake Resources


i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...



rog.asus.com




0702 are here


----------



## Antsu

Exilon said:


> RaptorLake Resources
> 
> 
> i will use this as a collection of test bioses/tools/info targeted towards Raptorlake + z69/790 NOTE for Z690: You must update ME on your Z690 to properly support raptorlake (if you are on dual bioses then you need to do this to both bioses) 1) d/l and install ME driver...
> 
> 
> 
> rog.asus.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 0702 are here


God damnit, I knew I should've looked harder before spending a whole night fighting with this BIOS, lmao. Thank you very much!

Edit: looks like 0703 just got released, skipping 0702 and testing that instead. Would appreciate feedback from someone who has tried both.


----------



## grifers

What would be the maximum safe voltage for 24/7 of the VDDQ and SA? I read that for the SA the best is not to exceed 1.3, but the VDDQ?

Best regards and thanks!

p.s - For Asus TUF Z690


----------



## slash621

for 32 GB capacity... what's my best bet? go with 4x8 or 2x16? and if it's 2x16 I assume I need to go with the fastest DR I can find on the compatibility chart?


----------



## KedarWolf

slash621 said:


> for 32 GB capacity... what's my best bet? go with 4x8 or 2x16? and if it's 2x16 I assume I need to go with the fastest DR I can find on the compatibility chart?


2x16GB DDR5 is single rank.


----------



## Shonk

Anyone else who has gone from 12900K to 13900K notice a 4.5ns latency jump at the exact same timings


----------



## Exilon

AIDA issue


----------



## buyology

Hi guys, i have some questions, can anyone help me?

13600KF-MSI Z690-A PRO- 4X8GB Viper 4400 C19

Are VDDQ TX voltage and VDDQ voltage same things?
What is the safe voltages are VDDQ TX and SA?
I want to do little bit oc ram, what is the safest clock and base timings for this setup?
Should i choose Gear 1 or Gear 2?


----------



## bscool

grifers said:


> What would be the maximum safe voltage for 24/7 of the VDDQ and SA? I read that for the SA the best is not to exceed 1.3, but the VDDQ?
> 
> Best regards and thanks!
> 
> p.s - For Asus TUF Z690


1.35sa and 1.6vddq is what I would stay under. [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread



slash621 said:


> for 32 GB capacity... what's my best bet? go with 4x8 or 2x16? and if it's 2x16 I assume I need to go with the fastest DR I can find on the compatibility chart?


2x16 will be easier to run since z690/z790 MB are Daisy chain. T topology usually work better with 4x8.



Shonk said:


> Anyone else who has gone from 12900K to 13900K notice a 4.5ns latency jump at the exact same timings


13700k will have latency comparable to 12900k, 13900k will be higher Overclocking Raptor Lake - 13900k,13700k, 13600k etc...



buyology said:


> Hi guys, i have some questions, can anyone help me?
> 
> 13600KF-MSI Z690-A PRO- 4X8GB Viper 4400 C19
> 
> Are VDDQ TX voltage and VDDQ voltage same things?
> What is the safe voltages are VDDQ TX and SA?
> I want to do little bit oc ram, what is the safest clock and base timings for this setup?
> Should i choose Gear 1 or Gear 2?


As above 1.35sa vddq upto 1.6v is ok but usually I find having them close usually works example 1.3sa and vddq 1.4. But you need to test and gear 1 is usually best for all around performance and latency. Limit will be around 4000 to 4266 in gear 1 depending on cpu/imc.

Guide to get started MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper


----------



## grifers

bscool said:


> 1.35sa and 1.6vddq is what I would stay under. [OFFICIAL] Asus Strix/Maximus Z690 Owners Thread


Hello, thank you very much. Let's see, is that I have the RAM at 4000 Mhz with 15-15-15-35 2T with the secondary and tertiary timmings modified. I have it with a SA of 1.3 and VDDQ at 1.35 and it is completely stable in Karhu for 4 hours, and it is also stable with 2 and a half hours of Testmem5 profile absolout of Anta777. The thing is that passing the Aida memory and cache performance test sometimes I have 48.1 ns, and then in another pass 47.1, should I push a little more the SA or the VDDQ? Or is that AIDA 64 things that every time I get different results?

One last thing, I want to push the uncore of my 12700k to 4400 mhz, with the cpu l2 voltage on auto it is not stable for me, but if I set it manually to 1.35 if it is stable for me, is 1.35 L2 voltage safe for 24/7 or do I lower it?

Best regards and thank you very much


----------



## bscool

grifers said:


> Hello, thank you very much. Let's see, is that I have the RAM at 4000 Mhz with 15-15-15-35 2T with the secondary and tertiary timmings modified. I have it with a SA of 1.3 and VDDQ at 1.35 and it is completely stable in Karhu for 4 hours, and it is also stable with 2 and a half hours of Testmem5 profile absolout of Anta777. The thing is that passing the Aida memory and cache performance test sometimes I have 48.1 ns, and then in another pass 47.1, should I push a little more the SA or the VDDQ? Or is that AIDA 64 things that every time I get different results?
> 
> One last thing, I want to push the uncore of my 12700k to 4400 mhz, with the cpu l2 voltage on auto it is not stable for me, but if I set it manually to 1.35 if it is stable for me, is 1.35 L2 voltage safe for 24/7 or do I lower it?
> 
> Best regards and thank you very much


Aida latency will vary a bit from run to run as will any type of benchmark. That is also some of Windows doing things in the background.

I dont know what a safe voltage is for L2. I have ran upt to 1.35 for testing but didnt leave it there long term.

Another tester/bench for memory is IML and the GUI versiona make it easier to use than CMD version from Intel. Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui


----------



## Exilon

I ran L2 1.35v manual for almost a year on a 12900K and it didn't degrade from there. You can probably keep it 1.3v permanently, seeing as 1.25v is the loaded stock on adaptive heavy load on Raptor Lake


----------



## greasemonky89

Going for a 13600k and have my old cl14 3200 single rank b-die 16gb whats the better value ddr4 mobo to hit 4000mhz on the memory. Torn between edge wifi or tuf.


----------



## grifers

bscool said:


> Aida latency will vary a bit from run to run as will any type of benchmark. That is also some of Windows doing things in the background.
> 
> I dont know what a safe voltage is for L2. I have ran upt to 1.35 for testing but didnt leave it there long term.
> 
> Another tester/bench for memory is IML and the GUI versiona make it easier to use than CMD version from Intel. Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui


Hello, thank you very much. It seems that lowering the L2 voltage from 1.35 to 1.28 still makes me stable 4400 mhz cache/uncore, I hope that those 1.28 for 24/7 are not too much. Anyway I would like to know exactly what value I put the board when I leave it in AUTO (to know a reference), in HWINFO I do not see the L2 voltage sensor, how can I know what is the voltage that I put in AUTO, in the bios I do not get it either.

Greetings!


----------



## Exilon

grifers said:


> Hello, thank you very much. It seems that lowering the L2 voltage from 1.35 to 1.28 still makes me stable 4400 mhz cache/uncore, I hope that those 1.28 for 24/7 are not too much. Anyway I would like to know exactly what value I put the board when I leave it in AUTO (to know a reference), in HWINFO I do not see the L2 voltage sensor, how can I know what is the voltage that I put in AUTO, in the bios I do not get it either.
> 
> Greetings!


Install XTU and check it there


----------



## solon

moved from 4x8Gb f4-3200c14 @ 3733c15~3800c15
to 2x16 trident z f4-4000c19-gtzkk(tried again bios 1.92, semi stable @4000,but 1.26 is ok)


----------



## Krzych04650

Got second sample because first 13900KF turned out to be massive dud. New 13900K not only needs 100mV less for the same frequency but also has better IMC. 4100 with tightened 69/69 RTLs and 1.5 VDDQ instead of 4000 73/73 79/79 barely booting with 1.6 VDDQ. AIDA latency went down by almost 5ms, couldn't break 50ms point before.









Still rolls over at 4200, booting with artifacts, I guess 4 sticks just cannot do that.


----------



## massivex

@Ichirou Heya mate, I'm asking on behalf of a friend hoping we can get some advice since you're the MSI Z690 Edge expert here! He says he's been through 3 AlderLake CPUs (12700K & 12900K) and tried two B-Die kits single and dual, 2x8 4400C19 (Patriot Viper) and 2x16 3600C14 (GSkill TridentZ), on an MSI Z690 Edge DDR4 motherboard. Yet he hasn't managed to break the 3600MT/s barrier on Gear1. Sounds really odd to me, isn't it? 

The catch though is that he said he uses BIOS 1.1 for AVX512 support, something about running emulators or something like that (I'm clueless on AVX512). He claims he's tried VDDQ up to 1.45v and VCCSA to 1.35v and it was still a no go. 

I'm wondering 2 things that I believe you could be a great help with:

I vaguely recall you saying that there is a best BIOS version for those that don't need 12900KS or RTL support. From a quick search I found a post you recommending 1.22, is that correct?
Are there are critical settings in the BIOS that he may have overlooked in your general opinion?

Thanks a lot!


----------



## massivex

Krzych04650 said:


> Got second sample because first 13900KF turned out to be massive dud. New 13900K not only needs 100mV less for the same frequency but also has better IMC. 4100 with tightened 69/69 RTLs and 1.5 VDDQ instead of 4000 73/73 79/79 barely booting with 1.6 VDDQ. AIDA latency went down by almost 5ms, couldn't break 50ms point before.
> View attachment 2581151
> 
> 
> Still rolls over at 4200, booting with artifacts, I guess 4 sticks just cannot do that.


Dude that is insaaaane! 6GHz all core with 5.2GHz ring and 4100CL14 G1 CR1... Sheesh! 
By the way, just one tiny thing caught my eye with the secondary timing. As far as I'm aware shouldn't your tRRD_S and _L be the other way around i.e. _S 4 and _L 5.


----------



## bhav

Exilon said:


> I ran L2 1.35v manual for almost a year on a 12900K and it didn't degrade from there. You can probably keep it 1.3v permanently, seeing as 1.25v is the loaded stock on adaptive heavy load on Raptor Lake


I need to run 1.325v L2 and 1.4v SA for my maxed out everything OC, but thats only up to when I get the next CPU so a few months.

Tried taking it from 4900 to 4920 on the ram just now because my cache and e cores sit at 3980 with the 4900 setting so was trying to get them closer to 4000, and errors return.

No more headroom for OC left after 4900CL17 until the new board is setup


----------



## Krzych04650

massivex said:


> Dude that is insaaaane! 6GHz all core with 5.2GHz ring and 4100CL14 G1 CR1... Sheesh!
> By the way, just one tiny thing caught my eye with the secondary timing. As far as I'm aware shouldn't your tRRD_S and _L be the other way around i.e. _S 4 and _L 5.


Well, it is important to mention that this is 8P/8E/HT0 config, ~1.35V gaming stable and ~1.4V R23 stable. With fully enabled 8P/16E/HT1 I can pass P59/E45/R52 suicide run in R23 at 1.4V load, but 6 GHz won't budge. Also power draw in R23 shoots up from ~270W up to 450W+ and becomes impossible to stress test because it is right at the edge of thermal throttling at 99C.

As for timings, I honestly don't know. This is the first time I am doing this from scratch, I did all of that by trial and error, observing others and watching some Buildzoid videos, I have absolutely no idea what these timings do, let alone what should be the relation between them. I will apply your suggestion, thanks.


----------



## fray_bentos

greasemonky89 said:


> Going for a 13600k and have my old cl14 3200 single rank b-die 16gb whats the better value ddr4 mobo to hit 4000mhz on the memory. Torn between edge wifi or tuf.


I'm getting gear 1 4300 17-17-17 on an MSI Z690-P Pro.


----------



## Skunk0001

massivex said:


> @Ichirou Heya mate, I'm asking on behalf of a friend hoping we can get some advice since you're the MSI Z690 Edge expert here! He says he's been through 3 AlderLake CPUs (12700K & 12900K) and tried two B-Die kits single and dual, 2x8 4400C19 (Patriot Viper) and 2x16 3600C14 (GSkill TridentZ), on an MSI Z690 Edge DDR4 motherboard. Yet he hasn't managed to break the 3600MT/s barrier on Gear1. Sounds really odd to me, isn't it?
> 
> The catch though is that he said he uses BIOS 1.1 for AVX512 support, something about running emulators or something like that (I'm clueless on AVX512). He claims he's tried VDDQ up to 1.45v and VCCSA to 1.35v and it was still a no go.
> 
> I'm wondering 2 things that I believe you could be a great help with:
> 
> I vaguely recall you saying that there is a best BIOS version for those that don't need 12900KS or RTL support. From a quick search I found a post you recommending 1.22, is that correct?
> Are there are critical settings in the BIOS that he may have overlooked in your general opinion?
> 
> Thanks a lot!


The 1.20 or 1.22 BIOS versions (that are widely accepted as being better for RAM OC than 1.1) also have AVX512 support, all you need to do is disable the E cores, and reboot, then there should be an option to enable the AVX-512 Microcode. He'd be best off to update to one of them then try again.









For the later versions (up to 1.40 at least) you can hack in an older Microcode to also retain AVX512 support, but probably best to start with 1.22, as for most* its considered best for RAM OC:








E7D31IMS.122.zip


Shared with Dropbox




www.dropbox.com




*For me 1.44 or 1.40 are better, but that's likely just something to do with my mismatched 4x8GB sticks.


----------



## Ichirou

massivex said:


> @Ichirou Heya mate, I'm asking on behalf of a friend hoping we can get some advice since you're the MSI Z690 Edge expert here! He says he's been through 3 AlderLake CPUs (12700K & 12900K) and tried two B-Die kits single and dual, 2x8 4400C19 (Patriot Viper) and 2x16 3600C14 (GSkill TridentZ), on an MSI Z690 Edge DDR4 motherboard. Yet he hasn't managed to break the 3600MT/s barrier on Gear1. Sounds really odd to me, isn't it?
> 
> The catch though is that he said he uses BIOS 1.1 for AVX512 support, something about running emulators or something like that (I'm clueless on AVX512). He claims he's tried VDDQ up to 1.45v and VCCSA to 1.35v and it was still a no go.
> 
> I'm wondering 2 things that I believe you could be a great help with:
> 
> I vaguely recall you saying that there is a best BIOS version for those that don't need 12900KS or RTL support. From a quick search I found a post you recommending 1.22, is that correct?
> Are there are critical settings in the BIOS that he may have overlooked in your general opinion?
> 
> Thanks a lot!





Skunk0001 said:


> The 1.20 or 1.22 BIOS versions (that are widely accepted as being better for RAM OC than 1.1) also have AVX512 support, all you need to do is disable the E cores, and reboot, then there should be an option to enable the AVX-512 Microcode. He'd be best off to update to one of them then try again.
> View attachment 2581245
> 
> 
> For the later versions (up to 1.40 at least) you can hack in an older Microcode to also retain AVX512 support, but probably best to start with 1.22, as for most* its considered best for RAM OC:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E7D31IMS.122.zip
> 
> 
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.dropbox.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *For me 1.44 or 1.40 are better, but that's likely just something to do with my mismatched 4x8GB sticks.


As Skunk says, V1.22 supports AVX-512. No reason not to use it.

I've tested up to V1.70 with the exact same hardware, and it is still the best. V1.40 is a close second for 12900KS support though.


----------



## massivex

@Skunk0001 @Ichirou
Muchos gracias guys! I'll pass him your replies. I think he'll be glad to hear that 1.2 and 1.22 both support AVX512 and are considered best for RAM overclocking. Also pretty cool that injecting Microcode is also a viable option.

Just one more thing, did either of you have to set your terminations? I happened to stumble upon Buildzoid's DDR4 OC on MSI Pro Z690-A where he says he hit a brickwall at 3600 if he didn't set the terminations. Just wondering if it might be the same on the Edge.
Thanks again guys. I'll update if there's any good news


----------



## bhav

On Asrock Z690 itx/ax, the early bioses that support AVX 512 dont have SA voltage adjustment lol.


----------



## zebra_hun

Greeting!
I'm new here and new to the z690.
I replaced the old comet lake system (10600k) with a new 12600kf in one Asus Prime D4 motherboard.
It has 0605 BIOS, which version is recommended?
It has 2x8Gbram GSkill memory 3200 cl14 b die gtzr, 3800cl 15 15 15 worked, but no higher frequency, or I'm just lame.
I guess I don't need the latest one because I don't have a Raptor cpu.
It would be nice if 4000 or 4133MHz worked on cl15.
On Comet Lake worked fine, but on ADL 0605 BIOS no boot.
Thx
Edit:
Voltages are maybe high, it's not long tested, wanted to see how works.


----------



## Raimond

When I look at the voltages,it does not have much headroom for more.
Looks like your cpu or maybe the B die is not a top bin.

The IMC voltage is really high,too high for my taste if it is 24/7 voltage


----------



## bscool

zebra_hun said:


> Greeting!
> I'm new here and new to the z690.
> I replaced the old comet lake system (10600k) with a new 12600kf in one Asus Prime D4 motherboard.
> It has 0605 BIOS, which version is recommended?
> It has 2x8Gbram GSkill memory 3200 cl14 b die gtzr, 3800cl 15 15 15 worked, but no higher frequency, or I'm just lame.
> I guess I don't need the latest one because I don't have a Raptor cpu.
> It would be nice if 4000 or 4133MHz worked on cl15.
> On Comet Lake worked fine, but on ADL 0605 BIOS no boot.
> Thx
> Edit:
> Voltages are maybe high, it's not long tested, wanted to see how works.
> View attachment 2581375
> View attachment 2581377


I dont have a Prime and dont know anyone who used one. But I know they dont get the same bios support as Strix and other Asus MB. You willl need to go thru and test each bios as I know on Strix d4 some bioses didnt work well with SR b die.

If I had to guess I would try the bioses that came after KS as those where good on Strix d4. So 1402, 1603, 1620 and 2003.

Edit could also be IMC but I have seen some 12600k running DR b die at 4300 so some do have a good IMC. Just need to test, I know it takes forever trying so many bioses but there is no other way. Unless you can find someone with that MB that runs SR and knows which bios works best. If you can find a December 2021 beta bois for your MB I would bet it is good as on Strix d4 901 was Dec 2021 bios and very good for DR/SR b die.


----------



## ju-rek

> The IMC voltage is really high,too high for my taste if it is 24/7 voltage


1.24v on SA is high voltage? I don't think you've ever cranked up your memories. Better see what the motherboard can set to XMP profiles.


----------



## Raimond

1.4 SA I see in the screenshots.

with the first screenshot 1.24 the second screenshot it is 1.4


----------



## ju-rek

I have 12600KF which does 4000cl16 at 1.26 SA, 1.25 VQ and 1.46 VDDR and no one wants to buy it for (in conversion) 250 euros. Such times.


----------



## solon

HNT y-chruncher stability is sometimes a lotery when retraining memory on a stable profile on any bios even after clear cmos
anyone with the same issue?


----------



## zebra_hun

bscool said:


> I dont have a Prime and dont know anyone who used one. But I know they dont get the same bios support as Strix and other Asus MB. You willl need to go thru and test each bios as I know on Strix d4 some bioses didnt work well with SR b die.
> 
> If I had to guess I would try the bioses that came after KS as those where good on Strix d4. So 1402, 1603, 1620 and 2003.
> 
> Edit could also be IMC but I have seen some 12600k running DR b die at 4300 so some do have a good IMC. Just need to test, I know it takes forever trying so many bioses but there is no other way. Unless you can find someone with that MB that runs SR and knows which bios works best. If you can find a December 2021 beta bois for your MB I would bet it is good as on Strix d4 901 was Dec 2021 bios and very good for DR/SR b die.


Ty.
Ok, i have to try some BIOS. 
Guys, sorry, two pics are there, two different voltages.
With Aida is the first try, and the second is with lowered voltages. Tested 10 cycle usmus, its ok.
3866 cant stabil, has error in tm5.
3900 can boot, but full error, tried 1.4VQ, 1.6Vdimm, and 1.38V SA, no way.
Ok, thx the infos, from newest BIOS "no rollback", i leave as last


----------



## zebra_hun

ju-rek said:


> I have 12600KF which does 4000cl16 at 1.26 SA, 1.25 VQ and 1.46 VDDR and no one wants to buy it for (in conversion) 250 euros. Such times.


Tried your low voltages, 10 cycle Usmus, and 15 mins Aida Cache and Memory without error. 
It is yet old BIOS, no much time now ...
Thx


----------



## chinyonghui

Hi all,

This is my setup currently:

CPU: 12700k
GPU: ROG RTX 3080
Ram: GSkill F4-4000C15Q-32GVK

I am new to overclocking ram and would appreciate it if anyone can guide me or direct me to any guides regarding this matter. Both my cpu and gpu are already overclocked and undervolted.

I have previously tried to turn on XMP but my pc goes straight to BIOS whenever it boots. But after I stopped using XMP, my pc boots normally.

Any help is much appreciated!

Thanks in advance!


----------



## ChaosAD

Skunk0001 said:


> The 1.20 or 1.22 BIOS versions (that are widely accepted as being better for RAM OC than 1.1) also have AVX512 support, all you need to do is disable the E cores, and reboot, then there should be an option to enable the AVX-512 Microcode. He'd be best off to update to one of them then try again.


My friend tried 1.22 and he was losing ethernet and one nvme drive when he was changing settings in bios. After an F6 everything was fine, so pretty unusable for him. Flashed 1.91 and everything works perfect. Any such behaviour for you?


----------



## Shonk

My 12900K could only run my ram at 3900 on my Z690 Aorus Elite AX DDR4
With my 13900K i have stability tested 4133 Karhu 30033% tRCD 630 1.360V
I am 21000% into a 30000% karhu test at 4133 tRCD 620 1.360V (it was failing randomly at 5000% or so tRCD 620 1.350V it it seems it was ram voltage)

anyway 4200 also boots fine but fails karhu and would like to stabalise it if i can without lowering timings beyond tRFC
Stability takes a huge nose dive if i upp VCCSA or VDDQ (Micron B die seems to prefer it lower)

*Does anyone have any idea's*



Code:


VCCSA 1.200V VDDQ 1.200V 1.360V Ram tRFC 620
21000% In to a test

4133 VCCSA 1.200V VDDQ 1.200V 1.360V Ram tRFC 630
Stopped testing after 0:23:45:59 with 30033 % coverage and 0 error(s)

4133 VCCSA 1.200V VDDQ 1.200V 1.350V Ram tRFC 620 (Needs 1.360V)
Stopped testing after 0:04:21:41 with 5384 % coverage and 1 error(s).

4133 VCCSA 1.350V VDDQ 1.350V 1.350V Ram tRFC 620
Stopped testing after 0:00:02:13 with 46 % coverage and 1 error(s).

4133 VCCSA 1.350V VDDQ 1.200V 1.350V Ram tRFC 620
Stopped testing after 0:00:08:36 with 182 % coverage and 1 error(s).

4133 VCCSA 1.200V VCCQ 1.350V 1.350V Ram tRFC 620
Stopped testing after 0:00:05:32 with 116 % coverage and 1 error(s).

4200 tRFC 630 failed karhu 145%
4200 VCCSA 1.200V VDDQ 1.200V 1.350V Ram tRFC 630 Fail 466%
4200 VCCSA 1.200V VDDQ 1.200V 1.360V Ram tRFC 630 Fail 263%
4200 VCCSA 1.200V VDDQ 1.200V 1.370V Ram tRFC 630 Fail 1248% + bsod when failed

4300 tRFC 645 boots but fails to boot windows (Cannot read this or that on boot)


*Here's my Current 4133 Setttings*


Code:


Final 4133 Timings
Ram 2 x 32 GB Crucial Ballistix 3600
Micron B Die Dual Rank BL2K32G36C16U4B
CPU Base Clock = 100.33
Gear Mode = Gear 1
Performance Cores = 58,58,57,57,56,56,55,55
Efficiency Cores = 43
Vcore Voltage Mode = Adaptive Vcore (Selection)
VF Point 6 to 11 = -0.030V
VCCSA = 1.20V
BCLK Adaptive Voltage = Disabled
Realtime Memory Timing = Auto
Memory Timing Mode = Dynamic
CPU Vcore Loadline Calibration = Normal
DRAM Voltage 1.360V
DRAM Vdd/VddQ = 1.20V

Detailed Timings @ 4133
CAS Latency                     17
tRCD                            19
tRP                             19
tRAS                            38

tRC                             57
tWR                             10
tRRD_S                          4
tRRD_L                          4
tWTR_S                          Auto (3)
tWTR_L                          Auto (6)
tRFC                            620
tRTP                            5
tFAW                            16
Command Rate                    1

tREFI                           58320
tRDRD_sg                        7
tRDRD_dg                        Auto (4)
tRDRD_dr                        7
tRDRD_sg                        7
tRDWR_sg                        13
tRDWR_dg                        13
tRDWR_dr                        13
tRDWR_dd                        13
tWRWR_sg                        7
tWRWR_dg                        Auto (4)
tWRWR_dr                        7
tWRWR_dd                        7
tWRRD_sg                        27
tWRRD_dg                        24
tWRRD_dr                        7
tWRRD_dd                        7

RTL MC0 C0 A1/A2 75/75
RTL MC1 C0 B1/B2 75/75

*Its slightly Faster than this with tRFC 620 that i am currently testing 0.1ns better Aida etc..*


----------



## massivex

My dear fellas, I was wondering if anyone knew what is the DDR5/Hynix equivalent for DDR4 2x16GB Samsung B-Die Dual Rank. A decent kit for B-Die (without fancy RGB) would be like $220 ~ $260 on newegg. Any idea what it would be for an equivalent latest Hynix kit? I'm not really up to date on DDR5 so forgive me.

Reason I'm asking is because I'm a genius that killed his Z690/DDR4 motherboard 🥺. I was thinking if to just get a DDR5 Z690 motherboard and a decent overclocker DDR5 kit and sell off my 2x16GB 4000CL16 kit. If the prices are still well over $300 then I think I'll stick with DDR4 for now and upgrade to DDR5 on a Meteor Lake platform.

Thanks!!!


----------



## bscool

massivex said:


> My dear fellas, I was wondering if anyone knew what is the DDR5/Hynix equivalent for DDR4 2x16GB Samsung B-Die Dual Rank. A decent kit for B-Die (without fancy RGB) would be like $220 ~ $260 on newegg. Any idea what it would be for an equivalent latest Hynix kit? I'm not really up to date on DDR5 so forgive me.
> 
> Reason I'm asking is because I'm a genius that killed his Z690/DDR4 motherboard 🥺. I was thinking if to just get a DDR5 Z690 motherboard and a decent overclocker DDR5 kit and sell off my 2x16GB 4000CL16 kit. If the prices are still well over $300 then I think I'll stick with DDR4 for now and upgrade to DDR5 on a Meteor Lake platform.
> 
> Thanks!!!


I would get the cheapest Hynix M die you can. Kingston 6000c40 and 6400 are some of the lowest price if you can get them directly from Kingston(when on sale) and they will all OC very close to 7000c30 to 7000c32 if the MB and CPU/IMC can do it.

But from NE G.SKILL Trident Z5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR5 6400 Desktop Memory Model F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5K - Newegg.com

There might be cheaper kits but it is hard to keep up and even these might be A die but in the past they were M die. A die are kind of picky(MB/bios compatibility) right now but they can clock higher than M die if you can get them working.


----------



## MrBridgeSix

Are these alright?


----------



## nievz

Is there a way to set an offset for the ring voltage on msi bios?


----------



## bhav

So I'm curious, is it possible to find any 2x8 Samsung B die kits for around £50 yet? 3200-3600 range.

Wouldn't mind one to replace my 2x4 Gb in my pentium build soon and could play around with it in the other builds for fun.

My micron 2x4 Gb kit runs at 2400 CL10, don't really need 16 Gb anyway unless its cheapo for samsung b die.


----------



## BoredErica

When OCing, can I assume that as long as I pass stringent stress tests (so OC is stable) that lower timings will improve perf and not lead to a degradation in performance? I assume perf degradation is due to error checking from unstable timings or maybe timings that are invalid (maybe mobo overriding with their own values). Is that correct?

I don't waaanaaaa bench ram after every change, especially when there's test variance.


----------



## massivex

bscool said:


> I would get the cheapest Hynix M die you can. Kingston 6000c40 and 6400 are some of the lowest price if you can get them directly from Kingston(when on sale) and they will all OC very close to 7000c30 to 7000c32 if the MB and CPU/IMC can do it.
> 
> But from NE G.SKILL Trident Z5 Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR5 6400 Desktop Memory Model F5-6400J3239G16GX2-TZ5K - Newegg.com
> 
> There might be cheaper kits but it is hard to keep up and even these might be A die but in the past they were M die. A die are kind of picky(MB/bios compatibility) right now but they can clock higher than M die if you can get them working.


Thanks Boss! I've also watched Buildzoid's November DDR5 roundup the other day, so I'm just slowly getting the hang of it with DDR5. I have a mid (or low mid) bin of 12700K, SP72, and the DDR4 IMC on it was only able to do 3900, I have no idea what the the DDR5 IMC is capable of tho. So _if I do_ go the DDR5 route, I'll be coupling the 12700K with a budget Z690 DDR5 mobo like the MSI PRO Z690-A.

So my understanding after your reading your post and watching Buildzoid's vid, is to avoid A-die since it's most likely going to be pointless on my 12th gen/Z690 combo. But instead, opt for a more budget friendly M-die kit. From the roundup video it seems that M-die is actually fairly affordable at ~$200. I could probably resell my DDR4 kit for near that price. 

By the way, a friend of mine can sell me a kit that says on the chips "SKhynix H5CG48MEBD X014 209A". I can't remember the XMP of that kit though, sorry. 
Any idea if that's M-Die?
Also, I would really appreciate it if you knew how to differ the older A to newer A-die to M-die ICs. From my understanding the newer A chips should have on them H5CG48AGBD written on them, correct?

Apologies in advance for the bombardment of questions lol.


----------



## bhav

Well cheapest b die 2x8 kit I can seem to find is still £94, all the <£60 2x8 kits are using hynix so not worth bothering with yet.


----------



## bscool

massivex said:


> Thanks Boss! I've also watched Buildzoid's November DDR5 roundup the other day, so I'm just slowly getting the hang of it with DDR5. I have a mid (or low mid) bin of 12700K, SP72, and the DDR4 IMC on it was only able to do 3900, I have no idea what the the DDR5 IMC is capable of tho. So _if I do_ go the DDR5 route, I'll be coupling the 12700K with a budget Z690 DDR5 mobo like the MSI PRO Z690-A.
> 
> So my understanding after your reading your post and watching Buildzoid's vid, is to avoid A-die since it's most likely going to be pointless on my 12th gen/Z690 combo. But instead, opt for a more budget friendly M-die kit. From the roundup video it seems that M-die is actually fairly affordable at ~$200. I could probably resell my DDR4 kit for near that price.
> 
> By the way, a friend of mine can sell me a kit that says on the chips "SKhynix H5CG48MEBD X014 209A". I can't remember the XMP of that kit though, sorry.
> Any idea if that's M-Die?
> Also, I would really appreciate it if you knew how to differ the older A to newer A-die to M-die ICs. From my understanding the newer A chips should have on them H5CG48AGBD written on them, correct?
> 
> Apologies in advance for the bombardment of questions lol.


Those should be m die Next generation DDR5 ICs Review: SK hynix 16 Gbit A-Die - 2x 16 GB with overclocking and gaming | igor'sLAB

I havent heard anything about new and older A die. As far as I know it is fairly new, so if there is a newer A die it is something I havent heard about or I missed it.

Edit if you mean some of the 6400c32 kits being A die the only way you can tell is if you have the kit and can see the label.



https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/attachments/gsk_ddr5_lot_code_rcr-jpg.706378/



Lot Code
-S830A = Micron 16Gbit A-Die (Q1)
-S82*A = Hynix 16Gbit A-Die
-S82*M = Hynix 16Gbit M-Die
-S810B = Samsung 16Gbit B-Die (Q1) 









[Sammelthread] - DDR5 Info- & Laberthread


DDR5 Info- & Laberthread Überblick und Vergleich mit DDR4 DDR5 Tests & WWW Reviews https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php/artikel/hardware/arbeitsspeicher/59988-ddr5-7200-cl34-schneller-speicher-von-corsair-und-g-skill-im-test.html...




www.hardwareluxx.de


----------



## Zero989

nievz said:


> Is there a way to set an offset for the ring voltage on msi bios?


I think it's hilarious that you even have to ask this. I don't even have this on a Z690 classified, I have to use throttlestop or intel xtu...


----------



## massivex

> Those should be m die Next generation DDR5 ICs Review: SK hynix 16 Gbit A-Die - 2x 16 GB with overclocking and gaming | igor'sLAB.


I skimmed through it previously and must have missed it lol. After I clicked your link, I found the paragraph where he explains the A and M die IC engraving differences right away. 



> I havent heard anything about new and older A die. As far as I know it is fairly new, so if there is a newer A die it is something I havent heard about or I missed it.
> 
> Edit if you mean some of the 6400c32 kits being A die the only way you can tell is if you have the kit and can see the label.


 Forget what I've said about new and old A-die, I think I was mislead or misunderstood my friend, I wasn't too sure about that one either, he made it sound like there was older generation and newer generation A dies, I think he was simply referring to the M as "old". It makes more a lot more sense now that there are simply M and A dies. 
And no I wasn't asking if 6400c32 can be A die but thanks for the info anyway! 

I've revisited Buildzoid's roundup once again with more careful listening and it seems if I'm going for a guaranteed M die yet "budget friendly" kit then I have: 6000c30, 6000c32 and 6400c32, apparently all from G.Skill. All of these ranging from $190 to $220. I'm tempted to get the 6400c32 2x16 as it's the Trident Z5 RGB kit, which IMHO looks the most aesthetically pleasing, has RGB, and highest XMP. I personally don't care that much for RGB and XMP, but I think those features might hold future resell value a bit better. 



> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/attachments/gsk_ddr5_lot_code_rcr-jpg.706378/
> 
> 
> 
> Lot Code
> -S830A = Micron 16Gbit A-Die (Q1)
> -S82*A = Hynix 16Gbit A-Die
> -S82*M = Hynix 16Gbit M-Die
> -S810B = Samsung 16Gbit B-Die (Q1)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [Sammelthread] - DDR5 Info- & Laberthread
> 
> 
> DDR5 Info- & Laberthread Überblick und Vergleich mit DDR4 DDR5 Tests & WWW Reviews https://www.hardwareluxx.de/index.php/artikel/hardware/arbeitsspeicher/59988-ddr5-7200-cl34-schneller-speicher-von-corsair-und-g-skill-im-test.html...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.hardwareluxx.de


 Bloody AWESOMS! Thanks!


----------



## bhav

If you have to choose between +100 on ram vs +100 on e cores, which would be better?

How much L2 voltage is safe for long term?

I was needing to run 1.4v SA and 1.325v L2 for 4900 ram & 4.0 ecores, which might be too much, for now I dropped L2 to 1.25 and e cores to 3.9 instead as I don't think they even help as much as ram?


----------



## Slickman

Finally got Gear 1 stable on my ram, it's alot slower than alot of numbers I see on here but I'm happy with it. 

Z690 Tomahawk DDR4 Wifi
13700K
32GB(4X8) 4000 17-17-17-37 1.35v stock

I'm running at stock primary timings on Gear 1 at 1.48V with 1.3 SA and stock VDDQ(1.35). Also I don't see this talked about much but I had to bump AUX voltage to 1.9 from 1.8 to make it stable.


----------



## bhav

Slickman said:


> Finally got Gear 1 stable on my ram, it's alot slower than alot of numbers I see on here but I'm happy with it.
> 
> Z690 Tomahawk DDR4 Wifi
> 13700K
> 32GB(4X8) 4000 17-17-17-37 1.35v stock
> 
> I'm running at stock primary timings on Gear 1 at 1.48V with 1.3 SA and stock VDDQ(1.35). Also I don't see this talked about much but I had to bump AUX voltage to 1.9 from 1.8 to make it stable.


Most likely because its an older kit, most people here are using recent kits.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Like :rollseyes: sa is on auto guess what is asking for ? 0.858mV


----------



## Slickman

bhav said:


> Most likely because its an older kit, most people here are using recent kits.


It's Trident Z Royal F4-4000C17Q-32GTRG.


----------



## fray_bentos

Slickman said:


> Finally got Gear 1 stable on my ram, it's alot slower than alot of numbers I see on here but I'm happy with it.
> 
> Z690 Tomahawk DDR4 Wifi
> 13700K
> 32GB(4X8) 4000 17-17-17-37 1.35v stock
> 
> I'm running at stock primary timings on Gear 1 at 1.48V with 1.3 SA and stock VDDQ(1.35). Also I don't see this talked about much but I had to bump AUX voltage to 1.9 from 1.8 to make it stable.


Stock VDDQ is 1.20 V not 1.35 V.


----------



## fray_bentos

zGunBLADEz said:


> View attachment 2583034
> 
> 
> Like :rollseyes: sa is on auto guess what is asking for ? 0.858mV


Yeah, gear 2, so IMC is only at 2533 MHz as your screenshot shows.


----------



## Slickman

fray_bentos said:


> Stock VDDQ is 1.20 V not 1.35 V.


Stock is 1.35 on my board, unless you're saying without XMP.


----------



## fray_bentos

Slickman said:


> Stock is 1.35 on my board, unless you're saying without XMP.


XMP isn't stock. For example, some boards set dangerously high SA voltages "on XMP" (e.g. 1.5 V), so I wouldn't use what gets set by enabling XMP as any measure of safety.


----------



## bhav

Slickman said:


> It's Trident Z Royal F4-4000C17Q-32GTRG.


Looks and sounds fancy, but if it needs 1.48v for that XMP at gear 1, I just hope you didn't waste a lot of money on it.


----------



## Slickman

fray_bentos said:


> XMP isn't stock. For example, some boards set dangerously high SA voltages "on XMP" (e.g. 1.5 V), so I wouldn't use what gets set by enabling XMP as any measure of safety.


Fair enough, so do you think 1.35 VDDQ is too high for my setup? I never bothered to touch it.


----------



## bhav

Slickman said:


> Fair enough, so do you think 1.35 VDDQ is too high for my setup? I never bothered to touch it.


As with anything when it comes to voltages, have you tested it to make sure lower doesn't work?


----------



## zGunBLADEz

fray_bentos said:


> Yeah, gear 2, so IMC is only at 2533 MHz as your screenshot shows.


did way better than any of my bdie kits XD only around 8ns away from the best bdie kit here in gear 1
cpu didnt need voltage sa is at 0.85mV like double rolleyes


----------



## bhav

fray_bentos said:


> Yeah, gear 2, so IMC is only at 2533 MHz as your screenshot shows.


Slight correction - halve the IMC value again.

5000 G2 = 1250 Mhz IMC.

2500 IMC = 10000 G2.

G2 is the single reason why higher speeds on ram is just not worth it until DDR5 frequency is double your current G1 DDR4.


----------



## Slickman

bhav said:


> Looks and sounds fancy, but if it needs 1.48v for that XMP at gear 1, I just hope you didn't waste a lot of money on it.


 Yeah it was super expensive when I got it. I'm still tweaking it though, I just stopped for a while after I got it stable and enjoyed some games. Part of my problem is I did my CPU undervolt first and then when I tightened ram timing I had to add some voltage back to the CPU to get it stable again. I didn't realize a CPU undervolt could become unstable by tweaking the ram. I need to isolate one thing that I'm testing at a time, I get impatient and change 3 things at once and I know that's not how it should be done.


----------



## Slickman

bhav said:


> As with anything when it comes to voltages, have you tested it to make sure lower doesn't work?


I have not but I will now, thanks.


----------



## fray_bentos

zGunBLADEz said:


> did way better than any of my bdie kits XD only around 8ns away from the best bdie kit here in gear 1
> cpu didnt need voltage sa is at 0.85mV like double rolleyes


I'd probably take the 8 ns lower latency over 10-20 GB/s throughput though, especially if gaming.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

fray_bentos said:


> I'd probably take the 8 ns lower latency over 10-20 GB/s throughput though, especially if gaming.


That depends where he ends at. That just primaries lol right now im in the middle of both worlds as it is.


----------



## Slickman

Should DRAM voltage and Eventual DRAM voltage be the same? I saw somebody on youtube recommended setting the eventual lower and that you need more to post than you do for running. I'm testing now with 1.48v to post then 1.46v after that.


----------



## fray_bentos

zGunBLADEz said:


> That depends where he ends at. That just primaries lol right now im in the middle of both worlds as it is.


"DDR4.5"


----------



## bhav

fray_bentos said:


> "DDR4.5"


Now what if I manage to get my current kit to 6000 on the new board? Its doubtful but I'm gonna try.


----------



## bhav

And hmmm do I buy it just to play with?



https://www.cclonline.com/kf432c16bbk2-16-kingston-fury-beast-16gb-2x8gb-3200mhz-ddr4-memory-kit-355324/



Turns out it might be DJR, but it might be anything else.

Also I tried checking on ebay to see if anyones selling my current kit for a second one instead, no one selling it 

Everyone is keeping their Mircron B dies it seems.


----------



## Slickman

Question, is it normal that a TRFC difference of just 5 can be the difference between stress tests failing in seconds and being totally stable?


----------



## Ichirou

Slickman said:


> Question, is it normal that a TRFC difference of just 5 can be the difference between stress tests failing in seconds and being totally stable?


Yes. Because the RAM doesn't magically change its construction unless you were to hypothetically degrade it over the years.
Every DIMM will be able to stabilize a specific minimum tRFC value. Just gotta find what that value is.


----------



## bhav

So what do you know, 4000G1 does work on my 12600k.

I needed to raise VDDQ, just used 1.4v for now, will fix the timings soon, try for 4200 first.

Spent ages trying to get higher, 4200CL14 G2 wont work even up to 1.6v VDDQ, 4133CL14 G2 works, 4133CL14 G2 won't work.


----------



## zhrooms

zhrooms said:


>


I sold my gaming PC earlier this year (shown in the screenshot above), as I no longer game as much as I did, and in the past few weeks I've upgraded my surf PC to be capable of gaming, as I still want to play something here and there.

This new build exceeded my expectations, greatly. I previously ran the ASUS Z690 TUF and Strix, so I wanted to stick to ASUS because they had the best BIOS support by far when it came to overclocking, and I managed to find a used ASUS B660 TUF for $125, kept my two 16GB b-die sticks and bought myself a new 13600K, as I wanted the large cache and the eight E-cores, got it considerably cheaper than a used 12900K and it's basically as fast (in some cases faster).

So, I expected it to do "well" on memory overclocking.. but it definitely exceeded my expectations, turns out.. it does the *same overclock* as my Z690 TUF/Strix  which cost considerably more, remember this is a cheap B660 board! (The BIOS is also more or less identical to Z690, the TUF lacked maybe 5 settings compared to the Strix, and this B660 TUF is missing maybe another 3 from the Z690 TUF, but every single important one that you actually use for overclocking is still there.)

Since I no longer wanted water cooling, as it's simply not needed, I went for 1.5V on DRAM, down from 1.65V when I ran them on Water, this is the overclock I've decided on (and stress tested), basically the same as in the screenshot above in the quote, except these differences:
*4000*, *15-15-15-30*, RFC *300* and that's it (I'm sure I could improve these, but I haven't even tried and don't see the point, it's already really fast). All other timings are identical, and since I wasn't pushing the memory as hard as before, I could relax voltages a lot as you can see below.

System Agent Voltage:
*1.050:* 1 Error (in TM5)
*1.100:* Passed

VDDQ Voltage:
*1.150:* No Boot
*1.200:* Passed

DRAM Voltage:
*1.450:* No Boot
*1.500:* Passed

These were the voltages I needed on Z690 TUF & Strix for comparison: 4100 CL14 = *SA 1.36V*, *VDDQ 1.38V* & *DRAM 1.65V*, so these voltages of 1.05/1.15/1.45 are significantly lower (maybe it has something to do with the CPU as well? I have no clue).

I then measured the latency in Intel MLC instead of AIDA64 as it seems to be outdated/buggy, and after running it a few times the lowest number I got was 44.75ns, from my previous 42.4 on Water (2.35ns higher now, or 5.5%).

And then I stress tested it, hot boxed the PC by lowering fan speeds to torture levels while running Superposition, and at 59°C (DIMM temperature) it produced a single error in TM5, so I adjusted the fan curves of the case fans (bumped them by 100-200RPM so that the memory didn't exceed ~57°C).

Overall, I'm extremely pleased, remember that I only paid *$125* for this used (brand new condition) B660 TUF, and it matches the memory overclocking on the Z690 TUF/Strix, just incredible value. On top of that, the 13600K runs 5.1GHz all-core in load, just ridiculous, it beats the 12900K stock in single-core as expected, but 17% slower multi-threaded because of the extra cores on the 12900K (33%), although costs far less, price/performance the 12900K doesn't even come close obviously.










_Note: Before I got this 13600K, I was temporarily using a 12100, and I didn't know that you can't adjust SA voltage if the CPU isn't unlocked (K), so I was limited to 0.95V default SA on it, and couldn't exceed 3600 MT/s, not the end of the world, as you can still reach maybe 47ns at 3600 by lowering CL, after I got the 13600K I could then adjust SA and 4000 required somewhere between 1.050 and 1.100, so I just set it to 1.100 for absolute stability.
Also, I wonder if the B660M TUF WiFi D4 (mATX) variant for __$169__ performs the same? I would assume so, if I had to buy a new one I'd probably go for that one._


----------



## bhav

So attempting gaming benchies between G1 and G2 is going to be tough. Preliminary test in Civ 6 AI bench, two runs in a row at same settings gives 7.09 and 7.24 (turn time, less is better), so it fluctuates a lot.

I also forgot I can't use BCLK overclock as it messes with the CPU stock clocks, so 4000CL14 G1 vs 4800CL17 G2 will be all I can do for now.

Trying to improve / stabilize the G1 timings, 18-18 middle was unstable at 1.35v SA so I had it reduced to 19-19, trying 18-18 again with 1.37v SA.

So just ran it real quick, 3 x Civ 6 AI benchmarks at 4000CL14 and 4800CL17, also using the gathering storm version which takes longer. 

G1 is better still, but by 0.3s average across the tests, so barely any difference.


----------



## sew333

Hi.5800x3d or 12900K- which is faster in Cyberpunk2077? Different reviews shows different results so i am confused. Some that 5800x3d performs the same ,some that 12900K is much faster.

On 1080P or 1440P


----------



## Cam1

i can't find clear answers of what should i use for "*ring down bin*", bios says to use this carefully because it influences voltage.
on Auto i see 4600 Max, but if i run any program it goes to 3600.
Can i tweak this setting and expect a performance increase?


----------



## MrTOOSHORT

Cam1 said:


> i can't find clear answers of what should i use for "*ring down bin*", bios says to use this carefully because it influences voltage.
> on Auto i see 4600 Max, but if i run any program it goes to 3600.
> Can i tweak this setting and expect a performance increase?


Disable it so you're at 4600MHz.


----------



## VULC




----------



## Ichirou

VULC said:


> View attachment 2583419
> 
> 
> View attachment 2583420
> 
> 
> View attachment 2583421


You don't really need to disable the E-cores with the 13th Gen. Just add some L2 cache voltage and raise Vcore a little more.


----------



## VULC

Ichirou said:


> You don't really need to disable the E-cores with the 13th Gen. Just add some L2 cache voltage and raise Vcore a little more.


Currently running 1.40v droops to 1.30v. I did test on timespy with ecores to get a better CPU score I think E cores on Auto and 1.41v might do it or even 1.42v.


----------



## VULC

Ichirou said:


> You don't really need to disable the E-cores with the 13th Gen. Just add some L2 cache voltage and raise Vcore a little more.


Should these values be safe daily Ichirou? L2 Cache voltage? Whats that in bios?


----------



## fray_bentos

VULC said:


> View attachment 2583419
> 
> 
> View attachment 2583420
> 
> 
> View attachment 2583421


Timings and voltages please.


----------



## fray_bentos

VULC said:


> Currently running 1.40v droops to 1.30v. I did test on timespy with ecores to get a better CPU score I think E cores on Auto and 1.41v might do it or even 1.42v.


That's degradation zone voltages for full load.


----------



## VULC

VULC said:


> Should these values be safe daily Ichirou?





fray_bentos said:


> Timings and voltages, please.


DRAM 1.5125v
VDDQ 1.39v
VCCSA 1.34v


----------



## VULC

fray_bentos said:


> That's degradation zone voltages for full load.


Are you sure? I'm pulling 230W and 170A.


----------



## fray_bentos

VULC said:


> Are you sure? I'm not going over 250w.


Depends on your definition of "full load", but P = VI, so plugging in numbers gives I = 192 A. Should be OK, but possibly not if you disabled e cores. Some of that total current should be shared out by flowing through the e cores, rather than all through the P cores. You could be exceeding local current limits for each P core if e cores are disabled. Given some on the sketchy degradation stories I am sticking below 1.20 V full load, since you get most of the clocks anyway from 1.15 to 1.20 V (after droop, and it keeps things cooler and less power hungry).

For example: Overclocking Raptor Lake - 13900k,13700k, 13600k etc...



Ichirou said:


> @Falkentyne
> So, while retrying my previously stable optimized config, I hit a CLOCK_WATCHDOG BSOD near the end of it. This chip has already degraded. Yikes.
> That was at 1.28V VR VOUT, ~245A current, and 310W power.





Falkentyne said:


> Just like my 12900k QS running 1.28v die sense in stockfish at 260+ amps.
> You shouldn't be above 1.250v.
> 
> Using Intel loadline:
> 
> 1520mv - (245 * 1.1) = 1.250V (1250mv).


And that's with e-cores enabled.


----------



## bhav

So why does Aida never work for me?

Intel MLC 42ns, Aida says 55.


----------



## fray_bentos

bhav said:


> So why does Aida never work for me?
> 
> Intel MLC 42ns, Aida says 55.


Is it because you lied when you were 17?


----------



## bhav

fray_bentos said:


> Is it because you lied when you were 17?


What?


----------



## fray_bentos

bhav said:


> What?


Travis lyrics (why does it always rain on me), sorry.

But more seriously, latency tests are not comparable between benchmarks, since the latency operation/measurement is different. Some have said that AIDA is bugged on 13th gen and adding ~5 ns. I am not so sure.


----------



## Krzych04650

Ran some numbers on memory tuning on 13900K, all clocks and speeds are the same except for memory timings, Auto uses basic 16-16-16-36 and all subtimings auto, and Tuned is fully optimized.


----------



## bhav

What resolution for those tests?


----------



## RichKnecht

VULC said:


> Currently running 1.40v droops to 1.30v. I did test on timespy with ecores to get a better CPU score I think E cores on Auto and 1.41v might do it or even 1.42v.


You don;t state your power draw at these values. I wouldn't run any daily 24/7 settings at that voltage if it made the CPU draw over 300W.


----------



## BenchAndGames

sorry wrong thread


----------



## fray_bentos

RichKnecht said:


> You don;t state your power draw at these values. I wouldn't run any daily 24/7 settings at that voltage if it made the CPU draw over 300W.


He states <250 W in the next post.


----------



## bhav

Well you know what, its 30 days returns on the £58 3200 Fury Renegade kit, and the site that had them for the least is updating for more black friday offers so might reduce the price still, and has 30 days returns.

Since I won't be upgrading to DDR5 for some time, will order a kit for the pentium / I3 soon rig, and test it out on my main PC.

If it isnt DJR, return under the 30 days.

2x4 Gb 2400 was £30 5 years ago so its still a great price for 2x8, and should be DJR on renegade kits.

Order placed, no extra price reduction added, but a prize draw entry on Kingston Ram purchases for a £50 voucher (If I win will be nice for the 13900KS)









KF432C16RBK2/16, Kingston FURY Renegade 16GB (2 x | Box.co.uk






www.box.co.uk





But now what do I do with this worthless stuff, it probably wont even get £20 because its only 4 Gb moduloes:










One of my steam friends is some poor guy in Brazil, last I checked he was using an I3 9100 and a single 8 Gb stick, so I DMed to see if he will at least pay for shipping if he wants it for free, but that will probably cost him more than buying more ram locally.


----------



## RichKnecht

fray_bentos said:


> He states <250 W in the next post.


Yep, saw that after I replied. The general consensus seems to agree that keeping these chips under 300W is a good idea. I am staying at defaults with undervolting. I'm messing around with memory now to see if I can get this kit to where I had it on my previous X299 rig.


----------



## bhav

Oddly 2666CL13 is £4 more than the 3200 kit, I tried looking for the 3600 but nowhere had it.


----------



## bhav

So I got my 4000G1 working with my CPU OC, it needed to be lowered to 14-19-19.

14-18-18 will need up to 1.4v SA which I don't want to risk at G1, 14-19-19 works at 1.35v SA, maybe even less, 14-18-18 needed 1.36v SA but only works with stock speed p cores, 1.37v wasn't even enough for 5.0 p cores.

Will be testing the cheap Kingston kit next when it arrives next week.


----------



## VULC

RichKnecht said:


> You don;t state your power draw at these values. I wouldn't run any daily 24/7 settings at that voltage if it made the CPU draw over 300W.


It's only going to 240w max going off of HwInfo.


----------



## WayWayUp

fyi i was able to pickup a z790 apex on newegg just now
I also grabbed the teamgroup 7600 36-46-46-84 ram kit. It should overclock nicely


----------



## sew333

Hi.

Hi.I compared fps in gameplay in Cyberpunk 2077 ( 1440P dlss quality,rt ultra ) on my Rtx 4090 with Ryzen 5800X3D with Rtx 4090. I have 12900K stock,ddr4 3600mhz.

And i have the same fps . Is this normal? I have the same performance on my 12900K stock Rtx 4090, like 5800X3D with Rtx 4090.


----------



## bhav

..... I had the 14-19-19 4000 set in Gear 2 .....

Gear 1 still no work with 5.0 P cores.

I've given up, its back to 4800G2 rock stable with CPU overclock.


----------



## VULC

sew333 said:


> Hi.
> 
> Hi.I compared fps in gameplay in Cyberpunk 2077 ( 1440P dlss quality,rt ultra ) on my Rtx 4090 with Ryzen 5800X3D with Rtx 4090. I have 12900K stock,ddr4 3600mhz.
> 
> And i have the same fps . Is this normal? I have the same performance on my 12900K stock Rtx 4090, like 5800X3D with Rtx 4090.


Yes because you're GPU bound no CPU usage or hardly any in Cyberpunk at 1440p.


----------



## VULC

Krzych04650 said:


> Ran some numbers on memory tuning on 13900K, all clocks and speeds are the same except for memory timings, Auto uses basic 16-16-16-36 and all subtimings auto, and Tuned is fully optimized.
> View attachment 2583561
> View attachment 2583562


Wouldn't it be better to turn off E cores and have 8 P cores with hyper threading enabled instead of going for 100 to 200 more hz to get 6Ghz as the P cores are way more powerful.


----------



## fray_bentos

VULC said:


> Wouldn't it be better to turn off E cores and have 8 P cores with hyper threading enabled instead of going for a 100 more hz to get 6Ghz as the P cores are way more powerful.


No. Hyperthreads have much less performance than an e core. A HT thread is worth about one quarter of a p core at best. Better to turn off HT to get extra Hz on the p cores instead.


----------



## Ichirou

VULC said:


> Wouldn't it be better to turn off E cores and have 8 P cores with hyper threading enabled instead of going for 100 to 200 more hz to get 6Ghz as the P cores are way more powerful.


Depends entirely on workload. You gotta do your own testing in your own use-case environment.


----------



## VULC

fray_bentos said:


> No. Hyperthreads have much less performance than an e core. A HT thread is worth about one quarter of a p core at best. Better to turn off HT to get extra Hz on the p cores instead.


A game won't scale significantly because of 100hz compared to HT though E cores take up L3 cache as well which is important for games also. He would have to show a test with HT on for us to get the full picture. Most gamers who setup for games are running E cores off not HT off with at 8 e cores enabled.


----------



## fray_bentos

VULC said:


> A game won't scale significantly because of 100hz compared to HT though E cores take up L3 cache as well which is important for games also. He would have to show a test with HT on for us to get the full picture. Most gamers who setup for games are running E cores off not HT off with at 8 e cores enabled.


HT on makes most games slower, with only a few exceptions. A good example is Spiderman Remastered which runs much slower with HT on.

I thought e cores off causes issues on 13th gen? Also I though e cores off disables some cache, or is that wrong?


----------



## bhav

Thing is with a 13900K already having 8 P cores and 16 e cores, will any games even need the HT on top?

If you disable the HT and get an extra 100 on the P cores, thats likely going to be better.


----------



## sew333

Hi. I have 12900K stock

32 GB 2x16 GB DDR4 3600mhz in GEAR 1

Palit Gamerock Pro OC rtx 4090

1300W Seasonic Platinum Prime

Aorus Elite DDR4 Z690

Windows 11 2H22. Updated new nvidia drivers.



So question will be this time about Cyberpunk 2077 <lól>.

Basically. I am using : 1440P,RT PSYCHO,DLSS QUALITY,rest ultra.

My fps during crowd areas are low something like 72-85fps. Its when running around many peoples.

Little China for example.

So i saw gameplay review on youtube with Rtx 4090 and AMD 7950X and have the same fps.

Also on AMD 7950X is 32GB DDR5 6000mhz.



Link:







<6:10 minute> this place






And my question is. Is 12900K performing the same like 7950X or why i have the same fps?THANKS


----------



## RichKnecht

I decided to keep my 13900K at default clocks and under volt it. Now I am playing with memory. I am using 4 16GB sticks of 3600 G Skill b-die set at 16 16 16 36 2N G1 @ 1.35V and it's running fine. I'm trying for 3800--4000, So I set all the RAM values at Auto and upped the frequency to 3800. I switched the frequency to 3800 and id doesn't boot. I didn't enter and voltages, just left them on auto. Should I have manually entered RAM, SA, VDDQ voltages manually?


----------



## yzonker

VULC said:


> Yes because you're GPU bound no CPU usage or hardly any in Cyberpunk at 1440p.


Only with DLSS off. With DLSS and a 4090, it can become at least partially CPU bound.


----------



## Krzych04650

VULC said:


> Wouldn't it be better to turn off E cores and have 8 P cores with hyper threading enabled instead of going for 100 to 200 more hz to get 6Ghz as the P cores are way more powerful.





VULC said:


> A game won't scale significantly because of 100hz compared to HT though E cores take up L3 cache as well which is important for games also. He would have to show a test with HT on for us to get the full picture. Most gamers who setup for games are running E cores off not HT off with at 8 e cores enabled.


This is what I thought at the beginning too. I bought this chip with an intention of running traditional 8c/16t and disabling E-cores was the first thing I did. But it turned out wrong.

HT is not only detrimental for performance a lot of the time but also increases temperatures, power and voltage requirements so much that you can run 200 MHz higher at the same voltage and lower power/temperatures without it.

Also, and this is crucial here, there are games, even single threaded ones like CSGO or Witcher 1, that gain 9-11% performance with E-cores enabled vs disabled, even though they sit idle. There are multiple theories on why that would be, but it is most likely due to RPL simply not functioning properly with E-cores off, at least in some cases. In cases like these, bone stock 13900K with mediocre memory is going to match fully tuned 8c/16t.

In games that are neutral to this, the penalty from running 8P/8E/HT0 vs 8c/16t is around 1.5%, so there is some, but it is quickly made up by 200 MHz higher clock.

I am planning to do more testing on this but just testing 10 games is not going to suffice in this case, with things like this you would want at least 100 games for firm conclusions, and not just random 100 games but carefully picked 100 games that would account for all types of engines and games from different time periods. Well maybe if you had that kind of game library and knowledge you wouldn't need as much as 100.

If you know any games that you think would run better on 8c/16t and benefit from HT then list them, I am willing to add some into my loop as it is still quite small, even if very diversified in terms of testing games from different time periods and different scaling behavior with threads and memory.


----------



## fray_bentos

Krzych04650 said:


> This is what I thought at the beginning too. I bought this chip with an intention of running traditional 8c/16t and disabling E-cores was the first thing I did. But it turned out wrong.
> 
> HT is not only detrimental for performance a lot of the time but also increases temperatures, power and voltage requirements so much that you can run 200 MHz higher at the same voltage and lower power/temperatures without it.
> 
> Also, and this is crucial here, there are games, even single threaded ones like CSGO or Witcher 1, that gain 9-11% performance with E-cores enabled vs disabled, even though they sit idle. There are multiple theories on why that would be, but it is most likely due to RPL simply not functioning properly with E-cores off, at least in some cases. In cases like these, bone stock 13900K with mediocre memory is going to match fully tuned 8c/16t.
> 
> In games that are neutral to this, the penalty from running 8P/8E/HT0 vs 8c/16t is around 1.5%, so there is some, but it is quickly made up by 200 MHz higher clock.
> 
> I am planning to do more testing on this but just testing 10 games is not going to suffice in this case, with things like this you would want at least 100 games for firm conclusions, and not just random 100 games but carefully picked 100 games that would account for all types of engines and games from different time periods. Well maybe if you had that kind of game library and knowledge you wouldn't need as much as 100.
> 
> If you know any games that you think would run better on 8c/16t and benefit from HT then list them, I am willing to add some into my loop as it is still quite small, even if very diversified in terms of testing games from different time periods and different scaling behavior with threads and memory.


The only games I have on my list of benefitting from HT are Battlefield games (V and 1), and Fortnite, if you class that as a game.


----------



## QSS-5

Krzych04650 said:


> Ran some numbers on memory tuning on 13900K, all clocks and speeds are the same except for memory timings, Auto uses basic 16-16-16-36 and all subtimings auto, and Tuned is fully optimized.
> View attachment 2583561
> View attachment 2583562


How did you train your RTLs?


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

QSS-5 said:


> How did you train your RTLs?


Training on the msi boards is pretty easy, basically set fastboot to disabled and under RTL setting in dram settings you can leave it auto or set to dynamic. Keep rebooting until RTLs are within 1 or 2 of each other and then switch fastboot to "no training".
I still did the training this way on my z790 although it was quicker...didnt really need much rebooting. It seems mostly dependent on VDIMM and/or primaries. For example if Im at 1.52vdimm I was training 69/71 but at 1.54v pretty much stayed around 71/71. Thats at 4133 cl15 g1.


----------



## VULC

So if you enforce Intel power limits in your bios does that make it safe regarding degradation and running a too high all core voltage?


----------



## fray_bentos

VULC said:


> So if you enforce Intel power limits in your bios does that make it safe regarding degradation and running a too high all core voltage?


Sadly not fully, but it will give some protection.


----------



## VULC

fray_bentos said:


> Sadly not fully, but it will give some protection.


Well you're capped at 253w how can the CPU degrade?


----------



## Ichirou

VULC said:


> Well you're capped at 253w how can the CPU degrade?


Degradation is always happening.
The 253W limit by Intel is just what they are covering under their warranty period. 
But people are gonna clock the chips high and RMA them when they degrade anyway.


----------



## RichKnecht

Ichirou said:


> Degradation is always happening.
> The 253W limit by Intel is just what they are covering under their warranty period.
> But people are gonna clock the chips high and RMA them when they degrade anyway.


Honestly, other than benchmarking, most people’s chips will never see 253W. Some are beating the crap out of their chips with tests that load the CPU with unrealistic loads, with crazy voltages and heat. Out of the box most will score 40K in R23. Sure, over clock it and you may get to 42K. That would mean a 5% increase in performance which you will never notice in real world situations. However, that 5% comes at a price of higher voltage, crazy heat, and crazy power draw. Ironically, those are the 3 things we try to improve upon when tweaking these chips. At least that’s what I am trying for.
I have to admit, I love to over clock. It’s a challenge and it allows you to learn so much about what certain settings do. But when it comes to the 13900K, it seems Intel maxed them out at stock. Maybe if they advertised lower clocks by about 200 mhz and we were able to over clock by 200 mhz it would be a different story. Right now, my challenge is undervolting. Intel’s 253W rating is barely achieved by the voltages I am using now, which are much lower than if I left it at stock voltages. Perhaps we need a separate thread on undervolting these chips.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Degradation is always happening.
> The 253W limit by Intel is just what they are covering under their warranty period.
> But people are gonna clock the chips high and RMA them when they degrade anyway.


13900KS is gonna have 350w limit lol.

Tbh looking more likely I'm going to undervolt mine at stock rather than bother to OC with how easily people here are degrading the 13900K.

I've pushed my 10900K to around 280w for 5.3 all core, no degradation but I only did that for a few benchies, 5.2 for some time and then stock since getting the 12600k.


----------



## Krzych04650

QSS-5 said:


> How did you train your RTLs?


You can either set them to Dynamic Mode under Advanced DRAM Configuration or enable Round Trip Latency under Advanced CPU Configuration.


----------



## VULC

Something is going on though that isn't right. I was running 1.4v LLC 5 on an Asus Strix z690a D4 and hitting 1.3v under load and passing 5.7ghz on R23. Later I checked it again after I couldn't load up a game thinking my CPU OC wasn't stable and it was hitting 1.33v on R23 under load. I went to bios and changed the voltage to 1.38v instead of 1.4v and I no longer pass R23 at 5.7ghz 1.3v. Under previous testing 1.4v at LLC2 would droop to 1.19v at 5.6ghz but I had to change to LLC 1 to get 1.19v this time but that does still pass. I never went over 91 degrees and maybe I ran 5 runs at most in the span of 1 week at the higher 1.3v all core voltage on R23 never exceeded 240w and 170A on vcore. The only reason people are hitting 350w is if they remove limits and and run all core P cores at 5.6ghz with E cores enabled which requires alot more voltage. It is most likely a bios bug but who knows at this point.


----------



## Netarangi

Trying to get 4300mhz stable, I was at 4200mhz with 1.55vdimm, 1.38 sa and vq which was stable.

I upped to 4300mhz and added .1 to each of the above, wasn't stable so went back to the original config and now this isn't stable..

I reset bios and loaded the 4200mhz profile and it is stable again(?). I do remember reading similar stories on here. Could the bios be saving certain training values and not resetting them when switching saved profiles or was it just not stable in the first place?

Edit: Post directly above me sounds kinda similar.


----------



## VULC

Netarangi said:


> Trying to get 4300mhz stable, I was at 4200mhz with 1.55vdimm, 1.38 sa and vq which was stable.
> 
> I upped to 4300mhz and added .1 to each of the above, wasn't stable so went back to the original config and now this isn't stable..
> 
> I reset bios and loaded the 4200mhz profile and it is stable again(?). I do remember reading similar stories on here. Could the bios be saving certain training values and not resetting them when switching saved profiles or was it just not stable in the first place?
> 
> Edit: Post directly above me sounds kinda similar.


These Asus boards are playing with our minds. Everything keeps getting thrown out of whack for some reason.


----------



## kazablanka

1.225 vddq , 1.275sa ,1.58 vdimm
kit f4-3600c16 gtzr not good not bad.


----------



## Ichirou

kazablanka said:


> View attachment 2584057
> View attachment 2584058
> 
> 
> 1.225 vddq , 1.275sa ,1.58 vdimm
> kit f4-3600c16 gtzr not good not bad.


Your BCLK is overclocked; that skews AIDA results.


----------



## kazablanka

Ichirou said:


> Your BCLK is overclocked; that skews AIDA results.


where is this rely to?


----------



## Ichirou

kazablanka said:


> where is this rely to?


AIDA64 has a bug where if the BCLK is overclocked with a 12th or 13th Gen chip, the bandwidth and latency scores will be better than they should be.

To find your true scores, divide your bandwidth scores by 1.048, and multiply your latency by 1.048.


----------



## kazablanka

Ichirou said:


> AIDA64 has a bug where if the BCLK is overclocked with a 12th or 13th Gen chip, the bandwidth and latency scores will be better than they should be.
> 
> To find your true scores, divide your bandwidth scores by 1.048, and multiply your latency by 1.048.


i will run with no bclk oc to see the difference ,thanks


----------



## bhav

I mean thats the same bandwidth I get at 4800 G2,

The trfc really helps with bandwidth, and Samsung B die can do around half what micron kits do.


----------



## Netarangi

VULC said:


> These Asus boards are playing with our minds. Everything keeps getting thrown out of whack for some reason.


Losing my mind here. Just happened again..


----------



## VULC

Ichirou said:


> AIDA64 has a bug where if the BCLK is overclocked with a 12th or 13th Gen chip, the bandwidth and latency scores will be better than they should be.
> 
> To find your true scores, divide your bandwidth scores by 1.048, and multiply your latency by 1.048.


Hey Ichirou,

What L2 cache and svid ring voltage do you use to run all E cores? Are there any baseline numbers to start testing off?


----------



## Ichirou

VULC said:


> Hey Ichirou,
> 
> What L2 cache and svid ring voltage do you use to run all E cores? Are there any baseline numbers to start testing off?


Ring voltage doesn't exist since all three voltages (P-Cores, E-Cores, and Ring) share the same Vcore.

E-Core L2 Cache Voltage starts at around 1.10V, going up. But hard to pinpoint the minimum since each test requires something different.
Cinebench R23 can suffice with rock bottom 1.10V L2 voltage, but y-cruncher shoots it up to 1.30V+ at the least.

Gotta test in your own use-case environments.


----------



## VULC

Ichirou said:


> Ring voltage doesn't exist since all three voltages (P-Cores, E-Cores, and Ring) share the same Vcore.
> 
> E-Core L2 Cache Voltage starts at around 1.10V, going up. But hard to pinpoint the minimum since each test requires something different.
> Cinebench R23 can suffice with rock bottom 1.10V L2 voltage, but y-cruncher shoots it up to 1.30V+ at the least.
> 
> Gotta test in your own use-case environments.


Thanks, this will give me a reference point to start testing.


----------



## SyneWTD

Trying to figure out if the 13700K would be worth upgrading to for memory stability/power consumption. I don't see a benefit for myself to get a 13900K with the pricing of it. I currently use an aio but will be custom looping my system within the next 3-6mo's.

I use my 12900K for primarily playing mw2/wz and that game prefers lowest latency possible. Most people run their Ecores with a lower ring but I get more performance with them disabled and running my ring at 48 with a core clock of 5100. I just run a lianli 360 aio right now and cant get above 5.1ghz 'daily' stable just thermal limit wise. I have my bdie at 4000 15-15-13-28 (gets 43 lat in aida and 41-44 lat in imlc). I cant get 4133 stable to even boot a game.

Thoughts/opinions?


----------



## Ichirou

SyneWTD said:


> Trying to figure out if the 13700K would be worth upgrading to for memory stability/power consumption. I don't see a benefit for myself to get a 13900K with the pricing of it. I currently use an aio but will be custom looping my system within the next 3-6mo's.
> 
> I use my 12900K for primarily playing mw2/wz and that game prefers lowest latency possible. Most people run their Ecores with a lower ring but I get more performance with them disabled and running my ring at 48 with a core clock of 5100. I just run a lianli 360 aio right now and cant get above 51ghz 'daily' stable just thermal limit wise. I have my bdie at 4000 15-15-13-28 (gets 43 lat in aida and 41-44 lat in imlc). I cant get 4133 stable to even boot a game.
> 
> Thoughts/opinions?


Average 13900K bins will do 56/45/51 P/E/Ring with decent Vcore.
IMC quality is slightly better but not by a significant amount.

The 13700K is probably a slight downbin, so it might be a little weaker. Can't give you an opinion.


----------



## SyneWTD

Ichirou said:


> Average 13900K bins will do 56/45/51 P/E/Ring with decent Vcore.
> IMC quality is slightly better but not by a significant amount.
> 
> The 13700K is probably a slight downbin, so it might be a little weaker. Can't give you an opinion.


Ok bet I appreciate it. Part of my difficulty in my decision making process on this is that in terms of core count, atom count, etc..the 13700K reads stat wise exactly like a 12900K. 

Is there something that they decreased on the 13700K that the 12900K excels in?....whether that be cache/voltage related etc?


----------



## Taraquin

VULC said:


> These Asus boards are playing with our minds. Everything keeps getting thrown out of whack for some reason.


Got same experience. On my 12400F I had 3700 G1 stable, tried 3733, then 3700 profile did not work after 😑


----------



## imrevoau

This is what I'm running until the BIOS updates mature a bit. I know some settings can be tighter but overclocking RAM is a nightmare currently. 1.52 DRAM and 1.35 SA.


----------



## kazablanka

guys is there any version of asrock timing configurator that works with win11?


----------



## bhav

Well my Fury Renegade arrived early, but Thaiphoon wont work on it:










Just SK Hynix confirmed but should be DJR based on the serials and the rest of the Renegade line.

Anyone have any idea why I can't get thaiphoon to work? I tried disabling defender and running as admin, neither work.

Also initial testing not that great it seems. 3800CL14 will start up but hang (1.6v Vram, 1.4v VDDQ, 1.35v SA).

It might be one of those kits that needs a lot more VDDQ.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

imrevoau said:


> This is what I'm running until the BIOS updates mature a bit. I know some settings can be tighter but overclocking RAM is a nightmare currently. 1.52 DRAM and 1.35 SA.
> View attachment 2584144


I’m almost exactly the same on a z790 , eye rolls


----------



## bhav

So my 3200 Hynix kit maxes out at 4200CL17, nothing higher boots even at auto CL.

So its fine for G1 at its price, now I have to wait however long for a 13th gen I3 to pair with it as well.


----------



## Slickman

Why is SA voltage so varied? For 4000 some people need to run 1.3 to 1.35 SA and others like myself can run at 1.1. 🤷


----------



## Ichirou

Slickman said:


> Why is SA voltage so varied? For 4000 some people need to run 1.3 to 1.35 SA and others like myself can run at 1.1. 🤷


Because frequency is not everything.
CAS latency, bandwidth, etc. all require more VCCSA as the overclock intensifies.


----------



## bhav

Slickman said:


> Why is SA voltage so varied? For 4000 some people need to run 1.3 to 1.35 SA and others like myself can run at 1.1. 🤷


I only need to push SA for the middle timings mainly.

Frequency will scale without bumping SA at higher timings. When lowering timings you need more SA.

4400 19-20-20 on my ballistix max works at stock SA on my 12600K for example. 19-19-19 XMP needs 1.35v+ SA.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I only need to push SA for the middle timings mainly.
> 
> Frequency will scale without bumping SA at higher timings. When lowering timings you need more SA.
> 
> 4400 19-20-20 on my ballistix max works at stock SA on my 12600K for example. 19-19-19 XMP needs 1.35v+ SA.


It all ties in. If you keep the timings static but raise frequency, you'll need more SA.

Overall, as the memory overclock gets more intense, the SA requirement shoots up.


----------



## ogider

Ichirou said:


> Because frequency is not everything.
> CAS latency, bandwidth, etc. all require more VCCSA as the overclock intensifies.


I need quite a bit SA.. for 4000 c15 15 15 rest tight 2x16 b-die 1.33V 
for 4100 cl 15 15 15 like 1.41V

on the other hand any change of vddq doesn't help anything. whether it is 1.2V or 1.5V..so i left it on auto and it is 1.200V . strange because i read that many people changing this voltage helps. MSI Z690 a-pro ddr4 no wifi with 12900Knewest bios


----------



## yzonker

ogider said:


> I need quite a bit SA.. for 4000 c15 15 15 rest tight 2x16 b-die 1.33V
> for 4100 cl 15 15 15 like 1.41V
> 
> on the other hand any change of vddq doesn't help anything. whether it is 1.2V or 1.5V..so i left it on auto and it is 1.200V . strange because i read that many people changing this voltage helps. MSI Z690 a-pro ddr4 no wifi with 12900Knewest bios


That may be specific to 13gen in regards to VDDQ.


----------



## Ichirou

ogider said:


> I need quite a bit SA.. for 4000 c15 15 15 rest tight 2x16 b-die 1.33V
> for 4100 cl 15 15 15 like 1.41V
> 
> on the other hand any change of vddq doesn't help anything. whether it is 1.2V or 1.5V..so i left it on auto and it is 1.200V . strange because i read that many people changing this voltage helps. MSI Z690 a-pro ddr4 no wifi with 12900Knewest bios


You only need enough when it comes to VDDQ. Different boards, BIOSes, and die-types necessitate different amounts.


----------



## bhav

I find VDDQ helps when right at the edge of G1 or ram max OC.

DDR4 benefits more from SA and a little from VDDQ, and DDR5 is the opposite.


----------



## X909

Currently on ASUS DDR4 B-DIE DR sucks so terrible, that not even 10V of VDDQTX may help :-/


----------



## bhav

X909 said:


> Currently on ASUS DDR4 B-DIE DR sucks so terrible, that not even 10V of VDDQTX may help :-/


It depends on the manufacture date, you need end of 2019 or later for the best ICs.

Also thaiphoon still not working after putting my micron kit back in, I tried emailing them but no response.


----------



## GeneO

bhav said:


> It depends on the manufacture date, you need end of 2019 or later for the best ICs.
> 
> Also thaiphoon still not working after putting my micron kit back in, I tried emailing them but no response.


Here is what the November readmefirst in typhoon says. I tried what they suggested but it didn't work:


3. When enabled, Smart App Control of Windows 11, version 22H2 blocks
Thaiphoon Burner driver from installing as it does not have the required
WHCP-signature. For this reason the program cannot read and write SPD. In
this case you can run the program in Windows 10 or import your SPD dumps
extracted from text reports of third-party software. To import a text SPD
dump copy it to the clipboard, go to "File"->"Import from Clipboard".

*** Hovewer, you can disable Windows 11 WDAC policy to let Thaiphoon Burner
*** run its driver via "Windows Security"->"Device Security"->"Memory
*** Integrity":OFF. Then run Regedit.exe, open the key
*** [HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\CI\Config]
*** and set “VulnerableDriverBlocklistEnable”=dword:00000000

*** More info at
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/security/threat-protection/windows-
defender-application-control/microsoft-recommended-driver-block-rules


----------



## bhav

Oh right, thats exactly what I thought, I mentioned in my email it seemed to stop working after 2H22.

I'll try those steps and see if I can get a read on my Hynix kit.

Well my smart app control doesn't even seem to be on, so that can't be it?

I already tried Rammom and Ramexpert, the former was more comprehensive but doesn't report the dies, so I will try see if I can export from that.


----------



## bhav

Exporting doesn't work, but I know what to do, my G4560 is still on Win 10 as it doesn't support 11, I'll get a read for the Kingston kit on there.


----------



## GeneO

bhav said:


> Oh right, thats exactly what I thought, I mentioned in my email it seemed to stop working after 2H22.
> 
> I'll try those steps and see if I can get a read on my Hynix kit.
> 
> Well my smart app control doesn't even seem to be on, so that can't be it?
> 
> I already tried Rammom and Ramexpert, the former was more comprehensive but doesn't report the dies, so I will try see if I can export from that.


What brand and model Hynix?

EDIT: cross posted. Kingston has the die encoded in their part number for a number of RAM models of theirs: 









Kingston® Memory Part Number Decoder - Kingston Technology


Learn how to read Kingston® memory part numbers including Kingston FURY™, Server Premier™, ValueRAM®, HyperX®, DDR5, DDR4, DDR3, DDR2, and DDR memory product lines to help you identify modules by specification.




www.kingston.com


----------



## bhav

GeneO said:


> What brand and model Hynix?


DDR4 Kingston Fury Renegade, same part number and series as their DJR kits, just wanted 100% confirmation:










And got it using my pentium build, Hynix D die which is DJR. Very recent manufacture date too.

So they are heavily binned kits, they put their reject DJR in the 2666-3600 kits which are all on black friday sales currently.

My 3200 kit goes up to 4200CL17, others that bought the 3600 ones get 4200CL16.

2x8 only available in 2666 and 3200, 2x16 in 3200 and 3600, they put all the chips that can't do higher end DJR clocks into these.

For £58 though, 2x8 4200CL17 is good.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

kazablanka said:


> 1.225 vddq , 1.275sa ,1.58 vdimm
> kit f4-3600c16 gtzr not good not bad.


looks good.

do you have a longer run? & hci run specially?
30m aint long enough to warm them sticks


----------



## imrevoau

Kinda sad that DDR4 isn't much better this gen. It really does seem to be just another bin higher across the board. I was looking forward to seeing some crazy 4400G1 chips


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> Kinda sad that DDR4 isn't much better this gen. It really does seem to be just another bin higher across the board. I was looking forward to seeing some crazy 4400G1 chips


4,400 MHz Gear 1 should be achievable with extremely golden chips. But that would pretty much be strictly 2x8 GB Samsung B-die.
The CPU would not be able to handle any other die or capacity.

The "ordinary consumer" range in terms of DDR4 IMC has expanded from max 4,000-4,266 MHz stable to max 4,000-4,300 MHz stable (depending on die and capacity).

At the end of the day, Raptor Lake is just better binned and better manufactured Alder Lake chips, with extra E-cores and cache.
So a significant improvement in IMC quality is not very likely.

You could go back to a 11900K or try out Gear 2, but (with the CPU core performance itself factored in) they are not as strong as Gear 1.
And Gear 2 is rapidly gaining traction in terms of overall performance as frequencies push well over 7,000 MHz with decently tight timings.


----------



## kazablanka

zGunBLADEz said:


> looks good.
> 
> do you have a longer run? & hci run specially?
> 30m aint long enough to warm them sticks


no i have not, i switched to 4200c16 with 1.54v now ,i think 1,58v is to high for 24/7


----------



## X909

bhav said:


> It depends on the manufacture date, you need end of 2019 or later for the best ICs.


Naahh... these chips ran 4800 Gear 2 and 4266 Gear 1 (2 DIMMs) on older BIOSes and 12900K. Now 4000 Gear 1 is possible with 2 DIMMs or 3200 12-13-13-28 with 4 DIMMs. It just doesn't train >3200 with 4 DIMMs. Thats for sure not a Memory IC issue.

PS: its old B-Die RAM and was top tir those days. Newer 3200C14 Kits are worse because they bin harder for the 4000 Kits now and you don't get top grade anymore when you buy 3200C14. I had multiple Kits.

Anyway... DDR5 Z790 inbound. I don't think they will put much effort in Z690/DDR4 optmization anymore.


----------



## Cam1

MrTOOSHORT said:


> Disable it so you're at 4600MHz.


Hey, thanks for the reply !
i try to Disable instead of Auto, and HWinfo still report lower frequency with a Max of 4600.
if i set 46 Max and 46 minimum i can't boot the pc, insta BSOD.
I tried 42max / 42 minimum, pc looks stable giving me 44ns instead of 48 in Intel MLC
How can i make it stable at x46 ? I have no idea what voltages or others settings have impact on the Ring down Bin


----------



## Ichirou

Cam1 said:


> Hey, thanks for the reply !
> i try to Disable instead of Auto, and HWinfo still report lower frequency with a Max of 4600.
> if i set 46 Max and 46 minimum i can't boot the pc, insta BSOD.
> I tried 42max / 42 minimum, pc looks stable giving me 44ns instead of 48 in Intel MLC
> How can i make it stable at x46 ? I have no idea what voltages or others settings have impact on the Run down Bin


If setting both min and max to 46x is unstable, your Vcore isn't enough for 46x ring. Boost it.


----------



## Cam1

i use auto overclocking, i didn't set Vcore manually, only the Ram is at 1.55V and VDDQ TX at 1.35 ( with VDDQ Auto computer crashed)
After a retry on Intel MLC i got the exact same "Best:" 44ns with any ring down bin stable settings.


----------



## bhav

So with the latest asrock bios released yesterday, I was able to stabilise 5.0 Pcores / 4.0 Ecores and 4.2 ring at 1.29v LLC3!

Also I only just found the 150w PL1 unlock, so its fine to leave it at that, it only goes a bit over in cinebench.

Warning people not to even try to add a 13600K to a 150w board, also the Asrock Z790M-ITX is even more junk .... they added 1 more vrm phase, but removed the bios flashback feature like lolwut?

DDR4 ITX builds on 12th / 13th gen should simply never have been attempted, its just about doable with a tiny OC on a 12600K.


----------



## imrevoau

so I decided to try 1.5VDDQ, and while it made absolutely no difference to my max memory OC (from 1.35) it did in fact make my PC POST way faster from a cold boot... interesting


----------



## Ichirou

@bhav I might actually be forced to swap motherboards since it doesn't seem like it's possible to stabilize 4,266 MHz with this one. And I doubt MSI's going to be able to fix it.
But at the same time, I am still eager to acquiring a good chip since I'm not too content with how I still have an average sample.
Since I can't even daily 4,266 MHz, it makes it no different from my 13900KF.

I'll give the ASUS Strix Z790-A a test drive to see whether or not it can stabilize 4,266 MHz. If it can, I'll settle. If not, I'll have to go with a chip that has better cores instead.
Decisions, decisions...


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> @bhav I might actually be forced to swap motherboards since it doesn't seem like it's possible to stabilize 4,266 MHz with this one. And I doubt MSI's going to be able to fix it.
> But at the same time, I am still eager to acquiring a good chip since I'm not too content with how I still have an average sample.
> Since I can't even daily 4,266 MHz, it makes it no different from my 13900KF.
> 
> I'll give the ASUS Strix Z790-A a test drive to see whether or not it can stabilize 4,266 MHz. If it can, I'll settle. If not, I'll have to go with a chip that has better cores instead.
> Decisions, decisions...


Test 4266 CL15 first, if it stabilizes the the problem is the ram not the mobo.

I really doubt 4266CL14 is gonna be possible.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> @bhav I might actually be forced to swap motherboards since it doesn't seem like it's possible to stabilize 4,266 MHz with this one. And I doubt MSI's going to be able to fix it.
> But at the same time, I am still eager to acquiring a good chip since I'm not too content with how I still have an average sample.
> Since I can't even daily 4,266 MHz, it makes it no different from my 13900KF.
> 
> I'll give the ASUS Strix Z790-A a test drive to see whether or not it can stabilize 4,266 MHz. If it can, I'll settle. If not, I'll have to go with a chip that has better cores instead.
> Decisions, decisions...


4266 C14 is very difficult to run, I wouldn't be surprised if that's the problem


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Test 4266 CL15 first, if it stabilizes the the problem is the ram not the mobo.
> 
> I really doubt 4266CL14 is gonna be possible.





imrevoau said:


> 4266 C14 is very difficult to run, I wouldn't be surprised if that's the problem


TM5 already passed, if you haven't seen the screenshot already. The RAM's fine.

Currently taking an unorthodox approach and testing BIOS V1.80 instead.
Compared to V1.91 (latest), it boots 4,266 CL14 to desktop with a single try, smooth as butter. So V1.91 might actually be worse for memory overclocking.
V1.91 needs like 6-8 boot loops to actually boot to the desktop.

y-cruncher still failed, but I'll try to play around with the voltages on this BIOS to see if I can gain some semblance of stability.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> TM5 already passed, if you haven't seen the screenshot already. The RAM's fine.
> 
> Currently taking an unorthodox approach and testing BIOS V1.80 instead.
> Compared to V1.91 (latest), it boots 4,266 CL14 to desktop with a single try, smooth as butter. So V1.91 might actually be worse for memory overclocking.
> V1.91 needs like 6-8 boot loops to actually boot to the desktop.
> 
> y-cruncher still failed, but I'll try to play around with the voltages on this BIOS to see if I can gain some semblance of stability.


I use this calculator to estimate what might be stable:



Ram Latency Calculator



So taking what my 10900K could manage with micron b die, 4533 CL15 gives a score of 6.6, and that takes 1.725v.

4266CL14 is 6.5, so if it would work you're looking at needing to push 1.75v+ to stabilize that, and thats if you have the same IMC as a top bin 10900K which I really doubt any 13th gen chip will have.

It simply looks like you have a boot and bench stable OC, but not 24/7. I really doubt a motherboard change is going to help with that, and does +66 on the ram even matter wasting that much money and time?

4200 is realistically the maximum these ICs will go on CL14 for 24/7 stability, plus you are running 4 modules not 2, you probably already the best stable CL14 frequency on the planet with 4200!

Also maybe try one stick at a time at 4266CL14 first to rule out if it is the ram or not, I'm quite certain it will be that you can't do 4266CL14 on at least one of the sticks.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I use this calculator to estimate what might be stable:
> 
> 
> 
> Ram Latency Calculator
> 
> 
> 
> So taking what my 10900K could manage with micron b die, 4533 CL15 gives a score of 6.6, and that takes 1.725v.
> 
> 4266CL14 is 6.5, so if it would work you're looking at needing to push 1.75v+ to stabilize that, and thats if you have the same IMC as a top bin 10900K which I really doubt any 13th gen chip will have.
> 
> It simply looks like you have a boot and bench stable OC, but not 24/7. I really doubt a motherboard change is going to help with that, and does +66 on the ram even matter wasting that much money and time?
> 
> 4200 is realistically the maximum these ICs will go on CL14 for 24/7 stability, plus you are running 4 modules not 2, you probably already the best stable CL14 frequency on the planet with 4200!
> 
> Also maybe try one stick at a time at 4266CL14 first to rule out if it is the ram or not, I'm quite certain it will be that you can't do 4266CL14 on at least one of the sticks.


TM5 1usmus is not a "boot and bench stable OC". And this was done in Gear 1, not 2.
And considering I only need 1.29V VCCSA with 4,200 MHz, there is plenty of IMC headroom to support the memory.
I needed 1.40V VCCSA with my 12900KF back then for that frequency.

The CPU only starts to act up once you push Micron B-die beyond 1.42V VCCSA or so. Samsung B-die doesn't have that problem; it'll play nice until 1.50V VCCSA.
I know, since I've tested it with the 12th Gen.

12th/13th Gen is different from older generations as you no longer need as much VDIMM. VDDQ compensation reduces it significantly, and is actually a requirement.

The board/BIOS is the issue here. I'm just trying to brute force it anyway.


----------



## bhav

Wait if thats at G1, do you have the same issues with 4266CL14 in G2?

Id say its the IMC if it works in G2, most likely the ram if not.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Wait if thats at G1, do you have the same issues with 4266CL14 in G2?
> 
> Id say its the IMC if it works in G2, most likely the ram if not.


It's pretty obvious at this point that there's something screwy going on. And I'm pretty confident it's the BIOS. Or maybe y-cruncher is bugged.
The RAM will do 4,300 CL14 in Gear 2 just fine.

I'm individually testing the different Component Stress Tests to see where the issue may lie.
The Main 10B test doesn't even attempt to start, which is really suspicious. It should fail at 1% or something. Not before it even starts to buffer.

SFT, y-cruncher's hardest test, passes just fine. I'm going to run each test individually to see which ones trigger issues.
I'll even give R23 30m a whirl, because why not.

Update: So far, all of the non-memory related tests pass just fine.
I have a feeling I might know where the issue lies. I'll let you know how it turns out after testing out my theory.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> The RAM will do 4,300 CL14 in Gear 2 just fine.


Need to know your address so I can steal that ram.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ichirou said:


> It's pretty obvious at this point that there's something screwy going on. And I'm pretty confident it's the BIOS. Or maybe y-cruncher is bugged.
> The RAM will do 4,300 CL14 in Gear 2 just fine.
> 
> I'm individually testing the different Component Stress Tests to see where the issue may lie.
> The Main 10B test doesn't even attempt to start, which is really suspicious. It should fail at 1% or something. Not before it even starts to buffer.
> 
> SFT, y-cruncher's hardest test, passes just fine. I'm going to run each test individually to see which ones trigger issues.
> I'll even give R23 30m a whirl, because why not.
> 
> Update: So far, all of the non-memory related tests pass just fine.
> I have a feeling I might know where the issue lies. I'll let you know how it turns out after testing out my theory.


With 2x16GB B-Die gear 1 4400, max. stable arround 4333, max. gear 2 4400 and max stable the same on Asus Strix....sticks can do 4700+
same limit.
Performance is good at 4300G1, that is with AI Auto OC Geekbench 3 64bit
ASUS System Product Name - Geekbench Browser


----------



## lkozarov

Ichirou said:


> It's pretty obvious at this point that there's something screwy going on. And I'm pretty confident it's the BIOS. Or maybe y-cruncher is bugged.
> The RAM will do 4,300 CL14 in Gear 2 just fine.
> 
> I'm individually testing the different Component Stress Tests to see where the issue may lie.
> The Main 10B test doesn't even attempt to start, which is really suspicious. It should fail at 1% or something. Not before it even starts to buffer.
> 
> SFT, y-cruncher's hardest test, passes just fine. I'm going to run each test individually to see which ones trigger issues.
> I'll even give R23 30m a whirl, because why not.
> 
> Update: So far, all of the non-memory related tests pass just fine.
> I have a feeling I might know where the issue lies. I'll let you know how it turns out after testing out my theory.


I guess You don`t have enough memory for 10B. 2.5B need a least ~12.5 GB free memory, so system must have at least 16 GB installed and almost no background running processes. Other way You will bench your Page File.


----------



## Ichirou

lkozarov said:


> I guess You don`t have enough memory for 10B. 2.5B need a least ~12.5 GB free memory, so system must have at least 16 GB installed and almost no background running processes. Other way You will bench your Page File.


I'm running 64 GB of RAM total.
Only the memory tests N32, N64, HNT, VST, and C17 are causing troubles at the moment.
I managed to pass FFT by raising VDIMM a bit more. But those tests above are not reacting no matter how much VDIMM I slap at the RAM.
Boosting IMC voltages doesn't seem to help either.

@PhoenixMDA Stable... in y-cruncher? Or just R23?
R23, I'm pretty sure I can pass 30 minutes just fine. y-cruncher is just too difficult right now.


----------



## imrevoau

So I thought I was safe with 1.55v DRAM voltage over air... Game started crashing after about an hour. Back to 1.52 

installed a new exhaust fan though, Noctua industrial fan. Gonna see if it can help with temps while gaming since my old fan was a crappy 800RPM Fractal fan.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ichirou said:


> I'm running 64 GB of RAM total.
> Only the memory tests N32, N64, HNT, VST, and C17 are causing troubles at the moment.
> I managed to pass FFT by raising VDIMM a bit more. But those tests above are not reacting no matter how much VDIMM I slap at the RAM.
> Boosting IMC voltages doesn't seem to help either.
> 
> @PhoenixMDA Stable... in y-cruncher? Or just R23?
> R23, I'm pretty sure I can pass 30 minutes just fine. y-cruncher is just too difficult right now.


All stable is up to 4333 Gear1 or 2, that is not the point.
I mean on my Strix Z690 the border between Gear1 oder 2 is the same and that gives one question why it so is.
My memory Kit is able to do min. 4700CL16 with 1,6V, thats not the reason.


----------



## ObviousCough

I read the last 5 pages and everyone is still using z690.

Does z790 not make a difference for ddr4?


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

ObviousCough said:


> I read the last 5 pages and everyone is still using z690.
> 
> Does z790 not make a difference for ddr4?


How do I fix the mlc latency display bug in win 11? I think it’s calculating the chip latency…like 6.7ns…


----------



## ju-rek

Do not run as administrator


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

ju-rek said:


> Do not run as administrator


oh dang, thanks - so like the opposite of most thing of course lol

EDIT: it doesnt even load the GUI if I dont run as admin...what the. The command prompt will run but the GUI is broken when not running admin?


----------



## ju-rek

I run it without gui, I just click the mlc.exe file and it shows the results in the console.


----------



## ObviousCough

I had to redownload it in a new folder to get the right reading.


Uncle Dubbs said:


> How do I fix the mlc latency display bug in win 11? I think it’s calculating the chip latency…like 6.7ns…


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

ObviousCough said:


> I had to redownload it in a new folder to get the right reading.


oh, ok, will try that thank you!


----------



## Ichirou

ObviousCough said:


> I read the last 5 pages and everyone is still using z690.
> 
> Does z790 not make a difference for ddr4?


Pretty much, yeah. There may be some minor improvements to the motherboard training though.


----------



## opheen

Ichirou said:


> If setting both min and max to 46x is unstable, your Vcore isn't enough for 46x ring. Boost it.


As Ichirou says, vcore needs to be set pretty high when you go for high OC\Ring


----------



## PhoenixMDA

ju-rek said:


> I run it without gui, I just click the mlc.exe file and it shows the results in the console.


Dont work for me no difference between admin or normal.


----------



## bhav

ObviousCough said:


> I read the last 5 pages and everyone is still using z690.
> 
> Does z790 not make a difference for ddr4?


The thing is in order to find out, you need to test between the same series Z690 and Z790 with the same CPU and ram.

Even if anyone could be bothered to, its entirely pointless.

Nothing is going to OC DDR4 with 1:1 IMC like Z490 used to, its entirely pointless to spec a motherboard just for OCing DDR4 when were stuck with these **** IMCs.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

bhav said:


> So with the latest asrock bios released yesterday, I was able to stabilise 5.0 Pcores / 4.0 Ecores and 4.2 ring at 1.29v LLC3!
> 
> Also I only just found the 150w PL1 unlock, so its fine to leave it at that, it only goes a bit over in cinebench.
> 
> Warning people not to even try to add a 13600K to a 150w board, also the Asrock Z790M-ITX is even more junk .... they added 1 more vrm phase, but removed the bios flashback feature like lolwut?
> 
> DDR4 ITX builds on 12th / 13th gen should simply never have been attempted, its just about doable with a tiny OC on a 12600K.


I disagree on a gigabyte z690 lite ddr4 


I see ppl still p95z'ing and y kruncher like lolz xD


----------



## bhav

zGunBLADEz said:


> I disagree on a gigabyte z690 lite ddr4
> 
> 
> I see ppl still p95z'ing and y kruncher like lolz xD


You do understand why its called a 'lite' don't you?

Enjoy your dysfunctional PCI-E slot.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

bhav said:


> You do understand why its called a 'lite' don't you?
> 
> Enjoy your dysfunctional PCI-E slot.


I know the whole drama cant complaint for a $150 board with 10phases that dont sweat xD im cool with my 16x slot been pciex3.0 xD


----------



## zGunBLADEz

PhoenixMDA said:


> Dont work for me no difference between admin or normal.
> View attachment 2585036


Right click run as admin or probably corrupted redownload bad ram oc


----------



## yzonker

zGunBLADEz said:


> Right click run as admin or probably corrupted redownload bad ram oc


It doesn't work for me either. Chipset/MEI drivers updated. ME firmware updated to 2020. MSI Z690 Edge mobo, 13900k.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

I remember having that issue and i redownload the thing using the gui and open as administrator solved the issue it was giving me the 5/6ns bs numbers


----------



## ViTosS

Well I have no idea what happened, but I borrowed a RAM stick from a local store and was able to post and boot, and then I just went and plugged back my ''defective'' RAM stick and I was able to post and boot , so right now 2x8GB, still testing, this is just primary timmings and all the rest auto.

By the way:


4300Mhz can post and boot at CL19-19-19-39, reduced to CL16-16-16-36 and CL16-17-17-37 and not even able to post, tried VDIMM up to 1.60v, SA to 1.35v and VDDQ 1.50v
4266Mhz was able to post at CL16-16-16-36 (didn't try lower) but BIOS hangs and freezes, no matter the voltages

So right now at 4200Mhz CL15-15-15-35 with VDIMM 1.56v, SA 1.30v and VDDQ 1.40v, don't have time now to further test, at night will do extensive testing, Windows 11 22H2 Ghost Spectre:


----------



## PhoenixMDA

zGunBLADEz said:


> Right click run as admin or probably corrupted redownload bad ram oc


The tool is buggy and not my ramoc^^


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Still wip. doesnt need 1.6mV+ ram (1.37mV)
doesnt need 1.4mV+ SA (1.170mV)
CPU is at AUTO 55/55/54/54/53/53 @ 43x E-CORES
cache i find not use touching it it doesnt improve nothing for now.

easy on the cpu imc


----------



## yzonker

MSI rolled back the Z690 Edge Wifi bios to 1.90 and listed improved memory compatibility. I flashed it and am currently running Karhu at 4200CL15 with only 1.50v VDDQ TX, down from a bare minimum of 1.565v (would not even train at 1.55v before). May go lower, but I wanted to check for basic stability before going lower.

Good news though I think. I'll report back when I get it fully fleshed out.


----------



## yzonker

Update on the MSI bios. Although it does post at lower VDDQ TX voltage, it is not any more stable at my 4200CL15 tune. Still need at least 1.565v. 

So not worth it probably. Might help someone running at a lower speed (maybe).

Edit: But SA requirement is much lower. Just passed yCruncher at 1.28v SA, down from a bare minimum of 1.325v with the previous bios. Also, maybe not useful, but I can also post above 1.58v VDDQ TX now. It might provide more headroom for higher speeds for benching, even if I didn't run it daily.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

ObviousCough said:


> I had to redownload it in a new folder to get the right reading.





Uncle Dubbs said:


> oh, ok, will try that thank you!


Yep, this worked! Deleted folder and reinstall. I don’t run it as admin, worked great thanks!


----------



## ItsCash

Any attempts to OC ram on the new MSI z690 ddr4 edge Wi-Fi bios 7D31v19? TIA.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Well, here is what I have so far....having a hard time stabilizing 4266cl15 even at 1.56vdimm and starting to play with some other voltages...


----------



## yzonker

ItsCash said:


> Any attempts to OC ram on the new MSI z690 ddr4 edge Wi-Fi bios 7D31v19? TIA.


Well if you scroll up 2 posts from yours you'll see that I'm testing it right now. I do have some positive results. 

Before I needed a minimum of 1.325v for SA, now I'm down to 1.25v and have not hit a point of instability. I was also able to reduce tRCD and tRP from 17 to 15 as well as small reductions to a couple of subtimings (haven't tested nearly all of them). And with my old timings I found I could reduce the mem voltage from 1.62v to 1.58v (haven't tested that yet with the updated timings).

But I also had hoped to reduce VDDQ TX, but nope, still a minimum of 1.565v required. It does post more easily at lower VDDQ TX voltages though, where before I had to raise it to 1.5v+ just to post 3800. So some change, but not for actual stability.

Just finished a partial test. Looks promising.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Ok, a little tighter, a little quicker.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

PhoenixMDA said:


> The tool is buggy and not my ramoc^^





Uncle Dubbs said:


> Yep, this worked! Deleted folder and reinstall. I don’t run it as admin, worked great thanks!


like i said the thing can get corrupted in a bad overclock  ☕


----------



## PhoenixMDA

zGunBLADEz said:


> like i said the thing can get corrupted in a bad overclock  ☕


Lol...If you start at first as admin...it don´t work right anymoreIf you start only normal then it works...
the mlc test don´t test your stability, that make´s tm5, memtest, gsat and so on, this people know whats necessary to test stability.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

Mine got corrupted on a bad overclock have to delete it and redownload at least u got it Woking.

I dont use tm5. Strictly hci.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

zGunBLADEz said:


> Mine got corrupted on a bad overclock have to delete it and redownload at least u got it Woking.
> 
> I dont use tm5. Strictly hci.


HCI is only memtest best way is to test GSat for imc stability or easier way but not so intensiv is tm5 with config.
Both is different and you must test both, HCI for mem and TM5.
That is that i can do a little bit under XMP Voltage of 1,55V, for 4000CL14-14 i need 1,5V so it will be over 1,6V at 4300 for daily make no sense.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

PhoenixMDA said:


> HCI is only memtest best way is to test GSat for imc stability or easier way but not so intensiv is tm5 with config.
> Both is different and you must test both, HCI for mem and TM5.
> That is that i can do a little bit under XMP Voltage of 1,55V, for 4000CL14-14 i need 1,5V so it will be over 1,6V at 4300 for daily make no sense.
> View attachment 2585386
> View attachment 2585388


been doing this for too long. one thing for sure, i do *NOT* do 20min memtests and call it stable XD* you need to warm up them sticks LONGER than that.*


Spoiler



[email protected] 4x8GBs








3733 4x16GBs










hci have been the better tester for me of them all it manages to catch all around problems between voltages/cache etc...


----------



## PhoenixMDA

zGunBLADEz said:


> been doing this for too long
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2585390
> 
> 
> 
> hci have been the better tester for me of them all.


For that?my chips are under water and can do this with lower voltage, thats only memtest a half hour is enough.
It´s more important that you know the stable border of temp they can do this setting, so i test without watercooling at first.

If you don´t test the imc stability, it can be that you are unstable, if you reach the border of IMC /mem comunication, it´s important to test that,
HCI don´t works for that, you get as exemple corrupt file´s.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

PhoenixMDA said:


> For that?my chips are under water and can do this with lower voltage, thats only memtest a half hour is enough.
> It´s more important that you know the stable border of temp they can do this setting, so i test without watercooling at first.
> 
> If you don´t test the imc stability, it can be that you are unstable, if you reach the border of IMC /mem comunication, it´s important to test that,
> HCI don´t works for that, you get as exemple corrupt file´s.


i find gsat too easy to pass. i do use it on my server labs tho less frantic


----------



## PhoenixMDA

zGunBLADEz said:


> i find gsat too easy to pass. i do use it on my server labs tho less frantic


GSat is the hardest test you can do if you are in the IMC limit, if you don´t pass the test without error´s you get corrupt file
really fast by compress or decompress file´s.Google use this test not without a reason.

Look here, memtest is easy in high frequency, that i can do the hole day, but Gsat fail after some minute´s.Because stable imc border is 4666mhz.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

PhoenixMDA said:


> GSat is the hardest test you can do if you are in the IMC limit, if you don´t pass the test without error´s you get corrupt file
> really fast by compress or decompress file´s.Google use this test not without a reason.
> 
> Look here, memtest is easy in high frequency, that i can do the hole day, but Gsat fail after some minute´s.Because stable imc border is 4666mhz.
> View attachment 2585400


look at your run time barely no time to warm up them sticks lol
i do alot of rendering and x264/x265 i need LONGEVITY stability... it AINT the % that matters. them ram have to be warmed up very good

in another notes...
i guess she likes that trfc so noted for the long run  still wip


Spoiler


----------



## PhoenixMDA

zGunBLADEz said:


> look at your run time barely no time to warm up them sticks lol


You don´t want understand, so do like you want to do 
With 2 mo-ra and all watercooled nothing rase up by ridiculous 100-300W.


----------



## zebra_hun

Hi Phoenix!

If I may ask, are you satisfied with your current config?
I ask because the cheap 12600k / Prime z690 didn't really work for me, I didn't like it, I already sold it.
Now I'm planning to buy the Strix D4 z690 with a 13600 or 13700k.
I would still stay on the DDR4 line, I would not switch to DDR5. (yet)
I saw your 4300 cl15 result, even if I don't manage to achieve that nice, 4000 or 4133MHz cl 15 would be nice for me.
Kit is still the 3200 cl 14 14 14 gtzr DR 2x16Gb.
I haven't decided the 13600 or 13700 question yet, 8 cores is probably better in game.
If it's not too much to ask, could you measure one in Tomb Raider at 4000 CL15?
It would help me a lot with DDR4 vs DDR5.
This is also questionable, but I have the DDR4 kit, so I wouldn't waste money unnecessarily.

Thank you very much.

PS.: Only if you have time for that.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

@zebra_hun 
I must now @work but i do this later, 
i think the best way is look at CL16 there the stable border of the IMC is, my first CPU was 4200 the limit, 
Then decide CL16 or CL15, i would prefer 4200-4300CL16 as 4000CL15, but all this is fast enough and make in reality no big difference.


----------



## zGunBLADEz

PhoenixMDA said:


> You don´t want understand, so do like you want to do
> With 2 mo-ra and all watercooled nothing rase up by ridiculous 100-300W.


have a MoRa3. phobya 1260&1080 and a chiller as well. XD but like i said them ram sticks NEED TO BE WARMED UP xD that doesnt mean "cooling"


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

PhoenixMDA said:


> HCI is only memtest best way is to test GSat for imc stability or easier way but not so intensiv is tm5 with config.
> Both is different and you must test both, HCI for mem and TM5.
> That is that i can do a little bit under XMP Voltage of 1,55V, for 4000CL14-14 i need 1,5V so it will be over 1,6V at 4300 for daily make no sense.
> View attachment 2585386
> View attachment 2585388


Nice! Man it seems msi boards hate 100x multipliers…I can’t get 4300 or 4266 stable …I think the voltage scaling goes weird or maybe I need more sa or tddq? Also it seems my twr just won’t go lower even though it’s set at 12 in bios it reads 14?


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Nice! Man it seems msi boards hate 100x multipliers…I can’t get 4300 or 4266 stable …I think the voltage scaling goes weird or maybe I need more sa or tddq? Also it seems my twr just won’t go lower even though it’s set at 12 in bios it reads 14?


With my first 13900k 4133-4200 was the imc limit, not complett tested, 4300 crashed by booten windows.
The IMC of the second 13900k can do 4300 stable and boot 4400.
Perhaps your IMC is at Limit, if that the case, you have no chance, you can push voltage, but in my case at 4400 it makes more unstable as stable.

OC Gear1 is...it works or not, the most limit is the imc if the voltage bring nothing.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

PhoenixMDA said:


> With my first 13900k 4133-4200 was the imc limit, not complett tested, 4300 crashed by booten windows.
> The IMC of the second 13900k can do 4300 stable and boot 4400.
> Perhaps your IMC is at Limit, if that the case, you have no chance, you can push voltage, but in my case at 4400 it makes more unstable as stable.
> 
> OC Gear1 is...it works or not, the most limit is the imc if the voltage bring nothing.


Ya I could boot and test 4400cl 16 and 4266 15s but I can’t really stabilize either…but ya I’m definitely on the edge there…I’ll play with it more when I get time probably and want to pull my hair out lol

edit: are your single Rank…which kit? Does that trefi make a diff?


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Nice! Man it seems msi boards hate 100x multipliers…I can’t get 4300 or 4266 stable …I think the voltage scaling goes weird or maybe I need more sa or tddq? Also it seems my twr just won’t go lower even though it’s set at 12 in bios it reads 14?


I see it now on your yc…you have the 4000cl14 kit.


----------



## ViTosS

Nothing special but my 24/7 RAM OC, unfortunately seems that my RAM is the limitation, I used to use 4400CL16-17-17 (couldn't use 16-16-16) in the 10900k and now I can't have 4200CL15-15-15 neither, only 15-16-16, I hardly doubt I can acquire anything better than this, because I really tried 15-15-15 messing with the 3 responsible voltages without success and 4300Mhz is unpostable/unbootable at CL16.

VDIMM (the same used in 10900k and 4400CL16) = 1.56v (1.54v errored)
SA = 1.225v (1.200v errored)
VDDQ = 1.40v (will try to lower this later)


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Uncle Dubbs said:


> I see it now on your yc…you have the 4000cl14 kit.


Yes a good Bin need for 4000CL15 arround 1,5V, i have a better one of the 2x16GB 4000C14 bin, that you can´t compare.
This 4000C14 is really the best case of possible chip´s of B-Die.
I think it´s like unpossible to find such chip´s on a other bin, because you need 32 awesome IC on the sticks.
But the difference of performance between 4000 to 4300 is not much, in CPU clock it´s like 200mhz.


zebra_hun said:


> Hi Phoenix!
> 
> If I may ask, are you satisfied with your current config?
> I ask because the cheap 12600k / Prime z690 didn't really work for me, I didn't like it, I already sold it.
> Now I'm planning to buy the Strix D4 z690 with a 13600 or 13700k.
> I would still stay on the DDR4 line, I would not switch to DDR5. (yet)
> I saw your 4300 cl15 result, even if I don't manage to achieve that nice, 4000 or 4133MHz cl 15 would be nice for me.
> Kit is still the 3200 cl 14 14 14 gtzr DR 2x16Gb.
> I haven't decided the 13600 or 13700 question yet, 8 cores is probably better in game.
> If it's not too much to ask, could you measure one in Tomb Raider at 4000 CL15?
> It would help me a lot with DDR4 vs DDR5.
> This is also questionable, but I have the DDR4 kit, so I wouldn't waste money unnecessarily.
> 
> Thank you very much.
> 
> PS.: Only if you have time for that.


I would say take the Z690 Strix often the board is in sale.CPU the 13700k because of 8 pcore´s, if it´s possible test 2 and keep the better on.
I have only take 13900k because of better chance of silicon quality, in game´s like SoT the 13900k is faster, in metro and HzD it´s faster as 13700k.

You have enough power with DDR4, if you want to be in all cases with DDR5 faster you need an awesome setting under 50ns.
DDR5 make more sense if you use many applications with heavy multicore load.
I´m really happy with the Z690 strix, it boot´s really fast, is absolut rockstable with ramoc and a great platform, the [email protected] clock is really fast enough
and the performance/watt/Temps are really good with UV voltage.
Here is 4000CL15-15 with my subs and 4300, you see no big impact.Perhaps 2-4% in real.I have done with 0% GPU bound, if you come i gpu bound
the AVG raise up to 430FPS^^, but what is not the real fps you can reach.
















And here what i mean in GPU bound


----------



## bhav

4000CL14 is normally the top SR, I've not seen many DR modules that can do that, normally 4000CL15 for the best DR kits.


----------



## ViTosS

PhoenixMDA said:


> Yes a good Bin need for 4000CL15 arround 1,5V, i have a better one of the 2x16GB 4000C14 bin, that you can´t compare.
> This 4000C14 is really the best case of possible chip´s of B-Die.
> I think it´s like unpossible to find such chip´s on a other bin, because you need 32 awesome IC on the sticks.
> But the difference of performance between 4000 to 4300 is not much, in CPU clock it´s like 200mhz.
> 
> I would say take the Z690 Strix often the board is in sale.CPU the 13700k because of 8 pcore´s, if it´s possible test 2 and keep the better on.
> I have only take 13900k because of better chance of silicon quality, in game´s like SoT the 13900k is faster, in metro and HzD it´s faster as 13700k.
> 
> You have enough power with DDR4, if you want to be in all cases with DDR5 faster you need an awesome setting under 50ns.
> DDR5 make more sense if you use many applications with heavy multicore load.
> I´m really happy with the Z690 strix, it boot´s really fast, is absolut rockstable with ramoc and a great platform, the [email protected] clock is really fast enough
> and the performance/watt/Temps are really good with UV voltage.
> Here is 4000CL15-15 with my subs and 4300, you see no big impact.Perhaps 2-4% in real.I have done with 0% GPU bound, if you come i gpu bound
> the AVG raise up to 430FPS^^, but what is not the real fps you can reach.
> View attachment 2585519
> View attachment 2585520
> 
> 
> And here what i mean in GPU bound
> View attachment 2585523


Nice, here is 13900k stock (P/E/R 5.5/4.3/4.5) and 4200CL15-16-16-36 with tight subtimings (Windows 11 22H2)


----------



## PhoenixMDA

bhav said:


> 4000CL14 is normally the top SR, I've not seen many DR modules that can do that, normally 4000CL15 for the best DR kits.


The Kit is EOL, some Shops have 2x16gb4000c14, but in time of DDR5 its to expensive to buy it now extra, that make no sense.
F4-4000C14D-32GTZN - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
A really good DDR5 Kit is much cheaper.


----------



## bhav

PhoenixMDA said:


> The Kit is EOL, some Shops have 2x16gb4000c14, but in time of DDR5 its to expensive to buy it now extra, that make no sense.
> F4-4000C14D-32GTZN - G.SKILL International Enterprise Co., Ltd.
> A really good DDR5 Kit is much cheaper.


Yea I've seen such overpriced junk all the time.

£150 3 years ago for a 2x16 4000CL16 DR capable kit, currently £110 with Kingston Renegade 2x16 3600.

For new kits though nothing is worth it over m die now. Though the £58 for 2x8 Gb that can do 4000Cl16 / 4200CL17 was a steal for my back up build.

So I'm sitting on 2x16 SR 4000CL14, 2x16 DR 4000CL15, and 2x8 SR 4000CL16 kits, all of which were cheapo budget trash at the times of purchase, and all go higher but 4000 is the realistic expectation for 13th gen.

Go go triple DDR4 systems for the next 3-5 years!

The only surprise was the SR 2x8 DJR not being as good as expected and weaker than 2x16 DR micron E die, but meh it was £58.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

You must it see so it´s like by CPU you have 16xIC´s SP110+ per one Stick, to select that cost money and that´s the reason why the Kit cost 550,-.
For people who want only a fast system, it´s more as enough to overclock a normal B-Die Bin.
The difference in performance not so much, so it´s more for enthusiast people who see that as hobby.
I´m happy with the Kit and thats also the reason why i´m stay in this gen at DDR4, if the impact with DDR5 at games will be better then i change.

Let's be honest, I don't need the performance at all. I just want to be satisfied with the system and unfortunately I'm still missing a directdie frame^^


----------



## zGunBLADEz

ViTosS said:


> Nothing special but my 24/7 RAM OC, unfortunately seems that my RAM is the limitation, I used to use 4400CL16-17-17 (couldn't use 16-16-16) in the 10900k and now I can't have 4200CL15-15-15 neither, only 15-16-16, I hardly doubt I can acquire anything better than this, because I really tried 15-15-15 messing with the 3 responsible voltages without success and 4300Mhz is unpostable/unbootable at CL16.
> 
> VDIMM (the same used in 10900k and 4400CL16) = 1.56v (1.54v errored)
> SA = 1.225v (1.200v errored)
> VDDQ = 1.40v (will try to lower this later)
> 
> View attachment 2585518


Try loosing the middle one 15/x/15 by 1 or 2up


----------



## ViTosS

Well yesterday I was trying a bit more RAM OC, I was able to boot 4300 CL15-16-16-36 and ran stable TM5 with just primary timings, but it was asking 1.348v for SA (1.34 and 1.35v wasn't working, so I found this sweet spot), considering in 4200Mhz profile I need just 1.225v for SA I didn't try any further, don't like the idea of using almost 1.35v SA for just 100Mhz.

Btw does Asus has something related to bad training or losing stability across reboots? I ask that because in my old MSI mobo I had to change Memory Fast Boot setting, that I think is the same of MRC Fast Boot on Asus, and also ask that because after messing with a lot of RAM tweaks and stressing and when I went back to 4200Mhz I couldn't get it stable in anymore, even with higher SA, I immediately think I degraded CPU IMC somehow, but luckily I just needed to Clear CMOS and back again to stability.


----------



## bass junkie xl

z790 Strix D4 bios bios 703 

dual rank g.skill Royals 4400 c17 kit to 
4266 15-16-16-32 @ 1.57v dim /1.35 vddq/1.38v vcssa passed 12 cycles tm5 absolute and y cruncher main test 0/1/8 and occt avx2 will try 4300 gear 1 + before I tighten this config if I even can go tighter. 

I was 4133 15-15-15-28 on z690/z790 till last night  

13900k sp 106 p /81 e I'm happy with it does 5.8 all core p / 5.1 ring / 46 e cores max before artic 420mm aio can't keep up 

6.0 GHz all core 5.2 ring e cores off passes tests.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> Nothing special but my 24/7 RAM OC, unfortunately seems that my RAM is the limitation, I used to use 4400CL16-17-17 (couldn't use 16-16-16) in the 10900k and now I can't have 4200CL15-15-15 neither, only 15-16-16, I hardly doubt I can acquire anything better than this, because I really tried 15-15-15 messing with the 3 responsible voltages without success and 4300Mhz is unpostable/unbootable at CL16.
> 
> VDIMM (the same used in 10900k and 4400CL16) = 1.56v (1.54v errored)
> SA = 1.225v (1.200v errored)
> VDDQ = 1.40v (will try to lower this later)
> 
> View attachment 2585518


Gotta use y-cruncher to find the proper minimum VCCSA. 

At that low of an SA, booting up to 4,400 MHz should be a breeze. The board or BIOS might be holding you back.


----------



## bhav

I only just realized making a sig means not having to keep repeating ram settings advice to people trying to OC similar ICs.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> Gotta use y-cruncher to find the proper minimum VCCSA.
> 
> At that low of an SA, booting up to 4,400 MHz should be a breeze. The board or BIOS might be holding you back.


Yeah I will use Y-Cruncher later, there is something weird happening now, not sure if 1.225v SA is the minimum anymore, I passed with that SA, had troubles and cleared CMOS and passed again but now I cleared CMOS again after messing with frequency and was not able to pass with 1.225v, neither 1.240v, passed after I raised to 1.250v but idk it must be luck just like with 1.225v SA, not understanding clearly what is happening if is related to training, if I need to enable or disable something...


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> Yeah I will use Y-Cruncher later, there is something weird happening now, not sure if 1.225v SA is the minimum anymore, I passed with that SA, had troubles and cleared CMOS and passed again but now I cleared CMOS again after messing with frequency and was not able to pass with 1.225v, neither 1.240v, passed after I raised to 1.250v but idk it must be luck just like with 1.225v SA, not understanding clearly what is happening if is related to training, if I need to enable or disable something...


It's most likely VDDQ/VDIMM. TM5 needs barely any VCCSA to pass. This is why y-cruncher is necessary for finding the true VCCSA minimum.
Also, if stuff in the BIOS for the CPU are set to Auto, that might factor in as well, in case certain clocks or Vcore are changing around from boot-to-boot.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> It's most likely VDDQ/VDIMM. TM5 needs barely any VCCSA to pass. This is why y-cruncher is necessary for finding the true VCCSA minimum.
> Also, if stuff in the BIOS for the CPU are set to Auto, that might factor in as well, in case certain clocks or Vcore are changing around from boot-to-boot.


VDIMM I know it isn't, either RAM temperature because I passed with 52c each stick last time at 1.56v VDIMM, also my RAM doesn't like much VDIMM, is starts to error faster if I raise too much like 1.60v+. VDDQ I failed at 1.30v, 1.35v and again at 1.40v (the one that passed), so when I raised VCSSA to 1.25v and kept VDDQ at 1.40v it passed, but like I said I have no idea what is the culript because settings that passed before sometimes doesn't pass so I can't say for sure, I think it was too low VCCSA, but I will test with Y-Cruncher like you said, also my CPU settings are all on manual and CPU is stable through Cinebench and Y-Cruncher first 3 most intensive CPU tests (but I throttles a lot because it reaches 253w and temps climb to 85+), my cooler can't keep up and I need to delid...


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> VDIMM I know it isn't, either RAM temperature because I passed with 52c each stick last time at 1.56v VDIMM, also my RAM doesn't like much VDIMM, is starts to error faster if I raise too much like 1.60v+. VDDQ I failed at 1.30v, 1.35v and again at 1.40v (the one that passed), so when I raised VCSSA to 1.25v and kept VDDQ at 1.40v it passed, but like I said I have no idea what is the culript because settings that passed before sometimes doesn't pass so I can't say for sure, I think it was too low VCCSA, but I will test with Y-Cruncher like you said, also my CPU settings are all on manual and CPU is stable through Cinebench and Y-Cruncher first 3 most intensive CPU tests (but I throttles a lot because it reaches 253w and temps climb to 85+), my cooler can't keep up and I need to delid...


The CPU tests (like SFT, the hardest) do not hammer the IMC. You can pass that but also fail N64/HNT/VST later.


----------



## RichKnecht

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Ok, a little tighter, a little quicker.
> View attachment 2585335


How are you drawing only 195W at those clocks and voltages? All core load clocks/temps?


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

RichKnecht said:


> How are you drawing only 195W at those clocks and voltages? All core load clocks/temps?


I am only running tm5 or Aida tests…no cb23 or other really crazy stuff…the amazing thing about these chips I can run these and game all day no probs/no corruption etc. the gaming will detect instability in my mem pretty quick…these dr chips don’t really like really low trc I dont think so I bumped it back to 320…they don’t get warm even really…but gaming brings out weird errors if not set right. …not sure it would work for what you need to do tho…but this is what I use it for…heavy mem intensive multiplayer games…basically it just runs/boosts 58-61 all the time, I balanced the llc/lite loads/ac/dc as well. Safe temps/amps and watts 👍


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> The CPU tests (like SFT, the hardest) do not hammer the IMC. You can pass that but also fail N64/HNT/VST later.


You were right about VDDQ being the problem, for some reason 1.40v wasn't enough, N64 teste kept failing, raised everything and just realized I didn't try VDDQ, then put it to 1.45v and problem solved, btw the minium SA is really 1.25v instead of 1.225v, 1.225v errors in N64 test too. Now this opens new possibilities to try 4300CL16 again, the only thing I wasn't messing was VDDQ, but yeah 4400Mhz is really the wall for my G1, board almost boots, lights the white light which is the last one before posting/booting but it stays locked and I have to hard shutdown PC and then BIOS boots back in safe mode.

Thanks!


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> You were right about VDDQ being the problem, for some reason 1.40v wasn't enough, N64 teste kept failing, raised everything and just realized I didn't try VDDQ, then put it to 1.45v and problem solved, btw the minium SA is really 1.25v instead of 1.225v, 1.225v errors in N64 test too. Now this opens new possibilities to try 4300CL16 again, the only thing I wasn't messing was VDDQ, but yeah 4400Mhz is really the wall for my G1, board almost boots, lights the white light which is the last one before posting/booting but it stays locked and I have to hard shutdown PC and then BIOS boots back in safe mode.
> 
> Thanks!


Glad to hear you're reaching some semblance of stability and clarification.
Yeah, y-cruncher is kind of necessary to figure out what your minimum VCCSA is.
TM5 is what you'd use to find your minimum VDDQ.

4,400 MHz bootable to some degree is a golden IMC already. Albeit not the absolute most golden for RPL.


----------



## bhav

Trying to search again for any cheap second hand 4400 ballistix max, came across another noobtech video review with mild OCs to 4600CL19 / 3866CL16, claiming 'its good but micron could have done a lot better'.

Had to leave a comment telling them exactly what the ram can actually do, waiting for the 'But 1.6v is danger oh noes!'.


----------



## bhav

So I only just clicked on HWinfo summary for the first time, and found this full XMP SPD list ... Now I have a lot of testing to do for the fun of it:










First I wanted to see if I could match my old DDR3 settings, which I can't, 1866CL7 won't boot, and also this just errored (My DDR3 kit did 7-8-8 1866 1.65v and was rated for 2133 9-9-9).

Was using 1.65v, 1.4v vddq, 1.35v SA, the XMP profiles on this kit are all too aggressive on the middle timings, it needs +1 on them.

And well nvm, everything up to 2666 it only does normalish CL, 2666 CL10 currently.


----------



## Cam1

Ichirou said:


> Glad to hear you're reaching some semblance of stability and clarification.
> Yeah, y-cruncher is kind of necessary to figure out what your minimum VCCSA is.
> TM5 is what you'd use to find your minimum VDDQ.
> 
> 4,400 MHz bootable to some degree is a golden IMC already. Albeit not the absolute most golden for RPL.


What test in "y-cruncher" do you recommend?
My computer freezes after 30mins when using "Component Stress Tester" but stable in everything else, should i add more VCCSA?


----------



## Ichirou

Cam1 said:


> What test in "y-cruncher" do you recommend?
> My computer freezes after 30mins when using "Component Stress Tester" but stable in everything else, should i add more VCCSA?


When you say "freezes", is that with all tests enabled?
If so, you've probably corrupted your BIOS at some point. Reflash it.

If you can pass all of those tests, you have enough Vcore and VCCSA already. Maybe even more than enough.
N64/HNT/VST is enough to figure out the minimum VCCSA.
SFT for a few loops is generally enough to figure out the minimum Vcore.


----------



## Cam1

Ichirou said:


> When you say "freezes", is that with all tests enabled?
> If so, you've probably corrupted your BIOS at some point. Reflash it.
> 
> If you can pass all of those tests, you have enough Vcore and VCCSA already. Maybe even more than enough.
> N64/HNT/VST is enough to figure out the minimum VCCSA.
> SFT for a few loops is generally enough to figure out the minimum Vcore.


i just flashed the BIOS to the last available version "2103" how can i know if it's really corrupted?
Yea it freezes after 20-30mins when i run the "Component Stress Tester" with no specific options.
As i said this is the only thing that crash the computer. 
Maybe i should not use the pc for anything else while running this stress test?
After BIOS flash i import the old configuration, is it a bad idea?


----------



## Ichirou

Cam1 said:


> i just flashed the BIOS to the last available version "2103" how can i know if it's really corrupted?
> Yea it freezes after 20-30mins when i run the "Component Stress Tester" with no specific options.
> As i said this is the only thing that crash the computer.
> Maybe i should not use the pc for anything else while running this stress test?
> After BIOS flash i import the old configuration, is it a bad idea?


If the PC freezes, the CPU or RAM is unstable at that point in time.
But if you're stable and it still freezes, the BIOS is corrupt. it'll freeze at random points in time while you use the PC. Which is not what you want.

Just save a profile to your USB, reflash the BIOS, and import it back. Doesn't take you more than a few minutes.

You need to enable all tests for the Component Stress Test to be thorough. The default config isn't good enough.


----------



## bass junkie xl

13900k / z790 strix D4 / 32gb ddr4 @ 4300
15-16-16-32 gear 1 stable in y cruncher and tm5 absolute 10 cycles


----------



## fray_bentos

bass junkie xl said:


> 13900k / z790 strix D4 / 32gb ddr4 @ 4300
> 15-16-16-32 gear 1 stable in y cruncher and tm5 absolute 10 cycles
> 
> View attachment 2585983
> 
> View attachment 2585985
> 
> View attachment 2585982
> 
> View attachment 2585981


Hint: there is a key on your keyboard with the words "print screen" (or similar) on it. Press it. Then control+V into software of your choice. Enjoy.


----------



## HemuV2

bass junkie xl said:


> 13900k / z790 strix D4 / 32gb ddr4 @ 4300
> 15-16-16-32 gear 1 stable in y cruncher and tm5 absolute 10 cycles
> 
> View attachment 2585983
> 
> View attachment 2585985
> 
> View attachment 2585982
> 
> View attachment 2585981


I have z690A and I can't seem to post 4200 below cl17 timings. 4300 posts too


----------



## bass junkie xl

13900 k 32gb ddr4 @ 4300 c15 Gear 1 cpu fsb is 100 so default here is cleaner none cell phone pictures , it passed tm5absolute for 10 ctycles , y cruncher main test in the above posts they were just blurry a bit 
is adia 64 latency bugged ? is there a way to fix it ?


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

bass junkie xl said:


> 13900 k 32gb ddr4 @ 4300 c15 Gear 1 cpu fsb is 100 so default here is cleaner none cell phone pictures , it passed tm5absolute for 10 ctycles , y cruncher main test in the above posts they were just blurry a bit
> is adia 64 latency bugged ? is there a way to fix it ?
> 
> View attachment 2586060
> 
> View attachment 2586061


Well done! Is this the 4000cl14 gksill kit? PS love the official screens shots


----------



## bass junkie xl

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Well done! Is this the 4000cl14 gksill kit? PS love the official screens shots


thanks its the g.skill rgb regular 4400 c17-18-18-38 1.55v xmp kit of 16 gb x 2 
i have 2 x 92mm fans stacked on eachother blowing on the dims @ 1200 rpm


----------



## imrevoau

Trying to tighten some stuff. If anyone has any suggestions for timings that can go tighter let me know. I've tested TRDWR's @ 10 and they weren't stable, but besides that it's fair game.


----------



## imrevoau

bass junkie xl said:


> 13900 k 32gb ddr4 @ 4300 c15 Gear 1 cpu fsb is 100 so default here is cleaner none cell phone pictures , it passed tm5absolute for 10 ctycles , y cruncher main test in the above posts they were just blurry a bit
> is adia 64 latency bugged ? is there a way to fix it ?
> 
> View attachment 2586060
> 
> View attachment 2586061


Try run in safe mode. I reckon in safe mode you can crack 41 ns


----------



## PhoenixMDA

More is with that imc not really possible...


----------



## bass junkie xl

PhoenixMDA said:


> More is with that imc not really possible...
> View attachment 2586187
> View attachment 2586189


wow that really good is your latency lower then normal cause your using blck 101.8 ? what is it if its 100 j/w so i caan compare mine to some ones to see if mine is higher then normal or mine is in normal ranges

did u disable e cores or use a special adia version


----------



## PhoenixMDA

bass junkie xl said:


> wow that really good is your latency lower then normal cause your using blck 101.8 ? what is it if its 100 j/w so i caan compare mine to some ones to see if mine is higher then normal or mine is in normal ranges
> 
> did u disable e cores or use a special adia version


Aida do fail if you use FSB, by only 101.7 it´s not much, i think my real Latency is arround 44,5, and 81-82k Copy or so.
You see also the increase by MLC.
At 4300 fsb100 i have 80k 45,5ns.


----------



## ViTosS

PhoenixMDA said:


> More is with that imc not really possible...
> View attachment 2586187
> View attachment 2586189


Nice, here I need 1.36v SA to pass 4300CL15-16-16-36 haha, sad...
From 4200 (1.25v SA) to 4300 the jump in SA is huge, definitely not going to use it for 24/7, and 4400 doesn't post no matter what.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> Nice, here I need 1.36v SA to pass 4300CL15-16-16-36 haha, sad...
> From 4200 (1.25v SA) to 4300 the jump in SA is huge, definitely not going to use it for 24/7, and 4400 doesn't post no matter what.


1.36V is honestly fine. I'd personally daily 4,300 MHz CL15 with that kind of VCCSA. That's already golden.

And I'm not sure whether Phoenix has tested his memory overclock in y-cruncher yet. Can't check his past history.
y-cruncher needs a _lot_ more VCCSA to pass than TM5.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> 1.36V is honestly fine. I'd personally daily 4,300 MHz CL15 with that kind of VCCSA. That's already golden.
> 
> And I'm not sure whether Phoenix has tested his memory overclock in y-cruncher yet. Can't check his past history.
> y-cruncher needs a _lot_ more VCCSA to pass than TM5.


Problem is that I needed 1.36v (1.344v in HWiNFO64) to pass TM5, probably in Y-Cruncher would need almost 1.40v, I read somewhere here that the max safe voltage for SA is 1.35v and I'm trying to keep below that.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Y-Cruncher,tm5 need 1,34V Bios, but memtest need 1,36V Bios and that is ok for 24/7.
The 4377CL15-15 need only more VDimm 1,59375V Bios, before it was 1,55V Bios for 4300.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

imrevoau said:


> Trying to tighten some stuff. If anyone has any suggestions for timings that can go tighter let me know. I've tested TRDWR's @ 10 and they weren't stable, but besides that it's fair game.
> View attachment 2586148


Try:

tRRD/l 6, leave /s at 4

Wrrd dr/dd 6, the others probably won’t lower but these two might

tke will probably be 2 but I don’t think it’s relevant if ppd is disabled


----------



## Dash8Q4

Anyone here with a Team Group 3600C14 kit that managed to squeeze it? looking for tips to OC my kit. 
MSI PRO Z690-A, 12900K, 2x16GB Team Group Xtreem 3600C14 kit.
thank you


----------



## PhoenixMDA

I have testet something if i using FSB OC the 2 core´s don´t get the right voltage at Bios 2004.
But i´m able to fixe the cache ever to 5ghz^^.That give´s also a good impact, by less wattage.
I use my min voltage for @stock have 5,5ghz allcore and use TVB for 5,7/5,6 in the low temp 35°/43°.
So i dont need more Vcore as my UV.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Dash8Q4 said:


> Anyone here with a Team Group 3600C14 kit that managed to squeeze it? looking for tips to OC my kit.
> MSI PRO Z690-A, 12900K, 2x16GB Team Group Xtreem 3600C14 kit.
> thank you


I would imagine you should be able to get similar to mine…click on my sig…scroll through here and look for screen shots…pro tip: save your profile in bios and usb…save yourself some hassle


----------



## ViTosS

Guys since you said 1.35v SA is fine, I'm working to finish my 4300CL15 profile, found out that I can't pass TM5 with tRTP at 8 (only at 10), does it impact that much in performance? Also couldn't run tRDRD_sg/dg and tWRWR_sg/dg at 7/4 only 8/4, the rest I'm tightening timing by timing, now just need to tight tRRD_L/S and tWTR_L/S and maybe tWR from 16 to 12.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> Guys since you said 1.35v SA is fine, I'm working to finish my 4300CL15 profile, found out that I can't pass TM5 with tRTP at 8 (only at 10), does it impact that much in performance? Also couldn't run tRDRD_sg/dg and tWRWR_sg/dg at 7/4 only 8/4, the rest I'm tightening timing by timing, now just need to tight tRRD_L/S and tWTR_L/S and maybe tWR from 16 to 12.
> 
> View attachment 2586515


Yeah, you need more VCCSA and probably more VDIMM for those. But if you want to stay under 1.35V VCCSA, you gotta make compromises.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> Yeah, you need more VCCSA and probably more VDIMM for those. But if you want to stay under 1.35V VCCSA, you gotta make compromises.


I was able to put tWTR_L/S in 8/4, but tRRD_L/S not stable 6/4, even 6/6, I will now try to increase either VCCSA or VDIMM, btw do you happen to have that table/guide where show all the timings and the equivalent of what is considered tight for each timing? If I'm not wrong you or another guy posted somewhere, I can't find it.

Thanks.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> I was able to put tWTR_L/S in 8/4, but tRRD_L/S not stable 6/4, even 6/6, I will now try to increase either VCCSA or VDIMM, btw do you happen to have that table/guide where show all the timings and the equivalent of what is considered tight for each timing? If I'm not wrong you or another guy posted somewhere, I can't find it.
> 
> Thanks.


Eh, just go as tight as you can and use AIDA to make sure there is a performance gain and not a loss.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> Eh, just go as tight as you can and use AIDA to make sure there is a performance gain and not a loss.


I ask that to use a more relaxed timing instead the ones that can't pass, like I know tRRD_L/S is 6/4 or 4/4 for tight, but if I don't pass that should I use what? 12/6? 10/4? Or it doesn't matter?


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> I ask that to use a more relaxed timing instead the ones that can't pass, like I know tRRD_L/S is 6/4 or 4/4 for tight, but if I don't pass that should I use what? 12/6? 10/4? Or it doesn't matter?


If it doesn't pass, then you just loosen it until it does.

You gotta do your own performance comparisons.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> If it doesn't pass, then you just loosen it until it does.
> 
> You gotta do your own performance comparisons.


Overclocking RAM must be such a pain for you since you’re on 64 gigs lol


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> Overclocking RAM must be such a pain for you since you’re on 64 gigs lol


There are a _lot_ of factors involved. A _lot_.
The choice of motherboard and BIOS version matters a lot as well.

And just within the last few hours, I've already pretty much confirmed that the Z790 Edge is better than the Z690 Edge at memory overclocking at 4,266+ MHz.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

ViTosS said:


> Guys since you said 1.35v SA is fine, I'm working to finish my 4300CL15 profile, found out that I can't pass TM5 with tRTP at 8 (only at 10), does it impact that much in performance? Also couldn't run tRDRD_sg/dg and tWRWR_sg/dg at 7/4 only 8/4, the rest I'm tightening timing by timing, now just need to tight tRRD_L/S and tWTR_L/S and maybe tWR from 16 to 12.
> 
> View attachment 2586515


you can try trrd l/s as 6/4 than maybe you can do rdrd/wrwr/sg's as 7 (try first) or possibly 6. Lower wrrd sg/dg to lower twtr l/s (like 28/23 and leave twtr's on auto and youll see what I mean..they will go down to 8/3) - you can google ram guide...or search through the posts here to find the integral guide...a lot of timings are dependant/used too influence others.

erdit , well nevermind I see you posted after that you couldnt do 6/4. Well, try those other ones first....some of them are wacky/high...maybe that will allow it/maybe not and maybe something else is causing it.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Ichirou said:


> There are a _lot_ of factors involved. A _lot_.
> The choice of motherboard and BIOS version matters a lot as well.
> 
> And just within the last few hours, I've already pretty much confirmed that the Z790 Edge is better than the Z690 Edge at memory overclocking at 4,266+ MHz.


Im stuck at 4133, I think your CPU IMC is better, seems to be a hard wall, this is a good kit I have...could do 4400 flat 16s in g1 on 10th gen i9. I get better bandwidth now but latency isnt quite as good...but I expected this after watching the 11th and 12th gens.

How are you liking the board? What do you find is better than the z690?


----------



## Ichirou

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Im stuck at 4133, I think your CPU IMC is better, seems to be a hard wall, this is a good kit I have...could do 4400 flat 16s in g1 on 10th gen i9. I get better bandwidth now but latency isnt quite as good...but I expected this after watching the 11th and 12th gens.


I've got a golden tier IMC, but not a diamond tier IMC like @MisterSheikh or @PhoenixMDA
And my 13900KF's IMC is only slightly worse than my current chip's IMC.

So far, this chip (on the Z790 Edge) will do 4,400 MHz CL19 Gear 1 stable. Tightening the timings will probably push VCCSA above 1.40V though.
Gonna try lowering it to 4,300 MHz and tightening that instead.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Ichirou said:


> I've got a golden tier IMC, but not a diamond tier IMC like @MisterSheikh or @PhoenixMDA
> And my 13900KF's IMC is only slightly worse than my current chip's IMC.
> 
> So far, this chip (on the Z790 Edge) will do 4,400 MHz CL19 Gear 1 stable. Tightening the timings will probably push VCCSA above 1.40V though.
> Gonna try lowering it to 4,300 MHz and tightening that instead.


cl19?


----------



## Ichirou

Uncle Dubbs said:


> cl19?


Yeah. Garbage CL19. It's just an initial test to make sure it actually runs and passes y-cruncher.

On my Z690 Edge, 4,266 MHz CL14 wouldn't run y-cruncher _at all_. Like, it doesn't even try to run.


----------



## ViTosS

It took me 1.380v VCCSA BIOS set to pass this 😭


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

ViTosS said:


> It took me 1.380v VCCSA BIOS set to pass this 😭
> 
> View attachment 2586551


says 1.36, drives me crazy that my chip/or board or something wont do better ...probably similar binned ram, maybe ill crank voltages but I thought I did...maybe I have to use 15-16-16


----------



## ViTosS

Uncle Dubbs said:


> says 1.36


1.380v *BIOS SET*


----------



## ViTosS

1.47v VDDQ - 1.59v DRAM - 1.40v SA (DRAM had to be reduced from 1.60 to pass this, 1.61, 1.62, 1.63 doesn't pass either), probably can lower SA by a tiny bit, also no way passing with tRDRD_sg/dg in 7/4, only 8/4, same thing for tWRWR_sg/dg, there is no voltage that will allow to pass them at 7/4.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ichirou said:


> I've got a golden tier IMC, but not a diamond tier IMC like @MisterSheikh or @PhoenixMDA
> And my 13900KF's IMC is only slightly worse than my current chip's IMC.
> 
> So far, this chip (on the Z790 Edge) will do 4,400 MHz CL19 Gear 1 stable. Tightening the timings will probably push VCCSA above 1.40V though.
> Gonna try lowering it to 4,300 MHz and tightening that instead.


For me is only one interessting, the performance and a good impact bring the cache, if you have heavy cache also @5GHZ, test it with CB23 the cache must have ever the same frequency.
TVB i let, because with TVB i get WHEA because of less voltage or really useless.
See the cache under heavy CB23 load my SoT screen that is with only Pcore 5,497 and Ecore 4262
















To push the frequency to 5,9ghz bring in the first szene of SOT like nothing, the 2. and the 3. or more higher.


----------



## Ichirou

PhoenixMDA said:


> For me is only one interessting, the performance and a good impact bring the cache, if you have heavy cache also @5GHZ, test it with CB23 the cache must have ever the same frequency.
> TVB i let, because with TVB i get WHEA because of less voltage or really useless.
> See the cache under heavy CB23 load my SoT screen that is with only Pcore 5,497 and Ecore 4262
> View attachment 2586686
> View attachment 2586688


I'm currently doing 4,300 CL14 1T Gear 1 mostly-tightened and stable on my chip, at stock multipliers.
I'll try boosting up the core multipliers later.


----------



## ViTosS

Would you guys use like this? 1.40v SA BIOS set is the minimum to pass Y-Cruncher N64, HNT and VST at 4300CL15, 1.376-1.392v according to HWiNFO64, or is too much risk of degradation?


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> Would you guys use like this? 1.40v SA BIOS set is the minimum to pass Y-Cruncher N64, HNT and VST at 4300CL15, 1.376-1.392v according to HWiNFO64, or is too much risk of degradation?
> 
> View attachment 2586689


It will degrade. Because I personally had it happen at 1.40V VCCSA after a few dozen y-cruncher runs.
Pull it down, or loosen some timings.

It's okay to bench it just to prove your chip and RAM can handle it, but do not daily it.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ichirou said:


> I'm currently doing 4,300 CL14 1T Gear 1 mostly-tightened and stable on my chip, at stock multipliers.
> I'll try boosting up the core multipliers later.


Dont push the core´s you must push the heavy cache, it give´s light that you set like to 5,1Ghz and heavy cache that is 4,5Ghz.
Under heavy load/gaming load it drops down to 4,5ghz and that cost performance.Over FSB and disable Ring Down i´m able *to fix the cache in all situations to 5ghz*

So i have awesome performance by lowest voltage.


----------



## Ichirou

PhoenixMDA said:


> Dont push the core´s you must push the heavy cache, it give´s light that you set like to 5,1Ghz and heavy cache that is 4,5Ghz.
> Under heavy load/gaming load it drops down to 4,5ghz and that cost performance.Over FSB and disable Ring Down i´m able *to fix the cache in all situations to 5ghz*
> 
> So i have awesome performance by lowest voltage.


I'm aware. I can do 50-51x Ring with the E-cores enabled depending on the chip.
I just meant that I haven't bothered to do so, yet.


----------



## zebra_hun

PhoenixMDA said:


> For me is only one interessting, the performance and a good impact bring the cache, if you have heavy cache also @5GHZ, test it with CB23 the cache must have ever the same frequency.
> TVB i let, because with TVB i get WHEA because of less voltage or really useless.
> See the cache under heavy CB23 load my SoT screen that is with only Pcore 5,497 and Ecore 4262
> View attachment 2586686
> View attachment 2586688
> 
> 
> To push the frequency to 5,9ghz bring in the first szene of SOT like nothing, the 2. and the 3. or more higher.
> View attachment 2586690


Insane 
How is the first pic? The 389 fps.
Is that 4.5 or 5GHz ring?
Monday bring the post my 13700, mobo is here.
I dreaming from same result, lol.
350-360 sootr fps on daily is nice to me.
380-390..., ddr5 users can't do on 8000MHz.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

zebra_hun said:


> Insane
> How is the first pic? The 389 fps.
> Is that 4.5 or 5GHz ring?
> Monday bring the post my 13700, mobo is here.
> I dreaming from same result, lol.
> 350-360 sootr fps on daily is nice to me.
> 380-390..., ddr5 users can't do on 8000MHz.


It´s so with 5.05 Ghz Cache and then it drop down to 4,58Ghz i have max. 385FPS, with 5,05Ghz fixe up to 389FPS and generell performance increase.🙌
In other benchmarks is the impact higher
It´s only possible on my Z690Strix if i push the FSB so high that the Cache Frequency is 5500, then i set it down to 4,5Ghz and disable down bin cache and i have fixe to 5ghz at all.
It´s like a trick^^

P.s.
With Bios 2203 it´s fixed and it´s possible to set min cache


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> It will degrade. Because I personally had it happen at 1.40V VCCSA after a few dozen y-cruncher runs.
> Pull it down, or loosen some timings.
> 
> It's okay to bench it just to prove your chip and RAM can handle it, but do not daily it.


Alright, just made a 4200CL15-15-15-35 stable profile, gladly it passed with everything tuned in the first time, also Y-Cruncher passes with 1.42v VDDQ and 1.32v SA, probably have margin to lower even more, will do that later.


----------



## ViTosS

I had to back my RAM OC, unfortunately the tests that I passed 4200CL15-15-15-35 and 4300CL15-16-16-36 they all was with a side fan blowing the sticks and opened side glass case, soon I tried to stress again without the fan and side closed and sticks reaching 45c+ I had errors, nothing seems to fix them, went back to 4200CL15-16-16-36 and they reach 48-50c and still stable, I'm done with RAM OC right now, just want to play games haha.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Yeah. Garbage CL19. It's just an initial test to make sure it actually runs and passes y-cruncher.
> 
> On my Z690 Edge, 4,266 MHz CL14 wouldn't run y-cruncher _at all_. Like, it doesn't even try to run.


What you reckon the chances of the 13900KS going up to 4533 G1 are?


----------



## MisterSheikh

ViTosS said:


> I had to back my RAM OC, unfortunately the tests that I passed 4200CL15-15-15-35 and 4300CL15-16-16-36 they all was with a side fan blowing the sticks and opened side glass case, soon I tried to stress again without the fan and side closed and sticks reaching 45c+ I had errors, nothing seems to fix them, went back to 4200CL15-16-16-36 and they reach 48-50c and still stable, I'm done with RAM OC right now, just want to play games haha.


ViTosS, can you share a screenshot of all the sensors you have visible in hwinfo64 with your z790-A strix d4? Another thing, in the bios do you have the option to change vcore monitoring from socket sense to die sense? Does your VCCSA and dram voltage fluctuate from what you set and also at load vs idle?

Thinking of snagging one in place of my z790 edge d4 but unsure.

Thanks.


----------



## MisterSheikh

bhav said:


> What you reckon the chances of the 13900KS going up to 4533 G1 are?


Who knows, not hopeful though. I guess I got quite lucky with my first 13900K purchase off the bat booting 4533 like that.


----------



## ViTosS

MisterSheikh said:


> ViTosS, can you share a screenshot of all the sensors you have visible in hwinfo64 with your z790-A strix d4? Another thing, in the bios do you have the option to change vcore monitoring from socket sense to die sense? Does your VCCSA and dram voltage fluctuate from what you set and also at load vs idle?
> 
> Thinking of snagging one in place of my z790 edge d4 but unsure.
> 
> Thanks.


I'm not in my home town right now, traveling for the holidays, but if I'm not wrong you can't change die sense to socket sense, at least I didn't see any option in BIOS, also my VCCSA set in BIOS is always higher than what HWiNFO64 reports and the VDIMM is higher in HWiNFO64 compared to BIOS instead of being lower like VCCSA, VDDQ is the only which is precisely set the same in BIOS and HWiNFO64. I think @PhoenixMDA has the Z790 Strix-A too, maybe he can send you a screenshot showing the sensors or when I get back to home I do it.


----------



## MisterSheikh

ViTosS said:


> I'm not in my home town right now, traveling for the holidays, but if I'm not wrong you can't change die sense to socket sense, at least I didn't see any option in BIOS, also my VCCSA set in BIOS is always higher than what HWiNFO64 reports and the VDIMM is higher in HWiNFO64 compared to BIOS instead of being lower like VCCSA, VDDQ is the only which is precisely set the same in BIOS and HWiNFO64. I think @PhoenixMDA has the Z790 Strix-A too, maybe he can send you a screenshot showing the sensors or when I get back to home I do it.


I see. Thank you chief, it's greatly appreciated. Guess I'm gonna consider going DDR5 perhaps.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> What you reckon the chances of the 13900KS going up to 4533 G1 are?


Extremely low.

Also, tREFI at 65520 (65536 doesn't boot):








I'm currently seeing how low I can pull down the VDIMM. 1.70V passes so far. Testing 1.69V and lower.
VCCSA is 1.39V; that's the lowest it can go with this config.

VDDQ is stable at 1.57V instead of 1.59V now. So the Z790 Edge is better.


----------



## MisterSheikh

ViTosS said:


> I'm not in my home town right now, traveling for the holidays, but if I'm not wrong you can't change die sense to socket sense, at least I didn't see any option in BIOS, also my VCCSA set in BIOS is always higher than what HWiNFO64 reports and the VDIMM is higher in HWiNFO64 compared to BIOS instead of being lower like VCCSA, VDDQ is the only which is precisely set the same in BIOS and HWiNFO64. I think @PhoenixMDA has the Z790 Strix-A too, maybe he can send you a screenshot showing the sensors or when I get back to home I do it.


You do have SP scores though right?


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> Extremely low.
> 
> Also, tREFI at 65520 (65536 doesn't boot):
> View attachment 2586895
> 
> I'm currently seeing how low I can pull down the VDIMM. 1.70V passes so far. Testing 1.69V and lower.
> VCCSA is 1.39V; that's the lowest it can go with this config.
> 
> VDDQ is stable at 1.57V instead of 1.59V now. So the Z790 Edge is better.


Nice! Do you think if you had B-Dies and 2x8 or 2x16GB you could reach 4300Mhz CL14? 


MisterSheikh said:


> You do have SP scores though right?


Yes SP scores is present.


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> Nice! Do you think if you had B-Dies and 2x8 or 2x16GB you could reach 4300Mhz CL14?
> 
> Yes SP scores is present.


Samsung B die 2x16 only very few people seem to have managed 4400+ on the 10900K because they are DR (10th gen was G1 only).

2x8 can do the same as 2x16 Micron B die as both are SR.

4300ish should be possible though on the same IMC.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> Nice! Do you think if you had B-Dies and 2x8 or 2x16GB you could reach 4300Mhz CL14?
> 
> Yes SP scores is present.


2x8 GB Samsung B-die SR is easy. DR might struggle a bit if you don't give enough VDIMM/VCCSA.
The chip I'm selling will very likely do 4,300 CL14 with 2x8 GB Samsung B-die at reasonable VCCSA. Buy it


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> 2x8 GB Samsung B-die SR is easy. DR might struggle a bit if you don't give enough VDIMM/VCCSA.
> The chip I'm selling will very likely do 4,300 CL14 with 2x8 GB Samsung B-die at reasonable VCCSA. Buy it


I see, when I said 4300CL14 I thought something like 4300 CL14-14-14-34 or 14-15-15-35, I wish I could buy it, if I lived in USA or Canada haha.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> I see, when I said 4300CL14 I thought something like 4300 CL14-14-14-34 or 14-15-15-35, I wish I could buy it, if I lived in USA or Canada haha.


I ship anywhere as long as you pay for the shipping.

And yes, you can do 4,300 MHz 14-15-15-XX with Samsung B-die. But you'd need like 1.75V VDIMM or something.
The IMC matters too, but you gotta be able to run the RAM at that setting first and foremost. If you can't cool it, loosen the primaries.

I did 4,266 MHz 14-15-15-XX with 2x8 GB Samsung B-die SR on my old 12900KF, and it had a _much _weaker IMC.
4,300 MHz should be an absolute cinch now with a decent IMC.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> I ship anywhere as long as you pay for the shipping.
> 
> And yes, you can do 4,300 MHz 14-15-15-XX with Samsung B-die. But you'd need like 1.75V VDIMM or something.
> The IMC matters too, but you gotta be able to run the RAM at that setting first and foremost. If you can't cool it, loosen the primaries.
> 
> I did 4,266 MHz 14-15-15-XX with 2x8 GB Samsung B-die SR on my old 12900KF, and it had a _much _weaker IMC.
> 4,300 MHz should be an absolute cinch now with a decent IMC.


I guess at that level of tune only possible with watercooled DIMMs, I see where is the limit of my kit related to temperature, air cooling not enough, especially if you live in a hot country like mine.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> I guess at that level of tune only possible with watercooled DIMMs, I see where is the limit of my kit related to temperature, air cooling not enough, especially if you live in a hot country like mine.


Just do CL15-16 instead. It's not a big deal. Doesn't hurt latency that much.

Send me a private message if you're interested in the chip


----------



## imrevoau

I'm hardwalled at 4133 on my current DR B Die


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> I'm hardwalled at 4133 on my current DR B Die


My 13900KF is available for sale


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> My 13900KF is available for sale


I live in Australia so shipping would be horrible  to be honest though wanting extra frequency is mostly a flex, in games it would make 0 difference


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> I live in Australia so shipping would be horrible  to be honest though wanting extra frequency is mostly a flex, in games it would make 0 difference


Eh, it would be like $30 USD with tracking. Haven't checked but that's my ballpark estimate.
Golden IMC though, I can promise you that.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> Eh, it would be like $30 USD with tracking. Haven't checked but that's my ballpark estimate.
> Golden IMC though, I can promise you that.


haha I don't think I could afford it tbh, I mean I'm not poor, but I definitely need to be more responsible with my money


----------



## jediblr

Ichirou said:


> My 13900KF is available for sale


you got a new one 13900 or new AMD platform?


----------



## Ichirou

jediblr said:


> new one 13900 or new platform?


Sorry, I don't understand your question.

It is an i9-13900KF. Raptor Lake.


----------



## criznit

I'm unable to get asrock timing to work and I keep getting this error message;

"access violation at address in module asrtc.exe"

I've disabled memory integrity and disabled all VT in bios. Is there a workaround to get this software to work? I'm running Win11 with everything up to date.


----------



## bscool

criznit said:


> I'm unable to get asrock timing to work and I keep getting this error message;
> 
> "access violation at address in module asrtc.exe"
> 
> I've disabled memory integrity and disabled all VT in bios. Is there a workaround to get this software to work? I'm running Win11 with everything up to date.


Try the newer version _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


----------



## criznit

bscool said:


> Try the newer version _Official_ Intel DDR5 OC and 24/7 daily Memory Stability...


This worked! Thank you


----------



## bhav

@Ichirou Initial testing on the MAG Z790, I can boot 4000CL13 but not stabilize, though I 'only' tried 1.68v vram and 1.38v SA.

4133G1 still no boot on my 12600K.

Also successful training takes like 5 seconds, and failed OCs reboot a lot faster than the Asrock board.

Trying for 4800CL16 stability now, then see if I can get 5000+.

Ok so testing further at just 1.65v, 4800CL16 still won't stabilize, but also 5066CL18 and 5200CL19 also work at 1.65v, just not stable as well.

5333 any CL won't work on my kit, so now I'm trying to get 5200CL19 stable, trying 1.68v now.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> @Ichirou Initial testing on the MAG Z790, I can boot 4000CL13 but not stabilize, though I 'only' tried 1.68v vram and 1.38v SA.
> 
> 4133G1 still no boot on my 12600K.
> 
> Also successful training takes like 5 seconds, and failed OCs reboot a lot faster than the Asrock board.
> 
> Trying for 4800CL16 stability now, then see if I can get 5000+.
> 
> Ok so testing further at just 1.65v, 4800CL16 still won't stabilize, but also 5066CL18 and 5200CL19 also work at 1.65v, just not stable as well.
> 
> 5333 any CL won't work on my kit, so now I'm trying to get 5200CL19 stable, trying 1.68v now.


I don't really care all that much about Gear 2, to be honest.
From my testing, I couldn't stabilize 5,000 MHz either, so I stopped bothering.
Currently playing around with 4,300 CL14.


----------



## imrevoau

So according to Buildzoid, it's basically impossible to get 1T DR B die to work. That would explain a lot to be honest. I'm almost tempted to throw back in my 16 gig kit of Ripjaws B-Die to see what I can get out of it. It seems like getting 4200 DR B die stable is already an achievement for my IMC, I do wanna see if I can stabilise 4266 tho.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> So according to Buildzoid, it's basically impossible to get 1T DR B die to work. That would explain a lot to be honest. I'm almost tempted to throw back in my 16 gig kit of Ripjaws B-Die to see what I can get out of it. It seems like getting 4200 DR B die stable is already an achievement for my IMC, I do wanna see if I can stabilise 4266 tho.


He's lying, because I have seen some people achieve 1T on Samsung B-die DR before. But it really depends on a lot of factors, such as the board, BIOS, RAM, voltages. It's certainly not easy, though.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> I don't really care all that much about Gear 2, to be honest.
> From my testing, I couldn't stabilize 5,000 MHz either, so I stopped bothering.
> Currently playing around with 4,300 CL14.


Its not really worth it for performance, just nice to see big numbers on DDR4.

You get more bandwidth but lose latency so its mostly meh.

I found what the issue is, VDDQ requirement spikes at 5000+.

1.45v 5200 won't boot, previously I was using 1.5v. Trying to see if 1.55v works, the maybe I might be able to try for something 5000+ CL18.

Main reason for the 13900KS is to try get a solid G1 IMC. Once I have that no more G2.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> He's lying, because I have seen some people achieve 1T on Samsung B-die DR before. But it really depends on a lot of factors, such as the board, BIOS, RAM, voltages. It's certainly not easy, though.


To be honest I've always had issues getting 1T to work, even at something like 3600Mhz. I've given up on that dream. When I tested on my 16 gig kit though I could relatively comfortably stabilise 4000 CR1 on my 12700KF, so at the very least it's MUCH easier on SR chips.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> To be honest I've always had issues getting 1T to work, even at something like 3600Mhz. I've given up on that dream. When I tested on my 16 gig kit though I could relatively comfortably stabilise 4000 CR1 on my 12700KF, so at the very least it's MUCH easier on SR chips.


Yeah, it's pretty much free with SR kits. One thing you can try is to throw a lot more VDIMM at the RAM, with everything else held equal.
You have to keep in mind that the difference between 1T and 2T is practically like +200 MHz of performance, so you gotta make up for that difference.
Besides, DR is better than SR anyway at the same settings, so even if it is 2T, it's still stronger overall.


----------



## bhav

Sooooo, anyone want to save £3000 on some clearance ram?


----------



## dracktw

bass junkie xl said:


> 13900k / z790 strix D4 / 32gb ddr4 @ 4300 15-16-16-32 gear 1 stable in y cruncher and tm5 absolute 10 cycles
> View attachment 2585983
> View attachment 2585985
> View attachment 2585982
> View attachment 2585981


 Vdim1.6 Vddq 1.4 S.a 1.35?


----------



## dracktw

Sorry doble post


----------



## RichKnecht

When trying new frequencies, how long does it take to train? Are there any settings, like Fast Boot, i need to disable or enable? working with a Z790 Tomahawk.


----------



## Ichirou

RichKnecht said:


> When trying new frequencies, how long does it take to train? Are there any settings, like Fast Boot, i need to disable or enable? working with a Z790 Tomahawk.


Nah. MSI boards are great in that if something is stable, it boots easily.
The only time it takes forever to train (if it does train) is if it's foreign territory or not fully stable.
So situations like 4,000+ CL13 or 5000+ Gear 2.

The best approach is to Auto everything except the primaries, and set the frequency you desire.
Plug in a generous amount of VDIMM, VCCSA, VDDQ (or auto the latter two), and figure your way around things.


----------



## bhav

RichKnecht said:


> When trying new frequencies, how long does it take to train? Are there any settings, like Fast Boot, i need to disable or enable? working with a Z790 Tomahawk.


My Z790 Tomahawk trains and recovers from failed OC in like 10% of the time my Asrock Z690 did, also it has a clear cmos button, but from the look of it I shouldn't ever need it.

Its actually faster than my Asus Z490 too.

And it even sets the secondaries too tight in like 5-10 seconds, with auto timings it tried setting 23-23-46 for 5000 which instantly froze in OCCT, manually setting 18-24-24-56 is working great at 1.65v for now.

For DDR4, the Pro-A or Tomahawk should both be great, but get the latter if the price difference isn't much, both for the clear cmos and my Arctic cooler mount fits with zero clearance problems. Not sure if the components are better, but all the components on the tomahawk are polished and shiny silver, the Pro-A is unpolished and lots of coppery bits on it.

I'm very happy with this board, and it was only £5 when I bought it than the Pro-A, but the price has dropped on that now and its £25-£30, at which I would still prioritize the tomahawk.

Pro A also doesn't have a heatsink on the second M.2 slot due to having an extra 4x slot in the same lane.

However theres currently an issue with the LAN port, a lot of people can't get a connection through it, so if its a hardware fault, I may need an RMA.


----------



## RichKnecht

First off, i am using 4x16GB of G Skill 3600 ( b-die ) which i know isnt going to be easy. Right now its running manually entered XMP settings of 16 16 16 36 @ 1.35V. I just tried 3800 18 18 18 38 @ 1.35 and it booted. Going to test it for a bit and see if i can get to 4000 @ 1.45. I have a feeling i may be adding a fan to cool them a bit like i did on my X299 system. If that doesnt work, ill just see how fast i can get it @ 3600. @Uncle Dubbs gave me some stuff to try, so maybe ill go that route.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> Nah. MSI boards are great in that if something is stable, it boots easily.
> The only time it takes forever to train (if it does train) is if it's foreign territory or not fully stable.
> So situations like 4,000+ CL13 or 5000+ Gear 2.
> 
> The best approach is to Auto everything except the primaries, and set the frequency you desire.
> Plug in a generous amount of VDIMM, VCCSA, VDDQ (or auto the latter two), and figure your way around things.


My last board was Asus, current is MSI. That's my exact experience too. 90% of the time if something posts quickly on MSI, I've had no problems with stability and passing tests. On my old Asus STRIX Z370-F, Sometimes it could take up to like 3 minutes to train something, it'd be stable, then I'd change something in BIOS and it wouldn't post anymore lol. MSI are amazing in that regard.


----------



## bhav

RichKnecht said:


> First off, i am using 4x16GB of G Skill 3600 ( b-die ) which i know isnt going to be easy. Right now its running manually entered XMP settings of 16 16 16 36 @ 1.35V. I just tried 3800 18 18 18 38 @ 1.35 and it booted. Going to test it for a bit and see if i can get to 4000 @ 1.45. I have a feeling i may be adding a fan to cool them a bit like i did on my X299 system. If that doesnt work, ill just see how fast i can get it @ 3600. @Uncle Dubbs gave me some stuff to try, so maybe ill go that route.


Only just noticed you already have the tomahawk too, from the look of it there doesn't seem to be much difference in what I can boot on mine to Ichirou's Edge, just that both my ram isn't as good a bin, and the current IMC sucks.

Its much better at training and recovery than my Asus Z490 too as I already pointed out, though I'm not sure how Asus DDR4 Z790s compare, but I doubt they're going to be any better, at most they will be the same, or even worse.


----------



## imrevoau

bhav said:


> Only just noticed you already have the tomahawk too, from the look of it there doesn't seem to be much difference in what I can boot on mine to Ichirou's Edge, just that both my ram isn't as good a bin, and the current IMC sucks.
> 
> Its much better at training and recovery than my Asus Z490 too as I already pointed out, though I'm not sure how Asus DDR4 Z790s compare, but I doubt they're going to be any better, at most they will be the same, or even worse.


It's the the same PCB layers and outside of some VRM and USB differences, they should all perform identical in memory training (even the Pro should be the same)

These talks have gotten me interested again, gonna see if I can stabilise 4266.


----------



## imrevoau

So, unless a new board could push me up another frequency tier. It looks like 4200 is my max. 

I may buy a 13th gen Refresh i9, I typically don't always get the most expensive chip, but I want to stay on this platform for at least 2-3 years, so might as well get comfortable. If the IMC sucks or isn't an upgrade I can always return it.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> So, unless a new board could push me up another frequency tier. It looks like 4200 is my max.
> 
> I may buy a 13th gen Refresh i9, I typically don't always get the most expensive chip, but I want to stay on this platform for at least 2-3 years, so might as well get comfortable. If the IMC sucks or isn't an upgrade I can always return it.


What board and chip do you have?


----------



## 2500k_2

bhav said:


> Initial testing on the MAG Z790, I can boot 4000CL13 but not stabilize





Ichirou said:


> So situations like 4,000+ CL13


Guys, don't settle for less than сl12 . You are on overclock.net 🤣🤣


----------



## bhav

2500k_2 said:


> Guys, don't settle for less than сl12 . You are on overclock.net 🤣🤣


Wow what ram is that?


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> What board and chip do you have?


13700KF on a Z690 A-Pro


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Wow what ram is that?


2x8 GB Samsung B-die SR. But the 1.67V VDIMM does not make sense for 4,200 MHz CL12. It's probably a post-boot tCL change.


imrevoau said:


> 13700KF on a Z690 A-Pro


And what is the maximum you can boot up to?
Because although the MSI Z690 boards have trouble stabilizing 4,266+ MHz, they can still boot up to 4,400 MHz.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> 2x8 GB Samsung B-die SR. But the 1.67V VDIMM does not make sense for 4,200 MHz CL12. It's probably a post-boot tCL change.
> 
> And what is the maximum you can boot up to?
> Because although the MSI Z690 boards have trouble stabilizing 4,266+ MHz, they can still boot up to 4,400 MHz.


My max bootable seems to be 4266 without suicide voltages, but I can stabilize 4200. I think I'm at the mercy of my IMC


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> My max bootable seems to be 4266 without suicide voltages, but I can stabilize 4200. I think I'm at the mercy of my IMC


Yeah, that's an IMC issue, not a board issue.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> Yeah, that's an IMC issue, not a board issue.


I think you're right but I assume if I got a new CPU and if the IMC was better, let's say it's possible to get 4400 G1 stable, I think at that point I'd need a new board to fully utilize it.


----------



## grey.clock

Having a awful time since I updated from 0707 to 2204. My cl 14 14 14 3866 @1.5v OC is now limited to cl 14 14 14 3600. The extra .5v no longer helps me move up a few hundred mhz.
Super sad to have updated and lost some performance......



























Any suggestions would be appreciated.


----------



## bhav

Theres quite a few people getting worse ram OCs on Asus boards after updating to the latest bios, the best advice in that situation is to roll back to the previous bios if you can.


----------



## grey.clock

bhav said:


> Theres quite a few people getting worse ram OCs on Asus boards after updating to the latest bios, the best advice in that situation is to roll back to the previous bios if you can.


Badly wish I could. It says on the bios update that there is no rolling back to previous versions. Has someone figured out a way around that?


----------



## bhav

grey.clock said:


> Badly wish I could. It says on the bios update that there is no rolling back to previous versions. Has someone figured out a way around that?


Yea no, thats the same issue that theres a big thread about unfortunately.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> I think you're right but I assume if I got a new CPU and if the IMC was better, let's say it's possible to get 4400 G1 stable, I think at that point I'd need a new board to fully utilize it.


Yeah. You'd probably need a Z790 board in that case.


grey.clock said:


> Badly wish I could. It says on the bios update that there is no rolling back to previous versions. Has someone figured out a way around that?


Nope. There is no return.
Newer is not always better, and people with a 12900K/KF or older should have just kept to older BIOSes.
But BIOSes have been improving, so just keep testing each new one out.


----------



## bhav

Oh my! Oh my oh my oh my oh my!!!!










1.7v.


----------



## bhav

@storm-chaser @Ichirou Don't ask me how, I don't even know how:










5066CL17 somehow?


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> @storm-chaser @Ichirou Don't ask me how, I don't even know how:
> 
> View attachment 2587647
> 
> 
> 5066CL17 somehow?


Because OCCT is trash. Use y-cruncher and TM5 like you're supposed to.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Because OCCT is trash. Use y-cruncher and TM5 like you're supposed to.


No I wont.

OCCT works fine, just have to run it a long time.

Testing 5100CL17.


----------



## storm-chaser

bhav said:


> @storm-chaser @Ichirou Don't ask me how, I don't even know how:
> 
> View attachment 2587647
> 
> 
> 5066CL17 somehow?



View attachment 2587647


5066CL17 somehow?
[/QUOTE]
Your frequency to CL ratio is pretty good, but not unheard of. What is most impressive is the memory clock speed by itself (5GHz). What was memory kit you used to hit these numbers? And just how much voltage did you have to run through this memory for this result? I can get close to your score but no way I'm going to get 5GHz out of this kit...


----------



## bhav

storm-chaser said:


> View attachment 2587647
> 
> 
> 5066CL17 somehow?


Your frequency to CL ratio is pretty good, but not unheard of. What is most impressive is the memory clock speed by itself (5GHz). What was memory kit you used to hit these numbers? And just how much voltage did you have to run through this memory for this result? I can get close to your score but no way I'm going to get 5GHz out of this kit...

View attachment 2587658

[/QUOTE]

Micron B die, 1.7v ram, 1,55v vddq, 1.35v SA.

5105 C L17 is currently testing (101 bclk).

Passed 45mins at 5105, tried to boot 5200CL17 but it wont, tightening the other timings now, trefi & trcd are still at stock so no benchies yet.


----------



## bscool

grey.clock said:


> Having a awful time since I updated from 0707 to 2204. My cl 14 14 14 3866 @1.5v OC is now limited to cl 14 14 14 3600. The extra .5v no longer helps me move up a few hundred mhz.
> Super sad to have updated and lost some performance......
> View attachment 2587634
> View attachment 2587635
> 
> 
> View attachment 2587639
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Any suggestions would be appreciated.


I posted in the Strix thread about what helped me on z690 Srtrix d4.

"manually setting tCWL(lower than tCL)"

It is worth a try to see if it helps on the Tuf. You might need to adjust some of the other timings that are connected. Before setting the correct timings I was limited to 3600. Leaving timings on auto/loose was worse for me.

Your timings look pretty good overall maybe try setting tCWL to 12 or 13 and adjust other timings(tRDWRs and TWRRDsg/dg) if needed.

Edit I also tested 12900ks cpu and it helped for newer bioses on Strix.









ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


I had 12900ks installed flashed from 1601 to 2103 and it was like I had a really bad IMC gear 1 after installing 13900k, it would not be stable for memtest or y cruncher. Current ME firmware(1917) was installed before installing 13900k So I flashed back to bios 2004 and then to 2103 and now it...




www.overclock.net













ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


BIOS 2004 simply wouldn't boot with E-Cores disabled and manually set 'Actual VRM' voltage, really odd bug. It did boot with Auto though... I was gonna get my Bios chip programmer and flash back to 0901 or something like that, but then I realized there was a new 2103 BIOS. It's working fine...




www.overclock.net


----------



## bass junkie xl

bhav said:


> No I wont.
> 
> OCCT works fine, just have to run it a long time.
> 
> Testing 5100CL17.


come on dont be scared do y cruncher 0/1/8 and some tm5 1nmus etleast lol


----------



## zebra_hun

Hi!

First time with my new anti oc (sp79) 13700k.
Z690 Strix D4
3200 CL14 GTZR DR G.Skill 2x16Gb

Daily 5.3p 4.3e 4.7c (1.21V load Vcore, not so good...)

Created 2 ram profil, booth are super for my rtx3080. 4133MHz CL17 is super low Voltages, 4266MHz CL17 is normal.
TM5 is a light test, AIDA with cpu, fpu, mem and cache is hard.

* 53p 43e 47c 4266 CL17 17 17











4266 Tomb Raider 720 lowest *











*TM5 + AIDA **4133MHz*











*TR 720 lowest + res modifier 1080Ti*











Tested *5.6GHz p* cores and *4.9GHz Cache, 4266 CL 16 16 16* TR: *356 FPS*

They are daily profiles, delid, and it will be oc'ed.


----------



## KedarWolf

https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=1&family=Motherboard+Family&chipset=Intel+Z690



Classified and Kingpin, $300 off.


----------



## bhav

KedarWolf said:


> https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=1&family=Motherboard+Family&chipset=Intel+Z690
> 
> 
> 
> Classified and Kingpin, $300 off.


You should put that in the DDR5 thread, they aren't DDR4 boards.

I would be curious how they compare for DDR5 overclocking to a mid priced Z790 D5 though.


----------



## KedarWolf

bhav said:


> You should put that in the DDR5 thread, they aren't DDR4 boards.
> 
> I would be curious how they compare for DDR5 overclocking to a mid priced Z790 D5 though.


Oh yes, I never realized I put in the DDR4 thread.


----------



## bhav

So maybe a small discovery, it looks like micron B die simply stops scaling at 1.725, same with when I had it on my 10900K, going above that does nothing for stability. I thought it was the 10900K IMC not allowing further scaling on the ram before.

I can only get mine to 4266CL14 1.72v on air, Ichirou managed 4300 with water cooling at around the same voltage. Tried up to 1.74v, no additional stability, and 1.75v wouldn't boot for whatever reason.

4266CL14, 4533CL15, and 5100CL17 are the maximums per those CL values at 1.72v, also I couldn't get 5333CL19 to boot at all, 5200CL18 boots, but not worth it over 5100CL17.

Also going up to 1.68v does very little for stability, then 1.7v sees a large jump in stable values.


----------



## Man4cl

Guys, can you please guide me on what I may be doing wrong? I just upgraded my 12900k to a 13900kf on a Z690 TUF D4 board with the 2103 bios.

With the 12900k I was stable at 4000CL15, but after switching to the 13900kf, I can't get past 3200Mhz.

I have tried the following, I set the ram speed to 3600 (1:1 ratio, 100:100 or 100:133) and start to go up by 0.1mv VDDQ and VCCSA , even Vram voltage. I read here that I had to disable "MCH Fullcheck", it is also disabled and nothing.

Is there any option that I should change so that I can boot at least 3600mhz ? I have been several hours and I can't make any progress.

Any help is greatly appreciated!


----------



## ViTosS

Man4cl said:


> Guys, can you please guide me on what I may be doing wrong? I just upgraded my 12900k to a 13900kf on a Z690 TUF D4 board with the 2103 bios.
> 
> With the 12900k I was stable at 4000CL15, but after switching to the 13900kf, I can't get past 3200Mhz.
> 
> I have tried the following, I set the ram speed to 3600 (1:1 ratio, 100:100 or 100:133) and start to go up by 0.1mv VDDQ and VCCSA , even Vram voltage. I read here that I had to disable "MCH Fullcheck", it is also disabled and nothing.
> 
> Is there any option that I should change so that I can boot at least 3600mhz ? I have been several hours and I can't make any progress.
> 
> Any help is greatly appreciated!


There are some people experiencing problem with XMP/high frequency RAM when using 13900k with Z690, try to update your ME and BIOS to latest one.


----------



## Man4cl

ViTosS said:


> There are some people experiencing problem with XMP/high frequency RAM when using 13900k with Z690, try to update your ME and BIOS to latest one.


And that was it... I had no idea you had to update the ME Firmware... I did it and I could even load my 4000 saved profile... always learn something new!!! hahahaha


----------



## PhoenixMDA

It´s not faster as my other setting i must lose timings, but possible as 24/7....
With the other Bios Version not possible only with Bios 2204


----------



## BroadPwns

Did any of you ever happen to see fewer FPS or worse benchmarks results after bumping cache ratio or lowering/raising tRFC/TREFI too aggresively?


----------



## bhav

BroadPwns said:


> Did any of you ever happen to see fewer FPS or worse benchmarks results after bumping cache ratio or lowering/raising tRFC/TREFI too aggresively?


No performance degradation raising trefi, however it will let you raise it a lot higher than it is stable at, so I first tried 250k which boots and errors in tm5, had to go all the way down to 114500 currently to stop errors. 115000 still errors after 50mins, 114500 passes 6 cycles, but simply might take longer to error, will keep an eye on it for that or future bsods.

trfc, if its too low your system simply wont boot, currently for me, 590 no boot, 600 stable.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

bhav said:


> No performance degradation raising trefi, however it will let you raise it a lot higher than it is stable at, so I first tried 250k which boots and errors in tm5, had to go all the way down to 114500 currently to stop errors. 115000 still errors after 50mins, 114500 passes 6 cycles, but simply might take longer to error, will keep an eye on it for that or future bsods.
> 
> trfc, if its too low your system simply wont boot, currently for me, 590 no boot, 600 stable.


Too low trfc can just be unstable as well tho, errors, overheats, bsod


----------



## bhav

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Too low trfc can just be unstable as well tho, errors, overheats, bsod


Hence why you test it first?

Personally never had an issue running 5-10 higher than whatever didn't boot, at 4800 650 no boot, 655 error free.


----------



## ViTosS

PhoenixMDA said:


> It´s not faster as my other setting i must lose timings, but possible as 24/7....
> With the other Bios Version not possible only with Bios 2204
> 
> View attachment 2588095


You are not using Z790 Strix-A anymore?


----------



## PhoenixMDA

ViTosS said:


> You are not using Z790 Strix-A anymore?


No Z790 Strix-A bring me i think like nothing and the Z690 has with 80A Stages the stronger vrm,
i have tested with tcwl 15 and hard sub´s and yes it can be possible, but the difference is to less for much voltage that make no sense.
My memory is able to do 4500CL15 or 4700CL16 with really good subs, for a really measurable impact in benchmarks need a better imc with 4500 stable.

But that will also in normal usage be like nothing.There i drive ever performance/watt.Perhaps a raptorlake refresh come´s next year.Nowi´m happy now with my setup.
I have with TVB up to 6Ghz and that by really good temp.Yes it give´s better chip´s but it bring perhaps 100mhz.
I´m not sponsored from asus so i take ever the best Performance/price choice🤷‍♂️

With 4300CL15-15 i have 9860/10350 it´s like less more and my temp´s and voltage´s are good.


----------



## Hexes

Here is 4400CL15-16-15 stable through all tests in regular 23-24C room temp. Fixed all-core setup so some latency is left on the table, but very reasonable voltages which can be reduced further. CPU easily runs 59x all-core now that is delidded but hesitant to use high watts (~330W). For daily use I guess you could easily set that, but for benchmarking no.

Too bad this RAM isn't quite the golden sample, although pretty good. IMC would allow running more, but tRCD won't do 15 even at 4300CL so 14-15-15 is not an option.

Next up will see if I can run something in between 4300-4400 MHz at 14-16-15. Perhaps the optimal setup with this RAM. Will also have to test what's best for gaming and see if higher boost clocks work better versus fixed all-core.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ingame you have most time allcore usage, boostclock is more that it looks nice^^
But TVB you can also use allcore thats work good.
But the difference of some MHz in real i will never feel ingame


----------



## Ichirou

Hexes said:


> Here is 4400CL15-16-15 stable through all tests in regular 23-24C room temp. Fixed all-core setup so some latency is left on the table, but very reasonable voltages which can be reduced further. CPU easily runs 59x all-core now that is delidded but hesitant to use high watts (~330W). For daily use I guess you could easily set that, but for benchmarking no.
> 
> Too bad this RAM isn't quite the golden sample, although pretty good. IMC would allow running more, but tRCD won't do 15 even at 4300CL so 14-15-15 is not an option.
> 
> Next up will see if I can run something in between 4300-4400 MHz at 14-16-15. Perhaps the optimal setup with this RAM. Will also have to test what's best for gaming and see if higher boost clocks work better versus fixed all-core.
> 
> View attachment 2588320


The 1.38V VCCSA isn't too great either. Is that the absolute minimum for y-cruncher? A friend of mine has roughly the same IMC quality, but needs a tiny bit more. However, the core quality is just average. 

I don't think tRCD 16 at 4,300+ MHz is awful though. But I have seen people run 15. It probably needs more VDIMM.


----------



## Hexes

Ichirou said:


> The 1.38V VCCSA isn't too great either. Is that the absolute minimum for y-cruncher? A friend of mine has roughly the same IMC quality, but needs a tiny bit more. However, the core quality is just average.
> 
> I don't think tRCD 16 at 4,300+ MHz is awful though. But I have seen people run 15. It probably needs more VDIMM.


No, like I said I can lower it to 1.36v set now. Should come out under 1.35v. VDIMM doesn't usually help with tRCD and B-die. I have tried over 1.70v without any help. I also found another trick which has a huge impact on VCCSA voltage while having an insignificant effect on performance. Will try it out a bit before posting. Many of course know it but probably don't realise how big of an effect it has.


----------



## jediblr

bhav said:


> No performance degradation raising trefi, however it will let you raise it a lot higher than it is stable at, so I first tried 250k which boots and errors in tm5, had to go all the way down to 114500 currently to stop errors. 115000 still errors after 50mins, 114500 passes 6 cycles, but simply might take longer to error, will keep an eye on it for that or future bsods.


*** with this 100k+ Trefi numbers, its ddr4 not ddr5?


----------



## Ichirou

Hexes said:


> No, like I said I can lower it to 1.36v set now. Should come out under 1.35v. VDIMM doesn't usually help with tRCD and B-die. I have tried over 1.70v without any help. I also found another trick which has a huge impact on VCCSA voltage while having an insignificant effect on performance. Will try it out a bit before posting. Many of course know it but probably don't realise how big of an effect it has.


You mean, loosening the tertiaries...?


----------



## Ichirou

jediblr said:


> *** with this 100k+ Trefi numbers, its ddr4 not ddr5?


I've done my own testing with tREFI at values below/above 65,536 (the DDR4 maximum spec), and there _is_ indeed an increase in performance.
But the returns are so extremely diminishing that they aren't worth the extra heat at all.
You're gaining an extra few hundred MB/s across the board but need to set tREFI to 130K+, which is nigh uncoolable.


----------



## ViTosS

I bought this RAM, was going to get 32GB but there is no stock nowhere, and 2x8GB still doing fine for games and also SR better for OCing, I hope I can get at least 4300CL15-15-15 with this, even knowing I'm on air cooling and hot ambient country, we will see 









G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Elite Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C14D-16GTES - Newegg.com


Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Elite Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C14D-16GTES with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!




www.newegg.com


----------



## bhav

jediblr said:


> *** with this 100k+ Trefi numbers, its ddr4 not ddr5?


Yea DDR4.

So far errors start appearing at 114500 but took a while to show, I've managed 113000 now without errors so far.


----------



## pitter

ViTosS said:


> Alright, just made a 4200CL15-15-15-35 stable profile, gladly it passed with everything tuned in the first time, also Y-Cruncher passes with 1.42v VDDQ and 1.32v SA, probably have margin to lower even more, will do that later.
> View attachment 2586719


why some values like tWRWR_DR tWRWR_DD RDWRs are "0" ?


----------



## Ichirou

pitter said:


> why some values like tWRWR_DR tWRWR_DD RDWRs are "0" ?


_dr only applies if you have dual rank memory.
_dd only applies if you have more than two DIMMs.
IIRC, anyway.


----------



## pitter

Ichirou said:


> _dr only applies if you have dual rank memory.
> _dd only applies if you have more than two DIMMs.
> IIRC, anyway.


i have both of these values and i have 2x16gb


----------



## Ichirou

pitter said:


> i have both of these values and i have 2x16gb


All RAM will have those values. It's just that they get ignored no matter what they're set to.
You can experiment: try setting the _dd values to 0 or 1. Nothing should happen since you only have two sticks.


----------



## pitter

Ichirou said:


> All RAM will have those values. It's just that they get ignored no matter what they're set to.
> You can experiment: try setting the _dd values to 0 or 1. Nothing should happen since you only have two sticks.


alright , what about the DR ? he got dual rank also but his are DR are 0


----------



## Ichirou

pitter said:


> alright , what about the DR ? he got dual rank also but his are DR are 0


2x8 GB is SR, not DR.


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> I bought this RAM, was going to get 32GB but there is no stock nowhere, and 2x8GB still doing fine for games and also SR better for OCing, I hope I can get at least 4300CL15-15-15 with this, even knowing I'm on air cooling and hot ambient country, we will see
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Elite Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C14D-16GTES - Newegg.com
> 
> 
> Buy G.SKILL Trident Z Royal Elite Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin PC RAM DDR4 4000 (PC4 32000) Desktop Memory Model F4-4000C14D-16GTES with fast shipping and top-rated customer service. Once you know, you Newegg!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.newegg.com


While its nice for benching, doesn't matter how much a 2x8 kit OCs, as soon you run into needing to use the page file above 16 Gb you lose up to 30 FPS at 0.1 and 1% lows.

2x16 is and has been cheap for a long time and overclocks just as well, just with +1 CL value needed if its DR.

I'm already planning on 2x32 DDR5 next, looking at meteor lake leaks 8000+ 64 Gb should become much easier with DDR5X, 15th / 16th gen 9000+ 64 Gb.

I'll still try and skip 2 gens if I can.


----------



## ViTosS

bhav said:


> While its nice for benching, doesn't matter how much a 2x8 kit OCs, as soon you run into needing to use the page file above 16 Gb you lose up to 30 FPS at 0.1 and 1% lows.
> 
> 2x16 is and has been cheap for a long time and overclocks just as well, just with +1 CL value needed if its DR.
> 
> I'm already planning on 2x32 DDR5 next, looking at meteor lake leaks 8000+ 64 Gb should become much easier with DDR5X, 15th / 16th gen 9000+ 64 Gb.
> 
> I'll still try and skip 2 gens if I can.


Well it's hard a game today where you run into pagefile with 2x8GB, also I never noticed stuttering or anything related to that when using pagefile, but for sure there must be a performance loss... Like I said this kit exists in 32GB version but I can't find it anywhere. Also if I don't get taxed, I can resell my current kit and pay almost the price I paid on this kit in dollars...


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> Well it's hard a game today where you run into pagefile with 2x8GB, also I never noticed stuttering or anything related to that when using pagefile, but for sure there must be a performance loss... Like I said this kit exists in 32GB version but I can't find it anywhere. Also if I don't get taxed, I can resell my current kit and pay almost the price I paid on this kit in dollars...


You won't notice it because the difference is like 280 to 230 minimum FPS at 1080p between 32 Gb and 16 Gb, nothing you will see.

Now bring on 4K numbers and Anno 1800. 16 Gb will dip to 20 FPS, 32 Gb will dip to 40 FPS even if you have a 13900K and 4090. Believe me you would be noticing that.

In the case that people are not concerned about that, then it makes little sense to even run any ram past Jedec spec as doing so is even less of an improvement.


----------



## Hexes

Got something cooking here. Let's see if can make that tRCD stick through all tests.

4400MHz CL15-15-15


----------



## Ichirou

Hexes said:


> Got something cooking here. Let's see if can make that tRCD stick through all tests.
> 
> 4400MHz CL15-15-15
> View attachment 2588502


What was the solution?


----------



## ViTosS

Hexes said:


> Got something cooking here. Let's see if can make that tRCD stick through all tests.
> 
> 4400MHz CL15-15-15
> View attachment 2588502


4400CL15, I think no DDR5 can beat that


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> 4400CL15, I think no DDR5 can beat that


Depends on workload.
Latency-wise, it'll match ~8,800 MHz tightened.
But bandwidth will always fall behind.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> Depends on workload.
> Latency-wise, it'll match ~8,800 MHz tightened.
> But bandwidth will always fall behind.


I know, talking about FPS. Latency wise will be still way lower than 8800 tightened, unless you can use 8800CL30 or something like that.


----------



## Hexes

Ichirou said:


> What was the solution?


Still working on it and no clue if I can do it so no reason to post really.


ViTosS said:


> 4400CL15, I think no DDR5 can beat that


It might be faster/as fast in some things but I'm quite sure in general top of the line tuned DDR5 is faster. Still nice to be able to somewhat hang with high end DDR5 setups. Pretty good for a combo of this price range at least.

Latency-wise I think no DDR5 setup with water can beat this. 34.xx ns Intel Memory Latency Checker should be no problem. AIDA I would guess ~43 ns. Just need to set up cache and high single core boost for P-cores.


----------



## imrevoau

Hexes said:


> Still working on it and no clue if I can do it so no reason to post really.
> 
> It might be faster/as fast in some things but I'm quite sure in general top of the line tuned DDR5 is faster. Still nice to be able to somewhat hang with high end DDR5 setups. Pretty good for a combo of this price range at least.
> 
> Latency-wise I think no DDR5 setup with water can beat this. 34.xx ns Intel Memory Latency Checker should be no problem. AIDA I would guess ~43 ns. Just need to set up cache and high single core boost for P-cores.


I get 43ns in Aida @ 4200 CL16. 4400CL15 should be into the 41s I think.


----------



## Hexes

imrevoau said:


> I get 43ns in Aida @ 4200 CL16. 4400CL15 should be into the 41s I think.


I don't think so unless something like BCLK overclocking is involved which is a bug. Alder Lake, sure. Raptor Lake Haven't seen that. Guess it's just AIDA though as Intel MLC is doing fine. But if you do please post a pic.


----------



## imrevoau

Hexes said:


> I don't think so unless something like BCLK overclocking is involved which is a bug. Alder Lake, sure. Raptor Lake Haven't seen that. Guess it's just AIDA though as Intel MLC is doing fine. But if you do please post a pic.


This is only at 4133 as well. At 4200 I can crack 70000 Read. The trick is to run safe mode


----------



## bhav

I'll see if Aida is working again on Z790 & 13600KF after finishing these backups.


----------



## RackarN

kinda curious how this score would be in win10 and debloated. Solid so far, noticed some audio crackling while installing a game but cant tell if its from memory OC or just YT that doesnt play nice while downloading/installing at the same time.


----------



## Hexes

imrevoau said:


> This is only at 4133 as well. At 4200 I can crack 70000 Read. The trick is to run safe mode


Safe Mode has always only helped a bit (for me anyway). I just tested and saw a ~0.5ns improvement on average. Definitely one doesn't benefit several ns from it. Something else is going on with your setup there.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

imrevoau said:


> I get 43ns in Aida @ 4200 CL16. 4400CL15 should be into the 41s I think.


With more core´s the ring is longer and the latency goe´s up, with 13700k you have better latency in Aida as with 13900k.


----------



## Hexes

PhoenixMDA said:


> With more core´s the ring is longer and the latency goe´s up, with 13700k you have better latency in Aida as with 13900k.


This is true but is it really worth several ns?


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Hexes said:


> This is true but is it really worth several ns?


Yes that are 2-3ns or so, if it cut by HW like 13700k. 
But for that you have more core´s/cache and a better bin of cpu/imc, easier to find a good one.


----------



## bass junkie xl

my first attepmt at 4,400 Gear 1 , Havent tried cl 15 yet , i did stabilze 4200 15 / 4,300 15 / 4,400 16 in y cruncher main 0/1/8 , 12 cycles of tm5 absolute . it trains this current config every time some times it wil lre start and retrain 2-3 times from a cmos reset , i was forever on 4133 cl 15-15-15-28 Gear 1 on 12900 ks sp 104 so having to be able to do up to 4400 16 is pretty cool , i havent tried any higher speed yet . 

my tm5 you gota zoom it close its the custom windows dark theme 
this config is 1.56-1.57 v dim / 1.39v vcssa / 1.35 vddq / 13900 k sp 106 P / 80 E


----------



## imrevoau

Hexes said:


> Safe Mode has always only helped a bit (for me anyway). I just tested and saw a ~0.5ns improvement on average. Definitely one doesn't benefit several ns from it. Something else is going on with your setup there.


Safe mode makes quite a big difference for me but my Windows isn't super clean


----------



## bhav

@Ichirou I've managed to get my voltages down to 1.28v SA, 1.3v VDDQ for 4300 14-20-20-36-600-113000.

I know TM5 isn't the best for SA stability, and you hate OCCT, but it turns out OCCT will error fast if VCCSA is too low so it was useful for voltage testing and also pushes dimm temps, so I use it for that and TM5 for stability.

1.26v SA and 1.25v VDDQ both give errors.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> @Ichirou I've managed to get my voltages down to 1.28v SA, 1.3v VDDQ for 4300 14-20-20-36-600-113000.
> 
> I know TM5 isn't the best for SA stability, and you hate OCCT, but it turns out OCCT will error fast if VCCSA is too low so it was useful for voltage testing and also pushes dimm temps, so I use it for that and TM5 for stability.
> 
> 1.26v SA and 1.25v VDDQ both give errors.


Not gonna comment or praise you for that overclock until you actually run y-cruncher.
The VCCSA requirement shoots up there. OCCT is trash on all fronts, and TM5 doesn't need much VCCSA.
You're just doing some silly cope.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Not gonna comment or praise you for that overclock until you actually run y-cruncher.
> The VCCSA requirement shoots up there. OCCT is trash on all fronts, and TM5 doesn't need much VCCSA.
> You're just doing some silly cope.


Ok what settings do I use?

0 Benchmark Pi, and single or multi threaded?


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Ok what settings do I use?
> 
> 0 Benchmark Pi, and single or multi threaded?


There's two approaches you can take. The simple approach would be to run the full component stress test with all tests enabled. This covers everything.
But that hammers the CPU as well, so it's not really necessary for the most part, _unless you have cores getting parked_.

The other approach would be to first run the main test by doing 0 > 1 > # that populates the most memory.
Then you want to also run a selective component stress test (N64, HNT, VST) by pressing 1 > 8 > 16 > 17 > 18 > 0 and passing at least one loop.
_(You may optionally enable N32 and C17, but they are weaker tests for the memory and don't really result in much.)_
All of those tests only hammer the IMC and memory, _not _the CPU.

With HWiNFO running, make sure you monitor the Effective Clocks to see if any cores are getting parked.
It should only take a few seconds to find out, as you'll notice the multipliers rising, but the (usually) P-cores will suddenly drop down to zero and only the E-cores run.

If you _do_ have cores getting parked, you have to either run the full component stress test, or _at least_ 3-4 loops of the selective N/H/V test.


----------



## bhav

I did 0-1 but could only populate the amount for this test:










It completed too quick so I maybe did something wrong, isn't there any such test with just a single start button bah.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I did 0-1 but could only populate the amount for this test:
> 
> View attachment 2588788
> 
> 
> It completed too quick so I maybe did something wrong, isn't there any such test with just a single start button bah.


0 > 1 > 8 for 32 GB.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> 0 > 1 > 8 for 32 GB.


I tried 8 but it wouldn't populate it so had to use 7. I'm trying the second method now, passedf N64 so far, using 1.3v SA in case 1.28 not enough.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I tried 8 but it wouldn't populate it so had to use 7. I'm trying the second method now, passedf N64 so far, using 1.3v SA in case 1.28 not enough.


Do you have anything running in the background?
What is the actual error message?


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Do you have anything running in the background?
> What is the actual error message?


Well yea, steam downloading and browser and all the usual stuff open.

Passed one loop of the other method, is that ok?


----------



## bhav

double posted.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Well yea, steam downloading and browser and all the usual stuff open.
> 
> Passed one loop of the other method, is that ok?


Let it do at least 3-4 loops to compensate for the lack of the main test.

If ~1.30V is enough to pass this, you have a diamond tier IMC that could allow you to do 4,400 MHz CL14 instead, but with ridiculous voltage.
4,400 MHz CL15 is a realistically doable voltage though. Also, it's subjective to the board/BIOS.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Let it do at least 3-4 loops to compensate for the lack of the main test.
> 
> If ~1.30V is enough to pass this, you have a diamond tier IMC that could allow you to do 4,400 MHz CL14 instead, but with ridiculous voltage.
> 4,400 MHz CL15 is a realistically doable voltage though. Also, it's subjective to the board/BIOS.


NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooo blub blub blub:










You know what though I'm gonna leave it at 1.3v SA cos I think it should be fine in everything else, will raise it if I get a BSOD.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> NOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooo blub blub blub:
> 
> View attachment 2588790
> 
> 
> You know what though I'm gonna leave it at 1.3v SA cos I think it should be fine in everything else, will raise it if I get a BSOD.


Failing just before it finishes like this probably just means you need to add an extra +0.01V. Which is really not a big deal.
Doesn't change the fact that your IMC is strong enough for 4,400 MHz CL15 or better, especially with only 2x16 GB. Give it a try.

If you hypothetically ran 4x16 GB, I imagine the VCCSA requirement would rise up to like 1.37V+. So closer to where I'm at.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> Let it do at least 3-4 loops to compensate for the lack of the main test.
> 
> If ~1.30V is enough to pass this, you have a diamond tier IMC that could allow you to do 4,400 MHz CL14 instead, but with ridiculous voltage.
> 4,400 MHz CL15 is a realistically doable voltage though. Also, it's subjective to the board/BIOS.





Ichirou said:


> Failing just before it finishes like this probably just means you need to add an extra +0.01V. Which is really not a big deal.
> Doesn't change the fact that your IMC is strong enough for 4,400 MHz CL15 or better, especially with only 2x16 GB. Give it a try.
> 
> If you hypothetically ran 4x16 GB, I imagine the VCCSA requirement would rise up to like 1.37V+. So closer to where I'm at.


There is 0 reason not to go to 1.35SA anyway. Might as well see what you can do with it.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Failing just before it finishes like this probably just means you need to add an extra +0.01V. Which is really not a big deal.
> Doesn't change the fact that your IMC is strong enough for 4,400 MHz CL15 or better, especially with only 2x16 GB. Give it a try.
> 
> If you hypothetically ran 4x16 GB, I imagine the VCCSA requirement would rise up to like 1.37V+. So closer to where I'm at.


Already tried 4400CL15 when I first got the chip, not stable at 1.35v SA.



imrevoau said:


> There is 0 reason not to go to 1.35SA anyway. Might as well see what you can do with it.


The reason I lowered it because theres no extra stability at 1.35v or 1.37v at 4400CL15 or lower on other timings, so I reduced it at these settings instead.

Tried 1.4v SA 4400 15-20-20-40-700-100k, this time it completely bricked both OCCT and Steam lol. Not doing that again.


----------



## JoeRambo

Some tips in using yCruncher:

1) VST seems the best in uncovering problems that reside in Uncore->IMC->DRAM area. It will just fail if uncore/IMC voltages are not enough to feed its memory access frenzy.
2) Worth doing longer runs of VST, like 600s minimum, as i had default runs complete and 600s fail mid test, probably some "heating" up is involved somewhere or it just needs time.
3) It is possible to save yCruncher config
a) once it is set up to your liking, press 10, then dont enter anything and press "enter"
b) to load it, press 9, press enter and voila, ready to accept "0" and run

so firing it up, pressing 1, 9, enter, 0

EDIT: for those of us who are completely lazy, it is possible to load saved config 
create run.cmd file and put this line:

y-cruncher.exe config .cfg

this will load and run that config saved in 3a step


----------



## firthen

Hello guys, i´m having trouble to get my Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 [email protected] XMP Profiles to work.

My system:
12700kf with 360AI (push+pull)
Asus z690-A gaming wifi d4
2x16 Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 [email protected]
850W PSU
3090FE

Tried XMP1 and XMP2 Profiles. everything else were set to standard settings. Run memtest86, both profiles had no errors.
While gaming there are pretty random crashes. Mostly i´m running discord, ts, youtube and a game, then everything freezes and pc restarts himself.
There are days without a crash and then there are days where the pc crshes every 15 mins.

i´m on BIOS Version 2204. The crashes happend on the previous one as well. Had the crashes on the 1720 Version as well.
The restarts occure with both profiles pretty random.

My goal is to run the system with AI OC and XMP on (manual RAM settings would be possible but i´m not experienced enough do set it by myself and would need a guide)

Is there something wrong with my RAM? Or is the Mainboard not good enough to run 4000 XMP stable?
Maybe manual settings of RAM would work?

I´m open to any help.


----------



## Cam1

firthen said:


> Hello guys, i´m having trouble to get my Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 [email protected] XMP Profiles to work.
> 
> My system:
> 12700kf with 360AI (push+pull)
> Asus z690-A gaming wifi d4
> 2x16 Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 [email protected]
> 850W PSU
> 3090FE
> 
> Tried XMP1 and XMP2 Profiles. everything else were set to standard settings. Run memtest86, both profiles had no errors.
> While gaming there are pretty random crashes. Mostly i´m running discord, ts, youtube and a game, then everything freezes and pc restarts himself.
> There are days without a crash and then there are days where the pc crshes every 15 mins.
> 
> i´m on BIOS Version 2204. The crashes happend on the previous one as well. Had the crashes on the 1720 Version as well.
> The restarts occure with both profiles pretty random.
> 
> My goal is to run the system with AI OC and XMP on (manual RAM settings would be possible but i´m not experienced enough do set it by myself and would need a guide)
> 
> Is there something wrong with my RAM? Or is the Mainboard not good enough to run 4000 XMP stable?
> Maybe manual settings of RAM would work?
> 
> I´m open to any help.


i have a similar setup, need 1.4 VDDQ to boot with anything above 3600MHz for the ram XMP profiles, and can't get 4000 Stable, using 3900 with no issue.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Already tried 4400CL15 when I first got the chip, not stable at 1.35v SA.
> 
> 
> 
> The reason I lowered it because theres no extra stability at 1.35v or 1.37v at 4400CL15 or lower on other timings, so I reduced it at these settings instead.
> 
> Tried 1.4v SA 4400 15-20-20-40-700-100k, this time it completely bricked both OCCT and Steam lol. Not doing that again.


Oof, unfortunate. Probably awful scaling. 


JoeRambo said:


> Some tips in using yCruncher:
> 
> 1) VST seems the best in uncovering problems that reside in Uncore->IMC->DRAM area. It will just fail if uncore/IMC voltages are not enough to feed its memory access frenzy.
> 2) Worth doing longer runs of VST, like 600s minimum, as i had default runs complete and 600s fail mid test, probably some "heating" up is involved somewhere or it just needs time.
> 3) It is possible to save yCruncher config
> a) once it is set up to your liking, press 10, then dont enter anything and press "enter"
> b) to load it, press 9, press enter and voila, ready to accept "0" and run
> 
> so firing it up, pressing 1, 9, enter, 0
> 
> EDIT: for those of us who are completely lazy, it is possible to load saved config
> create run.cmd file and put this line:
> 
> y-cruncher.exe config .cfg
> 
> this will load and run that config saved in 3a step


Yep, this why I suggest N64/HNT/VST for at least 3-4 runs. 

VST alone isn't enough; the others sometimes trigger errors that VST doesnt. 


firthen said:


> Hello guys, i´m having trouble to get my Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 [email protected] XMP Profiles to work.
> 
> My system:
> 12700kf with 360AI (push+pull)
> Asus z690-A gaming wifi d4
> 2x16 Corsair Dominator Platinum DDR4 [email protected]
> 850W PSU
> 3090FE
> 
> Tried XMP1 and XMP2 Profiles. everything else were set to standard settings. Run memtest86, both profiles had no errors.
> While gaming there are pretty random crashes. Mostly i´m running discord, ts, youtube and a game, then everything freezes and pc restarts himself.
> There are days without a crash and then there are days where the pc crshes every 15 mins.
> 
> i´m on BIOS Version 2204. The crashes happend on the previous one as well. Had the crashes on the 1720 Version as well.
> The restarts occure with both profiles pretty random.
> 
> My goal is to run the system with AI OC and XMP on (manual RAM settings would be possible but i´m not experienced enough do set it by myself and would need a guide)
> 
> Is there something wrong with my RAM? Or is the Mainboard not good enough to run 4000 XMP stable?
> Maybe manual settings of RAM would work?
> 
> I´m open to any help.


What are the BSOD error codes?


Cam1 said:


> i have a similar setup, need 1.4 VDDQ to boot with anything above 3600MHz for the ram XMP profiles, and can't get 4000 Stable, using 3900 with no issue.


Yeah, same here for some reason. Except that I can't boot over 3,900 MHz at all, regardless of the voltages I throw at the chip. 

Awful board. Going back to the Edge.


----------



## imrevoau

So I forgot that I actually got rid of my SR B Die kit lmao. So I ordered another one to do some testing on, it's gonna probably be a few days before I get the RAM but I'm excited to test it.


----------



## Cam1

@firthen i was using 1.35 VDDQ but since the last bios (2204) the ram training gives me different value on tRTL, with 1.4v VDDQ it's start consistently at 69 on ever tRTL timings.
i suggest you set XMP "on" and lower the ram frequency manually to 3800 and set VDDQ at 1.4, you don't risk anything doing that.
If it's stable, you can increase the ram frequency to 3900-4000Hz later.

My thought is that you have random crash because every times you start your pc the Bios train the ram differently And VDDQ voltage has something to do with Ram timings training.
If you want to tune the ram for more performances, you can follow this guide i link just here. Or ask any question in this very helpful forum 
MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper · GitHub


----------



## imrevoau

So do people use XMP then adjust? I've been just setting everything manually without XMP


----------



## Cam1

imrevoau said:


> So do people use XMP then adjust? I've been just setting everything manually without XMP


i think XMP profile is just auto settings some stuff in the bios, doesn't make a difference for me if i set them manually or lets the XMP profile set them.
but XMP is not touching VDDQ, SA and Gear mode..
XMP is supposed to be nooby friendly, but, if the system is not stable, you have to come here on overclock dot net and become an advanced user


----------



## SyneWTD

PhoenixMDA said:


> It´s not faster as my other setting i must lose timings, but possible as 24/7....
> With the other Bios Version not possible only with Bios 2204
> 
> View attachment 2588095


What Ram cooling block/kit do you use?


----------



## PhoenixMDA

SyneWTD said:


> What Ram cooling block/kit do you use?


EK Monarch chrom and EK X4 Block.


----------



## bhav

Cam1 said:


> i think XMP profile is just auto settings some stuff in the bios, doesn't make a difference for me if i set them manually or lets the XMP profile set them.
> but XMP is not touching VDDQ, SA and Gear mode..
> XMP is supposed to be nooby friendly, but, if the system is not stable, you have to come here on overclock dot net and become an advanced user


I was wondering how many people would return my memory kit for being unable to run XMP.

It always was an option for me, but I tested how it OCed first and dayum. Not returning that until it dies.

Hmmmm, wonder if I could get Crucial to replace it still when I'm done with it.


----------



## firthen

Cam1 said:


> @firthen i was using 1.35 VDDQ but since the last bios (2204) the ram training gives me different value on tRTL, with 1.4v VDDQ it's start consistently at 69 on ever tRTL timings.
> i suggest you set XMP "on" and lower the ram frequency manually to 3800 and set VDDQ at 1.4, you don't risk anything doing that.
> If it's stable, you can increase the ram frequency to 3900-4000Hz later.
> 
> My thought is that you have random crash because every times you start your pc the Bios train the ram differently And VDDQ voltage has something to do with Ram timings training.
> If you want to tune the ram for more performances, you can follow this guide i link just here. Or ask any question in this very helpful forum
> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper · GitHub


Ty for the answer. Set everything manually like you said in its working with 1.4v. Hopefully its still gonna work with AI OC.


----------



## bhav

Bricked my whole PC while CPU overclocking yesterday, ram OC now stable again after reinstalling windows. Phew.


----------



## Raimond

With RAM overclocks,thats pretty normal,that you can have corrupted files ect,when its not stable
Also if you have problems with corruptedWindows,it really could be that ram is not stable.

Also with cpu overclock,your RAM overclock could become unstable.


----------



## bhav

Raimond said:


> With RAM overclocks,thats pretty normal,that you can have corrupted files ect,when its not stable
> Also if you have problems with corruptedWindows,it really could be that ram is not stable.
> 
> Also with cpu overclock,your RAM overclock could become unstable.


Yea its more so the case when OCing the e cores and cache.

Testing just my max P core OC with Ram OC now, and no longer going to run trefi above DDR4 spec (65535).

Just remember to backup user, desktop and document folders before OCing which I already had, its just annoying having to reinstall drivers and such and login to everything again.


----------



## GeneO

bhav said:


> Yea its more so the case when OCing the e cores and cache.
> 
> Testing just my max P core OC with Ram OC now, and no longer going to run trefi above DDR4 spec (65535).
> 
> Just remember to backup user, desktop and document folders before OCing which I already had, its just annoying having to reinstall drivers and such and login to everything again.


First it is not bricked if you can recover it. Bricked = unrecoverable.

If you properly setup an image backup, it can take around 5 minutes to backup, and less to recover. Done it hundreds of times.


----------



## massivex

Is there any app to change BCLK with precision through Windows on MSI boards? For the sake of testing some things out without having to reboot back to BIOS each time.

I've tried MSI Power Dragon (1.0.0.12) but it's a bit finicky when it comes to BCLK, it sort of does its own thing and rounds up in ~0.2 BCLK increments. Thanks.


----------



## Pk1

I can't seem to get c15 to post even on 4000 but so far I've gotten this to work. What needs improving, how can I get the first set of RTLs be the same, and any suggestions for getting c15 to post or should I just try higher frequency? 1.35v VDDQ 1.35v SA 1.5v DRAM 4x8gb B-die. Thanks.


----------



## ViTosS

@PhoenixMDA are you sure TM5 is not bugged with core/thread utilization when using Windows 10? I'm on Windows 10 and the stress test starts fine with all the 32 threads being used 100%, but after a while all the load on P-Cores drop to 0% and only the E-Cores are at 100%... It doesn't happen on Windows 11 btw.


----------



## ju-rek

ViTosS said:


> are you sure TM5 is not bugged with core/thread utilization when using Windows 10? I'm on Windows 10 and the stress test starts fine with all the 32 threads being used 100%, but after a while all the load on P-Cores drop to 0% and only the E-Cores are at 100%... It doesn't happen on Windows 11 btw.


I don't know how to solve it either.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> @PhoenixMDA are you sure TM5 is not bugged with core/thread utilization when using Windows 10? I'm on Windows 10 and the stress test starts fine with all the 32 threads being used 100%, but after a while all the load on P-Cores drop to 0% and only the E-Cores are at 100%... It doesn't happen on Windows 11 btw.





ju-rek said:


> I don't know how to solve it either.


Must use the Windows power plan hack to stop Windows from parking the P-cores.


----------



## imanoobie

Ichirou said:


> Must use the Windows power plan hack to stop Windows from parking the P-cores.


you mean just put it in ultimate performance mode from the cmd ? I have 13700kf and win10 and it does wierd **** lol but I don't want win11


----------



## Ichirou

imanoobie said:


> you mean just put it in ultimate performance mode from the cmd ? I have 13700kf and win10 and it does wierd **** lol but I don't want win11


That's one method, but there's also manual control.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> That's one method, but there's also manual control.


No it doesn't do anything, I was using ultimate performance mode when I tested


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> That's one method, but there's also manual control.


Please elaborate, when I asked you how to ''power plan hack'' you ignored me.


----------



## ViTosS

I think the problem with Windows 11 not using all cores is wrong reading from the Windows itself and also MSI AB, I mean, when I switched to 10 the FPS in SOTTR benchmark was the same of Windows 11, so if there was really a problem with thread usage in Windows 11 the FPS should be way lower, also another game I tested is Warzone 2.0, in Windows 10 all the 32 threads get usage, FPS was 235 with 99% GPU usage (95-98% actually) in a spot I marked to drop in the map, so I went again in Windows 11 to the same spot, a lot of cores at 0-1% usage, but the FPS was the same 235-240 but the GPU usage wasn't the same, it was 85-92%, I don't know the reason to GPU usage drop, but all that matters is that the FPS was exactly the same on the same spot I dropped in the map


----------



## imanoobie

ViTosS said:


> I think the problem with Windows 11 not using all cores is wrong reading from the Windows itself and also MSI AB, I mean, when I switched to 10 the FPS in SOTTR benchmark was the same of Windows 11, so if there was really a problem with thread usage in Windows 11 the FPS should be way lower, also another game I tested is Warzone 2.0, in Windows 10 all the 32 threads get usage, FPS was 235 with 99% GPU usage (95-98% actually) in a spot I marked to drop in the map, so I went again in Windows 11 to the same spot, a lot of cores at 0-1% usage, but the FPS was the same 235-240 but the GPU usage wasn't the same, it was 85-92%, I don't know the reason to GPU usage drop, but all that matters is that the FPS was exactly the same on the same spot I dropped in the map


what got you to those frames did you change any render worker or vid memory scale or was it the overclock on cpu or did you tune ram i would love to improve my wz2 frames


----------



## ViTosS

imanoobie said:


> what got you to those frames did you change any render worker or vid memory scale or was it the overclock on cpu or did you tune ram i would love to improve my wz2 frames


CPU is stock, RAM is 4200CL15-16-16-16 and tight subtimings, I could use 4300CL15 but too much SA and also I need to cool the DIMMs 45 or lower, which is impossible on air cooler and in the ambient temperature that I have. And that FPS was at 720p lowest settings possible, just to test how much FPS I could get, I play at 4k 120hz.


----------



## imanoobie

ViTosS said:


> CPU is stock, RAM is 4200CL15-16-16-16 and tight subtimings, I could use 4300CL15 but too much SA and also I need to cool the DIMMs 45 or lower, which is impossible on air cooler and in the ambient temperature that I have. And that FPS was at 720p lowest settings possible, just to test how much FPS I could get, I play at 4k 120hz.


i want to try overvlokving my ram for first time how to do i find the temp of my ram its not showing in hwinfo


----------



## PhoenixMDA

ViTosS said:


> @PhoenixMDA are you sure TM5 is not bugged with core/thread utilization when using Windows 10? I'm on Windows 10 and the stress test starts fine with all the 32 threads being used 100%, but after a while all the load on P-Cores drop to 0% and only the E-Cores are at 100%... It doesn't happen on Windows 11 btw.


You are right, with admin was only working by memtestpro.
The fastest way is disable the ecore's, if you want seperat test PCores, but if you are really unstable TM5 also do error on the ecores really fast.
Test also memtestpro or dangwang, thats important.
For 4300cl15 under Air with less Voltage and higher temp stable you need a quality like 4000c14bin.The chance to find such a Kit in a other bin is feels like zero.....

Easiest way is do the sticks under water....or use 4300c16 or 4200c15


----------



## kx11

Got gskill ddr5 8000mt sticks, anyone got a full table of a low latency values?? my mobo is Aorus z690 xtreme


----------



## 2500k_2




----------



## Ichirou

2500k_2 said:


> View attachment 2589672


Nice. But largely unnecessary.


----------



## rulik006

Does anyone seen G.skill *8850F*?
Which IC's under the hood. first time i see this rare code on G.skill
Nanya maybe


----------



## PhoenixMDA

@ViTosS
I have seen you have 2x8GB 4000C14Bin, you can do up to 1,6V for Daily that´s no Problem under fan.
If you wonder why my Bin can do 4300C15-15 with 1,55V Bios, 2 thing´s...first H2O cooled, second that´s are the 2 best Sticks from 2Kit´s(4 Sticks).
A friend has bought 3 or 4 Kit´s and testet his best can do the same like my 2 Sticks [email protected],55V.

But every 4000C14 Bin is like a gold Chip
.


----------



## bhav

rulik006 said:


> Does anyone seen G.skill *8850F*?
> Which IC's under the hood. first time i see this rare code on G.skill
> Nanya maybe
> View attachment 2589680


3200 16-18-18 and 3600 18-22-22 = any random IC. They are DDR4 EOL clear out kits that every manufacturer is putting out now to get rid of whatever they have left.

I suppose its rare for a g skill kit because normally they don't release trash kits like these.


----------



## HemuV2

For DDR 4 13900K what would you consider a golden imc?


----------



## bhav

HemuV2 said:


> For DDR 4 13900K what would you consider a golden imc?


4300 G1 stable = golden, 4400 G1 stable = diamond and very very rare.


----------



## HemuV2

bhav said:


> 4300 G1 stable = golden, 4400 G1 stable = diamond and very very rare.


Mine is booting 4300 unstable, 4200 perfectly stable. How do i squeeze max perf?


----------



## PhoenixMDA

HemuV2 said:


> For DDR 4 13900K what would you consider a golden imc?


I think up to 4500 can be possible with a really rare under 1%, 4400 is perhaps less 5-10%, 4300 perhaps 10-30%..


----------



## bhav

HemuV2 said:


> Mine is booting 4300 unstable, 4200 perfectly stable. How do i squeeze max perf?


Tune it to what it can run at 4200, maybe give 4266 a try as well.

My chip does the same but 100 mhz higher, 4400 unstable boot, 4300 stable.


----------



## bhav

PhoenixMDA said:


> I think up to 4500 can be possible with a really rare under 1%, 4400 is perhaps less 5-10%, 4300 perhaps 10-30%..


Even it might be, I don't think anyone has yet posted 4500 stable on 12th or 13th gen. There are 4500 / 4533 bootable, those are the ones that run 4400 stable.

It seems to be the case that 100 mhz above the stable frequency will also boot on these chips, but error very quickly.


----------



## HemuV2

@bhav @Ichirou this is what im running on 4200, any changes i can make to tighten them further?


----------



## bhav

I've still not bothered with tertiary timings but it looks like I'm going to have to start as my new board doesn't auto tune them as well as my last one did.

Primaries wise, 4200 15-15-15 for dual rank samsung B die is as good as DDR4 gets, no need to worry about not being able to get a higher frequency with that.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

bhav said:


> Tune it to what it can run at 4200, maybe give 4266 a try as well.
> 
> My chip does the same but 100 mhz higher, 4400 unstable boot, 4300 stable.


I had only 2 chips and can do up to 4400 with many voltage...4300 can do not less in HWL, most Chips do 4200, so i think 4500 is not unpossible in 1 of 100-1000 chip´s


----------



## Ichirou

@bhav








Also boots 4,400 CL16, which wasn't possible with my previous chip (max 4,400 CL17).
Not a significant difference, but just wanted to mention.

@Falkentyne
Stable in y-cruncher SFT (two loops) with stock multipliers & 3600 MHz XMP

ASUS Strix: 1.37V BIOS, LLC 4

HWiNFO:
1.137V - 1.154V min-max
1.139V average


MSI Edge: 1.19V BIOS, LLC 5, Lite Load 1

HWiNFO:
1.172V - 1.174V min-max
1.174V average


----------



## Ichirou

HemuV2 said:


> View attachment 2589689
> 
> View attachment 2589690
> 
> View attachment 2589691
> 
> View attachment 2589692
> 
> View attachment 2589688
> 
> @bhav @Ichirou this is what im running on 4200, any changes i can make to tighten them further?


Copy somebody else's settings lol


----------



## bhav

@Ichirou Jeez don't you know how to take a screenshot? :x

Also thats the MSI board right not the Asus?

If you can boot 4533 you should be able to get 4400CL15 stable?

Or I think I see, if that 4533 boot was on the edge of barely stable, a screenshot would bsod lol.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> @Ichirou Jeez don't you know how to take a screenshot? :x
> 
> Also thats the MSI board right not the Asus?
> 
> If you can boot 4533 you should be able to get 4400CL15 stable?
> 
> Or I think I see, if that 4533 boot was on the edge of barely stable, a screenshot would bsod lol.


Weird chip-to-chip variance right now.

This chip can boot higher and 4,400 MHz tighter (it won't do CL15 at that).
However, trying to run my 4,300 CL14 config at even -0.01V less will not pass N64 in y-cruncher.

Not really sure what's going on. For now, testing TM5 1usmus (six cycles) to make sure the RAM is fine for now.
Will figure out the VCCSA issue afterwards.


----------



## imrevoau

My single rank kit should be here in a few hours. Gonna do some testing on it and see if it performs better than DR.


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> My single rank kit should be here in a few hours. Gonna do some testing on it and see if it performs better than DR.


The DR will pull bigger synthetic numbers.


----------



## imrevoau

bhav said:


> The DR will pull bigger synthetic numbers.


I'm testing 4200 1T ATM. This kit doesn't boot any higher than my dual rank lol.


----------



## imrevoau

Managed 4200 1T @ flat 16's. RTL's are really good (69/71) but I think I need more voltage to go for flat 15s, but RAM is overheating


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> I'm testing 4200 1T ATM. This kit doesn't boot any higher than my dual rank lol.


Which kit / dies?


----------



## imrevoau

bhav said:


> Which kit / dies?


G-Skill Ripjaws 3600 C16-16-16-36 1.35v XMP


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> G-Skill Ripjaws 3600 C16-16-16-36 1.35v XMP


If they won't even run 3733CL13 or 4133CL14 return them, junk bins.


----------



## imrevoau

bhav said:


> If they won't even run 3733CL13 or 4133CL14 return them, junk bins.


It's nothing to do with the RAM my guy they're middle of the road bins from September 2021. They all clock similar enough. They just need more voltage. I'm only putting 1.54v into them for 4200 CR1


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> It's nothing to do with the RAM my guy they're middle of the road bins from September 2021. They all clock similar enough. They just need more voltage. I'm only putting 1.54v into them for 4200 CR1


Lame, 1.6v them NOW!

If you can't get the timings significantly lower than DR then there's literally no point to SR.


----------



## imrevoau

bhav said:


> Lame, 1.6v them NOW!
> 
> If you can't get the timings significantly lower than DR then there's literally no point to SR.


I'll be doing more tomorrow. I need to go to the shed and find my old corsair fan to strap to the dimms


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> I'll be doing more tomorrow. I need to go to the shed and find my old corsair fan to strap to the dimms


If you have a normal setup with GPU plugged in its slot, better to stand a 140mm fan on the GPU.


----------



## imrevoau

@Ichirou Are you using real 1T or just the regular 1T?


----------



## Pk1

imrevoau said:


> @Ichirou Are you using real 1T or just the regular 1T?


How significant is the performance difference between 2N and 1T for gaming?


----------



## imrevoau

Pk1 said:


> How significant is the performance difference between 2N and 1T for gaming?


eh, probably insignificant tbh. I will be testing it at some point though


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> eh, probably insignificant tbh. I will be testing it at some point though


I get mixed opinions, some people think it makes 300 mt worth of difference, others say no difference.

The only main thing it looks like thats currently relevant is how high you can get your IMC. Everything else is less significant than that for latency.


----------



## bhav

Theres that chaotic part of my brain telling me to reply to someone asking about overclocking their Adata 'Micron B die' that won't even do 1.5v 3600 to the same as mine ...

Thats the old pre e die micron b die, like 2666-3000 XMP ....

'Yea sure, stick it up to 1.72v too and go go' 👹

I want to see someone's PC go boom! ... I shall not though.


----------



## KedarWolf

https://www.evga.com/products/productlist.aspx?type=1&family=Motherboard+Family&chipset=Intel+Z790


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> @Ichirou Are you using real 1T or just the regular 1T?


Regular 1T. Real 1T needs more VDIMM and VCCSA and doesn't give me any actual benefit.


bhav said:


> I get mixed opinions, some people think it makes 300 mt worth of difference, others say no difference.
> 
> The only main thing it looks like thats currently relevant is how high you can get your IMC. Everything else is less significant than that for latency.


I've thoroughly tested the difference between 2T and 1T. It's about +200 MHz. Often requires more VDIMM.

I am currently testing how setting _much_ higher VDIMM interacts with VDDQ.
Last night, I was struggling to figure out why I kept on crashing in y-cruncher no matter what VDDQ it was that I set it to.
Setting VDDQ too high causes the board to overheat or something, throwing errors.
And setting VDDQ too low was causing low memory voltage errors or BSODs.

Today, after a good night's rest and some pondering, I decided to raise VDIMM significantly.
I can now lower VDDQ significantly as well. Strange balance. Will update.

*So far, with a tentative ~1.75V VDIMM, I can pass y-cruncher with only ~1.52V VDDQ.
Much lower than the 1.60V VDDQ I needed last night, with VDIMM at 1.72V.*


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> *So far, with a tentative ~1.75V VDIMM, I can pass y-cruncher with only ~1.52V VDDQ.
> Much lower than the 1.60V VDDQ I needed last night, with VDIMM at 1.72V.*


Ooof, so maybe more vdimm can help by offsetting the VDDQ, but in your case trying to run 4 modules at a setting that still takes 1.72v on 2 is just pushing the other voltage requirements higher.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Ooof, so maybe more vdimm can help by offsetting the VDDQ, but in your case trying to run 4 modules at a setting that still takes 1.72v on 2 is just pushing the other voltage requirements higher.


It seems that VDIMM and VDDQ kind of serve the same purpose, but they power different parts of the memory.
In the past, whenever I tried to boost VDIMM to lower VDDQ, I never gained any traction, but I guess I just didn't raise it high enough.
Going to keep testing, because I think VDDQ is finnicky. When the board heats up, or when there are errors, it demands more.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> It seems that VDIMM and VDDQ kind of serve the same purpose, but they power different parts of the memory.
> In the past, whenever I tried to boost VDIMM to lower VDDQ, I never gained any traction, but I guess I never raised it high enough.
> Going to keep testing, because I think VDDQ is finnicky.


I initially already tried 1.7v with my current settings at 1.4v vddq and it didnt work, but 1.72 / 1.3 does. 1.275v vddq wasn't enough


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I initially already tried 1.7v with my current settings at 1.4v vddq and it didnt work, but 1.72 / 1.3 does. 1.275v vddq wasn't enough


I'm still trying to understand the nature of how VDDQ interacts with everything.
It seems that when the board heats up, or when there are errors, things just go wrong with it.
Now, as I try to retest it (after attempting to test VDDQ at 1.50V and failing), it's no longer passing at 1.52V again.
Definitely something screwing around. Maybe it's training? I don't know. Never had such massive inconsistency before.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> I'm still trying to understand the nature of how VDDQ interacts with everything.
> It seems that when the board heats up, or when there are errors, things just go wrong with it.
> Now, as I try to retest it (after attempting to test VDDQ at 1.50V and failing), it's no longer passing at 1.52V again.
> Definitely something screwing around. Maybe it's training? I don't know. Never had such massive inconsistency before.


This is showing signs of another degraded IMC.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> This is showing signs of another degraded IMC.


If it "degraded", I would not be able to pass with 1.52V VDDQ today when it needed 1.60V last night.

*Update*: Reflashed BIOS and reran the same ~1.75V/~1.52V VDIMM/VDDQ config. Passing y-cruncher again.
VDDQ seems to be insanely sensitive when it is _not enough_ and corrupts the BIOS _very_ easily.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> If it "degraded", I would not be able to pass with 1.52V VDDQ today when it needed 1.60V last night.
> 
> *Update*: Reflashed BIOS and reran the same ~1.75V/~1.52V VDIMM/VDDQ config. Passing y-cruncher again.
> VDDQ seems to be insanely sensitive when it is _not enough_ and corrupts the BIOS _very_ easily.


For understanding VDDQ, theres this but its all written in microelectronics jargon:



https://www.onsemi.com/pdf/datasheet/cm3202-00-d.pdf



Now some crude and possibly inaccurate description I read is that it applies to whatever is going on at the edges of the ram modules. Possibly that with DDR5 having 2 channels on each dimm, they are more sensitive to VDDQ with different things happening on each channel, DDR4 only having 1 channel per dimm doesn't need VDDQ as much. 

Maybe in your case with trying such settings on 4 dimms, the VDDQ requirement shoots up to the same a 2 modules DDR5 as you have the same amount of channels in use?


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> For understanding VDDQ, theres this but its all written in microelectronics jargon:
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.onsemi.com/pdf/datasheet/cm3202-00-d.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Now some crude and possibly inaccurate description I read is that it applies to whatever is going on at the edges of the ram modules. Possibly that with DDR5 having 2 channels on each dimm, they are more sensitive to VDDQ with different things happening on each channel, DDR4 only having 1 channel per dimm doesn't need VDDQ as much.
> 
> Maybe in your case with trying such settings on 4 dimms, the VDDQ requirement shoots up to the same a 2 modules DDR5 as you have the same amount of channels in use?


I wouldn't know, dude. All of this is technical stuff that I'd never understand. All I know is based on empirical testing and findings.

What I've uncovered so far is that VDIMM and VDDQ are inversely proportional to some degree, and setting too low VDDQ corrupts the BIOS _insanely easily._


----------



## imrevoau

Someone tripped the power while I was testing this  but it passed 4 cycles so it's "probably" stable.Currently at 1.6VDIMM. Gonna try for for CL14-15 next. I've realised I can go up to around 1.65VDIMM before hitting temp limits with the fan blowing.


----------



## persizi




----------



## kx11

Tried 13900kf and the Gskill 8000mt stick didn't run as i expected, i think my z690 mobo couldn't handle them, highest i got with XMP profile 8000mhz enabled is 7600mhz


----------



## Ichirou

kx11 said:


> Tried 13900kf and the Gskill 8000mt stick didn't run as i expected, i think my z690 mobo couldn't handle them, highest i got with XMP profile 8000mhz enabled is 7600mhz
> 
> 
> View attachment 2590094


Only the Z790 Apex, Z790i Edge, and Z690/Z790 Kingpin supports 8,000+ MHz right now.


----------



## kx11

Ichirou said:


> Only the Z790 Apex, Z790i Edge, and Z690/Z790 Kingpin supports 8,000+ MHz right now.


I hope GB reads this and fix it


----------



## Ichirou

kx11 said:


> I hope GB reads this and fix it


I wouldn't get your hopes up. Gigabyte is consistently one of the worst companies right now.
Even if they did bother to support 8,000+ MHz, it would most likely be with a top-end Z790.


----------



## imanoobie

KyKo. said:


> Finally I found stability on 4000 CL15 OC
> with (VIPER STEEL 4400CL19) 4X8GB
> Thanks to* Bloax *suggestions again !!!
> only with the old 1.23 BETA BIOS who msi subscribe like Improved memory compatibility.
> I spent days to testing different bios with different voltaj on SA 1.3-1.4 VDDQ 1.2-1.47 DRAM 1,53-1.57V
> Finally I add up WITH SA 1.35V VDDQ1.45V DRAM 1.55V
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 2561900
> View attachment 2561901
> View attachment 2561902
> View attachment 2561903
> View attachment 2561904
> View attachment 2561905
> View attachment 2561907
> View attachment 2561908
> View attachment 2561909
> View attachment 2561910
> View attachment 2561911
> View attachment 2561912


trying this now on 13700kf and bdie 🤣


----------



## kx11

Alright it's the same sticks (gskill 8000mt) but with manual OC 7200mhz

how good??


----------



## Ichirou

kx11 said:


> Alright it's the same sticks (gskill 8000mt) but with manual OC 7200mhz
> 
> how good??
> 
> View attachment 2590102


Probably better than 7,600 MHz CL38.


----------



## kx11

Ichirou said:


> Probably better than 7,600 MHz CL38.


Passed TESTMEM5 best configs twice with no errors (admin mode)


----------



## Forsaken1

Until next gigabyte bios.7800+ takes a lot of voltage on ambient.Not worth it.7600 tight or 7000 cl30 are best in my case.
aida64 key “expired”………Contact if you have a spare key  .


----------



## Forsaken1

Ichirou said:


> I wouldn't get your hopes up. Gigabyte is consistently one of the worst companies right now.
> Even if they did bother to support 8,000+ MHz, it would most likely be with a top-end Z790.


Na, Serg says it coming.Just late to party Z790 priority.
Giga can do 8000+. but voltages omg.


----------



## firthen

Hello guys!
so, some weaks ago i started to get some random crashes on my strix z690-a gaming wifi d4 (Bios v. 2004) while gaming, youtube, discord, twitch on second screen, nothing fancy.
12700KF
2x16 Corsair Dominator [email protected]
3090FE
Win 10
Asus AI OC, XMP1 and some OC on the 3090 were enabled and were running stable.

So i updated bios to latest version (2204). Kept the settings, the crashed kept going, like every 20-30 mins. Blue screen with error.
I though that the overclock wasnt stable on this bios version. Set everything to default settings, only kept XMP1. The crashes still occur.
Tried setting memory frequence to 3600 or increasing voltage. Still crashes.
Turned off xmp and kept it stock at 2133Mhz. So even if everything is stock the pc keep crashing. I can see the crash coming cause
the charakters wont move (like they stuck at invisible wall) or the browser become unclickable and after 2-3 seconds blue screen happen and pc restarts.

Weird thing is that they wont happen when i run cinebench, 3dmark or heavenbenchmark. i´m also passing the memtest86 without errors.
The pc is crashing only during gaming, even when i just idle without load. Sometimes its crashes when i tab out and change the youtube video.

i also reinstalled the cpu (the pins were fine) and tried switching ram slots, still no difference.

My last try would be a clean reinstall but i would like to avoid it.
So is there a way to figure out what is going on? Is something physically broken? Or could it be the bios? Or even some weird software error? A dying m2?

I´m open for any advice!
Thanks in advance!

Edit: cinebench r23 runs fine, 3dMark crashes in TimeSpy


----------



## bscool

firthen said:


> Hello guys!
> so, some weaks ago i started to get some random crashes on my strix z690-a gaming wifi d4 (Bios v. 2004) while gaming, youtube, discord, twitch on second screen, nothing fancy.
> 12700KF
> 2x16 Corsair Dominator [email protected]
> 3090FE
> Win 10
> Asus AI OC, XMP1 and some OC on the 3090 were enabled and were running stable.
> 
> So i updated bios to latest version (2204). Kept the settings, the crashed kept going, like every 20-30 mins. Blue screen with error.
> I though that the overclock wasnt stable on this bios version. Set everything to default settings, only kept XMP1. The crashes still occur.
> Tried setting memory frequence to 3600 or increasing voltage. Still crashes.
> Turned off xmp and kept it stock at 2133Mhz. So even if everything is stock the pc keep crashing. I can see the crash coming cause
> the charakters wont move (like they stuck at invisible wall) or the browser become unclickable and after 2-3 seconds blue screen happen and pc restarts.
> 
> Weird thing is that they wont happen when i run cinebench, 3dmark or heavenbenchmark. i´m also passing the memtest86 without errors.
> The pc is crashing only during gaming, even when i just idle without load. Sometimes its crashes when i tab out and change the youtube video.
> 
> i also reinstalled the cpu (the pins were fine) and tried switching ram slots, still no difference.
> 
> My last try would be a clean reinstall but i would like to avoid it.
> So is there a way to figure out what is going on? Is something physically broken? Or could it be the bios? Or even some weird software error? A dying m2?
> 
> I´m open for any advice!
> Thanks in advance!


No idea really but I wouldnt think it is the bios as you had the isssue on 2 different bios and you even have the issue at defaults. Sounds like a hardware or software compatibility issue but to narrow it down will be fun.

Maybe try process of elimination like disconnect 2nd monitor and work your way down to eliminate things to find the problem item/software.

There is a new 2301 beta bios out but I doubt that will fix it 2301


----------



## Ichirou

firthen said:


> Hello guys!
> so, some weaks ago i started to get some random crashes on my strix z690-a gaming wifi d4 (Bios v. 2004) while gaming, youtube, discord, twitch on second screen, nothing fancy.
> 12700KF
> 2x16 Corsair Dominator [email protected]
> 3090FE
> Win 10
> Asus AI OC, XMP1 and some OC on the 3090 were enabled and were running stable.
> 
> So i updated bios to latest version (2204). Kept the settings, the crashed kept going, like every 20-30 mins. Blue screen with error.
> I though that the overclock wasnt stable on this bios version. Set everything to default settings, only kept XMP1. The crashes still occur.
> Tried setting memory frequence to 3600 or increasing voltage. Still crashes.
> Turned off xmp and kept it stock at 2133Mhz. So even if everything is stock the pc keep crashing. I can see the crash coming cause
> the charakters wont move (like they stuck at invisible wall) or the browser become unclickable and after 2-3 seconds blue screen happen and pc restarts.
> 
> Weird thing is that they wont happen when i run cinebench, 3dmark or heavenbenchmark. i´m also passing the memtest86 without errors.
> The pc is crashing only during gaming, even when i just idle without load. Sometimes its crashes when i tab out and change the youtube video.
> 
> i also reinstalled the cpu (the pins were fine) and tried switching ram slots, still no difference.
> 
> My last try would be a clean reinstall but i would like to avoid it.
> So is there a way to figure out what is going on? Is something physically broken? Or could it be the bios? Or even some weird software error? A dying m2?
> 
> I´m open for any advice!
> Thanks in advance!


It helps to actually provide the BSOD error codes.


----------



## firthen

Ichirou said:


> It helps to actually provide the BSOD error codes.


Since there is no display for the codes on my mb, is there i way to find them somewhere else?


----------



## Ichirou

firthen said:


> Since there is no display for the codes on my mb, is there i way to find them somewhere else?


Download and run BlueScreenView and WhoCrashed.


----------



## firthen

Ichirou said:


> Download and run BlueScreenView and WhoCrashed.


Downloaded both but they are showing just some older files.
I can reproduce the crashes now by simply running timespy and it crashed on graphics test. But this bluescreens wont show up in both programms.


----------



## imrevoau

Has anyone actually proven high VDDQ is safe long term? I’m running 1.55 right now and it just feels wrong, lol.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> Has anyone actually proven high VDDQ is safe long term? I’m running 1.55 right now and it just feels wrong, lol.


ASUS publicly stated that VDDQ can go as high as necessary.

In personal practice, too low/high = instability and/or boot failures and/or BIOS corruption.
Sweet spot effect similar to VCCIO back in the day, but try for as low as possible.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> ASUS publicly stated that VDDQ can go as high as necessary.
> 
> In personal practice, too low/high = instability and/or boot failures and/or BIOS corruption.
> Sweet spot effect similar to VCCIO back in the day, but try for as low as possible.


I haven't completely optimised it, yet. 1.5 was too low, so I just set 1.55 and it seemed to have fix it, not sure how low I can go.


----------



## bscool

firthen said:


> Downloaded both but they are showing just some older files.
> I can reproduce the crashes now by simply running timespy and it crashed on graphics test. But this bluescreens wont show up in both programms.


Have you tried running OCCT Power test which loads cpu and gpu at the same time? I had 3 Seasonic Titanium Prime(1 850 and 2 1000) PSUs that would crash even with no cpu or mem oc. You issue sounds different but worth running to see if it passes. You can use the portable version so no installer.

What is your PSU?

OCBASE/OCCT : Free, all-in-one stability, stress test, benchmark and monitoring tool for your PC


You didnt mention the ME Firmware, if you havent updated that do that also.

ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BIOS 2204
Version 2204
12.13 MB
"- Improved DRAM compatibility

Improved system compatibility and stability
Update Intel ME firmware
“*Before BIOS update, please download Intel ME update tool from ASUS support site, and update ME firmware to Version 16.1.25.2020 to ensure optimized system settings*.”



https://station-drivers.com/index.php/en-us/component/remository/func-download/5579/chk,426395eabbb35be932def728c2fdb831/no_html,1/lang,en-us/



Or From Asus ME Firmware but it doesnt wanrt to install for some people.



https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/03CHIPSET/MEUpdateTool_16.1.25.2020_T.zip



ME Driver https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/03CHIPSET/DRV_MEI_Intel_Cons_TP_W11_64_V2240340_20221208R.zip


----------



## imanoobie

can anyone tell me what I need to know about voltages and ram/cpu on 13thgen ...13700kf to be exact

what is SA voltage and why does my msi board change it to 1.3v to 1.480v depending on what lite load I select ?

what is vddq and do I need to change it from its default 1.2v ?

what lite load am I meant to be using ? or am I not meant to be using any if not what am I meant to be doing to my cpu ... default bios is lite load 9...I chose 1 after its all people do online temps are good at ll1 I see 72c r23 but get a cpu cache l0 errors in my hwinfo during r23 with lite load 1 ...can this be stable by a +0.010v offset ...

if I wanted to overclock my cpu would I still have to use a lite load 1 to 9


do I need to choose a load line calibration at the same time as lite load ..I see people choosing 1 to 4 on llc, my bios is on auto


when overclock ram let's say taking my 3600mhz 16-16-16-38 @1.35v and tuning it to 4000mhz 16-16-16-28 @1.45v tight timings

what does the SA voltage and vddq have to do with this for example I can get a 4000mhz c16 tune to boot and play games just fine....I get an error 35minutes into something like tm5 can this be fixed with an SA / vddq voltage adjustment or do they not matter and I must up the vdimm ? 


lots of questions I don't want to degrade my hardware or blow it up so I'm asking before I go further into this rabbit hole because I've been doing silly things like just copying values from similar set ups without even understanding the roles of the SA vddq vcore and their safe parameters


----------



## kx11




----------



## firthen

bscool said:


> Have you tried running OCCT Power test which loads cpu and gpu at the same time? I had 3 Seasonic Titanium Prime(1 850 and 2 1000) PSUs that would crash even with no cpu or mem oc. You issue sounds different but worth running to see if it passes. You can use the portable version so no installer.
> 
> What is your PSU?
> 
> OCBASE/OCCT : Free, all-in-one stability, stress test, benchmark and monitoring tool for your PC
> 
> 
> You didnt mention the ME Firmware, if you havent updated that do that also.
> 
> ROG STRIX Z690-A GAMING WIFI D4 BIOS 2204
> Version 2204
> 12.13 MB
> "- Improved DRAM compatibility
> 
> Improved system compatibility and stability
> Update Intel ME firmware
> “*Before BIOS update, please download Intel ME update tool from ASUS support site, and update ME firmware to Version 16.1.25.2020 to ensure optimized system settings*.”
> 
> 
> 
> https://station-drivers.com/index.php/en-us/component/remository/func-download/5579/chk,426395eabbb35be932def728c2fdb831/no_html,1/lang,en-us/
> 
> 
> 
> Or From Asus ME Firmware but it doesnt wanrt to install for some people.
> 
> 
> 
> https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/03CHIPSET/MEUpdateTool_16.1.25.2020_T.zip
> 
> 
> 
> ME Driver https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/mb/03CHIPSET/DRV_MEI_Intel_Cons_TP_W11_64_V2240340_20221208R.zip


Yes, i updated the Firmware also. 
Did every available Update. Will try out the OCCT Power Test now. I got the Rog Thor platinum 850W PSU.


----------



## imanoobie

default cpu auto lite load 9 13700kf, edge wifi ddr4, 2x16gb 4133mhz 16-16-16-39 gear 1 cr2 1.5vdimm 1.380sa 1.5v vddq
ram is stable with xmp timings passed tm5 extreme, what should i do next timings wise ?? is the above voltage okay


----------



## kx11

Just in case anyone wants to toy around with them


----------



## imanoobie

imanoobie said:


> default cpu auto lite load 9 13700kf, edge wifi ddr4, 2x16gb 4133mhz 16-16-16-39 gear 1 cr2 1.5vdimm 1.380sa 1.5v vddq
> ram is stable with xmp timings passed tm5 extreme, what should i do next timings wise ?? is the above voltage okay
> 
> also does mlc not work with raptor I get alot Higher latency than aida dunno what's right


----------



## Ichirou

@bhav @bscool
Discovering a strange peculiarity:
1) 4,300 MHz CL14 1T Gear 1 was fully stable in y-cruncher Main 10B + N/H/V at 1.25V VCCSA, 1.52V VDDQ, 1.73V VDIMM. Great.
2) I do some light load CPU overclocking, etc., fast forward a couple of hours. Never touched y-cruncher during this time.
3) I decide to retest y-cruncher with the same config in #1 with a BIOS reflash and profile reload. Cannot pass it.
4) Attempt to reflash the BIOS several times, reseat CPU, RAM, delid CPU, etc. Still cannot pass.
5) I test the exact same config, but with 4,200 MHz instead. Passes.
6) I try lowering the voltages to see how low they can go. Doesn't really budge, just errors out quickly. I dial back and retest #5 again. Fails.
7) I reflash BIOS and retry #5 again. Still cannot pass.

Based on what I've spoke to skullbringer a little about, it sounds like there's a possibility that my motherboard might be failing.
I've proceeded to order a new one just to test this theory out; it will arrive mid-next week.

*The theory I have is that VDDQ is used to power the memory slots.
If VDDQ is set too high, it'll gradually degrade those memory slots, eventually causing instability. Plus, the board being hot further exacerbates the issue.*
(I noticed that sometimes letting the board cool off for a while allows it to last a bit longer.)

I ran this board at 1.58-1.62V VDDQ for quite some time before (on my previous chips), so memory slot degradation may very well be the culprit.
Usually, I can simply reflash the BIOS and any sort of corruption would be cleared pretty easily, allowing me to pass y-cruncher again.
However, that trick is no longer working this time (at the same stable VDDQ setting), no matter how many times I try that.

If it is all true, then it may explain why I had to raise the VDDQ on a later BIOS on the *Z69*0 Edge back then just to run the exact same config.

I'll experiment on this board a bit more, as it does seem to "go further" in y-cruncher if I play around with raising VDDQ and reflashing the BIOS.
I still cannot get a clean pass in both Main 10B and N/H/V for the time being. I can pass one, but it would fail the second (either order). Most likely overheating.

If my theory is correct, then I would have some pretty dire news to tell everyone: 1.50V+ VDDQ is _not _safe to run.

1.52V VDDQ isn't particularly high, and that is what I was running throughout my light load overclocking. And yet, the VDDQ requirement shot up.
I think that running extremely high CPU overclocks (I was doing 61x all-core during #2) only made it worse, even if it was a low load.

*The VCCSA and VDIMM requirement has luckily not changed. It is only VDDQ.
My findings regarding an incorrect VDDQ being prone to corrupting the BIOS continues to be true so far.*


----------



## Pk1

Ichirou said:


> @bhav @bscool
> Discovering a strange peculiarity:
> 1) 4,300 MHz CL14 1T Gear 1 was fully stable in y-cruncher Main 10B + N/H/V at 1.25V VCCSA, 1.52V VDDQ, 1.73V VDIMM. Great.
> 2) I do some light load CPU overclocking, etc., fast forward a couple of hours. Never touched y-cruncher during this time.
> 3) I decide to retest y-cruncher with the same config in #1 with a BIOS reflash and profile reload. Cannot pass it.
> 4) Attempt to reflash the BIOS several times, reseat CPU, RAM, delid CPU, etc. Still cannot pass.
> 5) I test the exact same config, but with 4,200 MHz instead. Passes.
> 6) I try lowering the voltages to see how low they can go. Doesn't really budge, just errors out quickly. I dial back and retest #5 again. Fails.
> 7) I reflash BIOS and retry #5 again. Still cannot pass.
> 
> Based on what I've spoke to skullbringer a little about, it sounds like there's a possibility that my motherboard might be failing.
> I've proceeded to order a new one just to test this theory out; it will arrive mid-next week.
> 
> *The theory I have is that VDDQ is used to power the memory slots.
> If VDDQ is set too high, it'll gradually degrade those memory slots, eventually causing instability. Plus, the board being hot further exacerbates the issue.*
> (I noticed that sometimes letting the board cool off for a while allows it to last a bit longer.)
> 
> I ran this board at 1.58-1.62V VDDQ for quite some time before (on my previous chips), so memory slot degradation may very well be the culprit.
> Usually, I can simply reflash the BIOS and any sort of corruption would be cleared pretty easily, allowing me to pass y-cruncher again.
> However, that trick is no longer working this time (at the same stable VDDQ setting), no matter how many times I try that.
> 
> If it is all true, then it may explain why I had to raise the VDDQ on a later BIOS on the *Z69*0 Edge back then just to run the exact same config.
> 
> I'll experiment on this board a bit more, as it does seem to "go further" in y-cruncher if I play around with raising VDDQ and reflashing the BIOS.
> I still cannot get a clean pass in both Main 10B and N/H/V for the time being. I can pass one, but it would fail the second (either order). Most likely overheating.
> 
> If my theory is correct, then I would have some pretty dire news to tell everyone: 1.50V+ VDDQ is _not _safe to run.
> 
> 1.52V VDDQ isn't particularly high, and that is what I was running throughout my light load overclocking. And yet, the VDDQ requirement shot up.
> I think that running extremely high CPU overclocks (I was doing 61x all-core during #2) only made it worse, even if it was a low load.
> 
> *The VCCSA and VDIMM requirement has luckily not changed. It is only VDDQ.
> My findings regarding an incorrect VDDQ being prone to corrupting the BIOS continues to be true so far.*


Does enabling VDDQ Training in MSI Bios help at all? I haven't attempted Y-cruncher but I can pass TM5 anta777 Extreme 4133c16 with 1.3sa 1.35vddq 1.5dram . I'm attempting 4133c15 at the same settings but with 1.55v dram. 4x8gb bdie.


----------



## Ichirou

Pk1 said:


> Does enabling VDDQ Training in MSI Bios help at all? I haven't attempted Y-cruncher but I can pass TM5 anta777 Extreme 4133c16 with 1.3sa 1.35vddq 1.5dram . I'm attempting 4133c15 at the same settings but with 1.55v dram. 4x8gb bdie.


Not sure, but I'll give it a test drive.
TM5 doesn't really test the IMC. I can pass TM5 however many times I wish. That's not the issue here.

*Update*: Tried it out. It trains VDDQ to some super low value that's unstable when VDDQ is left on Auto.
However, setting your own VDDQ seems to show some promise. Will keep you posted.

*Update 2*: Wow, after a good hour of testing, I managed to stabilize the PC with VDDQ Training enabled. And at a lower VDDQ as well.
So it does in fact help with VDDQ stability. I wonder why it isn't enabled by default? Thanks for the suggestion, it solved the issue.

I suppose this throws my whole VDDQ degradation theory earlier into the trash then. *The actual problem: the board wasn't properly training VDDQ.*


----------



## imanoobie

Ichirou said:


> @bhav @bscool
> Discovering a strange peculiarity:
> 1) 4,300 MHz CL14 1T Gear 1 was fully stable in y-cruncher Main 10B + N/H/V at 1.25V VCCSA, 1.52V VDDQ, 1.73V VDIMM. Great.
> 2) I do some light load CPU overclocking, etc., fast forward a couple of hours. Never touched y-cruncher during this time.
> 3) I decide to retest y-cruncher with the same config in #1 with a BIOS reflash and profile reload. Cannot pass it.
> 4) Attempt to reflash the BIOS several times, reseat CPU, RAM, delid CPU, etc. Still cannot pass.
> 5) I test the exact same config, but with 4,200 MHz instead. Passes.
> 6) I try lowering the voltages to see how low they can go. Doesn't really budge, just errors out quickly. I dial back and retest #5 again. Fails.
> 7) I reflash BIOS and retry #5 again. Still cannot pass.
> 
> Based on what I've spoke to skullbringer a little about, it sounds like there's a possibility that my motherboard might be failing.
> I've proceeded to order a new one just to test this theory out; it will arrive mid-next week.
> 
> *The theory I have is that VDDQ is used to power the memory slots.
> If VDDQ is set too high, it'll gradually degrade those memory slots, eventually causing instability. Plus, the board being hot further exacerbates the issue.*
> (I noticed that sometimes letting the board cool off for a while allows it to last a bit longer.)
> 
> I ran this board at 1.58-1.62V VDDQ for quite some time before (on my previous chips), so memory slot degradation may very well be the culprit.
> Usually, I can simply reflash the BIOS and any sort of corruption would be cleared pretty easily, allowing me to pass y-cruncher again.
> However, that trick is no longer working this time (at the same stable VDDQ setting), no matter how many times I try that.
> 
> If it is all true, then it may explain why I had to raise the VDDQ on a later BIOS on the *Z69*0 Edge back then just to run the exact same config.
> 
> I'll experiment on this board a bit more, as it does seem to "go further" in y-cruncher if I play around with raising VDDQ and reflashing the BIOS.
> I still cannot get a clean pass in both Main 10B and N/H/V for the time being. I can pass one, but it would fail the second (either order). Most likely overheating.
> 
> If my theory is correct, then I would have some pretty dire news to tell everyone: 1.50V+ VDDQ is _not _safe to run.
> 
> 1.52V VDDQ isn't particularly high, and that is what I was running throughout my light load overclocking. And yet, the VDDQ requirement shot up.
> I think that running extremely high CPU overclocks (I was doing 61x all-core during #2) only made it worse, even if it was a low load.
> 
> *The VCCSA and VDIMM requirement has luckily not changed. It is only VDDQ.
> My findings regarding an incorrect VDDQ being prone to corrupting the BIOS continues to be true so far.*


Well there goes my first stable overclock 😂 1.5vddq


----------



## imanoobie

half xmp half mine lol 3600mhz 16-16-16-38 at 4133mhz cr2 gear 1 , @1.5v sa,1.410v vddq 1.5v
yes too much for my liking too but its what was needed could go 4200 maybe ?


----------



## Ichirou

imanoobie said:


> half xmp half mine lol 3600mhz 16-16-16-38 at 4133mhz cr2 gear 1 , @1.5v sa,1.410v vddq 1.5v
> yes too much for my liking too but its what was needed could go 4200 maybe ?
> 
> 
> View attachment 2590385


You shouldn't go past 1.35V VCCSA and 1.50V VDDQ.


----------



## bhav

I've been messing around so much trying to get that 75k bandwidth back in G2, that I think its time to just get the second rig redone and plonk the ram back in it to get a read on the Asrock 4800 timings.

Aaaaahhhhhh crap, cant set the second PC up, forgot I need new LGA 1700 mounting kit for my H115i cooler. I just spent a while dismantling before realizing.

Ticket sent.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ichirou said:


> @bhav @bscool
> Discovering a strange peculiarity:
> 1) 4,300 MHz CL14 1T Gear 1 was fully stable in y-cruncher Main 10B + N/H/V at 1.25V VCCSA, 1.52V VDDQ, 1.73V VDIMM. Great.
> 2) I do some light load CPU overclocking, etc., fast forward a couple of hours. Never touched y-cruncher during this time.
> 3) I decide to retest y-cruncher with the same config in #1 with a BIOS reflash and profile reload. Cannot pass it.
> 4) Attempt to reflash the BIOS several times, reseat CPU, RAM, delid CPU, etc. Still cannot pass.
> 5) I test the exact same config, but with 4,200 MHz instead. Passes.
> 6) I try lowering the voltages to see how low they can go. Doesn't really budge, just errors out quickly. I dial back and retest #5 again. Fails.
> 7) I reflash BIOS and retry #5 again. Still cannot pass.
> 
> Based on what I've spoke to skullbringer a little about, it sounds like there's a possibility that my motherboard might be failing.
> I've proceeded to order a new one just to test this theory out; it will arrive mid-next week.
> 
> *The theory I have is that VDDQ is used to power the memory slots.
> If VDDQ is set too high, it'll gradually degrade those memory slots, eventually causing instability. Plus, the board being hot further exacerbates the issue.*
> (I noticed that sometimes letting the board cool off for a while allows it to last a bit longer.)
> 
> I ran this board at 1.58-1.62V VDDQ for quite some time before (on my previous chips), so memory slot degradation may very well be the culprit.
> Usually, I can simply reflash the BIOS and any sort of corruption would be cleared pretty easily, allowing me to pass y-cruncher again.
> However, that trick is no longer working this time (at the same stable VDDQ setting), no matter how many times I try that.
> 
> If it is all true, then it may explain why I had to raise the VDDQ on a later BIOS on the *Z69*0 Edge back then just to run the exact same config.
> 
> I'll experiment on this board a bit more, as it does seem to "go further" in y-cruncher if I play around with raising VDDQ and reflashing the BIOS.
> I still cannot get a clean pass in both Main 10B and N/H/V for the time being. I can pass one, but it would fail the second (either order). Most likely overheating.
> 
> If my theory is correct, then I would have some pretty dire news to tell everyone: 1.50V+ VDDQ is _not _safe to run.
> 
> 1.52V VDDQ isn't particularly high, and that is what I was running throughout my light load overclocking. And yet, the VDDQ requirement shot up.
> I think that running extremely high CPU overclocks (I was doing 61x all-core during #2) only made it worse, even if it was a low load.
> 
> *The VCCSA and VDIMM requirement has luckily not changed. It is only VDDQ.
> My findings regarding an incorrect VDDQ being prone to corrupting the BIOS continues to be true so far.*


The most problem are the springs of the Socket.
You can only see it when you turn the board in the light, due to the different reflections of the spring contacts, if you have " luck".
The other is buggy bios...

If i do too much CPU's RAM in and out, i change the board after that and take a new one.
Only to be sure that it is really the max. possible.
Z390Hero was with the third board 4x8gb 4400gb stable possible and 4x8gb 4500 memtest etc.


----------



## Ichirou

PhoenixMDA said:


> The most problem are the springs of the Socket.
> You can only see it when you turn the board in the light, due to the different reflections of the spring contacts, if you have " luck".
> The other is buggy bios...
> 
> If i do too much CPU's RAM in and out, i change the board after that and take a new one.
> Only to be sure that it is really the max. possible.
> Z390Hero was with the third board 4x8gb 4400gb stable possible and 4x8gb 4500 memtest etc.


Yeah, I’m noticing that the issue could be both physically the board itself, as well as training. 

After @Pk1 suggested testing out VDDQ Training, I managed to restabilize and actually reduce VDDQ further. Tried it for many runs and they were all clean. 

However, upon trying to reduce some voltages even further (as an experiment; they weren’t necessarily stable), I corrupted the BIOS again, and ultimately reached a point where reflashing doesn’t help.

So I have currently powered off the PSU for the night to let the RAM completely flush and the board to cool off for another test drive today.


----------



## YoungChris

What's the highest anyone has gotten Gear 1 on ambient yet? I don't think I've seen anyone hitting above 4400mhz even for just benchable yet but surely it's possible


----------



## Ichirou

YoungChris said:


> What's the highest anyone has gotten Gear 1 on ambient yet? I don't think I've seen anyone hitting above 4400mhz even for just benchable yet but surely it's possible


DDR4 Gear 1? 4,400 MHz CL15 stable with 2x16 GB Samsung B-die DR.
4,533 MHz should hypothetically be possible with 2x8 GB Samsung B-die SR and the right board and voltages. But nobody really runs 2x8 GB anymore.
And yes, that's with air cooling. Though water is strongly recommended.


----------



## Ichirou

*Update*: Even after letting the PC sit for a night with the PSU powered off to flush the RAM, reflashing the BIOS, and resetting CMOS, etc., I can't pass y-cruncher again.
There's definitely some motherboard f*ckery going on here. Going to keep playing around with the voltages a bit more to see if I can pinpoint where the issue lies.

I temporarily cancelled my reorder of the Z790 Edge on Amazon, but if this inconsistency persists, I may have to proceed with testing out a fresh board.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ichirou said:


> Yeah, I’m noticing that the issue could be both physically the board itself, as well as training.
> 
> After @Pk1 suggested testing out VDDQ Training, I managed to restabilize and actually reduce VDDQ further. Tried it for many runs and they were all clean.
> 
> However, upon trying to reduce some voltages even further (as an experiment; they weren’t necessarily stable), I corrupted the BIOS again, and ultimately reached a point where reflashing doesn’t help.
> 
> So I have currently powered off the PSU for the night to let the RAM completely flush and the board to cool off for another test drive today.


It can be that you can go with a bestcase board more stable, if it not the bios.
I have read your last post, my recommendation change the board.take a new👈 one.... 


@YoungChris
At this moment with B-Die and Micron 4400 is the max. stable border, if you have a good imc with good mem.


----------



## Ichirou

PhoenixMDA said:


> It can be that you can go with a bestcase board more stable, if it not the bios.
> I have read your last post, my recommendation change the board.take a new👈 one....
> 
> 
> @YoungChris
> At this moment with B-Die and Micron 4400 is the max. stable border, if you have a good imc with good mem.


Yeah, I'm just doing some final tests with this board before giving up and grabbing a new one.
It definitely feels like something is wrong with the board.


----------



## Pk1

@Ichirou what tests should I run in Y-cruncher? I've never used it before. My 4133c15 passed TM5 and several hours of the 8 yr old daughter test which is definitely pretty tough. Lol.


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

Hi all. I'm receiving 13700k and z790 msi-a pro ddr4 next week.

Ram I'm planning to use is 4x F4-4400C16D-16GTRS. I already have 1 pair. I decided 4x8 because the board is daisy chain. If it doesn't work out I can use my F4-4400C17D-32GTRS instead.

The c17 kit is currently with my 10600k mpg z490 and runs at 4133mhz with tuned timings everywhere. So I know the limits of my current imc (weak).

With 13th gen I need to learn about the following:


gear 1 / gear 2
vddq
One thing I want to do when I get the board is use the c17 kit to test what memory frequencies I can boot at gear 1 / 2. I'll just need ddr and vccio / sa voltages adjusted for this right? Anything I need to know specific about z790?

Anything else I need to know and any advice?

Thanks


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

Ichirou said:


> *Update*: Even after letting the PC sit for a night with the PSU powered off to flush the RAM, reflashing the BIOS, and resetting CMOS, etc., I can't pass y-cruncher again.
> There's definitely some motherboard f*ckery going on here. Going to keep playing around with the voltages a bit more to see if I can pinpoint where the issue lies.
> 
> I temporarily cancelled my reorder of the Z790 Edge on Amazon, but if this inconsistency persists, I may have to proceed with testing out a fresh board.


How long does 64gb of ddr4 take to stress test?

I got quite bored at how long 32gb takes when I upgraded from 16gb.


----------



## Ichirou

Pk1 said:


> @Ichirou what tests should I run in Y-cruncher? I've never used it before. My 4133c15 passed TM5 and several hours of the 8 yr old daughter test which is definitely pretty tough. Lol.


N64, HNT, and VST in y-cruncher's Component Stress Test (one loop is enough), plus a full run of y-cruncher's Main test (as much memory populated as possible).


Pro4TLZZ said:


> Hi all. I'm receiving 13700k and z790 msi-a pro ddr4 next week.
> 
> Ram I'm planning to use is 4x F4-4400C16D-16GTRS. I already have 1 pair. I decided 4x8 because the board is daisy chain. If it doesn't work out I can use my F4-4400C17D-32GTRS instead.
> 
> The c17 kit is currently with my 10600k mpg z490 and runs at 4133mhz with tuned timings everywhere. So I know the limits of my current imc (weak).
> 
> With 13th gen I need to learn about the following:
> 
> 
> gear 1 / gear 2
> vddq
> One thing I want to do when I get the board is use the c17 kit to test what memory frequencies I can boot at gear 1 / 2. I'll just need ddr and vccio / sa voltages adjusted for this right? Anything I need to know specific about z790?
> 
> Anything else I need to know and any advice?
> 
> Thanks


Start at 4,000 MHz and work your way up, since you need to know the limits of your CPU's IMC.
Start with 1.35V VCCSA and 1.40V VDDQ. That should be good enough at the start.


Pro4TLZZ said:


> How long does 64gb of ddr4 take to stress test?
> 
> I got quite bored at how long 32gb takes when I upgraded from 16gb.


In TM5? Like, a bit over 80 minutes for 1usmus six cycles. And four hours for anta777 ABSOLUT default.
In y-cruncher, that's around 15 minutes.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> DDR4 Gear 1? 4,400 MHz CL15 stable with 2x16 GB Samsung B-die DR.
> 4,533 MHz should hypothetically be possible with 2x8 GB Samsung B-die SR and the right board and voltages. But nobody really runs 2x8 GB anymore.
> And yes, that's with air cooling. Though water is strongly recommended.


Not 100% true, I have 2x8GB and the absolute max I can get is 4300CL15, also impossible to cool with air cooling, I had to keep the side glass panel open with a fan blasting at 100% speed to keep them below 44c, otherwise they would error in TM5. But keep in mind I live in a country where 30-35c ambient is common.


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> Not 100% true, I have 2x8GB and the absolute max I can get is 4300CL15, also impossible to cool with air cooling, I had to keep the side glass panel open with a fan blasting at 100% speed to keep them below 44c, otherwise they would error in TM5. But keep in mind I live in a country where 30-35c ambient is common.


You need to add dedicated fans. Not just case fans. And certain heatspreaders will fare better than others. Plus, ambient temperatures.


----------



## imrevoau

@Ichirou so I was actually running 2x8 as an experiment, it passed everything. Y-Cruncher with all tests, testmem5 absolute 6 runs, but after a day or 2, the RAM started playing up. My browser would crash randomly, then Discord started freezing at random times. Swapped back in my 32 gig kit and all issues were gone. I really wonder what the problem was since I didn't get any errors.


----------



## bhav

So look at this DDR4 vs DDR5 impact in Time Spy:










Lets see what ram higher CPU scores than mine have I'm guessing all Samsung B die, I'm only 14th place for 13600KF CPU score for all GPUs.

Ah, 7800-8400 Hynix rams beated me 

Next CPU score up from mine is 7200 hynix, but not by a lot.


----------



## Ichirou

*Update: *Spent a good few hours trying to diagnose the issue, but have not managed to reach any semblance of stability. Tried pretty much everything.
After I tried to run the system with -0.01V less Vcore (compared to my previous stable) in y-cruncher, it just crash and burned and could never stabilize since.
I'm going to wait for the new motherboard to arrive next Wednesday and then retest then. Not wasting any more time for now.


----------



## imanoobie

Ichirou said:


> You shouldn't go past 1.35V VCCSA and 1.50V VDDQ.


what does having SA higher than 1.35v do im currently running 1.39v and why isit bad ??


----------



## bhav

imanoobie said:


> what does having SA higher than 1.35v do im currently running 1.39v and why isit bad ??


Several cases of IMC degradation at 1.4v SA on 13th gen.


----------



## imanoobie

bhav said:


> Several cases of IMC degradation at 1.4v SA on 13th gen.


imc degradation over like what 1 year 2 years ?


----------



## bhav

imanoobie said:


> imc degradation over like what 1 year 2 years ?


Instant loss of ram OC stability, like in 5-10 mins of Y cruncher.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> You need to add dedicated fans. Not just case fans. And certain heatspreaders will fare better than others. Plus, ambient temperatures.


I had a dedicated fan on the side without side glass panel and the gpu temps not influacing RAM temps this way, but soon as I close it and go game it was impossible to keep RAM below 45c, gpu heating the case inside and the fan blowing internal hot air.


----------



## bhav

ViTosS said:


> I had a dedicated fan on the side without side glass panel and the gpu temps not influacing RAM temps this way, but soon as I close it and go game it was impossible to keep RAM below 45c, gpu heating the case inside and the fan blowing internal hot air.


Open frame so nice for this, I can keep my ram under 45c.

So for my 3d mark attempts, I had to keep the cabinet doors open for lowest temps, pushed high GPU OCs at 57c.

As soon as I closed the doors, unstable at 66c 

I got 3rd place for my CPU & GPU in Time Spy regular, missing second place by 3 points. All my attempts to get second place crashed.

If only I could get 45c GPU with +300 OC too 

Kind of offtopic, but my ram inflates the CPU score by a lot.


----------



## imanoobie

imanoobie said:


> imc degradation over like what 1 year 2 years ?


13ths gen hasnt been out long so


bhav said:


> Instant loss of ram OC stability, like in 5-10 mins of Y cruncher.


oh wow been doing it for days at 1.39v sa on like tm5extreme1 will lower it and see if 1.35vsa works for my ram oc


----------



## bhav

imanoobie said:


> 13ths gen hasnt been out long so
> 
> oh wow been doing it for days at 1.39v sa on like tm5extreme1 will lower it and see if 1.35vsa works for my ram oc


I found on my ram, trcd / trp hugely increase the amount of SA needed, you might want to see if raising them by 1 cuts the SA requirement down by a lot.


----------



## Cam1

ViTosS said:


> I had a dedicated fan on the side without side glass panel and the gpu temps not influacing RAM temps this way, but soon as I close it and go game it was impossible to keep RAM below 45c, gpu heating the case inside and the fan blowing internal hot air.


Same here with my 350W gpu, everything is getting +10 to +20C 🤣


----------



## imanoobie

bhav said:


> I found on my ram, trcd / trp hugely increase the amount of SA needed, you might want to see if raising them by 1 cuts the SA requirement down by a lot.


 my trcd and trp are both 16 as im running 4133 16-16-16-38....default xmp was 16-16-16-39

i will lower my SA towards 1.35v untill im not stable and try to work form there am i safe to keep vddq at 1.5v while i do this


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Ichirou said:


> *Update: *Spent a good few hours trying to diagnose the issue, but have not managed to reach any semblance of stability. Tried pretty much everything.
> After I tried to run the system with -0.01V less Vcore (compared to my previous stable) in y-cruncher, it just crash and burned and could never stabilize since.
> I'm going to wait for the new motherboard to arrive next Wednesday and then retest then. Not wasting any more time for now.


Don’t be surprised if the new one isn’t much better. I find this board worse than my z490 tomahawk. Just seems …unstable and I’ve been wondering if it’s a bios thing:
-training takes a lot longer 
-booting is slow and weird
-power issues seem weird

The bios got more options but I feel like they bog it down or cause problems. I’m sure I’m passed my return time and don’t want the hassle of it….knowing what I know now, I probably wouldn’t have even bothered to upgrade …but the 13900k is a beast…so it’s not all bad. Should have saved myself $150+ and went with the pro or tomahawk.


----------



## Ichirou

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Don’t be surprised if the new one isn’t much better. I find this board worse than my z490 tomahawk. Just seems …unstable and I’ve been wondering if it’s a bios thing:
> -training takes a lot longer
> -booting is slow and weird
> -power issues seem weird
> 
> The bios got more options but I feel like they bog it down or cause problems. I’m sure I’m passed my return time and don’t want the hassle of it….knowing what I know now, I probably wouldn’t have even bothered to upgrade …but the 13900k is a beast…so it’s not all bad. Should have saved myself $150+ and went with the pro or tomahawk.


I can't say that I've particularly experienced those issues except during extreme overclocks (to which is my own fault, not MSI's).

The only issue now is that I've reached a point where I can't gain any semblance of stability no matter what voltages it is that I use.
Which leads me to believe that I may have permanently damaged the board itself. Worn out the memory traces or slots or something.

A fresh board will serve to prove/disprove this hypothesis though. I'll know by next Wednesday.
I've already got my stable profile saved, so it's just a matter of loading it up and retesting. If all is fine, it should pass the very first try.
If it should fail, then I can simply return it to Amazon, since I'm still within its return period. Nothing lost except time and effort.


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

ViTosS said:


> I had a dedicated fan on the side without side glass panel and the gpu temps not influacing RAM temps this way, but soon as I close it and go game it was impossible to keep RAM below 45c, gpu heating the case inside and the fan blowing internal hot air.


Watercool the gpu.

My 3080 is on the hybrid and the fans blow air out of the case


----------



## PhoenixMDA

bhav said:


> So look at this DDR4 vs DDR5 impact in Time Spy:
> 
> View attachment 2590499
> 
> 
> Lets see what ram higher CPU scores than mine have I'm guessing all Samsung B die, I'm only 14th place for 13600KF CPU score for all GPUs.
> 
> Ah, 7800-8400 Hynix rams beated me
> 
> Next CPU score up from mine is 7200 hynix, but not by a lot.


If both test with Win10 you have no chance with DDR4, TimeSpy CPU Score scale with bandwith.
With DDR5 you are able to hit 30K CPU Score in TimespyThat are 2-3k more as with DDR4 is possible.


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

PhoenixMDA said:


> If both test with Win10 you have no chance with DDR4, TimeSpy CPU Score scale with bandwith.
> With DDR5 you are able to hit 30K CPU Score in TimespyThat are 2-3k more as with DDR4 is possible.


I can't wait till a die gets cheaper. Looking forward to arrow lake and ddr5


----------



## tweety6207

Hi there.
What do you think of my settings? Are they consistent? thank you. 
corsair dominator rgb
default 3200mhz.
vccsa 1.10 
vddq default


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Pro4TLZZ said:


> I can't wait till a die gets cheaper. Looking forward to arrow lake and ddr5


I´m waiting for the Raptor Lake Refresh perhaps over DDR4 4400 is possible, a little bit more clock or cache,
if DDR5 over 10000 then perhaps, but at this moment it bring me nothing.
The price/performance and stability is awesome with DDR 4, i have with [email protected] UV 385FPS avg in SoT and also in all over games the performance
is so high that it´s not easy to reach that with DDR5.
And with OC it´s not really higher as UV


----------



## bhav

PhoenixMDA said:


> If both test with Win10 you have no chance with DDR4, TimeSpy CPU Score scale with bandwith.
> With DDR5 you are able to hit 30K CPU Score in TimespyThat are 2-3k more as with DDR4 is possible.


Im using Win 11, the results around the same as mine are either 4200+ Samsung DDR4 or 7200 Hynix.

7800-8400 is between 300-400 points higher, not 3-4k.

Highest CPU score with 8400 ram is 400 points higher.

Also I'm running extreme not standard, only managed third place in standard where CPU score variance does seem a lot higher, but still its nowhere near 2-3k.


----------



## Krzych04650

PhoenixMDA said:


> I´m waiting for the Raptor Lake Refresh perhaps over DDR4 4400 is possible, a little bit more clock or cache,
> if DDR5 over 10000 then perhaps, but at this moment it bring me nothing.
> The price/performance and stability is awesome with DDR 4, i have with [email protected] UV 385FPS avg in SoT and also in all over games the performance
> is so high that it´s not easy to reach that with DDR5.
> And with OC it´s not really higher as UV
> 
> View attachment 2590519


401 is a really high score for DDR4, I cannot really break 400 mark, best I ever did was 396.

And yeah, game doesn't respond much to core OC, it is entirely memory bound at this point. One of the few games where DDR5 has slight edge, I've seen some scores close to 410.


----------



## yzonker

bhav said:


> Im using Win 11, the results around the same as mine are either 4200+ Samsung DDR4 or 7200 Hynix.
> 
> 7800-8400 is between 300-400 points higher, not 3-4k.
> 
> Highest CPU score with 8400 ram is 400 points higher.
> 
> Also I'm running extreme not standard, only managed third place in standard where CPU score variance does seem a lot higher, but still its nowhere near 2-3k.


That gap gets larger with the 13900k I think.


----------



## bhav

yzonker said:


> That gap gets larger with the 13900k I think.


And I'm still feeling insane enough to try get second place for my CPU & GPU in standard timespy, I was only 3 points off and then GPU instability kicked in.

If I get like an industrial fan and point it at the graphics card I'd win, but right now I can get it to 57c with the maximum limits available on the FE with open frame and 'open desk' (I.E open cupboard doors).

I'm still super impressed with these cupboard temps though, in closed case at 100% GPU fan, I could only run stock GPU at 85.

After open frame, 81c stock and OC with stock fan profile as it ramps up a bit with the overclock. With 100% fan around 65c at max overclock in closed cupboard, under 60c when opened.

As well as the ram only running at 33c TM5, and under 45c OCCT with 1.72v.

I tried setting the Ram tertiary timings lower, but anything more I try anywhere now fails TM5, this seems to be the best I can get:










Only reason I tried out Timespy anyway is because people advised it scales with ram, then when I saw my stock score and the top score for my CPU and GPU, the insanity kicked in again and now I have to beat all the scores!


----------



## yzonker

bhav said:


> And I'm still feeling insane enough to try get second place for my CPU & GPU in standard timespy, I was only 3 points off and then GPU instability kicked in.
> 
> If I get like an industrial fan and point it at the graphics card I'd win, but right now I can get it to 57c with the maximum limits available on the FE with open frame and 'open desk' (I.E open cupboard doors).
> 
> I'm still super impressed with these cupboard temps though, in closed case at 100% GPU fan, I could only run stock GPU at 85.
> 
> After open frame, 81c stock and OC with stock fan profile as it ramps up a bit with the overclock. With 100% fan around 65c at max overclock in closed cupboard, under 60c when opened.
> 
> As well as the ram only running at 33c TM5, and under 45c OCCT with 1.72v.
> 
> I tried setting the Ram tertiary timings lower, but anything more I try anywhere now fails TM5, this seems to be the best I can get:
> 
> View attachment 2590520
> 
> 
> Only reason I tried out Timespy anyway is because people advised it scales with ram, then when I saw my stock score and the top score for my CPU and GPU, the insanity kicked in again and now I have to beat all the scores!


Yes, the CPU score scales a lot with ram throughput and latency. Did you try all of the usual tricks like running in [email protected], NVCP tweaks, etc...? Also, sometimes you can get a higher combined score by forcing reBar. It will hurt your CPU score, but boost the graphics score. Just depends on how much you gain/lose as to whether the combined is higher. It weights the graphics score very heavily.


----------



## bhav

yzonker said:


> Yes, the CPU score scales a lot with ram throughput and latency. Did you try all of the usual tricks like running in [email protected], NVCP tweaks, etc...? Also, sometimes you can get a higher combined score by forcing reBar. It will hurt your CPU score, but boost the graphics score. Just depends on how much you gain/lose as to whether the combined is higher. It weights the graphics score very heavily.


No I don't know any of this stuff. The top standard timespy result for 13600KF & 3080 Ti has 1500 less CPU score than me but much higher GPU and Vram clocks which are unobtainable on my card, overall score its 200 points higher which I won't reach on my FE.

Also the top result is only running 3600 DDR4 too, so best I can try for is second place as my card can't reach those clocks.


----------



## tweety6207

Does anyone have an opinion on the memory setting? 

Cordially


----------



## bhav

tweety6207 said:


> Does anyone have an opinion on the memory setting?
> 
> Cordially


Its simply stock XMP cheapest DDR4 ram?


----------



## bhav

yzonker said:


> Yes, the CPU score scales a lot with ram throughput and latency. Did you try all of the usual tricks like running in [email protected], NVCP tweaks, etc...? Also, sometimes you can get a higher combined score by forcing reBar. It will hurt your CPU score, but boost the graphics score. Just depends on how much you gain/lose as to whether the combined is higher. It weights the graphics score very heavily.


Well I reached second place, but with barely stable OC GPU and this is like the best out of 5 runs that actually passed:










Now if you compare the GPU and CPU scores, you see just how much my ram is carrying me.

Also yes in standard timespy, CPU scores are several thousand apart based on the ram, the top 13600KF CPU score is about 4000 higher with hynix DDR4 7200 this time.

I got unlucky with the vram on my 3080 Ti, can only get +900 without artificing in benchies and its not game stable, +225 on GPU in timespy standard, somehow +280 in extreme, but the boost / average clock doesn't reach the same as other peoples, just under 2000 for me.


----------



## yzonker

bhav said:


> Well I reached second place, but with barely stable OC GPU and this is like the best out of 5 runs that actually passed:
> 
> View attachment 2590530
> 
> 
> Now if you compare the GPU and CPU scores, you see just how much my ram is carrying me.
> 
> Also yes in standard timespy, CPU scores are several thousand apart based on the ram, the top 13600KF CPU score is about 4000 higher with hynix DDR4 7200 this time.
> 
> I got unlucky with the vram on my 3080 Ti, can only get +900 without artificing in benchies and its not game stable, +225 on GPU in timespy standard, somehow +280 in extreme, but the boost / average clock doesn't reach the same as other peoples, just under 2000 for me.


Yea they're using the Galax 1kw bios to get higher clocks. Unfortunately the FE can't be flashed. 

Make sure you are not too high on the VRAM OC. It will regress before actually artifacting/crashing.

Might also try forcing reBar to see where that ends up if you haven't. Just set the 3 highlighted lines like I show below.


----------



## bscool

tweety6207 said:


> Hi there.
> What do you think of my settings? Are they consistent? thank you.
> corsair dominator rgb
> default 3200mhz.
> vccsa 1.10
> vddq default
> 
> View attachment 2590518


Is it stable? Have you run any kind of mem test or y cruncher? Your RTLs are off and that usually means you are at the edge of stability and need more of some voltage. Could also be bios I don't think 1720 was very good but I cant remember for sure. I know 901 was one of the best for me with DR b die on z690 Strix d4. 1504 was good with KS.

To see all RTLs you need to use memtweakit or look in bios. RTLs usually should be all the same on same channel example 71/71/71 and 73/73/73 https://www.overclock.net/attachments/rtls-png.2545567/


Edit looking back looks like 1720 had issues but if it is working for you that is all that matters. ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


----------



## bhav

yzonker said:


> Yea they're using the Galax 1kw bios to get higher clocks. Unfortunately the FE can't be flashed.
> 
> Make sure you are not too high on the VRAM OC. It will regress before actually artifacting/crashing.
> 
> Might also try forcing reBar to see where that ends up if you haven't. Just set the 3 highlighted lines like I show below.


I only overclocked the vram a bit for this, will try stick to 750 max as 900 is all thats artifact free, 1000 is ok for a few runs until it warms up, then the same at 950.

Tbh I'd like the card to die so I can refund and replace with a 4080, but not gonna push the Vram anymore.

I realized the issue is the FE power limit not the clocks, the crashes are due to hitting the PL not unstable GPU, so +750 vram and +225 GPU is the max I can realistically run for 24/7.

Regarding rebar, still no clue where to access those profile options, and I doubt it will make up for the GPU clocks on AIB cards.


----------



## tweety6207

sorry for double post


----------



## tweety6207

bscool said:


> Is it stable? Have you run any kind of mem test or y cruncher? Your RTLs are off and that usually means you are at the edge of stability and need more of some voltage. Could also be bios I don't think 1720 was very good but I cant remember for sure. I know 901 was one of the best for me with DR b die on z690 Strix d4. 1504 was good with KS.
> 
> To see all RTLs you need to use memtweakit or look in bios. RTLs usually should be all the same on same channel example 71/71/71 and 73/73/73 https://www.overclock.net/attachments/rtls-png.2545567/
> 
> 
> Edit looking back looks like 1720 had issues but if it is working for you that is all that matters. ASUS ROG Strix Z690-A Gaming WiFi D4 Thread


Hello, thank you for your help. The system is stable. If I modify the rtl the pc does not start. I tightened all the timings except rtl which I did not modify. I don't know if I did well. I followed a tutorial. Cordially.


----------



## bscool

tweety6207 said:


> Hello, thank you for your help. The system is stable. If I modify the rtl the pc does not start. I tightened all the timings except rtl which I did not modify. I don't know if I did well. I followed a tutorial. Cordially.
> 
> View attachment 2590551


Yeah you cannot set RTLs on z590/z690/z790 like you could on previous gens. Usually they train "off" from a bad bios or being on the edge of stability and needing more SA/VDDQ or dram voltage. As long as it is stable for you then it is fine.


----------



## Cam1

tweety6207 said:


> Hi there.
> What do you think of my settings? Are they consistent? thank you.
> corsair dominator rgb
> default 3200mhz.
> vccsa 1.10
> vddq default


if it's stable then you are good 

What type of Ram is that?
If you don't know you can use "thaiphoon" but you will need to disable core isolation to read them on windows 11.
This is the tuto you are following?
*MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper · GitHub *


----------



## tweety6207

Thanks
I just installed version 1504 and ? rtl its ok. But now is instable .


----------



## tweety6207

Cam1 said:


> *MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper · GitHub *


Thanks for this. 
after a few adjustments it is stable again.


----------



## MisterSheikh

2 x 32GB Crucial Ballistix 3200 c16 Micron Rev.B overclocked to 4400 c16 1T gear1 with a 13900K and MSI z790 Edge Wifi DDR4.

Tm5 absolut and y-cruncher CST stable.

I can daily this but personally will probably backdown to 2T since it allows me to run a lower SA and VDIMM voltage, allowing further potential headroom for CPU OC but I'll likely just run the CPU stock, power limited to 280 W. I've benched this and a manual 7400 c34 and 8000 c36 DDR5 profile. I think many will be kind of shocked by the results.

*Tm5 Absolut stable*










*Y-cruncher CST stable







*


----------



## imrevoau

@Ichirou @bhav So I managed to basically kill my A-Pro... So I went and bought a Z790 Tomahawk. Interested to see if there's ANY gear 1 OCing difference.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> @Ichirou @bhav So I managed to basically kill my A-Pro... So I went and bought a Z790 Tomahawk. Interested to see if there's ANY gear 1 OCing difference.


Mind elaborating?


----------



## HemuV2

imrevoau said:


> @Ichirou @bhav So I managed to basically kill my A-Pro... So I went and bought a Z790 Tomahawk. Interested to see if there's ANY gear 1 OCing difference.


 How do you kill a motherboard🗿


----------



## imrevoau

HemuV2 said:


> How do you kill a motherboard🗿


collateral damage from changing cases... lol. yes I am ashamed.


----------



## Taraquin

MisterSheikh said:


> 2 x 32GB Crucial Ballistix 3200 c16 Micron Rev.B overclocked to 4400 c16 1T gear1 with a 13900K and MSI z790 Edge Wifi DDR4.
> 
> Tm5 absolut and y-cruncher CST stable.
> 
> I can daily this but personally will probably backdown to 2T since it allows me to run a lower SA and VDIMM voltage, allowing further potential headroom for CPU OC but I'll likely just run the CPU stock, power limited to 280 W. I've benched this and a manual 7400 c34 and 8000 c36 DDR5 profile. I think many will be kind of shocked by the results.
> 
> *Tm5 Absolut stable*
> View attachment 2590604
> 
> 
> 
> *Y-cruncher CST stable
> View attachment 2590605
> *


Damn, impressive IMC! I have never seen higher than 4350 i G1! Close to IMC of 10900K on 2dimm mobo  I wish I could unlock SA volt on my 12400F, it runs 3700c14 B-die G1 tight at the ridiculus 0.95v locked SA, 4200+ should hace been possible on unlocked SA.


----------



## HemuV2

Taraquin said:


> Damn, impressive IMC! I have never seen higher than 4350 i G1! Close to IMC of 10900K on 2dimm mobo  I wish I could unlock SA volt on my 12400F, it runs 3700c14 B-die G1 tight at the ridiculus 0.95v locked SA, 4200+ should hace been possible on unlocked SA.


i wonder if there is any catch to running such a high gear1, like maybe ring instability or such.


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> collateral damage from changing cases... lol. yes I am ashamed.


Just one time I killed the pins on a board between CPU change, as I was waiting for the new one and didn't bother putting the socket protector on.


----------



## neteng101

Besides SOTR, is there any other good gaming benchmark to test for memory performance? Not considering Timespy - the CPU test makes the CPU run like a GPU, so while it can help tell if your memory has improved, its not indicative of actual gaming performance uplifts.


----------



## bhav

neteng101 said:


> Besides SOTR, is there any other good gaming benchmark to test for memory performance? Not considering Timespy - the CPU test makes the CPU run like a GPU, so while it can help tell if your memory has improved, its not indicative of actual gaming performance uplifts.


Spiderman scales excessively with bandwidth more than latency, maybe because the engine was programmed to utilize the PS5's M.2 bandwidth.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

neteng101 said:


> Besides SOTR, is there any other good gaming benchmark to test for memory performance? Not considering Timespy - the CPU test makes the CPU run like a GPU, so while it can help tell if your memory has improved, its not indicative of actual gaming performance uplifts.


Anno 1800, also, but you can see it in every game


----------



## imrevoau

bhav said:


> Just one time I killed the pins on a board between CPU change, as I was waiting for the new one and didn't bother putting the socket protector on.


I broke the GPU clip and killed some traces on the board lol


----------



## Ichirou

@bhav @PhoenixMDA 
Update with the new board. But before that, some context:
On my first Z790 Edge, I can still do 4,200 MHz stable in y-cruncher. 4,300 MHz isn't possible, but still trains and POSTs it just fine.
On my Z690 Edge, I can't even do 4,200 MHz stable anymore (even though it used to be able to). So probably degraded. But trains and POSTs 4,300 MHz just fine.

With this new board (which came in a box that looked like someone hit it with a sledgehammer):
4,200 MHz is stable in y-cruncher.
4,300 MHz has difficulty POSTing when RTL training is enabled. Only POSTs like 1 out of 10 times if lucky.
And even when it does POST, it does not pass y-cruncher.

So, this board is even _worse_ than the two boards I had before, since it can't even train properly (nothing else changed).
I'm going to get this exchanged again, quoting shipping damage. Because it shouldn't have trouble even POSTing, let alone testing.


----------



## bhav

I think there might be a lot of variance on the second channel slots by the look of it. those daisy chain traces aren't very strong.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I think there might be a lot of variance on the second channel slots by the look of it. those daisy chain traces aren't very strong.


Yeah, this is definitely reinforcing my hypothesis that there is board-to-board variance, and that board degradation is a real thing.
Swapping this Edge for another one, yet again.


----------



## yzonker

Ichirou said:


> @bhav @PhoenixMDA
> Update with the new board. But before that, some context:
> On my first Z790 Edge, I can still do 4,200 MHz stable in y-cruncher. 4,300 MHz isn't possible, but still trains and POSTs it just fine.
> On my Z690 Edge, I can't even do 4,200 MHz stable anymore (even though it used to be able to). So probably degraded. But trains and POSTs 4,300 MHz just fine.
> 
> With this new board (which came in a box that looked like someone hit it with a sledgehammer):
> 4,200 MHz is stable in y-cruncher.
> 4,300 MHz has difficulty POSTing when RTL training is enabled. Only POSTs like 1 out of 10 times if lucky.
> And even when it does POST, it does not pass y-cruncher.
> 
> So, this board is even _worse_ than the two boards I had before, since it can't even train properly (nothing else changed).
> I'm going to get this exchanged again, quoting shipping damage. Because it shouldn't have trouble even POSTing, let alone testing.


That's pretty much where my machine is at. With 2x16 DR, 4200CL15 is stable even with relatively low 1.25 SA. Bumping up to 4266 with the same timings at a high 1.4 SA is stable enough to benchmark on without any crashes/blue screens, but will fail stability testing eventually. 4266 with loose timings passed moderate stress testing. 4300 will load Windows but is very unstable and will blue screen eventually without much of anything running.

So far none have that has really changed since I got the board (Z690 Edge) when the 13900k was released. Been running 1.58v VDDQ since I got it. 

Because of the issues you're having, I retested today and as far as I could tell nothing has changed. (so far!)


----------



## Ichirou

yzonker said:


> That's pretty much where my machine is at. With 2x16 DR, 4200CL15 is stable even with relatively low 1.25 SA. Bumping up to 4266 with the same timings at a high 1.4 SA is stable enough to benchmark on without any crashes/blue screens, but will fail stability testing eventually. 4266 with loose timings passed moderate stress testing. 4300 will load Windows but is very unstable and will blue screen eventually without much of anything running.
> 
> So far none have that has really changed since I got the board (Z690 Edge) when the 13900k was released. Been running 1.58v VDDQ since I got it.
> 
> Because of the issues you're having, I retested today and as far as I could tell nothing has changed. (so far!)


Yeah, this first Z790 Edge I have (I already reinstalled it) has no trouble training and booting 4,300 MHz. The second Edge I received from Amazon today simply can't train it properly.
There is definitely board-to-board variance. Of course, the CPU IMC comes first, but when that's no longer an issue, the motherboard becomes one.


----------



## Ichirou

@bhav Well, after stabilizing 4,200 MHz on my first Z790 Edge, I forgot to enable Memory Fast Boot and the board retrained itself to becoming unstable again.
Haven't been able to stabilize it yet after a handful of attempts. Annoying training.

This is clear evidence of a motherboard/BIOS issue, not CPU/RAM. Not relevant to 4,300 MHz though.


----------



## bhav

So after MrSheikh, do I have the second best G1 OC now because Ichirou's failed?


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> @bhav Well, after stabilizing 4,200 MHz on my first Z790 Edge, I forgot to enable Memory Fast Boot and the board retrained itself to becoming unstable again.
> Haven't been able to stabilize it yet after a handful of attempts. Annoying training.


I highly advise you stop trying for 4300CL14 1.72v with 4 modules, it would appear to be too much for the second channel slots.

The ram itself can handle it, it looks like 4 slot boards can't.

I've only been running these settings with 2 sticks, and previously on 2 slot boards. Basically you are trying to run absolute max settings for 2x16 Rev. B with 4 sticks, while your sticks can handle it, the second channel slots can't!


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I highly advise you stop trying for 4300CL14 1.72v with 4 modules, it would appear to be too much for the second channel slots.
> 
> The ram itself can handle it, it looks like 4 slot boards can't.
> 
> I've only been running these settings with 2 sticks, and previously on 2 slot boards. Basically you are trying to run absolute max settings for 2x16 Rev. B with 4 sticks, while your sticks can handle it, the second channel slots can't!


I'm not even trying for 4,300 MHz at the moment. Just 4,200 MHz for now, lol. And the board's having training issues.
I forgot to enable Memory Fast Boot to stop it from retraining. And now it can't pass y-cruncher again after a single restart.


----------



## imrevoau

bhav said:


> So after MrSheikh, do I have the second best G1 OC now because Ichirou's failed?


There's a handful of people here doing 4300/4400 on DR B-Die so idk about that


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ichirou said:


> @bhav @PhoenixMDA
> Update with the new board. But before that, some context:
> On my first Z790 Edge, I can still do 4,200 MHz stable in y-cruncher. 4,300 MHz isn't possible, but still trains and POSTs it just fine.
> On my Z690 Edge, I can't even do 4,200 MHz stable anymore (even though it used to be able to). So probably degraded. But trains and POSTs 4,300 MHz just fine.
> 
> With this new board (which came in a box that looked like someone hit it with a sledgehammer):
> 4,200 MHz is stable in y-cruncher.
> 4,300 MHz has difficulty POSTing when RTL training is enabled. Only POSTs like 1 out of 10 times if lucky.
> And even when it does POST, it does not pass y-cruncher.
> 
> So, this board is even _worse_ than the two boards I had before, since it can't even train properly (nothing else changed).
> I'm going to get this exchanged again, quoting shipping damage. Because it shouldn't have trouble even POSTing, let alone testing.


I you think the board was not new and a take a really new one.And a second thing the Thermalright frame, you remember the problem with the rockit hs?
It give´s 2 versions the new one, has notches on the sides.I have the new version, that's fit also with the rockit hs, perhaps it give's also difference with the presure to the socket.
That i dont know.



bhav said:


> So after MrSheikh, do I have the second best G1 OC now because Ichirou's failed?


LOL🤣
You kick the 10k Single thread Memscore in Geekbench 3?


----------



## bhav

PhoenixMDA said:


> I you think the board was not new and a take a really new one.And a second thing the Thermalright frame, you remember the problem with the rockit hs?
> It give´s 2 versions the new one, has notches on the sides.I have the new version, that's fit also with the rockit hs, perhaps it give's also difference with the presure to the socket.
> That i dont know.
> 
> 
> LOL🤣
> You kick the 10k Single thread Memscore in Geekbench 3?
> View attachment 2591118


That looks more reliant on CPU, and I only really care for freq : CL. Actual performance difference between different ram at the same freq : CL is zero.


----------



## Ichirou

PhoenixMDA said:


> I you think the board was not new and a take a really new one.And a second thing the Thermalright frame, you remember the problem with the rockit hs?
> It give´s 2 versions the new one, has notches on the sides.I have the new version, that's fit also with the rockit hs, perhaps it give's also difference with the presure to the socket.
> That i dont know.


Sorry, could you repeat that? I don't think the translation went through properly.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Sorry, could you repeat that? I don't think the translation went through properly.


Incorrect installation of the contact frame might be the cause of the lower ram OC.

You should consider testing it without the contact frame.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Incorrect installation of the contact frame might be the cause of the lower ram OC.
> 
> You should consider testing it without the contact frame.


I do think that there is a potential contact issue, especially now since I can't even stabilize *4,200 MHz* on my first Z790 Edge after a *single restart* (nothing changed or physically touched). I reflashed, loaded up my 4,200 MHz profile, booted up, ran y-cruncher, and passed. And then, I restarted, forgetting to enable Memory Fast Boot, and it trained _off_ of what was stable, and hasn't ever managed to retrain back to it since no matter what I've tried. That was a few hours ago. So annoying.

*Update: *After reseating the CPU+RAM (again) and reflashing + loading up my 4,200 MHz config a few times, I finally reached a point where I could pass 12% of y-cruncher. So I promptly enabled Fast Boot to prevent it from retraining, fiddled with the voltages a bit, and have now successfully passed y-cruncher. Just ridiculous.

I think that as a motherboard ages/degrades, it becomes less capable of training the RAM properly, and takes a lot of effort to actually do so. So it's imperative to get a proper train, and then lock it in and never allow it to change. And if you make adjustments, leave it locked in for the best possibility of maintaining that train.


----------



## PhoenixMDA

Ichirou said:


> Sorry, could you repeat that? I don't think the translation went through properly.


I mean the difference between the old and the New frame, i think you use the same or?
Perhaps it gives also difference in presure to the socket spring contacts.
Old









New










bhav said:


> That looks more reliant on CPU, and I only really care for freq : CL. Actual performance difference between different ram at the same freq : CL is zero.


That is the memory performance, the CPU OC bring there not much.
If i push the core Clock my single score is over 9700 points not 9400


----------



## Ichirou

PhoenixMDA said:


> I mean the difference between the old and the New frame, i think you use the same or?
> Perhaps it gives also difference in presure to the socket spring contacts.
> Old
> View attachment 2591137
> 
> 
> New
> View attachment 2591138
> 
> 
> That is the memory performance, the CPU OC bring there not much.
> If i push the core Clock my single score is over 9700 points not 9400


Haven't seen those notches before, so I have the older version. But I don't think that really matters when I could already stabilize up to ~4,300 MHz before with the old TR frame.
At the moment, I managed to get 4,200 MHz stable again, but it took _many_ retraining attempts, and Memory Fast Boot enabled to prevent retraining.

I do believe that this Z790 Edge has degraded and cannot run 4,300 MHz anymore, though. I will continue to test fresh motherboards, as there is certainly board-to-board variance.


----------



## Cam1

Should i disable unuse memory channel?


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Haven't seen those notches before, so I have the older version. But I don't think that really matters when I could already stabilize up to ~4,300 MHz before with the old TR frame.
> At the moment, I managed to get 4,200 MHz stable again, but it took _many_ retraining attempts, and Memory Fast Boot enabled to prevent retraining.
> 
> I do believe that this Z790 Edge has degraded and cannot run 4,300 MHz anymore, though. I will continue to test fresh motherboards, as there is certainly board-to-board variance.


I believe your data does indicate motherboard variance, but again, I've been pushing 1.72v on two sticks on Z490 and Z790 now, did the whole G1 4300 and G2 5400 with it, on Z490 I tried up to 4800 1.8v with no luck, before I got this kit was pushing 1.52v for 4200CL16 on the e die kit, I've never yet had a reduction in ram OC while doing this with 2 modules. Just my stopgap Asrock Z690 in the middle didn't really work with over 1.6v on the ram.

The difference is you are trying to do this on the second channel slots as well, those are what seem to be causing the problem.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> I believe your data does indicate motherboard variance, but again, I've been pushing 1.72v on two sticks on Z490 and Z790 now, did the whole G1 4300 and G2 5400 with it, on Z490 I tried up to 4800 1.8v with no luck, before I got this kit was pushing 1.52v for 4200CL16 on the e die kit, I've never yet had a reduction in ram OC while doing this with 2 modules. Just my stopgap Asrock Z690 in the middle didn't really work with over 1.6v on the ram.
> 
> The difference is you are trying to do this on the second channel slots as well, those are what seem to be causing the problem.


Past generations didn't have VDDQ. Things are different now. There isn't much information on exactly what VDDQ is or does, but it does seem to be aligned with VDIMM, and may be directly linked to the memory slots. 

I too cease to believe that a perfectly stable memory overclock would suddenly go to crap with a simple -0.01V Vcore change, and never stabilize again, regardless of voltage. Nothing else changed or physically touched. Degradation doesn't work like that. 

My suspicions regarding motherboard degradation (or failures, if one wants to avoid casually using that term) stem from the variance of memory overclocking potential on each board: how good/bad their training is, and how easy/hard it is to stabilize a configuration (esp. over time).

I don't know whether or not the second channel is the culprit, as I can't exactly take out two DIMMs to check right now due to watercooling, but I'll continue to bin a few more boards to gain a clearer picture into motherboard binning and determine whether or not it is a real thing. It doesn't cost me anything for now besides time and effort.

For what it's worth, even at 4,200 MHz, assuming the board trains properly, I can still pass y-cruncher with very low voltages, so that's an indication that the cores and IMC, in theory, are still fine. 

I'll try finding the absolute minimum voltages later in the day for 4,200 MHz.


----------



## bhav

Looks like Intel MLC was broken, it won't report over 67k bandwidth no matter how much higher I OC:










Can't be bothered to retry G2 for a while though.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Ichirou said:


> I'm not even trying for 4,300 MHz at the moment. Just 4,200 MHz for now, lol. And the board's having training issues.
> I forgot to enable Memory Fast Boot to stop it from retraining. And now it can't pass y-cruncher again after a single restart.


I’ve had similar experiences with mine and training.


----------



## Pk1

So far so good. Been using this for several days now and has worked without a hitch. 1.38 Vddq, 1.32 SA, 1.52 DRAM. I'm quite happy with it.


----------



## Ichirou

Uncle Dubbs said:


> I’ve had similar experiences with mine and training.


I eventually managed to get the board to retrain it to a state where it can stabilize y-cruncher with 4,200 MHz again, so, I enabled Memory Fast Boot to prevent it from retraining.
Attempted to push 4,300 MHz with it enabled, but to no avail, regardless of voltages. Board's probably too far gone to be able to do 4,300 MHz.

Will wait for another board to come next week. Hopefully it's better binned this time.


----------



## imrevoau

Current daily @ 1.58 VDIMM, 1.35 SA and 1.35 VDDQ. I've noticed this board trains RTL's slightly tighter than my 690 A Pro did.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> @bhav Well, after stabilizing 4,200 MHz on my first Z790 Edge, I forgot to enable Memory Fast Boot and the board retrained itself to becoming unstable again.
> Haven't been able to stabilize it yet after a handful of attempts. Annoying training.
> 
> This is clear evidence of a motherboard/BIOS issue, not CPU/RAM. Not relevant to 4,300 MHz though.


I had some problem with training in my old Z490 Unify, but actually what fixed was enabling memory fast boot (set it specifically to ENABLED, not AUTO or NO TRAINING or DISABLED), also if I rembember correctly, to train every change of timings you have to have memory fast boot ENABLED or AUTO (which is the default setting), if you change the timings but have it to DISABLED, the timings won't change because the mobo won't train, at least for me that used to use it DISABLED after tunning the timings, during the week with reboots/shutdowns I was losing stability, what fixed for me was leaving memory fast boot ENABLED always...


----------



## ViTosS

Fortunately with this Asus mobo I don't even have to mess with MRC Fast Boot, etc, my current OC (4200CL15) is stable through days and weeks across reboots and shutdowns, been running TM5 and Y-Cruncher at least 1 time in the week to make sure, also I OCed my ring clock from 4.5Ghz stock to 4.9Ghz, at the same vcore, but had to raise VCCSA from 1.25v to 1.275v to mantain stability in Y-Cruncher (amazing software, with just a single run of N64 it quickly tells you if you have to raise VDDQ or VCCSA, thanks @Ichirou for recommending that)


----------



## Ichirou

@ViTosS Yeah, I had no issue with 4,300 MHz CL14 even with the Fast Boot setting on Auto and across however many restarts, but my Z790 Edge has most likely degraded and cannot support it anymore. And the second Z790 Edge that I received can't even train it, let alone test it.


----------



## ViTosS

Ichirou said:


> @ViTosS Yeah, I had no issue with 4,300 MHz CL14 even with the Fast Boot setting on Auto and across however many restarts, but my Z790 Edge has most likely degraded and cannot support it anymore. And the second Z790 Edge that I received can't even train it, let alone test it.


That's sad, you've tested a Strix-A Z790 also if I'm not wrong, right? And if I remember it was really bad sample of a motherboard. Maybe you should try another Strix instead of the Edge again?


----------



## Ichirou

ViTosS said:


> That's sad, you've tested a Strix-A Z790 also if I'm not wrong, right? And if I remember it was really bad sample of a motherboard. Maybe you should try another Strix instead of the Edge again?


No. The Strix's second channel is absolute hot garbage. No amount of binning's going to give a +400 MHz frequency improvement.
ASUS clearly doesn't care for four DIMMs, and I highly doubt they ever will. It's kind of evident based on their history with quad DIMM DDR5 boards as well.

MSI is quite frankly the _only_ brand to go with for quad DIMM configurations.


----------



## kx11

Yay AIDA64 being weird again


----------



## yzonker

Bizarre stuff with mem OC'ing. I was benchmarking at 4266. No issues, no crashes. Switched back to my daily 4200 tune and bam, unstable. Win11 kept blue screening. 

Tried increasing SA and VDDQ. Not stable. 

I finally loaded defaults, restarted. Then shut down and flipped the switch on the PSU for a few seconds. 

And back to stable at 4200. Didn't change anything else.


----------



## kx11

yzonker said:


> Bizarre stuff with mem OC'ing. I was benchmarking at 4266. No issues, no crashes. Switched back to my daily 4200 tune and bam, unstable. Win11 kept blue screening.
> 
> Tried increasing SA and VDDQ. Not stable.
> 
> I finally loaded defaults, restarted. Then shut down and flipped the switch on the PSU for a few seconds.
> 
> And back to stable at 4200. Didn't change anything else.


Clear CMOS ??


----------



## yzonker

kx11 said:


> Clear CMOS ??


No, that would have been next.


----------



## neteng101

Just got my 2 sets of 4000-CL16 PVS416G400C6K Samsung B-die in, 4x8GB SR - any tips on starting SA, VDDQ and DRAM voltage I should set to find my IMC's limits for Gear 1 before working on fine tuning voltages/timings?


----------



## GeneO

kx11 said:


> Yay AIDA64 being weird again
> 
> 
> View attachment 2591276


Any reason for using the fully random latency method?


----------



## Pk1

neteng101 said:


> Just got my 2 sets of 4000-CL16 PVS416G400C6K Samsung B-die in, 4x8GB SR - any tips on starting SA, VDDQ and DRAM voltage I should set to find my IMC's limits for Gear 1 before working on fine tuning voltages/timings?


1.35v SA, 1.5v VDDQ, and 1.55v DRAM. That should allow you to post most things over 4000mhz. Once you find your maximum frequency you can try to reduce voltages when fine tuning.


----------



## ju-rek

Why do you give such a high VDDQ voltage, 1.2v, 1.26 SA and 1.52 DRAM are enough for me.
With 4 x 4000-CL16 PVS416G400C6K clocked above 4000, you will need to give very good airflow, because they will boil, the heatsink is paper.


----------



## neteng101

Pk1 said:


> 1.35v SA, 1.5v VDDQ, and 1.55v DRAM.


1.5v VDDQ is a no go - gives me problem even at 4000 booting into Windows. 1.48v VDDQ works, earlier 1.45v VDDQ wasn't enough, got errors in 1usmus in a single cycle at 4000. I don't really know how my DRAM I need, been running that range 1.5v+. Tried 4100/4133 unsuccessfully so far - 4100 seems harder, 4133 will POST but not successfully logging into Windows.


----------



## bhav

So as usual I got another 'OMG 1.72v' comment on reddit, I found this interesting thing to share with them:










Watercooling presets on some MSI boards lol.


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> So as usual I got another 'OMG 1.72v' comment on reddit, I found this interesting thing to share with them:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Watercooling presets on some MSI boards lol.


Never saw that before. What board? Must be Samsung B-die with some older gen board.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Never saw that before. What board? Must be Samsung B-die with some older gen board.


G.Skill RipJaw V 4000Mhz. on MSI MEG UNIFY X570


----------



## kx11

GeneO said:


> Any reason for using the fully random latency method?


Allegedly more accurate


----------



## Pk1

ju-rek said:


> Why do you give such a high VDDQ voltage, 1.2v, 1.26 SA and 1.52 DRAM are enough for me.
> With 4 x 4000-CL16 PVS416G400C6K clocked above 4000, you will need to give very good airflow, because they will boil, the heatsink is paper.


You're right, the lower the better. I was just trying to give "safe" maximum values that would allow our friend to get posted and then tune voltages down. I'm surprised you're vddq requirements are so low. Thats sweet. At 4x8gb 4133c15 my RTLs were misaligned until I bumped up VDDQ to 1.38v.


----------



## neteng101

Pk1 said:


> I was just trying to give "safe" maximum values that would allow our friend to get posted and then tune voltages down.


VDDQ has been biting my ass all day. SA set to 1.35v and left at that for now, I started with VDDQ at 1.45v and that wasn't enough even. For those settings below it takes 1.47v VDDQ to make it to Windows, DRAM at 1.52v. 4100 doesn't post, 4133 will POST, boot to Windows and blue screen/crashing while logging in or even before. Tried loosening timings and other stuff but 4133 seems like a lost cause.

Even having a hard time tuning timings at 4000 - lowering tCL to 15 can boot but not stable, can't seem to lower tRFC to Samsung B-die low levels either. Maybe a combination of my board+IMC. I'll continue fiddling but if anyone has ideas of stuff to try, I'm all ears.


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> VDDQ has been biting my ass all day. SA set to 1.35v and left at that for now, I started with VDDQ at 1.45v and that wasn't enough even. For those settings below it takes 1.47v VDDQ to make it to Windows, DRAM at 1.52v. 4100 doesn't post, 4133 will POST, boot to Windows and blue screen/crashing while logging in or even before. Tried loosening timings and other stuff but 4133 seems like a lost cause.
> 
> Even having a hard time tuning timings at 4000 - lowering tCL to 15 can boot but not stable, can't seem to lower tRFC to Samsung B-die low levels either. Maybe a combination of my board+IMC. I'll continue fiddling but if anyone has ideas of stuff to try, I'm all ears.
> 
> View attachment 2591471


Run VDIMM at 1.60V.


----------



## Cam1

Since Bios update the Voltage values become Purple and Red at way higher value.
For SA and DDR voltage.
Does this mean 1.45V SA is safer on the new bios since it's now showing it in white color?


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

Ichirou said:


> N64, HNT, and VST in y-cruncher's Component Stress Test (one loop is enough), plus a full run of y-cruncher's Main test (as much memory populated as possible).
> 
> Start at 4,000 MHz and work your way up, since you need to know the limits of your CPU's IMC.
> Start with 1.35V VCCSA and 1.40V VDDQ. That should be good enough at the start.
> 
> In TM5? Like, a bit over 80 minutes for 1usmus six cycles. And four hours for anta777 ABSOLUT default.
> In y-cruncher, that's around 15 minutes.


Thanks. 1.3v vddq is working better for me than 1.4. with 1.4 I struggle to load windows without errors or complete a aida64 memory benchmark.


----------



## Ichirou

Cam1 said:


> Since Bios update the Voltage values become Purple and Red at way higher value.
> For SA and DDR voltage.
> Does this mean 1.45V SA is safer on the new bios since it's now showing it in white color?


No. Ignore the colours; they’re meaningless.


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

Trying to use MSI dragon ball 1.0.0.10 on my MSI z790 a-pro ddr4 WiFi and it tells me it doesn't support this platform. 

The version in the initial post goes to a dead link.

The asrock timing version in the initial post tells me of an access violation error.

What is everyone use for checking timings within windows?

Thanks


----------



## ju-rek

MSI Dragon Ball(1.0.0.10)-intel.zip







drive.google.com


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

ju-rek said:


> MSI Dragon Ball(1.0.0.10)-intel.zip
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thanks but this version gives me the error 'Do not support this platform'.


----------



## bhav

You need version 1.0.0.12 for Z790, theres a link on HWbot forums if you search for it.


----------



## ju-rek

MSI Dragon Ball - Google Drive







drive.google.com


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

bhav said:


> You need version 1.0.0.12 for Z790, theres a link on HWbot forums if you search for it.





ju-rek said:


> MSI Dragon Ball - Google Drive
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com


Thanks both!
It works


----------



## neteng101

Ichirou said:


> Run VDIMM at 1.60V.


Giving up on 4000 - might be my board or IMC, possibly the board, I've never stabilized at 4000 on it, different kits and not on the old 12700k either. Just trying out 3900 and seeing what timings I can get now on the latency side before deciding if I'm keeping these RAM or looking at something else.


----------



## bscool

neteng101 said:


> Giving up on 4000 - might be my board or IMC, possibly the board, I've never stabilized at 4000 on it, different kits and not on the old 12700k either. Just trying out 3900 and seeing what timings I can get now on the latency side before deciding if I'm keeping these RAM or looking at something else.


Did you ever try just 2 sticks in a2 and b2? To see what you can do?

That way you would know what 2x16 could do as an example. On z690 Strix d4 I can do quite a bit more with only 2 stick vs 4.


----------



## neteng101

bscool said:


> Did you ever try just 2 sticks in a2 and b2? To see what you can do?


Those 2 sticks would have to be SR likely - will lose out on the interleaving then. I have tried 2x16DR twice, the B-die 4000 DR kit didn't even work previously, early bios though back then. Also can't get B-die 16GB SR sticks.


----------



## bscool

neteng101 said:


> Those 2 sticks would have to be SR likely - will lose out on the interleaving then. I have tried 2x16DR twice, the B-die 4000 DR kit didn't even work previously, early bios though back then. Also can't get B-die 16GB SR sticks.


You tried 2x16 with your 13th gen? If so then you have a weak IMC if it cant run DR b die past 4000.

Why do they have to be SR? I use DR b die at 4266 to 43000c15 gear 1 with 12th and 13th gen CPUs.

z690/z790 MB are Daisy chain and can run 2x16 easier than 4x8.

I can boot 2 sticks of SR b die or DR b die very close to the same clocks in gear 1. 4266 to 4400 depending on CPU.


----------



## neteng101

bscool said:


> You tried 2x16 with your 13th gen? If so then you have a weak IMC if it cant run DR b die past 4000.


Nope - returned that kit. Didn't see much if any B-die 2x16DR kits in stock and didn't want to spend a ton on DDR4 at this point but if you have a kit recommendation I might try that out.

Edit - I forgot I did try a non B-die 2x16DR kit but didn't work too much on it, its Hynix die and I have it running rock solid 4000-18-22-22-42-2T on a 12600k currently. I have another board I could try too - just doubt if I have the time to rip 2 machines apart and get them figured out before I start work again on Tuesday.


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> Nope - returned that kit. Didn't see much if any B-die 2x16DR kits in stock and didn't want to spend a ton on DDR4 at this point but if you have a kit recommendation I might try that out.


Buy one of @bscool's dozens of Samsung B-die kits lying around collecting dust


----------



## bscool

neteng101 said:


> Nope - returned that kit. Didn't see much if any B-die 2x16DR kits in stock and didn't want to spend a ton on DDR4 at this point but if you have a kit recommendation I might try that out.


It really is lotto on b dies. I have had close to 3 dozen kits(many high end bins) and some of the best were the 4000c16-16-16, 3600c14-15-15 and the 4000c14.

If I were buying today it would be 4000c16-16-16 or 3600c14-14-14 those should have a good chance of being good bins.


----------



## bscool

Ichirou said:


> Buy one of @bscool's dozens of Samsung B-die kits lying around collecting dust


The "best" bin I have right now for DR besides my 4000c14 kit is 4400c17-18-18 Gskill Ripjaws and they are weaker than the ones I listed above.

I think they need around 1.56 to 1.57ish for 4133c15-15-15 with tight subs.


----------



## Ichirou

In other news, thanks to the beta V1.34 BIOS that @Uncle Dubbs referred me to, I'm able to run y-cruncher at 1.58V+ without instantly erroring.
Haven't stabilized it yet, but at least it runs.

On the previous official V1.30 BIOS, I couldn't even run y-cruncher at 1.58V+. It would just instantly error. So there is some VDDQ improvements with this BIOS.
Even if I _do _hypothetically stabilize, I'll still need to bin a new motherboard to correct the issue of VDDQ being too high (due to degradation), though.


----------



## neteng101

bscool said:


> If I were buying today it would be 4000c16-16-16 or 3600c14-14-14 those should have a good chance of being good bins.


That's what I got 4000-16 but 8GB SR sticks. Jusdging by RTLs set my board is far from the best, I still suspect its a major factor.


----------



## Ichirou

@bhav @Uncle Dubbs @bscool
I managed to pass y-cruncher Main 10B + N/H/V with 1.60V VDDQ!! There's hope now.
All that's left is to try to get a fresh board that can lower the VDDQ requirement.

This beta BIOS definitely helped. Thanks @Uncle Dubbs


----------



## neteng101

Looks like this is the best I can manage, 1.35v SA, 1.48v VDDQ (1.5v VDDQ fails to boot), 1.54v VDIMM. I think I need more VDDQ to tighten tCL and tRFC but my board seems to freak out instead. Really bummed cause I was hoping to be able to run 4133/4266 with 14-15-15-30 type timings. Still better than what I was on but down 32GB now if I keep this set.

tCKE - not sure if I should do something with this timing?


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> Looks like this is the best I can manage, 1.35v SA, 1.48v VDDQ (1.5v VDDQ fails to boot), 1.54v VDIMM. I think I need more VDDQ to tighten tCL and tRFC but my board seems to freak out instead. Really bummed cause I was hoping to be able to run 4133/4266 with 14-15-15-30 type timings. Still better than what I was on but down 32GB now if I keep this set.
> 
> tCKE - not sure if I should do something with this timing?
> 
> View attachment 2591599


Even the best binned Samsung B-Die kits require like, ~1.56V VDIMM to run 4,000 MHz CL14, so if you think you could do 4,133+ with that, then good luck.

Get a fan and run 1.60V+ VDIMM. Seriously.


----------



## neteng101

Ichirou said:


> Get a fan and run 1.60V+ VDIMM. Seriously.


Doesn't work - already tried 1.6V VDIMM + active cooling, it doesn't get me one bit more. Its the VDDQ getting stuck and not working even at 1.5V.


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> Doesn't work - already tried 1.6V VDIMM + active cooling, it doesn't get me one bit more. Its the VDDQ getting stuck and not working even at 1.5V.


Have you tested up to 1.45V VCCSA yet?


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

What is the safest VCCSA voltage? Does 1.4v+ cause degradation?


----------



## Ichirou

Pro4TLZZ said:


> What is the safest VCCSA voltage? Does 1.4v+ cause degradation?


Max 1.35V. 1.40V+ does indeed cause degradation. First-hand experience.

@Uncle Dubbs For whatever reason, when reflashing this beta BIOS, M-Flash _alternates_ between V1.34 and V1.34U1, as if they are two separate BIOSes built-in.
Not really sure why. They both support the same profiles loaded from the USB, though.

On a side note, I can't stabilize y-cruncher again. Zzz. Training issues are lame.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Ichirou said:


> Max 1.35V. 1.40V+ does indeed cause degradation. First-hand experience.
> 
> @Uncle Dubbs For whatever reason, when reflashing this beta BIOS, M-Flash _alternates_ between V1.34 and V1.34U1, as if they are two separate BIOSes built-in.
> Not really sure why. They both support the same profiles loaded from the USB, though.
> 
> On a side note, I can't stabilize y-cruncher again. Zzz. Training issues are lame.


Dang, hmm I think one said mflash only but not sure what that really means since that’s the only way I know of to flash.

I was running the 1.33 before because it was accidentally posted on the official site…but I didn’t see a diff when I used 1.3. I’ve been thinking about trying 1.34…just wish I could do 4400 flat 16s , but isn’t the bandwidth like capped anyway…I mean for some reason I have better bandwidth even at 4133 15s, but some of my timings aren’t better…terts are a little worse


----------



## Ichirou

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Dang, hmm I think one said mflash only but not sure what that really means since that’s the only way I know of to flash.
> 
> I was running the 1.33 before because it was accidentally posted on the official site…but I didn’t see a diff when I used 1.3. I’ve been thinking about trying 1.34…just wish I could do 4400 flat 16s , but isn’t the bandwidth like capped anyway…I mean for some reason I have better bandwidth even at 4133 15s, but some of my timings aren’t better…terts are a little worse


You gotta tighten the subtimings (esp. the tertiaries) or else even a high frequency ends up being as garbage as a low one.

M-Flash only means that you cannot use BIOS flashback (via MSI.ROM on a USB from the button on the side of the motherboard).

*Update: *1.52-1.53V VDDQ doesn't work anymore (obviously). But 1.60V works (nothing less). However, after a restart, it no longer runs y-cruncher, even after a reflash.
Dropping VDDQ _back_ to 1.58V allows me to run y-cruncher again. Which is weird. Definitely a lot of VDDQ instability with this board right now.


----------



## neteng101

Ichirou said:


> Have you tested up to 1.45V VCCSA yet?


Not going there - at some point one has to know when to stop. Trying to find a daily OC, rather than continue pushing for every ounce.

I did get past the VDDQ wall, got up to 1.53V and it was helping a bit but when you have to throw that much more voltage for a small increase in one timing, that's the sign of true diminishing returns.

Just not going to be able to do much more with this CPU/board/memory sticks without heroics.


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> Not going there - at some point one has to know when to stop. Trying to find a daily OC, rather than continue pushing for every ounce.
> 
> I did get past the VDDQ wall, got up to 1.53V and it was helping a bit but when you have to throw that much more voltage for a small increase in one timing, that's the sign of true diminishing returns.
> 
> Just not going to be able to do much more with this CPU/board/memory sticks without heroics.


Raising VCCSA is more just to rule out the IMC as a factor. Because there's a possible chance that your IMC might just not be up to snuff, not VDDQ.


----------



## yzonker

neteng101 said:


> Not going there - at some point one has to know when to stop. Trying to find a daily OC, rather than continue pushing for every ounce.
> 
> I did get past the VDDQ wall, got up to 1.53V and it was helping a bit but when you have to throw that much more voltage for a small increase in one timing, that's the sign of true diminishing returns.
> 
> Just not going to be able to do much more with this CPU/board/memory sticks without heroics.


Have you tried to raise VDDQ and VDimm together?


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

neteng101 said:


> Looks like this is the best I can manage, 1.35v SA, 1.48v VDDQ (1.5v VDDQ fails to boot), 1.54v VDIMM. I think I need more VDDQ to tighten tCL and tRFC but my board seems to freak out instead. Really bummed cause I was hoping to be able to run 4133/4266 with 14-15-15-30 type timings. Still better than what I was on but down 32GB now if I keep this set.
> 
> tCKE - not sure if I should do something with this timing?
> 
> View attachment 2591599


Tcke is the clock enable or Something …but if you have power down options disabled (like ppd/apd 0) it apparently has no affect so you can lower it To the floor….I’m at tcke 2…usually that should work or 4.


----------



## neteng101

Nothing works basically - I can raise all 3 voltages at once, and can't even get a decent boot without blue screen on 3900 with tCL lowered to 15. Its a definite wall, not sure if its board or IMC or memory, but there's nothing more. The only setting that can be pushed lower is tRFC but getting from 380 to 360 requires a big jump in VDDQ from 1.48V to 1.52V. Didn't test points below, but that was already a sign of a wall.

Appreciate the help and ideas though - always good to get pushed and verify, at least now I know.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

Ichirou said:


> You gotta tighten the subtimings (esp. the tertiaries) or else even a high frequency ends up being as garbage as a low one.
> 
> M-Flash only means that you cannot use BIOS flashback (via MSI.ROM on a USB from the button on the side of the motherboard).
> 
> *Update: *1.52-1.53V VDDQ doesn't work anymore (obviously). But 1.60V works (nothing less). However, after a restart, it no longer runs y-cruncher, even after a reflash.
> Dropping VDDQ _back_ to 1.58V allows me to run y-cruncher again. Which is weird. Definitely a lot of VDDQ instability with this board right now.


oh ya, my terts are as tight as they go. They were before as well, just this board changed the way I could tighten them. My rdwr’s do 10, but everything else is 1 or 2 higher than on my 10850k and z490 tomahawk. I could do 6/4/5/5; 6/4/6/6, 5/5, otherwise it’s identical but hard wall at 4133 15s where before I was 4400 16s with the above terts and everything else same. Same voltages too, 1.52 set, 1.51 measured. Even SA is basically the same, maybe a touch lower.


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> Nothing works basically - I can raise all 3 voltages at once, and can't even get a decent boot without blue screen on 3900 with tCL lowered to 15. Its a definite wall, not sure if its board or IMC or memory, but there's nothing more. The only setting that can be pushed lower is tRFC but getting from 380 to 360 requires a big jump in VDDQ from 1.48V to 1.52V. Didn't test points below, but that was already a sign of a wall.
> 
> Appreciate the help and ideas though - always good to get pushed and verify, at least now I know.


Remind me what your hardware config is, again?


----------



## neteng101

Ichirou said:


> Remind me what your hardware config is, again?


MSI Z690-A Pro DDR4 board, 13700k, 4x8GB Samsung B-die 4000 CL16 (2 Patriot Viper kits). I do suspect the board which I've had since Alder Lake launched is probably a factor here.


----------



## Ichirou

Once again can't stabilize 4,300 MHz. What a mess of a board and its VDDQ. Gonna wait for the new board before retrying. Kind of fed up with wasting time.
At least I've gained some stability and can use this baseline as a means to bin boards.


----------



## bhav

One thing I find odd though, 4300CL14 1T on Z790 is only around 47 ns latency with this ram.

On Z490 it was 41ns at 4533CL15 2T.

Going up to the next frequency : CL limit lowers latency that much, or platform difference?

More likely the platform as samsung B die on 10th gen could manage sub 35ns?


----------



## ViTosS

Has anyone tried this latest beta BIOS for Z790 Strix-A?






ROG-STRIX-Z790-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0810.7z







drive.google.com





@PhoenixMDA?


----------



## PhoenixMDA

ViTosS said:


> Has anyone tried this latest beta BIOS for Z790 Strix-A?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ROG-STRIX-Z790-A-GAMING-WIFI-D4-ASUS-0810.7z
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> drive.google.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> @PhoenixMDA?


I have the Z690 Strix D4, but i can say the last Bios 2204 for the Z690 is really the best Bios at all.
I really didn't think that something useful would come. But this time the people at Asus did a really good job.
So i would try it


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> One thing I find odd though, 4300CL14 1T on Z790 is only around 47 ns latency with this ram.
> 
> On Z490 it was 41ns at 4533CL15 2T.
> 
> Going up to the next frequency : CL limit lowers latency that much, or platform difference?
> 
> More likely the platform as samsung B die on 10th gen could manage sub 35ns?


Platform difference. But you can get similar numbers if you use Intel MLC instead of AIDA.


----------



## neteng101

Hypothetical question… if RAM works at advertised speeds in Gear 2, shouldn’t the same amount of VDIMM work for Gear 1? SA/VDDQ I can understand but why raise VDIMM?


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> Hypothetical question… if RAM works at advertised speeds in Gear 2, shouldn’t the same amount of VDIMM work for Gear 1? SA/VDDQ I can understand but why raise VDIMM?


In theory, yes.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Platform difference. But you can get similar numbers if you use Intel MLC instead of AIDA.


Intel MLC, I'm not sure if its currently accurate for some reason.

Aida always giving 70500 bandwidth, 47-48 latency, IMLC only 67k bandwidth. latency fluctuates from 42-48!


----------



## Ichirou

bhav said:


> Intel MLC, I'm not sure if its currently accurate for some reason.
> 
> Aida always giving 70500 bandwidth, 47-48 latency, IMLC only 67k bandwidth. latency fluctuates from 42-48!


Use AIDA for bandwidth, and Intel MLC for latency.


----------



## imrevoau

I feel like my AIDA bandwidth is always lower than it should be. At least for Read, the others seem in line. I only get around 70k read @4200 yet I see others getting 73+


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> I feel like my AIDA bandwidth is always lower than it should be. At least for Read, the others seem in line. I only get around 70k read @4200 yet I see others getting 73+


Subtimings and die-type, my friend.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> Subtimings and die-type, my friend.


well I have pretty much everything as tight as it well go, and relative to other people on Samsung B-Die anyway.


----------



## Pk1

neteng101 said:


> Hypothetical question… if RAM works at advertised speeds in Gear 2, shouldn’t the same amount of VDIMM work for Gear 1? SA/VDDQ I can understand but why raise VDIMM?





neteng101 said:


> Giving up on 4000 - might be my board or IMC, possibly the board, I've never stabilized at 4000 on it, different kits and not on the old 12700k either. Just trying out 3900 and seeing what timings I can get now on the latency side before deciding if I'm keeping these RAM or looking at something else.


I have MSI Fast Boot changed to "Slow Training". Under "DRAM Training Config" I have VDDQ Training, Round Trip Latency, and Turn Around Timing, all set to enabled. Then 1.32v SA, 1.38 VDDQ, 1.55v DRAM and 1.55v Eventual DRAM. Try AUTO SA to see if that helps any. You can try turning on those Trainings to see if it helps anything. I know I had trouble at first when I overlooked Eventual DRAM and until I turned Fast boot to Slow Training. Hope it helps! I also have 4x8gb 4000c16 sticks but from Corsair.


----------



## neteng101

Pk1 said:


> I have MSI Fast Boot changed to "Slow Training". Under "DRAM Training Config" I have VDDQ Training, Round Trip Latency, and Turn Around Timing, all set to enabled.


I don't have the option for slow training, but fast boot is disabled for me. I'll try training and eventual DRAM. Close to getting 4000-16 working with not too tight secondary/tertiary timings, there's just a few errors I can't weed out yet. 9 errors in TM5 Absolut overnight, 6 cycles.

Edit - pretty sure I'm done now - this will never work. Your suggestions yielded results in RTL training, but the one thing that I absolutely need is tons of VDDQ. The tighter RTLs actually made even what was stable before a bit unstable, but I can only raise VDDQ so much before I get instability from too much VDDQ. 1.50v VDDQ and beyond brings back instability, 1.45v and below is totally unusable too, and within that limited window I just can't get to 100% stability.

Maybe its my IMC or board, starting to lean to IMC at this point, but looks like no bueno for me.


----------



## tunste

neteng101 said:


> I don't have the option for slow training, but fast boot is disabled for me. I'll try training and eventual DRAM. Close to getting 4000-16 working with not too tight secondary/tertiary timings, there's just a few errors I can't weed out yet. 9 errors in TM5 Absolut overnight, 6 cycles.
> 
> Edit - pretty sure I'm done now - this will never work. Your suggestions yielded results in RTL training, but the one thing that I absolutely need is tons of VDDQ. The tighter RTLs actually made even what was stable before a bit unstable, but I can only raise VDDQ so much before I get instability from too much VDDQ. 1.50v VDDQ and beyond brings back instability, 1.45v and below is totally unusable too, and within that limited window I just can't get to 100% stability.
> 
> Maybe its my IMC or board, starting to lean to IMC at this point, but looks like no bueno for me.


I have my GSKILL Ripjaws V Series 32GB (2 x 16GB) DDR4 4000 (CL 16 @ 1.4v) @ 4133 MHz (15,15,15,30,320,Gear1, CR2). SA: 1.34v. VDDQ TX: 1.35v. Ram @ 1.58v. My CPU: 13600K @5.6 GHz all cores on MSI z790 Tomahawk.


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> I don't have the option for slow training, but fast boot is disabled for me. I'll try training and eventual DRAM. Close to getting 4000-16 working with not too tight secondary/tertiary timings, there's just a few errors I can't weed out yet. 9 errors in TM5 Absolut overnight, 6 cycles.
> 
> Edit - pretty sure I'm done now - this will never work. Your suggestions yielded results in RTL training, but the one thing that I absolutely need is tons of VDDQ. The tighter RTLs actually made even what was stable before a bit unstable, but I can only raise VDDQ so much before I get instability from too much VDDQ. 1.50v VDDQ and beyond brings back instability, 1.45v and below is totally unusable too, and within that limited window I just can't get to 100% stability.
> 
> Maybe its my IMC or board, starting to lean to IMC at this point, but looks like no bueno for me.


It's definitely IMC. No point denying it like many others. Try binning another chip if it really bugs you that much.


----------



## neteng101

Ichirou said:


> It's definitely IMC. No point denying it like many others. Try binning another chip if it really bugs you that much.


Yeah - no point wasting time on this POS any more. I'd rather rebuild the whole setup around DDR5 instead of just a chip, but might wait it out another year or two.

Since I have the RAM and needed some extra RAM anyways, I'll try them out in my other build, that 12600k so far is rock solid running a slower kit at 4000.


----------



## neteng101

This took hardly any time to get results, actually had to dial back voltages to pass y-cruncher, SA 1.32v, VDDQ 1.35v, VDIMM 1.52v - probably can tune SA down a bit more too, and tighten timings. Previously on the 13700k anything I could manage on 4000-16 was nowhere near a prayer of running y-crucher. I didn't tweak secondaries/tertiaries yet, these were from the old set.


----------



## neteng101

This is all for now - have to test for long term stability but it passes y-cruncher 2.5/5b and seems to work. There's a nasty little secret I found about this Patriot Viper 4000-16 B-die kits by accident really - it doesn't like tCWL too low. I checked XMP timings, tCWL was at 18, and lowering it to 16 causes a ton of issues with stability.


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> This is all for now - have to test for long term stability but it passes y-cruncher 2.5/5b and seems to work. There's a nasty little secret I found about this Patriot Viper 4000-16 B-die kits by accident really - it doesn't like tCWL too low. I checked XMP timings, tCWL was at 18, and lowering it to 16 causes a ton of issues with stability.
> 
> View attachment 2591903


Raising the tRDWR group allows you to lower tCWL.


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

new CPU arrived and I got something stable to start off with now. Fast memory fixed the linpack bottleneck now, runs much hotter (90c just at start) and sucks more power. CPU gets delidded tomorrow, I get it back in a few days and do some more tweaking.


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

question, at what point is gear 2 better than gear 1?

eg if you can run 4400mhz at gear 2 but only 4000mhz at gear 1 then is the gear 1 option the best?

thanks


----------



## bhav

Pro4TLZZ said:


> question, at what point is gear 2 better than gear 1?
> 
> eg if you can run 4400mhz at gear 2 but only 4000mhz at gear 1 then is the gear 1 option the best?
> 
> thanks


At no point on DDR4 is G2 better than G1.

It takes 6000 DDR5 to beat 3600CL16 by 1%, so nothing in G2 on DDR5 is matching 4000+ G1.

I did just one test, even at 4800CL17, G2 was still slower in Civ 6 turn time benchmark than 4000CL14 G1.


----------



## riximFPS

Now this is my final result with Patriot 4x Viper 4400mhz RAM.
Do the timings fit, what do you think?















One thing I don't understand: the RAM voltage can't be set above 1,39v at 4000mhz, otherwise I don't get a POST anymore.
If I clock the RAM at e.g. 3600 mhz I can set 1,6v without problems, funny.


----------



## neteng101

Ichirou said:


> Raising the tRDWR group allows you to lower tCWL.


That worked - but at this point I suspect I got some bad memory sticks - not going to bother wasting more time, just returning them. TM5 will just get errors in extended tests regardless of what I do to timings (even really loose timings). Lots of time wasted, but I did learn a lot from trying out all sorts of combinations.


----------



## bscool

Faris put some ddr4 memory OC benches up comparing 3600XMP to tightened 4000c15-15-15 and 4300c16-16-16.

He was going to do a comparison against ddr5 but had issues with the DDR5 board. I think the ddr4 results are still instesting and helpful for many to see how increasing speed and timings helps.






PCBuilding


KingFaris10's Site




kingfaris.co.uk


----------



## Ichirou

neteng101 said:


> That worked - but at this point I suspect I got some bad memory sticks - not going to bother wasting more time, just returning them. TM5 will just get errors in extended tests regardless of what I do to timings (even really loose timings). Lots of time wasted, but I did learn a lot from trying out all sorts of combinations.


Extended tests? As in errors popping up over time?

Most likely overheating.


----------



## KyKo.

PATRIOT VIPER STEEL DDR4 4400 CL19 4X8GB OC 4000CL15 GR1


----------



## DearWolf

Hello

I had a question about SR/DR OC on Raptor lake.

Today I bought Trident Z 3200 CL14 2 x 16GB, earlier I used Patriot Viper Steel [email protected] Gear 1 works well. S.A. 1.33/ VDQQ - 1.22V DRAMV 1.56V.

Today RAM works fine in Gear [email protected] [email protected] CR1 65k tREFI. 1.38V. It could boot at 4133 but without any stability. Even at 19-19-19-39 CR1. I know that it could boot at [email protected] CR1 1.45V VDQQ 1.3V SA. 1.34V

I also done Round Trip/Turn Around/VDDQ training.

4133 is my Max IMC with DR or it doesn’t matter?

mobo: Gigabyte Z690 Gaming X DDR4. BIOS F.22
CPU : 13700kF


----------



## Ichirou

DearWolf said:


> Hello
> 
> I had a question about SR/DR OC on Raptor lake.
> 
> Today I bought Trident Z 3200 CL14 2 x 16GB, earlier I used Patriot Vaiper Steel [email protected] Gear 1 works well. S.A. 1.33/ VDQQ - 1.22V DRAMV 1.56V.
> 
> Today RAM works fine in Gear [email protected] [email protected] CR1 65k tREFI. 1.38V. It could boot at 4133 but without any stability. Even at 19-19-19-39 CR1. I know that it could boot at [email protected] CR1 1.45V VDQQ 1.3V SA. 1.34V
> 
> 4133 is my Max IMC with DR or it doesn’t matter?
> 
> mobo: Gigabyte Z690 Gaming X DDR4. BIOS F.22
> CPU : 13700kF


DR is harder to run than SR. Try 4,100 or 4,000 MHz instead.


----------



## Penguininattack

Hyper x predator cl 17 won't post at 3900 gear 1 command rate 2 even with 1,61 on vddq and vdim at 1.47 vccsa. What a **** kit. **** sumsung. Return it?

Ideas?


----------



## Ichirou

Penguininattack said:


> Hyper x predator cl 17 won't post at 3900 gear 1 command rate 2 even with 1,61 on vddq and vdim at 1.47 vccsa. What a *** kit. *** sumsung. Return it?
> 
> Ideas?


What board and CPU?


----------



## Penguininattack

12900 z690 assess


----------



## Penguininattack

K


----------



## DearWolf

I’m


Ichirou said:


> DR is harder to run than SR. Try 4,100 or 4,000 MHz instead.


Thanks for you replay.
It’s working fine at 4100MHz. CL14-15-15-34 @ 1.54V. I have to test it more but works fine on 
Prime95 and TestMem5 extreme config. 
VDDQ 1.35
SA 1.33
48C degree in heavy ram game is okey temperature?
4090 makes them pretty hot 😂


----------



## Ichirou

DearWolf said:


> I’m
> 
> 
> 48C degree in heavy ram game is okey temperature?
> 4090 makes them pretty hot 😂


Wouldn't recommend it.
Run SFC /scannow in CMD to see if anything corrupted.


----------



## DearWolf

Ichirou said:


> Wouldn't recommend it.
> Run SFC /scannow in CMD to see if anything corrupted.


For current time: Windows Resource protection did not find any integrity violation.

I’m using active cooling on them but there is around 47.2C.

What temperature do you recommend for daily?

Im really glad for you help!


----------



## Ichirou

DearWolf said:


> For current time: Windows Resource protection did not find any integrity violation.
> 
> I’m using active cooling on them but there is around 47.2C.
> 
> What temperature do you recommend for daily?
> 
> Im really glad for you help!


If you don't get any corruption or BSODs and can run stress tests like TM5 1usmus/anta777 just fine, you'll probably be okay.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> If you don't get any corruption or BSODs and can run stress tests like TM5 1usmus/anta777 just fine, you'll probably be okay.


140MM fan is the way. Dropped my temps in TM5 Absolute from 48c @ 1.53v, to 42c @ 1.63v. Looks ugly though, lol. Wonder how watercooled RAM would do.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> 140MM fan is the way. Dropped my temps in TM5 Absolute from 48c @ 1.53v, to 42c @ 1.63v. Looks ugly though, lol. Wonder how watercooled RAM would do.


With DIMMs under water, the heatspreaders feel cool to the touch even up to 1.70-1.75V. Almost as if the RAM isn't even running.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> With DIMMs under water, the heatspreaders feel cool to the touch even up to 1.70-1.75V. Almost as if the RAM isn't even running.


It'd be fun to watercool DIMM's but I will probably be moving to DDR5 soon, and even with just a fan I'm not temp limited, my RAM just doesn't scale past around 1.6-1.63. Be cool to do at some point though.


----------



## bscool

DearWolf said:


> Hello
> 
> I had a question about SR/DR OC on Raptor lake.
> 
> Today I bought Trident Z 3200 CL14 2 x 16GB, earlier I used Patriot Viper Steel [email protected] Gear 1 works well. S.A. 1.33/ VDQQ - 1.22V DRAMV 1.56V.
> 
> Today RAM works fine in Gear [email protected] [email protected] CR1 65k tREFI. 1.38V. It could boot at 4133 but without any stability. Even at 19-19-19-39 CR1. I know that it could boot at [email protected] CR1 1.45V VDQQ 1.3V SA. 1.34V
> 
> I also done Round Trip/Turn Around/VDDQ training.
> 
> 4133 is my Max IMC with DR or it doesn’t matter?
> 
> mobo: Gigabyte Z690 Gaming X DDR4. BIOS F.22
> CPU : 13700kF


Run cr2/t2 with DR b die not 1t. Even with SR might need 2t. Easier to run in gear 1.


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> 140MM fan is the way. Dropped my temps in TM5 Absolute from 48c @ 1.53v, to 42c @ 1.63v. Looks ugly though, lol. Wonder how watercooled RAM would do.


You don't need to watercool ram if you can get a proper static pressure fan over them <45c at 1.72v with OCCT ram test, only because that test maxes out ram temps. 33c in TM5.


----------



## Cam1

Tuto says: "B-Die is temperature sensitive, and its ideal range is ~30-40 °C"
Because of the gpu, the ram runs at 50+ but i don't get any error.
CPU settings untouched
VRAM 1.55v
SA 1.35v
VDDQ 1.4v


----------



## St1tchFix

Hello gents,

I was working the last days on a RAM OC with what seems Micron 8Gb E-die (Rev.E) . Those where bought 2x 16Gb Corsair Vengeance SL PRO 3600 CL18 dual rank.
First I used them with a 12400F, and I ran them at 3500-15-19-17-38-1T @1.45 but i wasn't able to run them faster because of the VCSA which was locked.

Now that I changed to a 13600KF CPU i am doing that again as the VCSA is now unlocked.

MSI Z690-A Pro
I5 13600KF
2x 16Gb Corsair Vengeance SL PRO 3600 CL18 - Micron 8Gb Rev.E ( E-die) dual ranks - D9VPP (Z11B / 19 nm)

I tried a lot of frequencies but it seems that the sweet spot is 3900MT/s, it runs with a 3900-16-22-18-42-1T, @ 1.45v and 1.2VCSA, VCIO doesn't exist on this BIOS it seems. Could you check my table and tell me if this seems good. Should I try something else. Are the voltages good, should i try to optimize maybe other things ?

Here the table i used for my tests with latencies and all tertiaries.
OC table


----------



## Cam1

St1tchFix said:


> Hello gents,
> 
> I was working the last days on a RAM OC with what seems Micron 8Gb E-die (Rev.E) . Those where bought 2x 16Gb Corsair Vengeance SL PRO 3600 CL18 dual rank.
> First I used them with a 12400F, and I ran them at 3500-15-19-17-38-1T @1.45 but i wasn't able to run them faster because of the VCSA which was locked.
> 
> Now that I changed to a 13600KF CPU i am doing that again as the VCSA is now unlocked.
> 
> MSI Z690-A Pro
> I5 13600KF
> 2x 16Gb Corsair Vengeance SL PRO 3600 CL18 - Micron 8Gb Rev.E ( E-die) dual ranks - D9VPP (Z11B / 19 nm)
> 
> I tried a lot of frequencies but it seems that the sweet spot is 3900MT/s, it runs with a 3900-16-22-18-42-1T, @ 1.45v and 1.2VCSA, VCIO doesn't exist on this BIOS it seems. Could you check my table and tell me if this seems good. Should I try something else. Are the voltages good, should i try to optimize maybe other things ?
> 
> Here the table i used for my tests with latencies and all tertiaries.
> OC table


Not sure what is VCIO, we use Vram VCSA and VDDQ only i think.
i followed this guide to setup my ram -> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper · GitHub


----------



## St1tchFix

Yeah


Cam1 said:


> Not sure what is VCIO, we use Vram VCSA and VDDQ only i think.
> i followed this guide to setup my ram -> MemTestHelper/DDR4 OC Guide.md at oc-guide · integralfx/MemTestHelper · GitHub


yeah, VDDQ then is at 1.3, used the same guide


----------



## riximFPS

KyKo. said:


> PATRIOT VIPER STEEL DDR4 4400 CL19 4X8GB OC 4000CL15 GR1
> 
> View attachment 2592161
> View attachment 2592162



I copied just some of your subtimings and managed to do a little better:










But I still can't set more than 1.4 V at 4000 MHz and therefore unfortunately can't improve the timings either, because otherwise my system won't boot. Does this have something to do with the IMC, or what could be the reason for this?


----------



## bscool

riximFPS said:


> I copied just some of your subtimings and managed to do a little better:
> 
> View attachment 2592311
> 
> 
> But I still can't set more than 1.4 V at 4000 MHz and therefore unfortunately can't improve the timings either, because otherwise my system won't boot. Does this have something to do with the IMC, or what could be the reason for this?


Combo of IMC and running 4x8 is harder than 2x8 or 2x16. If you wanted to see if it is the IMC run 2x8 in a2 and b2 to see if you can run hgher than 4000. When I tested on Strix d4 a long time ago I could run quite a bit higher wit 2x8/.2x16 than with 4 sticks.

z690/z790 MB are daisy chain so can run 2 stick easier. T topology MB do better with 4 sticks, but those are older gens like z390.


----------



## bhav

St1tchFix said:


> Hello gents,
> 
> I was working the last days on a RAM OC with what seems Micron 8Gb E-die (Rev.E) . Those where bought 2x 16Gb Corsair Vengeance SL PRO 3600 CL18 dual rank.
> First I used them with a 12400F, and I ran them at 3500-15-19-17-38-1T @1.45 but i wasn't able to run them faster because of the VCSA which was locked.
> 
> Now that I changed to a 13600KF CPU i am doing that again as the VCSA is now unlocked.
> 
> MSI Z690-A Pro
> I5 13600KF
> 2x 16Gb Corsair Vengeance SL PRO 3600 CL18 - Micron 8Gb Rev.E ( E-die) dual ranks - D9VPP (Z11B / 19 nm)
> 
> I tried a lot of frequencies but it seems that the sweet spot is 3900MT/s, it runs with a 3900-16-22-18-42-1T, @ 1.45v and 1.2VCSA, VCIO doesn't exist on this BIOS it seems. Could you check my table and tell me if this seems good. Should I try something else. Are the voltages good, should i try to optimize maybe other things ?
> 
> Here the table i used for my tests with latencies and all tertiaries.
> OC table


I'm not sure if its the case that all newer micron E die is worse than the original 3200 LT sport kit.

It should do 3733CL14 1.45-1.5v, 3900-4000CL15, 4133-4200CL16 both at under 1.55v.

The 3200CL16 and 3600CL18 are random lottery ram, you get anything that the ram companies still have lying around being cleared out for cheap, so no idea if you got old good e die or newer and seemingly worse ones.

Also on my 10900K, I only needed 1.15v SA for 4200CL16 with loose other timings, more SA for tighter TRCD / TRP as is the case with micron ram.

Test all timings at auto, only screen for Freq : CL first, try confirm for stability 3733-3800CL14, 3900-4000 CL15, 4133-4200CL16, even if you need to set gear 2 for the latter, and only after that tune the rest of the timings.


----------



## ItsCash

I know this doesn't pertain to a memory OC, any info would be greatly appreciated. Is there any room for improvement if using for gaming specifically? Ram is 4000/C15 at 1.5v.


----------



## bhav

ItsCash said:


> View attachment 2592450
> I know this doesn't pertain to a memory OC, any info would be greatly appreciated. Is there any room for improvement if using for gaming specifically? Ram is 4000/C15 at 1.5v.


If its a DR kit 4000CL15 for that voltage is already very good, however if your IMC can manage you could try 4200CL16.

Also are you sure its running in Gear 1? Post a CPU-Z screenshot of the memory tab so we can check.

Also the SA is far too high for 12th gen, you shouldn't go over 1.35v.


----------



## imrevoau

bhav said:


> If its a DR kit 4000CL15 for that voltage is already very good, however if your IMC can manage you could try 4200CL16.
> 
> Also are you sure its running in Gear 1? Post a CPU-Z screenshot of the memory tab so we can check.
> 
> Also the SA is far too high for 12th gen, you shouldn't go over 1.35v.


Yeah, 4200 on a 12th gen i7 is probably not gonna happen.


----------



## ViTosS

Guys, if my RAM OC (4300CL15-16-16 or 4200CL15-15-15) is only stable below 45c, do you think future BIOS can resolve this or is only a problem of my RAM dealing with heat and the sticks limitation itself that no better BIOS can solve?


----------



## ItsCash

bhav said:


> If its a DR kit 4000CL15 for that voltage is already very good, however if your IMC can manage you could try 4200CL16.
> 
> Also are you sure its running in Gear 1? Post a CPU-Z screenshot of the memory tab so we can check.
> 
> Also the SA is far too high for 12th gen, you shouldn't go over 1.35v.










The SA is on auto, is that a dangerous voltage for SA?


----------



## bhav

ItsCash said:


> View attachment 2592456
> The SA is on auto, is that a dangerous voltage for SA?


It is in gear 1 so thats good.

Yes the SA voltage is dangerous for 12th / 13th gen, reduce it to 1.35v and check the ram OC is still stable. You shouldn't even need that much SA for 4000CL15.


----------



## bscool

ViTosS said:


> Guys, if my RAM OC (4300CL15-16-16 or 4200CL15-15-15) is only stable below 45c, do you think future BIOS can resolve this or is only a problem of my RAM dealing with heat and the sticks limitation itself that no better BIOS can solve?


It is the ram. Just how b die is with tight timings/subs.


----------



## ItsCash

bhav said:


> It is in gear 1 so thats good.
> 
> Yes the SA voltage is dangerous for 12th / 13th gen, reduce it to 1.35v and check the ram OC is still stable. You shouldn't even need that much SA for 4000CL15.










Dialed the SA to 1.35 so far, still consistently in the 50 range latency in AIDA and no window errors. May run Memtest over night for any errors as well.


----------



## Ichirou

ItsCash said:


> View attachment 2592467
> Dialed the SA to 1.35 so far, still consistently in the 50 range latency in AIDA and no window errors. May run Memtest over night for any errors as well.


Did you tighten the timings yet?


----------



## ViTosS

bscool said:


> It is the ram. Just how b die is with tight timings/subs.


I see... Yeah I can't get no better timings until I watercool the DIMMs, not gonna happen, maybe I switch to future BIOS to try less VDDQ or SA, but not so worried about that, I'm 1.275v SA atm and 1.45v VDDQ. Plenty safe.


----------



## ItsCash

Ichirou said:


> Did you tighten the timings yet?





Ichirou said:


> Did you tighten the timings yet?


I tightened the timings as much as I could, I tried C14 and would get errors or crash to windows. C15 seems to be lowest I can get these sticks. Tried to run 4 sticks lol and that was a def no couldn't do C15 with 4 sticks at all.


----------



## bhav

ItsCash said:


> I tightened the timings as much as I could, I tried C14 and would get errors or crash to windows. C15 seems to be lowest I can get these sticks. Tried to run 4 sticks lol and that was a def no couldn't do C15 with 4 sticks at all.


Did you try CL14 with 1.6v and a fan though?

What about 4133-4200 G1?


----------



## ItsCash

bhav said:


> Did you try CL14 with 1.6v and a fan though?
> 
> What about 4133-4200 G1?


May try to up the voltage to run C14 haven't tried that I as thought 1.5 was max for B-Die? I could run 4133 C15 but wasn't much of gain to justify it. May try 4200C15 with 1.6 as well. Those are some things I will try this weekend when I'm off work.


----------



## bhav

ItsCash said:


> May try to up the voltage to run C14 haven't tried that I as thought 1.5 was max for B-Die? I could run 4133 C15 but wasn't much of gain to justify it. May try 4200C15 with 1.6 as well. Those are some things I will try this weekend when I'm off work.


Theres a lot of XMP kits with 1.55v, and one with 1.6v so it should be fine as long as its cooled, maybe just try 1.55v if you don't want to go all the way to 1.6v.

4000+ CL14 on any ram is usually 1.6v+ territory anyway, but I think there is a b die XMP kit thats 4000CL14 1.55v, but 2x8 Gb maybe.


----------



## Ichirou

ItsCash said:


> May try to up the voltage to run C14 haven't tried that I as thought 1.5 was max for B-Die? I could run 4133 C15 but wasn't much of gain to justify it. May try 4200C15 with 1.6 as well. Those are some things I will try this weekend when I'm off work.


4x8 GB Samsung B-Die struggles a bit in my experience. CL15 tends to be the lowest you can go on these boards.
I'd suggest 4,133 MHz CL15 with tightened timings.


----------



## bhav

Oh for 8 Gb b die, at least with 2x8 you can do like 4133 CL14 with around 1.55v, but with 4x8 might not be possible.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> 4x8 GB Samsung B-Die struggles a bit in my experience. CL15 tends to be the lowest you can go on these boards.
> I'd suggest 4,133 MHz CL15 with tightened timings.


There's a guy running 4400 C14 on DR B-Die, no idea what god bin he has though or how much voltage is going into it. I need 1.65v just to boot C14 @ 4200 lol.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> There's a guy running 4400 C14 on DR B-Die, no idea what god bin he has though or how much voltage is going into it. I need 1.65v just to boot C14 @ 4200 lol.


You need a diamond bin DDR4 IMC to do 4,400 MHz Gear 1 with two sticks of RAM.

I can do 4,300 MHz with four sticks of RAM, and my IMC can do 4,400 MHz as well (but I'm limited by the motherboard).
Sticking with 4,200 MHz for a daily, though. After the CPU's overclocked, the headroom available for the memory is severely limited.
The RAM isn't nearly as important as the CPU in terms of overall performance, so I can tolerate dropping 100 MHz.

Don't really want to kill another board after all of the frustration I've gone through so far. It's time to move on with life.
I know my CPU can do 4,400 MHz. 1.26V VCCSA is enough for 4,300 MHz CL14, and every +100 MHz needs around +0.06V VCCSA. You can do the math.


----------



## imrevoau

Ichirou said:


> You need a diamond bin DDR4 IMC to do 4,400 MHz Gear 1 with two sticks of RAM.
> 
> I can do 4,300 MHz with four sticks of RAM, and my IMC can do 4,400 MHz as well (but I'm limited by the motherboard).
> Sticking with 4,200 MHz for a daily, though. After the CPU's overclocked, the headroom available for the memory is severely limited.
> The RAM isn't nearly as important as the CPU in terms of overall performance, so I can tolerate dropping 100 MHz.
> 
> Don't really want to kill another board after all of the frustration I've gone through so far. It's time to move on with life.
> I know my CPU can do 4,400 MHz. 1.26V VCCSA is enough for 4,300 MHz CL14, and every +100 MHz needs around +0.06V VCCSA. You can do the math.


Yeah I'm sticking with 4200 since the board and CPU are happy to run it with relatively conservative voltages, and anything above 4200 is an go anyway.


----------



## bhav

imrevoau said:


> There's a guy running 4400 C14 on DR B-Die, no idea what god bin he has though or how much voltage is going into it. I need 1.65v just to boot C14 @ 4200 lol.


I could boot but not stabilize 4400 G1. After putting on the contact frame I can no longer boot 4400 G1 or 5400 G2 whoops.

But 4300 still working so meh.


----------



## Ichirou

imrevoau said:


> Yeah I'm sticking with 4200 since the board and CPU are happy to run it with relatively conservative voltages, and anything above 4200 is an go anyway.





bhav said:


> I could boot but not stabilize 4400 G1. After putting on the contact frame I can no longer boot 4400 G1 or 5400 G2 whoops.
> 
> But 4300 still working so meh.


If I were to stick with 55/43/45 stock (or maybe a tiny bit above it), I might be able to daily 4,300 MHz.
But a +100 MHz increase on the memory isn't going to make up for a massive frequency increase on the CPU. The performance just isn't there.
The E-cores seem to demand the most though, due to L2 Cache voltage. Perhaps if I ran a P-core only config, I'd be able to go much further.


----------



## zebra_hun

Hi everyone!

First time using Intel MLC. What do i wrong? 
CL 15 15 15 bring nothing. I've got 51ns with CL17, with CL15 latency is 49. Aida shows me ~43ns.
I use CL17, because less voltage, and ingame ~ -5 fps.
Downoaded IMLCGui-1.1.1, but it has no .exe, download mlc_v3.10 and it has in windows ordner IMLCGui.exe, copied to first ordner, and works.
How can i use IMLC?
Thx


----------



## Taraquin

ItsCash said:


> View attachment 2592467
> Dialed the SA to 1.35 so far, still consistently in the 50 range latency in AIDA and no window errors. May run Memtest over night for any errors as well.


SA voltage is impacted by CPU-temp aswell. Going from stock Intel cooler to a basic tower cooler that lowered CPU-temp at load by 15C I was able to run my ram 100MHz faster at same locked SA-voltage on my 12400F. If you have a high CPU OC that drives you in the 70C+ territory at load you might consider lowering it slightly to lower voltages and that may give you 100-200MHz more ram oc headroom at same SA-voltage which generally will matter more for performance than 100MHz on the core, especially in most games


----------



## Taraquin

zebra_hun said:


> Hi everyone!
> 
> First time using Intel MLC. What do i wrong?
> CL 15 15 15 bring nothing. I've got 51ns with CL17, with CL15 latency is 49. Aida shows me ~43ns.
> I use CL17, because less voltage, and ingame ~ -5 fps.
> Downoaded IMLCGui-1.1.1, but it has no .exe, download mlc_v3.10 and it has in windows ordner IMLCGui.exe, copied to first ordner, and works.
> How can i use IMLC?
> Thx
> View attachment 2592473


ns for 2 CL lower is something and sounds perfectly valid. Remember that the 3 primary timings don\t matter that much. See what you can do about RAS, RFC and REFI.What voltage do you use? At 4266 350 RFC equates to 164ns which is quite slow. at 1.5V most B-die can do 135-140ns, at 1.4V they usually do 140-145ns. At 4266cl15 you probably need 1.55-1.6V, that should give you room for sub 300 RFC. A really good kit at 1.55V can do 270 RFC. Your RAS can probably run 30 fine at cl17 and even at cl15. REFI can go up to 262143, but try something like 131072 first. Too high REFI can cause file corruption so be careful  Generally lowering RFC by 10 reduces latency by 0.1ns, going from 65536 REFI to 13072 should equate to around 1ns latency aswell, lowering RAS by 5 should net you around 0.5ns.


----------



## KyKo.

The Patriot viper steel 4400cl19 & 4000cl16 on 2x8 GB confiq
Every +/-200Mhz need +/-0.06v
In my case with the 4x8 4400cl19 kit OC on 4000cl15 need 1.55v . And on 3800cl15 need 1.47v = 0.08v
Also 2x8 config every +/-CL is 0.09v
So for 4000cl15 1.55v for 4000cl14 is 1.64+0.02v 
Or 4000cl16 1.46v
for 4200cl15 1.62v unstable do the limitations of/ imc /temperature/board...
For those with i7/i5 on 4x8GB GR1 3800CL14/15 is best.
Now for 13gen looks like need less voltage for SA and VDDQ compare the 12gen.


----------



## Riadon

I went from fully stable with 2x8 GB sr b-die (with 13600kf) in y-cruncher/tm5 absolut/gaming at 4200 16-17-16-28 2t, 1.47v DRAM, 1.3 SA, auto (1.2) VDDQ, to immediately unstable in all 3 even when increasing voltages by 100 mv each. I'm even unstable at the same speed after increasing primary timings by 1 and setting all of my subtimings to auto, also unstable at 4133 using the old settings.

I was testing ODTs and VDDQ right before I lost stability. Not sure which did it but VDDQ at least seems to occasionally have a glitchy interaction with SA on my board (ASUS B660-PLUS D4 latest bios 2014) in that when VDDQ is set above SA, the SA voltage is raised to match VDDQ and doesn't come back down once VDDQ is lowered. My board is locked to 1.4 SA so I don't see how that could have degraded my imc so severely in the few hours of testing with tm5 which shouldn't even be particularly hard on the memory controller. Not heat related either, I was stable even at 42-45c gaming temperatures but get errors even at 30c now.

Clearing cmos does nothing, reflashing the same bios does nothing and I can't downgrade to an older bios because the board won't let me. Is there a better method for clearing out potentially corrupted motherboard settings? CPU and RAM are only about 3 weeks old, motherboard is about a year.

Here are the full timings if necessary.


----------



## St1tchFix

bhav said:


> I'm not sure if its the case that all newer micron E die is worse than the original 3200 LT sport kit.
> 
> It should do 3733CL14 1.45-1.5v, 3900-4000CL15, 4133-4200CL16 both at under 1.55v.
> 
> The 3200CL16 and 3600CL18 are random lottery ram, you get anything that the ram companies still have lying around being cleared out for cheap, so no idea if you got old good e die or newer and seemingly worse ones.
> 
> Also on my 10900K, I only needed 1.15v SA for 4200CL16 with loose other timings, more SA for tighter TRCD / TRP as is the case with micron ram.
> 
> Test all timings at auto, only screen for Freq : CL first, try confirm for stability 3733-3800CL14, 3900-4000 CL15, 4133-4200CL16, even if you need to set gear 2 for the latter, and only after that tune the rest of the timings.


Hey, yeah not sure what I've got, but for what it seems it doesn't like CL14 even at 3600. I've extensively tested and here are the results. Above 4000 I always have errors, even at CL20 below CL16 i managed to get it work at 3500 CL15, but CL14 I never managed.

What does it change to make as example 4000 G1 30x100x1.33 or 4000G1 40x100x1.00 ?

Here is what i tried



4133CL174133CL161.55 - 1.25 - 1.25errors4000CL161.5 - 1.25 - 1.25errors @ 42deg4000CL161.45 - 1.2errors @ 42deg3900CL161.45 - 1.2 - 1.2*Works*3866CL151.5 - 1.25 - 1.25errors3800CL151,5 - 1,25errors @ 43deg3800CL151.5 - 1.25 - 1.25errors @ 43/44deg3733CL151.5 - 1.25 - 1.25errors 6min3500CL151.45 - 1.2 - 1.2*Works*3733CL141.5 - 1.25 - 1.25errors3600CL141.45 - 1.25 - 1.25errors3600CL141.5 - 1.25 - 1.25errors3600CL141.55 - 1.3 - 1.3errors3600CL141.5 - 1.25errors3600CL141.55 - 1.3errors


here the full table


----------



## Taraquin

Riadon said:


> I went from fully stable with 2x8 GB sr b-die (with 13600kf) in y-cruncher/tm5 absolut/gaming at 4200 16-17-16-28 2t, 1.47v DRAM, 1.3 SA, auto (1.2) VDDQ, to immediately unstable in all 3 even when increasing voltages by 100 mv each. I'm even unstable at the same speed after increasing primary timings by 1 and setting all of my subtimings to auto, also unstable at 4133 using the old settings.
> 
> I was testing ODTs and VDDQ right before I lost stability. Not sure which did it but VDDQ at least seems to occasionally have a glitchy interaction with SA on my board (ASUS B660-PLUS D4 latest bios 2014) in that when VDDQ is set above SA, the SA voltage is raised to match VDDQ and doesn't come back down once VDDQ is lowered. My board is locked to 1.4 SA so I don't see how that could have degraded my imc so severely in the few hours of testing with tm5 which shouldn't even be particularly hard on the memory controller. Not heat related either, I was stable even at 42-45c gaming temperatures but get errors even at 30c now.
> 
> Clearing cmos does nothing, reflashing the same bios does nothing and I can't downgrade to an older bios because the board won't let me. Is there a better method for clearing out potentially corrupted motherboard settings? CPU and RAM are only about 3 weeks old, motherboard is about a year.
> 
> Here are the full timings if necessary.
> 
> View attachment 2592479


Remove battery for a few minutes,that should reset everything.


----------



## zebra_hun

Taraquin said:


> ns for 2 CL lower is something and sounds perfectly valid. Remember that the 3 primary timings don\t matter that much. See what you can do about RAS, RFC and REFI.What voltage do you use? At 4266 350 RFC equates to 164ns which is quite slow. at 1.5V most B-die can do 135-140ns, at 1.4V they usually do 140-145ns. At 4266cl15 you probably need 1.55-1.6V, that should give you room for sub 300 RFC. A really good kit at 1.55V can do 270 RFC. Your RAS can probably run 30 fine at cl17 and even at cl15. REFI can go up to 262143, but try something like 131072 first. Too high REFI can cause file corruption so be careful  Generally lowering RFC by 10 reduces latency by 0.1ns, going from 65536 REFI to 13072 should equate to around 1ns latency aswell, lowering RAS by 5 should net you around 0.5ns.


Sorry, I appreciate your reply. My question was why IMLC Latency is so high, AIDA Latency is of course good. Everyone has lower latency using IMLC. Maybe I installed the software wrong.
Thanks.

Edit:
If i use windows balanced power plan, grrrr. 70ns. AIDA Cache Bench is super, and my pc works well without problem. Only Intel MLC.
Downloaded, but nothing works, and the IMLCGui.exe i found on internet, copied into the MLC ordner, so works.


----------



## bscool

zebra_hun said:


> Sorry, I appreciate your reply. My question was why IMLC Latency is so high, AIDA Latency is of course good. Everyone has lower latency using IMLC. Maybe I installed the software wrong.
> Thanks.
> 
> Edit:
> If i use windows balanced power plan, grrrr. 70ns. AIDA Cache Bench is super, and my pc works well without problem. Only Intel MLC.
> Downloaded, but nothing works, and the IMLCGui.exe i found on internet, copied into the MLC ordner, so works.
> View attachment 2592547


Are you getting it from here Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui

Are you on Windows 10 or 11? I use Windows 10 and it works fine/normal for me.


----------



## keiththesneak

Hello, newbie here! 

Mobo - Asus TUF Gaming Wifi Plus D4
CPU - 12700k with power limits unlocked 
RAM - F4-4000C16D-32GTZR
XMP enabled. Timing =16-19-19-39, gear 1 enabled. 

I was able to post without any issues and gamed on this set up for a few hours yesterday. Did some CPU bench/stress testing, but is MemTest still the go to for RAM testing? 

Thanks!


----------



## zebra_hun

bscool said:


> Are you getting it from here Releases · FarisR99/IMLCGui
> 
> Are you on Windows 10 or 11? I use Windows 10 and it works fine/normal for me.


Thx, but i'm a noob ... W10, and if i download from your link the exe, it doesn't work. Sorry, how can i install this latency checker? Run as Admin, it's ok. In download section isn't the mlc.exe. Miss something.
Thx


----------



## bscool

zebra_hun said:


> Thx, but i'm a noob ... W10, and if i download from your link the exe, it doesn't work. Sorry, how can i install this latency checker? Run as Admin, it's ok. In download section isn't the mlc.exe. Miss something.
> Thx
> View attachment 2592582


Have the MLC exe(IMLCGui) in a separate folder so it keeps them together.

Click configure tab, then download tab.


----------



## Cam1

keiththesneak said:


> Hello, newbie here!
> 
> Mobo - Asus TUF Gaming Wifi Plus D4
> CPU - 12700k with power limits unlocked
> RAM - F4-4000C16D-32GTZR
> XMP enabled. Timing =16-19-19-39, gear 1 enabled.
> 
> I was able to post without any issues and gamed on this set up for a few hours yesterday. Did some CPU bench/stress testing, but is MemTest still the go to for RAM testing?
> 
> Thanks!


Check temps and voltages in HWinfo?
i have same moba cpu can't get stable 4000Hz memory with any bios including last, have to reduce the ram to 3900Hz and set VDDQ to 1.35v or more.


----------



## zebra_hun

bscool said:


> Have the MCL exe in a separate folder so it keeps them together.
> 
> Click configure tab, then download tab.


Grrrrr, i'm an idiot... THX!!!!
Sometimes i need read


----------



## keiththesneak

Cam1 said:


> Check temps and voltages in HWinfo?
> i have same moba cpu can't get stable 4000Hz memory with any bios including last, have to reduce the ram to 3900Hz and set VDDQ to 1.35v or more.


I believe temps were in the low/mid 40's and will check on voltages. I have it set at 1.4v in BIOS.


----------



## Riadon

Taraquin said:


> Remove battery for a few minutes,that should reset everything.


Unfortunately that worked effectively the same as clearing the CMOS via the motherboard header

There is at least some level of weirdness going on in the BIOS. Even after resetting CMOS and reflashing the BIOS, saving a new profile and then loading that profile, the RAM shows as being set 1 speed bin higher (4266 vs 4200, 4200 vs 4133). Booting into Windows shows that it was just a visual error and the original speed is being used, but it makes me wonder what else is going on in the background because that wasn't happening before my issues started.


----------



## Raimond

yzonker said:


> Bizarre stuff with mem OC'ing. I was benchmarking at 4266. No issues, no crashes. Switched back to my daily 4200 tune and bam, unstable. Win11 kept blue screening.
> 
> Tried increasing SA and VDDQ. Not stable.
> 
> I finally loaded defaults, restarted. Then shut down and flipped the switch on the PSU for a few seconds.
> 
> And back to stable at 4200. Didn't change anything else.


i have had this also before with my z690 edge ddr4,the motherboard was getting weird.
I had this issue once and then never again.
I thought I had broken something,but everything was ok.

I have thought, reflasht the bios to be sure its not an corrupted bios or something.

Also you guys with an z690 edge ddr4 having troubles with overclocking memory with the latest 1.90 bios.
With an old bios(like 1.20) I can pass 4000 cl16 without no problems.But with that 1.90 bios I cant passs 3600 .
A bit anoying,lol.

But with older bios versions like 1.20,my WD 850x is noticeable slower
Witch newer bios is any good?


----------



## OCmylife

So far I`m really happy with this result, as these are only Gskill Neo 3600 CL16-19-19-39 Dimms and the Voltages(1.3 VCCsa, 1.35 VDDQ, 1.4 VDIMM) are pretty fine as well. I know that Samsung B-Die would perform better, but for my personal Rig these aren`t worth the money. Ycruncher 0-1-7 was stable as well.


----------



## Dziarson

@OCmylife Use taiphoon burner i think 16-19 is not B-DIE same mem but timinngs are 16-16-16-16.
TRFC on this mem is catastrophy repair it


----------



## OCmylife

Dziarson said:


> @OCmylife Use taiphoon burner i think 16-19 is not B-DIE same mem but timinngs are 16-16-16-16.
> TRFC on this mem is catastrophy repair it
> 
> View attachment 2593086


Nope, these are Hynix CJR(Typhoon Burner stated something like C/DJR? ), if I could trust the www. I meant that Samsung B Die would be a better option for me, but I'm happy with my Hynix sticks. 😁
Do your think that I could lower the TRFC so that it really matters? Thanks for your help! 😎


----------



## GeneO

You can and it will affect the latency some. But from my experience, with cjr you are not going to get great TRFC.


----------



## OCmylife

I know that there ist still tuning potential left, as they were running CL [email protected] MT on my 10850K, but this wasn't stable on my actual 13700K setup. I even have to increase the timings one clock, to get this kit stable at Gear 1.

I was becoming more of that conservative Overclocker over the years, as I've killed some Hardware due to high Voltage, liquid metal, condensed water from a chiller, Water leaks and so on, when I was young. 😂


----------



## Dziarson

@OCmylife what you are talking about ?"I've killed some Hardware due to high Voltage, liquid metal, condensed water from a chiller, Water leaks and so on " 
After 25 years of overclocking i kill one CPU C2D8600, He died after test how much voltage he can take 2.2V he died i think you are more destroyer not overclocker.


----------



## OCmylife

Dziarson said:


> @OCmylife what you are talking about ?"I've killed some Hardware due to high Voltage, liquid metal, condensed water from a chiller, Water leaks and so on "
> After 25 years of overclocking i kill one CPU C2D8600, He died after test how much voltage he can take 2.2V he died i think you are more destroyer not overclocker.


Lmao! You know me well! 😁

Since I bought the 2500K(10 years ago?!) I wasn't in the mood to overclock the hardware to the max for maybe 5% of performance, so I destroyed nothing since then. I really don't care for the last %, if it makes no difference. I also don't mind if someone ist running 4400 CL14 Gear 1 with 6.2 GHz and is 10% faster then my OC in synthetic benchmarks. I've learned my lessons.
But I will try to lower the TRFC, as long as I don't have to raise the Voltages. 🙂


----------



## Cam1

@OCmylife 
Put more Voltages 

lol
this is what you are using? (1.3 VCCsa, 1.35 VDDQ, 1.4 VDIMM) 
1.3V vccsa looks higher than other with 13 gen CPUs.

that's said it's safe zone 
Max 1.35 VCCSA and 1.5 VDDQ

And Check water-cooling loop before turning on the PC 🤣


----------



## OCmylife

Cam1 said:


> @OCmylife
> Put more Voltages
> 
> lol
> this is what you are using? (1.3 VCCsa, 1.35 VDDQ, 1.4 VDIMM)
> 1.3V vccsa looks higher than other with 13 gen CPUs.
> 
> that's said it's safe zone
> Max 1.35 VCCSA and 1.5 VDDQ
> 
> And Check water-cooling loop before turning on the PC 🤣












You guys are really hilarious!  So I dropped my TRFC from 718 to 550 (500 doesn`t boot) and the Latency goes down from 61.x to 59 ns. Thanks for the tip! Now I`ll have to run another Testmem5 session.
1.3 set in Bios is 1.278 in HWinfo. Should be fine for 4100 Gear 1.


----------



## OCmylife

OCmylife said:


> View attachment 2593105
> 
> 
> You guys are really hilarious!  So I dropped my TRFC from 718 to 550 (500 doesn`t boot) and the Latency goes down from 61.x to 59 ns. Thanks for the tip! Now I`ll have to run another Testmem5 session.
> 1.3 set in Bios is 1.278 in HWinfo. Should be fine for 4100 Gear 1.



Edit: 550 wasn`t stable (2 Errors in almost 1,5h TestMem5). Next step 575.


----------



## MagmaTET

Hello, i have a oc stable at 4100Mhz C15-16-16-34 (0 errors after multiple Testmem5 absolut) but when I try Prime95 small fft I immediately got hardwarefailure/error code beyond 3867Mhz.

So which one i need to trust Prime95 or Testmem5 ?

My cpu is 12900K and my MB is ASUS Z690-A WIFI D4


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

OCmylife said:


> Edit: 550 wasn`t stable (2 Errors in almost 1,5h TestMem5). Next step 575.


Probably just heat related if you don’t have a fan of em


----------



## OCmylife

Uncle Dubbs said:


> Probably just heat related if you don’t have a fan of em












I don`t have a fan on them, but 48 °C on each DIMM should be fine. 570 TRFC seems to be stable.


----------



## Uncle Dubbs

OCmylife said:


> View attachment 2593124
> 
> 
> I don`t have a fan on them, but 48 °C on each DIMM should be fine. 570 TRFC seems to be stable.


Meh, after that long though, I wouldn’t rule out heat. Throw a 2000rpm fan on those and watch how much your temps Improve…even if the errors don’t go away you’ll rule it out and maybe able to throw a little more at them and figure out the timings issue. Maybe you can get trfc lower and push trefi - easy for $10-$20 - especially cuz that timing causes heat and 570 fixed it…but if you’re happy who cares. You may find it gets hotter though when gaming etc because the rest of parts will warm up…also consider open be closed case door 🤷‍♂️


----------



## Ichirou

OCmylife said:


> View attachment 2593124
> 
> 
> I don`t have a fan on them, but 48 °C on each DIMM should be fine. 570 TRFC seems to be stable.





Uncle Dubbs said:


> Meh, after that long though, I wouldn’t rule out heat. Throw a 2000rpm fan on those and watch how much your temps Improve…even if the errors don’t go away you’ll rule it out and maybe able to throw a little more at them and figure out the timings issue. Maybe you can get trfc lower and push trefi - easy for $10-$20 - especially cuz that timing causes heat and 570 fixed it…but if you’re happy who cares. You may find it gets hotter though when gaming etc because the rest of parts will warm up…also consider open be closed case door 🤷‍♂️


anta777 configs are extremely tRFC and tREFI sensitive due to heat. 1usmus is a lot less strict in terms of temps.


----------



## OCmylife

I don't want to put a fan over the Dimms, cause I have a window on my case and my PC is in our living room next to the TV, but there are 4 fans that take the hot air out of the case. So far I don't have any issues with the overall system temperature during game sessions.


----------



## Ichirou

OCmylife said:


> View attachment 2593127
> 
> 
> I don't want to put a fan over the Dimms, cause I have a window on my case and my PC is in our living room next to the TV, but there are 4 fans that take the hot air out of the case. So far I don't have any issues with the overall system temperature during game sessions.


I see you didn’t care much about aesthetics xD


----------



## OCmylife

You`re right. I don`t care about those cable mods and hardtubes.  The only thing that annoyed me after I upload the photo was the dust on the 3090. Otherwise I`m really happy with my setup.


----------



## yzonker

OCmylife said:


> You`re right. I don`t care about those cable mods and hardtubes.  The only thing that annoyed me after I upload the photo was the dust on the 3090. Otherwise I`m really happy with my setup.


The dust was the first thing I noticed.


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

MagmaTET said:


> Hello, i have a oc stable at 4100Mhz C15-16-16-34 (0 errors after multiple Testmem5 absolut) but when I try Prime95 small fft I immediately got hardwarefailure/error code beyond 3867Mhz.
> 
> So which one i need to trust Prime95 or Testmem5 ?
> 
> My cpu is 12900K and my MB is ASUS Z690-A WIFI D4


An error is an error. By any chance are you overclocking your cache?

If you get an error immediately then try something like y-cruncher vst or linpack and see if you get an error immediately as well.


----------



## MagmaTET

Pro4TLZZ said:


> An error is an error. By any chance are you overclocking your cache?
> 
> If you get an error immediately then try something like y-cruncher vst or linpack and see if you get an error immediately as well.


I don't touch the cache and my cpu is stock (just ecore off so the cache run at 4700Mhz) for the moment since I want to finish my ram oc first, I'm going to try linpack and y-cruncher
I was thinking tesmem5 was the best to find memory error but prime95 give error in 10s so...

EDIT: Linpack and Y-cruncher seem fine


----------



## Ichirou

MagmaTET said:


> I don't touch the cache and my cpu is stock (just ecore off so the cache run at 4700Mhz) for the moment since I want to finish my ram oc first, I'm going to try linpack and y-cruncher
> I was thinking tesmem5 was the best to find memory error but prime95 give error in 10s so...
> 
> EDIT: Linpack and Y-cruncher seem fine


Different tests test different things.
Linpack/y-cruncher/Prime95 are primarily for the CPU and/or IMC. Testmem5 is for the RAM. They all matter.


----------



## MagmaTET

Ichirou said:


> Different tests test different things.
> Linpack/y-cruncher/Prime95 are primarily for the CPU and/or IMC. Testmem5 is for the RAM. They all matter.


So that mean my max stable for my 12900k is 3867Mhz even at 1.35v SA? look like a terrible imc


----------



## Ichirou

MagmaTET said:


> So that mean my max stable for my 12900k is 3867Mhz even at 1.35v SA? look like a terrible imc





MagmaTET said:


> Hello, i have a oc stable at 4100Mhz C15-16-16-34 (0 errors after multiple Testmem5 absolut) but when I try Prime95 small fft I immediately got hardwarefailure/error code beyond 3867Mhz.
> 
> So which one i need to trust Prime95 or Testmem5 ?
> 
> My cpu is 12900K and my MB is ASUS Z690-A WIFI D4


Based on this, I'd say that the RAM is fine. The CPU and/or IMC is the issue.

Run y-cruncher, go to the Component Stress Test screen, and test N64, HNT, and VST for one loop. See if you can pass them all.
If not, you do not have enough Vcore, VCCSA, VDDQ, and/or L2 Cache voltage. Any of those are possible.


----------



## GioCTRL

So I've settled at 4000c15 with 1.52vdimm and tested how far down I could go in terms of SA. 1.1vsa errors out after 5 mins of anta, 1.15vsa until now doesn't seem to spit out any errors. 1.15vsa for 4000c15 sounds really good though or what do you guys think, shouldnt this imc be capable of more with 1.34/1.35sa?


----------



## GioCTRL

Raimond said:


> i have had this also before with my z690 edge ddr4,the motherboard was getting weird.
> I had this issue once and then never again.
> I thought I had broken something,but everything was ok.
> 
> I have thought, reflasht the bios to be sure its not an corrupted bios or something.
> 
> Also you guys with an z690 edge ddr4 having troubles with overclocking memory with the latest 1.90 bios.
> With an old bios(like 1.20) I can pass 4000 cl16 without no problems.But with that 1.90 bios I cant passs 3600 .
> A bit anoying,lol.
> 
> But with older bios versions like 1.20,my WD 850x is noticeable slower
> Witch newer bios is any good?


ive got that issues aswell constantly that 4133 is stable and the next day on freshboot absolutely unstable, corrupted my os twice :/ so i reflashed my bios as you did but it didnt do f*ck all for me, im going to wait for a newer bios release and if that doesnt work i'll revert to v1.91 beta bios that got taken down from their website but i luckily saved on a stick.

somethings wrong the latest z690 edge bios v1.90, my vddq is locked to 1.2v if i try increasing it only a tiny bit to 1.21v mem oc fails on boot. But my sa need got decreased by a whole lot only needing 1.15vsa for 4000c15 rock solid. Im on a 13900k btw.


----------



## LaBestiaHumana

Wrong thread!


----------



## Ichirou

GioCTRL said:


> So I've settled at 4000c15 with 1.52vdimm and tested how far down I could go in terms of SA. 1.1vsa errors out after 5 mins of anta, 1.15vsa until now doesn't seem to spit out any errors. 1.15vsa for 4000c15 sounds really good though or what do you guys think, shouldnt this imc be capable of more with 1.34/1.35sa?





GioCTRL said:


> ive got that issues aswell constantly that 4133 is stable and the next day on freshboot absolutely unstable, corrupted my os twice :/ so i reflashed my bios as you did but it didnt do f*ck all for me, im going to wait for a newer bios release and if that doesnt work i'll revert to v1.91 beta bios that got taken down from their website but i luckily saved on a stick.
> 
> somethings wrong the latest z690 edge bios v1.90, my vddq is locked to 1.2v if i try increasing it only a tiny bit to 1.21v mem oc fails on boot. But my sa need got decreased by a whole lot only needing 1.15vsa for 4000c15 rock solid. Im on a 13900k btw.


TM5 doesn't really push VCCSA. As I've mentioned before, you need to run y-cruncher N64/HNT/VST to properly test it.
VDDQ needs to be tested in both y-cruncher as well as TM5.

If you're getting so much corruption, I'd recommend you going through y-cruncher's main test as well, with as much memory populated as possible.


LaBestiaHumana said:


> What am I missing here? Lately my brain has been malfunctioning, so I gotta ask. Why does the faster 64GB DDR5 kit the least expensive?
> What makes the GSKILL kit cost 899?
> Why is the Corsair slower , but costs 649?
> I bought the ccheaper kit, but it also seems that it’s the fastest and it’s only 420 bucks.
> View attachment 2593237
> 
> View attachment 2593239
> 
> View attachment 2593238


This is the DDR4 thread, not the DDR5 one.


----------



## bhav

OCmylife said:


> View attachment 2593127
> 
> 
> I don't want to put a fan over the Dimms, cause I have a window on my case and my PC is in our living room next to the TV, but there are 4 fans that take the hot air out of the case. So far I don't have any issues with the overall system temperature during game sessions.


The fan I'm using you can see through it while its spinning.


----------



## kx11

Losing performance with 13900k apparently, Mobo is z690 xtreme waterforce, these timings are stable actually, ram sticks are Gskill Hynix 16gbx2


----------



## Wolverine2349

For DDR4 running at 4000MHz 2 sticks and dual rank CL14 or CL15: Is Samsung BDIe or Micron EDie or something else the most reliable and easiest with no active cooling?


----------



## Ichirou

Wolverine2349 said:


> For DDR4 running at 4000MHz 2 sticks and dual rank CL14 or CL15: Is Samsung BDIe or Micron EDie or something else the most reliable and easiest with no active cooling?


Samsung B-Die might be a little sketch. Micron E-Die will largely be fine.
Also, stop using a Noctua if you want memory overclocking. They don't mix, like drinking and driving.


----------



## Wolverine2349

Ichirou said:


> Samsung B-Die might be a little sketch. Micron E-Die will largely be fine.
> Also, stop using a Noctua if you want memory overclocking. They don't mix, like drinking and driving.



So basically Micron E die is better.

And how is Noctua bad for RAM overclocking. Does it not cool the IMC good enough or is it the heat pipes too close to the RAM sticks and make them hotter?


----------



## Ichirou

Wolverine2349 said:


> So basically Micron E die is better.
> 
> And how is Noctua bad for RAM overclocking. Does it not cool the IMC good enough or is it the heat pipes too close to the RAM sticks and make them hotter?


Micron isn't "better," it just tolerates hotter temperatures.

You can't cool the RAM with a Noctua. The IMC isn't really a big deal; you don't really make any extra gains by cooling the CPU.
At least, not to any meaningful amount that you couldn't get from simply cooling the RAM.

Stop being a Noctua fanboy and move to an AIO. I did the same back in the day. World of difference for memory overclocking.


----------



## Wolverine2349

Ichirou said:


> Micron isn't "better," it just tolerates hotter temperatures.
> 
> You can't cool the RAM with a Noctua. The IMC isn't really a big deal; you don't really make any extra gains by cooling the CPU.
> At least, not to any meaningful amount that you couldn't get from simply cooling the RAM.
> 
> Stop being a Noctua fanboy and move to an AIO. I did the same back in the day. World of difference for memory overclocking.



Are you saying you used to be hesitant to AIO and liquid cooling and always insisted on air cooling like I am now. I am not a Noctua fanboy but more an air cooler and nervous with liquid cooling. Just so happens Noctua is most well known air cooler and has the best air coolers.


----------



## Ichirou

Wolverine2349 said:


> Are you saying you used to be hesitant to AIO and liquid cooling and always insisted on air cooling like I am now. I am not a Noctua fanboy but more an air cooler and nervous with liquid cooling. Just so happens Noctua is most well known air cooler and has the best air coolers.


Once upon a time, to some extent. But it was more along the lines of "Why does my RAM keep overheating?" as opposed to "AIOs are the Devil and I will never use them."

I'm not sure why you'd ever be concerned about using an AIO. Sure, they lose effectiveness over time, but they don't leak or anything; they're mechanically designed to be a permanently closed loop. They also vent out the heat as opposed to keeping it within the case. And they have water serving as a heat buffer, which allows you to sustain loads for much longer, as opposed to tower coolers which instantly saturate.


----------



## Pro4TLZZ

Ichirou said:


> Once upon a time, to some extent. But it was more along the lines of "Why does my RAM keep overheating?" as opposed to "AIOs are the Devil and I will never use them."
> 
> I'm not sure why you'd ever be concerned about using an AIO. Sure, they lose effectiveness over time, but they don't leak or anything; they're mechanically designed to be a permanently closed loop. They also vent out the heat as opposed to keeping it within the case. And they have water serving as a heat buffer, which allows you to sustain loads for much longer, as opposed to tower coolers which instantly saturate.


also use an aio on the gpu if you can. that way you can avoid blowing 300w+ on the dimms


----------



## Ichirou

Pro4TLZZ said:


> also use an aio on the gpu if you can. that way you can avoid blowing 300w+ on the dimms


Blame Nvidia for designing GPUs to blow heat out of the back of them with the 3000 series; definitely a stupid decision.


----------



## bhav

Ichirou said:


> Blame Nvidia for designing GPUs to blow heat out of the back of them with the 3000 series; definitely a stupid decision.


I still disagree with this, in most users experience the fan blowing through the GPU actually leads to lower ram temps, it certainly has never been an issue with my 3080 Ti, using both the 3080 Ti and Ram OCed to their limit on air has never led to instability on a stable ram OC.


----------



## yzonker

bhav said:


> I still disagree with this, in most users experience the fan blowing through the GPU actually leads to lower ram temps, it certainly has never been an issue with my 3080 Ti, using both the 3080 Ti and Ram OCed to their limit on air has never led to instability on a stable ram OC.


It's not too much of a problem if you have good case ventilation. When I first got a 4090 on air, I had an internal case temp sensor that I used to ramp my case fans. I didn't have any trouble with my OC'ed RAM. It was fairly audible with the 4090 at full load though.


----------



## Cam1

Ichirou said:


> Blame Nvidia for designing GPUs to blow heat out of the back of them with the 3000 series; definitely a stupid decision.


During summer while playing bf2042 my entire pc case went to 40-50 degrees 🤣 
Water cooling the gpu on the same loop as the cpu looks not a good idea to me. And gpu blocks cost a lot of money!


----------



## Ichirou

Cam1 said:


> During summer while playing bf2042 my entire pc case went to 40-50 degrees 🤣
> Water cooling the gpu on the same loop as the cpu looks not a good idea to me. And gpu blocks cost a lot of money!


Need much more water volume and cooling via radiators and reservoirs lol


----------



## bhav

yzonker said:


> It's not too much of a problem if you have good case ventilation. When I first got a 4090 on air, I had an internal case temp sensor that I used to ramp my case fans. I didn't have any trouble with my OC'ed RAM. It was fairly audible with the 4090 at full load though.


Or open frame.


----------



## imrevoau

Testing the Z790 edge DDR4 atm, and I have to say it’s sad how something that costs almost double a Z690-A Pro, gives you almost 0 extra noticeable features.

In fact I actually lost functionality because the Z790 boards have less fat USB headers so I have to choose between pump power or front panel connectivity. Lol


----------



## kx11

Lol weird


----------



## Taraquin

Dziarson said:


> @OCmylife Use taiphoon burner i think 16-19 is not B-DIE same mem but timinngs are 16-16-16-16.
> TRFC on this mem is catastrophy repair it
> 
> View attachment 2593086


Is this the lowest you get? I think the worst kit I have heard of is Hynix MJR, that one needs about 660 for 4000. Samsung D-die tends to need 600-640.


----------



## Taraquin

OCmylife said:


> Edit: 550 wasn`t stable (2 Errors in almost 1,5h TestMem5). Next step 575.


Try 560  RFC is usually either 100% stable or unbootable, if you lower them by 5 they can become unable to boot. My rev E was 100% stable at 522 at 3733, 520 had many errors, 518 unable to boot.

Generally 10 lower RFC equals 0.1ns lower latency so lowering it by 168 should be close to 2ns


----------



## kx11

Current setup up, very stable until Gigabyte Control Center ****s up and causes a BSOD randomly


----------



## Raimond

[/QUOTE]
how can you loose performance,when nothing as changed?
Those timings are really.....


kx11 said:


> Current setup up, very stable until Gigabyte Control Center ****s up and causes a BSOD randomly
> 
> View attachment 2593479


gigabyte control center is terrible ,that is what i think.
But like msi center and Armour crate from Asus or not much better


----------



## OCmylife

Taraquin said:


> Try 560  RFC is usually either 100% stable or unbootable, if you lower them by 5 they can become unable to boot. My rev E was 100% stable at 522 at 3733, 520 had many errors, 518 unable to boot.
> 
> Generally 10 lower RFC equals 0.1ns lower latency so lowering it by 168 should be close to 2ns


570 is stable and like you said it's a drop of 2ns in latency compared to 718 TRFC. But I don't want to run another test, just to check if 560 is also stable. 😁
If I'm in the mood, I will try to get 4200 CL18 stable with relative low Voltages, but so far I'm happy 👍


----------

