# Ryzen 3000 Memory / Fabric (X370/X470/X570)



## chakku

> Above 4000 MHz with 2x16GB has been demonstrated on C8F.


By demonstrated do you mean observed by those who were testing it or has it been published online somewhere? Would personally love to see more on this as I have my finger crossed on getting my 2x16GB B-Die kit to 3600 on the new processors with the C7H.

Also glad to see a post from yourself again!


----------



## elmor

chakku said:


> By demonstrated do you mean observed by those who were testing it or has it been published online somewhere? Would personally love to see more on this as I have my finger crossed on getting my 2x16GB B-Die kit to 3600 on the new processors with the C7H.
> 
> Also glad to see a post from yourself again!


I've seen it myself, though it was at benchmark settings with high memory voltage. See below. I would have tested it, but one of the sticks in my Dual-Rank kit didn't want to play along.

edit: Booted up the system with one stick and works with 4000CL18 1.4V. But it's not 100% stable.

edit2: MSI lists the 4000 MT/s 2x16GB kit CMT32GX4M2K4000C19 in their QVL: https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/MEG-X570-GODLIKE#support-mem-19

edit3: Similarly Asus lists a 4000 MT/s 4x8GB kit CMK32GX4M4K4000C19 in their QVL: https://dlcdnets.asus.com/pub/ASUS/..._FORMULA/Crosshair_VIII_Series_Memory_QVL.pdf . I believe the "Spectek" listing in the Asus QVL refers to Micron E-die.


----------



## chakku

elmor said:


> I've seen it myself, though it was at benchmark settings with high memory voltage. See below. I would have tested it, but one of the sticks in my Dual-Rank kit didn't want to play along.
> 
> edit: Booted up the system with one stick and works with 4000CL18 1.4V. But it's not 100% stable.


Looks very promising! Also yeah can't imagine the voltage you'd need for 4000+ at CL12 is usable daily.

Do you still need GDM enabled for dual rank sticks or do they play better with true 1T command rates on the new IMC?


----------



## elmor

chakku said:


> Looks very promising! Also yeah can't imagine the voltage you'd need for 4000+ at CL12 is usable daily.
> 
> Do you still need GDM enabled for dual rank sticks or do they play better with true 1T command rates on the new IMC?


~2.0  I've not tested that, but even the SR results above are using the default setting 1T Geardown=Enabled.


----------



## Streetdragon

so tldr:
1800/3600 and tight the timings as low as possible?


----------



## VPII

@elmor I noticed on some review that showed the memory performance that the 3900X had double the write speed of the 3700X. Is it possibly to do with 3900X being two chips and thus dual or two IF?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## elmor

Streetdragon said:


> so tldr:
> 1800/3600 and tight the timings as low as possible?



Yes, unless you want higher copy bandwidth.




VPII said:


> @elmor I noticed on some review that showed the memory performance that the 3900X had double the write speed of the 3700X. Is it possibly to do with 3900X being two chips and thus dual or two IF?
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk



I suppose theoretically, since each has 16-bit width lanes for writes (32 bits for reads) which makes 2x16=32 bits total. It will depend on the application and if it uses both dies to access memory. From what I remember AIDA64 always tests memory using core 0 which wouldn't show any improvement, but that could have changed. I re-do these tests with 3900X when I get my hands on one.


----------



## Jackalito

Thank you so much for sharing your wisdom with us, elmor.
It's great seeing you so active around here again! :specool:


----------



## AlphaC

Thanks for confirming what AMD wrote: 3600C16 is probably the best compromise for most people


----------



## Blameless

elmor said:


> From what I remember AIDA64 always tests memory using core 0


The AIDA64 memory bandwidth tests have been multi-threaded for quite some time.

I'm not sure about the latency test.


----------



## nick name

Beautiful. Many thanks.


----------



## larrydavid

Elmor: Have you been able to get the PBO settings to actually do anything on the CH6/CH7?


----------



## rv8000

@elmor

It's a bit unclear as to how ASUS is addressing the settings of the FCLK (synchronous/asynchronous) in the bios settings.

Is the setting tied to the memory speed selection, i.e. anything above 3600 will force asynchronous mode, or can you select the fclk ratio separately from the memory speed?

Thanks for sharing these results!

P.S. Did you try any timings scaling testing at 3600?


----------



## Nizzen

Why does Ryzen 3k support 4400mhz+ memory, when it doesn't help for performance over 3733mhz?


----------



## AlphaC

Nizzen said:


> Why does Ryzen 3k support 4400mhz+ memory, when it doesn't help for performance over 3733mhz?


Some things are bandwidth bound and not latency bound


----------



## Razor333

Does the new SOC have different base voltage? The 1.25V is rather extreme for the old ones.


----------



## Anty

Why SOC 1.25?


----------



## Bart

Awesome stuff, thanks for the great info Elmor! Turns out I might not have to buy new memory after all, unless I want crystal pimp RAM.  I wonder if it's 'safe' to assume that most current good B-die kits are still useful on X570 (ie most 3200CL14 kits)?


----------



## bavarianblessed

Bart said:


> Awesome stuff, thanks for the great info Elmor! Turns out I might not have to buy new memory after all, unless I want crystal pimp RAM.  I wonder if it's 'safe' to assume that most current good B-die kits are still useful on X570 (ie most 3200CL14 kits)?



It would seem so, that's what he used for his testing. I have B-die 3600 CL16 sticks so I'll see how they do on the C6H and 3700X on Thursday when the chip gets here


----------



## gerardfraser

Thanks for the Information.I have a 4000kit waiting to try on Ryzen 5 3600x.
I only game so I expect DDR4 CL14 3200Mhz still might be within a couple % compared to DDR4 CL16 3600Mhz/DDR4 CL18 4000Mhz


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

My 3200C14 rated kit isn't working on my X370-F now at all with the 3700X, it just winds up posting in safe mode.


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor nice to see You post I'm still waiting for 3900x to come and box of toys to build my mate 3600system.
If You got time Would be great if You could drop a quck test of 3600cl16 vs 3600cl14 on latency and lets say quick cb15 score. Very interested how latencies affect performance. All I'w seen is 3200cl14 vs 3600cl16 tests


----------



## Martin778

My 2x16GB 3200 CL14 B-Die kit finally runs at XMP speeds on X570 Godlike and 3600. 
Weird that the 3600 has such bad memory write speeds.


----------



## gamervivek

Single chiplet CPUs suck at memory write speeds since AMD have reduced it to half. Happens to 3700X too,

https://techreport.com/review/34672/amd-ryzen-7-3700x-and-ryzen-9-3900x-cpus-reviewed/3/


----------



## Lexi is Dumb

Okay, I just noticed that the board is putting the voltage at about 1.46v during idle. Should I be worried?


----------



## elmor

Blameless said:


> The AIDA64 memory bandwidth tests have been multi-threaded for quite some time.
> 
> I'm not sure about the latency test.



Ah yes, you're right. It's only the latency test that always uses Core 0. Bandwidth should be multi-threaded.



larrydavid said:


> Elmor: Have you been able to get the PBO settings to actually do anything on the CH6/CH7?



Not tested yet.



rv8000 said:


> @elmor
> 
> It's a bit unclear as to how ASUS is addressing the settings of the FCLK (synchronous/asynchronous) in the bios settings.
> 
> Is the setting tied to the memory speed selection, i.e. anything above 3600 will force asynchronous mode, or can you select the fclk ratio separately from the memory speed?
> 
> Thanks for sharing these results!
> 
> P.S. Did you try any timings scaling testing at 3600?



If you leave FCLK Frequency at Auto, it will keep 1:1 until some point, I believe it's 1800 MHz. When you keep increasing DRAM Frequency, FCLK will still stay at that point if left Auto.

If you manually set both, it will be 1:1 if you set them to that (actually 1:2 as DRAM Frequency is shown as DDR MT/s). There's no separate switch for it, the values just needs to match.



Nizzen said:


> Why does Ryzen 3k support 4400mhz+ memory, when it doesn't help for performance over 3733mhz?



It does help in some cases for performance. Theoretically if you can push memory high enough you can also get better results in most than at 1:1, but I don't see that happening for most users on this generation. Then again many just look at the frequency not the performance. It's the same on Intel platforms, most high frequency memory does not make much sense in terms of actual application performance. Additionally the decision to go with this implementation was most likely made before they knew how high memory frequency they would be able to get out of the design.



Anty said:


> Why SOC 1.25?



Why not? I wanted to keep things consistent and it's working well.



Bart said:


> Awesome stuff, thanks for the great info Elmor! Turns out I might not have to buy new memory after all, unless I want crystal pimp RAM.  I wonder if it's 'safe' to assume that most current good B-die kits are still useful on X570 (ie most 3200CL14 kits)?



From what I'm seeing, the requirements are the same as on previous Ryzen platforms. The main uplift is that you should now be able to get higher memory capacity at much better performance than before (2x16GB, 4x8GB) which goes well with the increased core count and lower DRAM prices.



Lexi is Dumb said:


> My 3200C14 rated kit isn't working on my X370-F now at all with the 3700X, it just winds up posting in safe mode.



Probably the same issue I had, that the memory voltage is always 1.200V when starting the system and it has had time to execute BIOS code.



lordzed83 said:


> @elmor nice to see You post I'm still waiting for 3900x to come and box of toys to build my mate 3600system.
> If You got time Would be great if You could drop a quck test of 3600cl16 vs 3600cl14 on latency and lets say quick cb15 score. Very interested how latencies affect performance. All I'w seen is 3200cl14 vs 3600cl16 tests



I'll add it to the list 



gamervivek said:


> Single chiplet CPUs suck at memory write speeds since AMD have reduced it to half. Happens to 3700X too,
> 
> https://techreport.com/review/34672/amd-ryzen-7-3700x-and-ryzen-9-3900x-cpus-reviewed/3/



It doesn't seem to have a large real world impact, I'm sure AMD did their research before going with this decision. Keep in mind these are very specific benchmark numbers testing only raw bandwidth and not actual application performance.



Lexi is Dumb said:


> Okay, I just noticed that the board is putting the voltage at about 1.46v during idle. Should I be worried?



Idle and low load it's fine, for heavy loads it's a bit much.


----------



## Streetdragon

so i COULD set the IF clock to 2000 and push the ram to 4000DDR(2000Mhz) to get the 1:1 speed?


----------



## VPII

Streetdragon said:


> so i COULD set the IF clock to 2000 and push the ram to 4000DDR(2000Mhz) to get the 1:1 speed?


I think the max is 1800 for IF as it starts getting unstable if you go higher.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## Nighthog

VPII said:


> I think the max is 1800 for IF as it starts getting unstable if you go higher.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


I've read comments on reddit and elsewhere where they confirm you can set them however you like manually just that stability is not guaranteed with silicon variances being as they are so 2000/4000 might be possible theoretically it will be needed to be tested and found out if silicon is good enough for such practically.


----------



## VPII

Nighthog said:


> I've read comments on reddit and elsewhere where they confirm you can set them however you like manually just that stability is not guaranteed with silicon variances being as they are so 2000/4000 might be possible theoretically it will be needed to be tested and found out if silicon is good enough for such practically.


Well my friend from The Overclocker tested with a 3600 and an Asrock x570 board and 1900 was the highest he got to work. 

This is probably why AMD recommend 3733 or 3600 memory speed.

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


----------



## foook92

I'll get a 3900x near november / december, to pair with my C6H. Hope she will do well. For now, with my r7 1700, she can keep it at 4ghz with 1.33v and memory at 3400mhz with c14-13-13-24-38 timings (and tight subtimings - G.Skill F4-3200c14-8GTZR b.die) . 
I hope they can do the same paired with 3900x if not even better.

And hope the C6H can handle the 3900x as well also...


----------



## fursko

VPII said:


> Well my friend from The Overclocker tested with a 3600 and an Asrock x570 board and 1900 was the highest he got to work.
> 
> This is probably why AMD recommend 3733 or 3600 memory speed.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk


Fabric speed should have good impact. I guess it's the only thing left for users to tweak. Cpus already maxed out out of the box.


----------



## elmor

Plug and Play Gen4 on X470 apparently. Futuremark System Info doesn't seem to detect PCI-E Gen properly.

*Max theoretical bandwidth*

PCI-E Gen3 x16 = 0.985*16 = 15.8 GB/s
PCI-E Gen4 x16 = 1.969*16 = 31.5 GB/s


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> Plug and play Gen 4 on X470 apparently. Futuremark System Info doesn't seem to detect PCI-E Gen properly.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


Nice Jon :thumb:, you have PCI-E 4.0 storage device to test?


----------



## Pilotasso

The burning question is: will PCI Gen 4 also work on other boards like the X370 Crosshair VI?

And how? (support for that on <X570 was supposedly blocked by AMD a few weeks before launch)


----------



## Martin778

Hmmmmph, I have a X570 Godlike and only get ~13GB/s even though GPU-Z says the card is running x16.

+
I'm blind, 5700XT is a Gen4 GPU


----------



## elmor

gupsterg said:


> Nice Jon :thumb:, you have PCI-E 4.0 storage device to test?



No, but it should work if using the CPU M.2 slot.



Pilotasso said:


> The burning question is: will PCI Gen 4 also work on other boards like the X370 Crosshair VI?
> 
> And how? (support for that on <X570 was supposedly blocked by AMD a few weeks before launch)



It should work just as well on X370 as on X470, depending on the trace layout of the specific board. I don't think it was ever said that it would be blocked, just not officially supported.




Martin778 said:


> Hmmmmph, I have a X570 Godlike and only get ~13GB/s even though GPU-Z says the card is running x16.
> 
> +
> I'm blind, 5700XT is a Gen4 GPU



I added theoretical max numbers for Gen 3/4 and highlighted the important parts


----------



## gupsterg

elmor said:


> No, but it should work if using the CPU M.2 slot.


+rep for sharing :thumb: .



elmor said:


> It should work just as well on X370 as on X470, depending on the trace layout of the specific board. I don't think it was ever said that it would be blocked, just not officially supported.


Ahh BOOMbastic! :band:...


----------



## KDiehl

Can you shows any more results at 3600 with various CAS latencies?
I would love to see the results from CL14-18.

Thanks for posting!


----------



## mito1172

@elmor

Hello. is the article here real?

No Asus Motherboards Officially Support the R9 3900x

https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cb26yf/no_asus_motherboards_officially_support_the_r9/


----------



## AlphaC

Phoronix did a memory scaling article today:
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=amd-3900x-ram&num=1


----------



## JackCY

Thx Elmor, those boards sure do suck with those issues.


----------



## gupsterg

mito1172 said:


> @elmor
> 
> Hello. is the article here real?
> 
> No Asus Motherboards Officially Support the R9 3900x
> 
> https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cb26yf/no_asus_motherboards_officially_support_the_r9/


Shawn Jennings aka Johan45 has this in his review:-



Spoiler



X470 Compatibility

Just before the embargo was lifted ASUS posted a BIOS for the ROG Crosshair VII Wifi. I had tested a previous release but it didn’t function quite right. After downloading ver. 2406 and using the flashback function of the motherboard I came up with some results. These are slightly higher than the results posted in the testing portion of this review but that would be due to improved cooling and precision boost taking advantage of that. Below is a sample of benchmarks which were run on the Crosshair VII using the 12-core 3900X just to demonstrate that these CPUs will work from day one on older hardware.



Source link.

Screenshot link.

Also see some more screenshots here.

I reckon the support pages have not been updated, I do recall at Ryzen 1xxx launch a similar case, you can see similar things in the C6H OCN thread in posts of 2017.


----------



## gtbtk

elmor said:


> Yes, unless you want higher copy bandwidth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I suppose theoretically, since each has 16-bit width lanes for writes (32 bits for reads) which makes 2x16=32 bits total. It will depend on the application and if it uses both dies to access memory. From what I remember AIDA64 always tests memory using core 0 which wouldn't show any improvement, but that could have changed. I re-do these tests with 3900X when I get my hands on one.


It would seem that the decoupled FCLK is locked at 1800Mhz while the MCLK is increased with the faster kits not as was originally communicated, running at a 2:1 ratio.That can be seen in gaming frame rates as memory speeds imcrease above 3600MT/s

Please remember that those AMD slides in the presentation Deck are a little misleading and do not show teh full picture. 

If we do the Maths 
L3 Cache is clocked at CPU frequency yet the slides show that it is communicating at 32 bytes /cycle. At a CPU frequency of 4200MHz, that is approximately 440GB/s of theoretical Bandwidth and is reflected in the Aida Cache benchmarks with real world cache throughput between Core and Cache in the 400+GB/s range depending on CPU frequency. The Timings required for the Cache memory are baked into the UEFI and not user adjustable

The infinity Fabric interconnects are also shown at 32 bytes/cycle yet they are capped at 1800 MHz. with 3600MT/s Ram installed that is a maximum theoretical bandwidth of 56.7GB/s. 

On the 3900X slide, it shows that there are 2 interconnects between the CCDs and the I/O die. but what is not shown, is that those 2 inteconnects are merged into a single interconnect, also running at 32 bytes/cycle at 1800Mhz that connects the data fabric in the IO Die to the Memory Controller circuitry. That aspect of Zen is in common with Zen 1 and 1+. That single interconnect to the memory limits Ryzen CPUs to a total 56.7GB/s between CPU Cores and the dual Channel RAM that in itself also has a theoretical Max bandwith that matches the Infinity Fabric up to 1800Mhz.Above that frequency, teh Infinity Fabric will start to bottleneck the Installed 4000+MT/s Ram

That 56.7GB/s of total end to end bandwidth also has to be shared with the GPU and it's DMA memory access requirements. A 2080ti running at full speed is demanding upwards of 15GB/s of data, that, while separated directly from the hardware by the kernel virtual memory management, ultimately has to come from the L3 Cache or the Ram over those physical interconnects. That requires need the CPU cores to sacrifice memory bandwidth and leads to longer CPU stalls as the cores have to wait idle for memory requests due to the reduction in available bandwidth for the CPU

The tests shown above show real world throughput that includes the Latency overhead cause by the Rams need to operate with appropriate timings.

Conversely, Intel Ringbus ties L3 cache speed to the Ring topology interconnect and also transfers data at 32 bytes/cycle yet, with a Cache multiplier of x42, it gives the transport, that also has to share the bandwidth between CPU and GPU memory needs, a total theoretical bandwidth of 144GB/s providing a surplus of bandwidth that is shared between CPU and GPU to access memory.


----------



## elmor

Ryzen 9 3900X results










With 2xCCD read bandwidth is no longer penalized in asynchronous mode but keeps scaling with both fabric and memory clock.












As expected with 2xCCD write bandwidth is approximately doubled. Similarly to the read bandwidth scenario, asynchronous mode does not longer seem to reduce the write bandwidth.












Copy bandwidth gets a nice boost from the increased write bandwidth with 2xCCD.












Memory latency is the same in both cases.


----------



## gupsterg

@elmor

+rep for above share  .

From my R5 3600 it seems that 3600MHz 1:1 is very easy to have on Matisse. I'd setup 3533MHz using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings last night, I only had to bump VDIMM from 1.35V to 1.355V. I manually set SOC same as what I saw at default, set CLDO_VDDG ~40mV below SOC.

AIDA64 Bench (Latency is higher than PR though at same clocks/timings, etc)



Spoiler














RAM Test 1200% last night



Spoiler














RAM Test 2400% on full POST after shutdown overnight.



Spoiler














Same POST rerun RAM Test 1200%



Spoiler














View attachment 2406_R5_Base_3600S_setting.txt


----------



## Haelous

elmor said:


> Plug and Play Gen4 on X470 apparently. Futuremark System Info doesn't seem to detect PCI-E Gen properly.
> 
> *Max theoretical bandwidth*
> 
> PCI-E Gen3 x16 = 0.985*16 = 15.8 GB/s
> PCI-E Gen4 x16 = 1.969*16 = 31.5 GB/s


Should we be concerned about this being removed in the next BIOS update on the Crosshair VII? I love the board but it would be pretty frustrating if I had to choose between AGESA >1.0.0.2 and PCI-E Gen4 on the first x16 and M.2 slot.


----------



## elmor

mito1172 said:


> @elmor
> 
> Hello. is the article here real?
> 
> No Asus Motherboards Officially Support the R9 3900x
> 
> https://old.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cb26yf/no_asus_motherboards_officially_support_the_r9/



Seems baseless to me, I think they're just behind on qualification. Technically the CPUs are already working on most boards, past and present.



Haelous said:


> Should we be concerned about this being removed in the next BIOS update on the Crosshair VII? I love the board but it would be pretty frustrating if I had to choose between AGESA >1.0.0.2 and PCI-E Gen4 on the first x16 and M.2 slot.



It's a possibility, we'll just have to wait and see. Enabling it by default is puzzling, would be better if it's an opt-in setting as it can't be guaranteed to work.


----------



## nick name

Are we going to see those Aida latency numbers come down? My best/stable 3600MHz setup is high 57ns low 58ns with the 2700X.


----------



## majestynl

elmor said:


> Ryzen 9 3900X results
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> With 2xCCD read bandwidth is no longer penalized in asynchronous mode but keeps scaling with both fabric and memory clock.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> As expected with 2xCCD write bandwidth is approximately doubled. Similarly to the read bandwidth scenario, asynchronous mode does not longer seem to reduce the write bandwidth.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Copy bandwidth gets a nice boost from the increased write bandwidth with 2xCCD.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Memory latency is the same in both cases.


Thanks for the share Jon!




gupsterg said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> +rep for above share  .
> 
> From my R5 3600 it seems that 3600MHz 1:1 is very easy to have on Matisse. I'd setup 3533MHz using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings last night, I only had to bump VDIMM from 1.35V to 1.355V. I manually set SOC same as what I saw at default, set CLDO_VDDG ~40mV below SOC.
> 
> AIDA64 Bench (Latency is higher than PR though at same clocks/timings, etc)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278984
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RAM Test 1200% last night
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278982
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RAM Test 2400% on full POST after shutdown overnight.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278978
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same POST rerun RAM Test 1200%
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278980
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278986


Thanks for you too chap 




nick name said:


> Are we going to see those Aida latency numbers come down? My best/stable 3600MHz setup is high 57ns low 58ns with the 2700X.


Special thanks to the new I/O Die  

Managed 62.9ns with 3800mzh CL14 (only base-timings) yesterday. Maybe if we can push/oc the IF more ?!! who knows for now


----------



## gupsterg

@nick name

Yep same RAM MHz & timings on R5 3600 do not yield latency ns in AIDA64 as 2700X, it's slower by ~8ns.



Spoiler














But in Sandra inter core latency is lower than 2700X, by ~10ns and compare the red line of R5 3600 vs green of 2700X. The 2700X was on 3533MHz The Stilt 3466MHz timings and the R5 3600 was pure UEFI defaults of 2133MHz slo mo...



Spoiler














In the limited testing I did of that bench RAM MHz aided the 2700X and as the 3600 was stock I may see gains later, but dunno.
@majestynl

Below is my first 1100% PASS on 3666MHz, 1:1 FCK & MEMCLK. I'm still using The Stilt 3466MHz timings, 1T, Gear Down Mode: [Disabled]. Tweak CAD Bus to 30 A A A helped me. I tried a lot or runs this morning trying to keep as low SOC/CLDO_VDDG/VDIMM (1.043/1.003/1.365). RM shows some info wrong but still has a lot right and currently only util with some settings readback.



Spoiler


----------



## crakej

Thanks and reps for the information guys - will be very helpful when my cpu finally gets here


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Below is my first 1100% PASS on 3666MHz, 1:1 FCK & MEMCLK. I'm still using The Stilt 3466MHz timings, 1T, Gear Down Mode: [Disabled]. Tweak CAD Bus to 30 A A A helped me. I tried a lot or runs this morning trying to keep as low SOC/CLDO_VDDG/VDIMM (1.043/1.003/1.365). RM shows some info wrong but still has a lot right and currently only util with some settings readback.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279012
> 
> 
> View attachment 279014


Looking great!  Good luck pushing further... Talking about Ryzen Master, did you saw post/reply from Robert (AMD) about RM showing sleeping cores and behavior of voltage reading? Very interesting:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cbbfce/3900x_being_overvolted_on_amd_ryzen_power_plans/

ps: Did you left CPU OC on auto?


----------



## gupsterg

crakej said:


> Thanks and reps for the information guys - will be very helpful when my cpu finally gets here


NP  , hope you get your CPU today  .

BTW another menu for gaining RAM MHz is the PMU menu.



Spoiler














See this post by Elmor for further info, link.



majestynl said:


> Looking great!  Good luck pushing further... Talking about Ryzen Master, did you saw post/reply from Robert (AMD) about RM showing sleeping cores and behavior of voltage reading? Very interesting:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cbbfce/3900x_being_overvolted_on_amd_ryzen_power_plans/
> 
> ps: Did you left CPU OC on auto?


Cheers, all the best to you as well to enjoy Matisse!

CPU is UEFI defaults, not changed anything in RM concerning it, seems nuts to me it's doing ACB 4.2GHz on 1.3V. I'm only using RM/ASUS Turbo V core for data in screenie, otherwise all tweaks/fan profile, etc is UEFI settings.

Cheers for link, TBH I had seen that info on RM somewhere before. I am using the Ryzen plan, core parking seems disabled to me. Any how everything been working as it should haven't looked at it or played with it, if you get what I mean.



Spoiler


----------



## hazium233

gtbtk said:


> It would seem that the decoupled FCLK is locked at 1800Mhz while the MCLK is increased with the faster kits not as was originally communicated, running at a 2:1 ratio.That can be seen in gaming frame rates as memory speeds imcrease above 3600MT/s


I thought that what is dropping to 1/2 speed is UCLK. In the CPUz shots I have seen posted (reddit), it was showing "North Bridge" frequency of 933 with ram set to 1866MHz, and FCLK 1800MHz, or whatever.

edit: * here is one pic. From a review, has half NB clock


----------



## mito1172

gupsterg said:


> Shawn Jennings aka Johan45 has this in his review:-
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> X470 Compatibility
> 
> Just before the embargo was lifted ASUS posted a BIOS for the ROG Crosshair VII Wifi. I had tested a previous release but it didn’t function quite right. After downloading ver. 2406 and using the flashback function of the motherboard I came up with some results. These are slightly higher than the results posted in the testing portion of this review but that would be due to improved cooling and precision boost taking advantage of that. Below is a sample of benchmarks which were run on the Crosshair VII using the 12-core 3900X just to demonstrate that these CPUs will work from day one on older hardware.
> 
> 
> 
> Source link.
> 
> Screenshot link.
> 
> Also see some more screenshots here.
> 
> I reckon the support pages have not been updated, I do recall at Ryzen 1xxx launch a similar case, you can see similar things in the C6H OCN thread in posts of 2017.


I agree with you. Thanks for information



elmor said:


> Seems baseless to me, I think they're just behind on qualification. Technically the CPUs are already working on most boards, past and present.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's a possibility, we'll just have to wait and see. Enabling it by default is puzzling, would be better if it's an opt-in setting as it can't be guaranteed to work.


Thanks for information


----------



## elguero

Wow nicely done Elmor, thank you for keeping track of this boards even now that you don't work for asus.

Class act.


----------



## rush2049

Thanks for running through the testing on the 3900X vs 3600X.

Very interesting that we do not have to worry about memory speed over 3733mhz going into a-sync mode for the fabric when there are two CCDs.


----------



## elmor

nick name said:


> Are we going to see those Aida latency numbers come down? My best/stable 3600MHz setup is high 57ns low 58ns with the 2700X.


All the results here are without any additional tuning, so obviously you can get much better results. I've been down to 69 ns at 4600Mhz memory with custom sub timings, but it's not within reach for most users. And I could always tune subtimings at 3600 MHz as well.




elguero said:


> Wow nicely done Elmor, thank you for keeping track of this boards even now that you don't work for asus.
> 
> Class act.


Really no worries, I'm doing this for my own curiosity and benefit.


----------



## nick name

elmor said:


> All the results here are without any additional tuning, so obviously you can get much better results. I've been down to 69 ns at 4600Mhz memory with custom sub timings, but it's not within reach for most users. And I could always tune subtimings at 3600 MHz as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -snip-


That's what I wanted to hear. Many thanks.


----------



## fursko

rush2049 said:


> Thanks for running through the testing on the 3900X vs 3600X.
> 
> Very interesting that we do not have to worry about memory speed over 3733mhz going into a-sync mode for the fabric when there are two CCDs.


Yeah two ccds also has memory write speed advantage(if that is advantage?)

I'm curious about ccx latency. 3900X latency increases when you use 4 cores or more, 3700X and 3800X has the advantage of additional 1 core per ccx. You have to utilize 5 cores to increase that latency. When you think about applications and games i assume 4 core utilization is common. So i think 3700X may have latency advantage in some cases.

Also another advantage is fabric overclock. I assume 3900X with 2ccd and 12 cores may have harder time to overclock fabric speed.


----------



## mouacyk

Hey @elmor -- would you be able to setup RAM drives and do CDM and/or AS SSD benchmarks between the single-CCD and multi-CCD cpus? Curious to see how the half-write bandwidth affects RAM drive speeds.


----------



## elmor

Timing results at 3600 MHz with 3900X, much smaller difference than expected until tuning subtimings and setting GearDown=Dis. In the "tuned" result I used the "4000MHz 1.5v 2x8GB B-die" profile and manually set the primary timings.








































mouacyk said:


> Hey @elmor -- would you be able to setup RAM drives and do CDM and/or AS SSD benchmarks between the single-CCD and multi-CCD cpus? Curious to see how the half-write bandwidth affects RAM drive speeds.



Sorry I think you'll have to ask someone else to test that.


----------



## Bart

Oh baby, I know who's timings I'm going to be blindly copying sometime soon.


----------



## finalheaven

fursko said:


> Yeah two ccds also has memory write speed advantage(if that is advantage?)
> 
> I'm curious about ccx latency. 3900X latency increases when you use 4 cores or more, 3700X and 3800X has the advantage of additional 1 core per ccx. You have to utilize 5 cores to increase that latency. When you think about applications and games i assume 4 core utilization is common. So i think 3700X may have latency advantage in some cases.
> 
> Also another advantage is fabric overclock. I assume 3900X with 2ccd and 12 cores may have harder time to overclock fabric speed.


Actually this is the reason I am waiting to see if the 3950X beats all the other 4000 series chips. Advantage of lower latency + higher boost clocks + write speed. I am guessing that the fabric overclock will not matter much at around 3600 1:1 anyways.


----------



## dev1ance

The problem on my end is I'm using C6E which has a woinky BIOs on 1.0.0.2. Gotta clear CMOs if RAM fails to boot. Even at DDR4-3200CL14 with tightened sub-timings, it's giving me problems if I disable GearDownMode when it wasn't a problem whatsoever before. Stock subtimings works without GearDownMode but tightened subtimings was a no go until GDM is enabled.

Best I can do with DDR4-3600 with tuned sub-timings on B-Die (GDM enabled so that's at least a ns or two I think) is ~69.1-69.3ns (did do a 68.5ns run but that was an outler):


----------



## Maracus

gupsterg said:


> @elmor
> 
> +rep for above share  .
> 
> From my R5 3600 it seems that 3600MHz 1:1 is very easy to have on Matisse. I'd setup 3533MHz using The Stilt's 3466MHz timings last night, I only had to bump VDIMM from 1.35V to 1.355V. I manually set SOC same as what I saw at default, set CLDO_VDDG ~40mV below SOC.
> 
> AIDA64 Bench (Latency is higher than PR though at same clocks/timings, etc)
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278984
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RAM Test 1200% last night
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278982
> 
> 
> 
> 
> RAM Test 2400% on full POST after shutdown overnight.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278978
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Same POST rerun RAM Test 1200%
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278980
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 278986


Good effort! I have my 3900x coming in a couple days and wondering how my x470 Gaming 7 (t-topology) will handle 4x8GB (3600C16D-16GVK), also Looking forward to tweaking sub timing to see how far I can get the latency down. I will probably try it out with stock cooler to begin with then throw the custom cooling I have ready for it on once im sure this board will behave itself.

Also anyone tried BLCK overclock? Think on my 2700x I only managed a 100mhz OC before the NvMe drive started to **** the bed.


----------



## FlanK3r

very good thread. Im still thinking about benchamrking Matisse on X470 (Win7 support of chipset). 

Elmor, u are true AMD fan  Again u are doing well to support for Crosshair board, for fanbase and in your free time  Excelent.

btw. do u have some tips for LN2? I saw guide from safedisk, but maybe u know another helpfull tip  Thanks.


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Below is my first 1100% PASS on 3666MHz, 1:1 FCK & MEMCLK. I'm still using The Stilt 3466MHz timings, 1T, Gear Down Mode: [Disabled]. Tweak CAD Bus to 30 A A A helped me. I tried a lot or runs this morning trying to keep as low SOC/CLDO_VDDG/VDIMM (1.043/1.003/1.365). RM shows some info wrong but still has a lot right and currently only util with some settings readback.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279012
> 
> 
> View attachment 279014


Hmm good results! Also saw your other posts reaching 1600% with Ramtest...  
I didnt find any time to stress test my memory. Will do soon. Looks promising for now  Yesterday i was playing with PBO settings, got multicore boosting a bit higher but SC boost seems to be locking at 4.4Maybe im missing something, but again didnt had much time to play..


----------



## lordzed83

@elmor Deffo need sobe fixed up bios for C7H from You. Before I get back playing need to check if i set all core in bios and play around with voltage offset i can get cpu to downclock on this bios. So far got 3800cl16 1:1 with geardown on working around 65ns. Passed memtest and stresstest.


----------



## fursko

finalheaven said:


> Actually this is the reason I am waiting to see if the 3950X beats all the other 4000 series chips. Advantage of lower latency + higher boost clocks + write speed. I am guessing that the fabric overclock will not matter much at around 3600 1:1 anyways.



It looks like every fabric overclock counts. It's best to push as far as you can. 2CCD cpu's has one more advantage if i understand correctly. You don't need 1:1 if you overclock your ram. Let's say 1800 fabric, 4000mhz ram is better than 1800 fabric 3600mhz ram for 2 ccd cpus.


----------



## rdr09

A bit off topic. This RAM was just 125$ a few days ago.

https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb...pjaws_V_DDR4_3200_CL14-_-20-232-217-_-Product

Not sure wutsup. It is showing available at 184$ and at other times Back order for 114$.


----------



## bigblueshock

rdr09 said:


> A bit off topic. This RAM was just 125$ a few days ago.
> 
> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb...pjaws_V_DDR4_3200_CL14-_-20-232-217-_-Product
> 
> Not sure wutsup. It is showing available at 184$ and at other times Back order for 114$.


https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb...pjaws_V_DDR4_3200_CL14-_-20-232-217-_-Product

You will see here when it's on Backorder, a different merchant shows up as the seller that actually has it in stock (scrolling all the way down). The $114 is shipped+sold by Newegg (right now on Backorder so it's not the primary sale, but can still buy it. When it comes in stock, will ship). The one for $184 is from a 3rd party seller in-stock.


----------



## gupsterg

Maracus said:


> Good effort! I have my 3900x coming in a couple days and wondering how my x470 Gaming 7 (t-topology) will handle 4x8GB (3600C16D-16GVK), also Looking forward to tweaking sub timing to see how far I can get the latency down. I will probably try it out with stock cooler to begin with then throw the custom cooling I have ready for it on once im sure this board will behave itself.
> 
> Also anyone tried BLCK overclock? Think on my 2700x I only managed a 100mhz OC before the NvMe drive started to **** the bed.


Thanks  , all the best with your new purchase & enjoy :thumb: .

100MHz is max BCLK I can use since went PCI-E storage, only with SATA have I tested upto 104MHz on 2700X, using lower RAM divider to say = 3600MHz+ RAM MHz and gain say ~4.2GHz+ ACB.



majestynl said:


> Hmm good results! Also saw your other posts reaching 1600% with Ramtest...
> I didnt find any time to stress test my memory. Will do soon. Looks promising for now  Yesterday i was playing with PBO settings, got multicore boosting a bit higher but SC boost seems to be locking at 4.4Maybe im missing something, but again didnt had much time to play..


Cheers  , 3K% in this post.


----------



## Miiksu

What are the max mem clocks with four sticks and bandwidth?


----------



## rv8000

elmor said:


> Timing results at 3600 MHz with 3900X, much smaller difference than expected until tuning subtimings and setting GearDown=Dis. In the "tuned" result I used the "4000MHz 1.5v 2x8GB B-die" profile and manually set the primary timings.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry I think you'll have to ask someone else to test that.


Thanks for posting this and your work for testing!

I noticed somewhere else in the thread you managed to get sub 70ns on latency with the fclk 2:1 and above 4000mhz? Is this a benchmarking only situation or was there a possibility of having it sustainable @ 1.5vdimm


----------



## majestynl

gupsterg said:


> Cheers  , 3K% in this post.


Nice, let's hope it passes the 5k-10k! I can remember I had errors around even at those high percentages. Good luck!

PS: I'm curious why Karhu using that much cpu resources, can't remember it did that on 1x and 2x series. The app is also not updated for a while..


----------



## Heuchler

Igor's Lab has very similar results as elmor. Appreciate the excessive testing 
https://www.tomshw.de/2019/07/11/am...dbreite-zwischen-ryzen-r9-3900x-und-r7-3700x/

Concerning AIDA 64, which did not speak about it in the call, but one of the optimizations brought by Zen 2 is the reduction of the writing from a CCD to the IOD of 32B / cycle to 16B / cycle when the writing bandwidth remains fully provisioned at 32B / cycle. Since workloads have little writing, the link does not need to be 32B wide. This choice of design makes it possible to optimize the energy consumption in other parts of the architecture. In other words, with the 3700X and only one chiplet the observed behavior is normal (and on 3900X with two chiplets you will logically observe higher theoretical writing results).


----------



## DragonQ

Has anyone else tried a Ryzen 3000 CPU on an X470 Taichi (Ultimate)? I've tried both an R5 3600 and R7 3700X and I'm having memory issues with both. Basically:

- XMP 3000 MT/s = works fine
- XMP 3200 MT/s = "stable" but causes audio issues (I tried on-board, HDMI, and USB DAC)
- Anything over 3200 MT/s = won't POST

Given everyone seems to be saying 3600 MT/s is "easy" on Ryzen 3000, I'm guessing this is a motherboard/BIOS issue? This board is stuck on AGESA 1.0.0.1 still. So far I've found two other people elsewhere with similar issues running either the X370 or X470 Taichi. Anyone else here have experience with this? Will I just have to wait for AGESA 1.0.0.3?


----------



## Hwgeek

Heuchler said:


> Igor's Lab has very similar results as elmor. Appreciate the excessive testing
> https://www.tomshw.de/2019/07/11/am...dbreite-zwischen-ryzen-r9-3900x-und-r7-3700x/
> 
> Concerning AIDA 64, which did not speak about it in the call, but one of the optimizations brought by Zen 2 is the reduction of the writing from a CCD to the IOD of 32B / cycle to 16B / cycle when the writing bandwidth remains fully provisioned at 32B / cycle. Since workloads have little writing, the link does not need to be 32B wide. This choice of design makes it possible to optimize the energy consumption in other parts of the architecture. In other words, with the 3700X and only one chiplet the observed behavior is normal (and on 3900X with two chiplets you will logically observe higher theoretical writing results).


Did any one tested 3800X writing speeds? if it's 105W TDP vs 65W TDP- *maybe it's dual Chiplet design?*


----------



## rdr09

bigblueshock said:


> https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-16gb...pjaws_V_DDR4_3200_CL14-_-20-232-217-_-Product
> 
> You will see here when it's on Backorder, a different merchant shows up as the seller that actually has it in stock (scrolling all the way down). The $114 is shipped+sold by Newegg (right now on Backorder so it's not the primary sale, but can still buy it. When it comes in stock, will ship). The one for $184 is from a 3rd party seller in-stock.


I see. Heard of rumors RAM prices might go up when it was in the news not long ago that they might come down in price. That would really suck if it comes true.


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Nice, let's hope it passes the 5k-10k! I can remember I had errors around even at those high percentages. Good luck!
> 
> PS: I'm curious why Karhu using that much cpu resources, can't remember it did that on 1x and 2x series. The app is also not updated for a while..


Cheers  .

At present I have just been interested in getting reasonable stability testing done, more lengthy later, RT has behaved as it does on 3xxx as it did on previous CPUs for me.

TBH, considering that the C7H UEFI is AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2, over the course of ~2 days testing/reruns of say 3533S, 3600S, 3666S I've been impressed how well it has worked. Occasionally when tweaking I got something wrong the "RETRY" button has got me back, so not needed CMOS_CLR, etc.

Last night I did manage to lock myself completely out  , I enabled below setting.



Spoiler














Even CLEAR_CMOS would not get board to POST properly, I had to reflash UEFI to gain back functionality  .


----------



## CubanB

OP, you seem to be the right person to ask these questions to.

I'm looking to avoid X570. I already have a X370 Crosshair. Would I benefit from going up to X470 Crosshair, outside of the larger BIOS flash rom? I don't care much about PCIe 4.0.

If the RAM was running at the same speeds on all 3 platforms (2666mhz with same timings for example) would there be a big difference in the performance of the CPU itself? In X370 vs X470 vs X570? It didn't seem like there was a big difference for 2700X with X370 vs X470 for example.

And finally, if I want to run 4 sticks of 16GB 3200mhz Corsair memory (pretty sure it's Hynix).. would I be better off with the X370 in the long run, because it's T-Topology. I'd be hoping to run it at 3200 xmp timings.. or even be happy to drop it back to 2933mhz if it would be 100% stable without needing to overvolt it.

I realise it's hard to answer these questions, since everyone is waiting on more BIOS updates to smooth out all of the bugs and kinks. But is there a gut feeling based on previous years? And how the IMC is supposed to be better this time around?


----------



## Spectre73

CubanB said:


> OP, you seem to be the right person to ask these questions to.
> 
> I'm looking to avoid X570. I already have a X370 Crosshair. Would I benefit from going up to X470 Crosshair, outside of the larger BIOS flash rom? I don't care much about PCIe 4.0.
> 
> If the RAM was running at the same speeds on all 3 platforms (2666mhz with same timings for example) would there be a big difference in the performance of the CPU itself? In X370 vs X470 vs X570? It didn't seem like there was a big difference for 2700X with X370 vs X470 for example.
> 
> And finally, if I want to run 4 sticks of 16GB 3200mhz Corsair memory (pretty sure it's Hynix).. would I be better off with the X370 in the long run, because it's T-Topology. I'd be hoping to run it at 3200 xmp timings.. or even be happy to drop it back to 2933mhz if it would be 100% stable without needing to overvolt it.
> 
> I realise it's hard to answer these questions, since everyone is waiting on more BIOS updates to smooth out all of the bugs and kinks. But is there a gut feeling based on previous years? And how the IMC is supposed to be better this time around?


I am not the OP but I have thought about this as well.

The BIOS support for the various chipset iterations (x370, x470, b350, b450 and x570) seems to be staggered. x570 ist first and then support is delayed ever more, the older the chipset is. So it is not that hard to imagine that support for x370 will be very slow and barebones, if at all.

I fully expect only the necessary updates for x370 and even them will die out rather sooner than later.

x470 support of course will be better, but it will eventually die out, too.

So my plan of action is this:

Wait the first few weeks how support for x370 evolves. If it is weak und insufficient I will switch to x570 and out of principle another brand than x370.
I would regard x470 as a weak option, because even x470 is a second class citizen to x570 and support will never be as good.


----------



## Jaju123

PSA: My C7H for some reason defaulted to 1600mhz FCLK when memory was set to 3600mhz (should be 1800mhz). I dont know why it is asynchronous by default. Setting it manually to 1800 improved perf a lot.


----------



## majestynl

Jaju123 said:


> PSA: My C7H for some reason defaulted to 1600mhz FCLK when memory was set to 3600mhz (should be 1800mhz). I dont know why it is asynchronous by default. Setting it manually to 1800 improved perf a lot.


Thats how it is, you need to set FCLK (1:1) manually!




gupsterg said:


> Cheers  .
> 
> At present I have just been interested in getting reasonable stability testing done, more lengthy later, RT has behaved as it does on 3xxx as it did on previous CPUs for me.
> 
> TBH, considering that the C7H UEFI is AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2, over the course of ~2 days testing/reruns of say 3533S, 3600S, 3666S I've been impressed how well it has worked. Occasionally when tweaking I got something wrong the "RETRY" button has got me back, so not needed CMOS_CLR, etc.
> 
> Last night I did manage to lock myself completely out  , I enabled below setting.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 279474
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Even CLEAR_CMOS would not get board to POST properly, I had to reflash UEFI to gain back functionality  .



Yeap saw the lock-down on the other thread  Im also impressed with results so far!!


----------



## gilljoy

Posting here in case anyone can help. When using the AMD Ryzen Balanced plan my CPU seems to be always boosting and the fans spinning up and down with an idle temp of around 55-60C.

I'm running the following setup

Asus Crosshair Vii X470
3700x
Crucial Balistix 16gb (running at xmp standard)

Everything in the bios is set to Auto. When looking in CPU-Z or Ryzen Master the Core voltage is always at 1.4Ghz except for a fraction of a second when it drops to 0.9V & Core speed is always around 4.4Ghz Any suggestions?


----------



## Wuest3nFuchs

elmor said:


> Plug and Play Gen4 on X470 apparently. Futuremark System Info doesn't seem to detect PCI-E Gen properly.
> 
> *Max theoretical bandwidth*
> 
> PCI-E Gen3 x16 = 0.985*16 = 15.8 GB/s
> PCI-E Gen4 x16 = 1.969*16 = 31.5 GB/s


AWESOMENESS!!!


----------



## mito1172

C6H doesn't add 3900x to processor support list 

https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO/HelpDesk_CPU/


----------



## jon666

gilljoy said:


> Posting here in case anyone can help. When using the AMD Ryzen Balanced plan my CPU seems to be always boosting and the fans spinning up and down with an idle temp of around 55-60C.
> 
> I'm running the following setup
> 
> Asus Crosshair Vii X470
> 3700x
> Crucial Balistix 16gb (running at xmp standard)
> 
> Everything in the bios is set to Auto. When looking in CPU-Z or Ryzen Master the Core voltage is always at 1.4Ghz except for a fraction of a second when it drops to 0.9V & Core speed is always around 4.4Ghz Any suggestions?


I was playing with windows power plans yesterday for my 1700x so voltage would drop on idle. I have Ultimate Performance active but I can drop down to High Performance, Balanced, and Power saver. In that order each will more aggressively downvolt, and downclock. If you want things to calm down on idle, amd cool'n quiet must be enabled (sounds like it is for you) and windows power plan must be set to something like balanced. Try em all out and see which one you like, cause it is probably the best it is going to get I think.


----------



## elmor

mito1172 said:


> C6H doesn't add 3900x to processor support list
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO/HelpDesk_CPU/



The motherboard vendors only received 3900X CPU's this week, takes a while to qualify them.


----------



## chakku

elmor said:


> *Issues*
> 
> 
> 
> C6H 7106: DRAM Voltage at the beginning of POST is always 1.200V which limits the max memory frequency. *It's possible to work around by first booting with lower DRAM Frequency and higher voltage, then only increasing DRAM Frequency in steps without the board shutting down.*
> C7H 2406: DRAM Vboot is always 1.200V by default, it can be manually set instead. However the setting is lost after standby power is removed from the motherboard.
> C6H 7106 + C7H 2406: After failing memory overclocking you get stuck at C5 POST code which never seems to recover. The only way to get back is to clear CMOS.


This seems to be the case for me on C7H 2406 as well. Is there a maximum jump in DRAM Frequency before the board shuts down? I seem to be able to get away with 2133 - 3200 but almost always get stuck on a code trying to push above that, whether it's C5, 19, 15, 07, or some other undocumented code.


----------



## mito1172

elmor said:


> The motherboard vendors only received 3900X CPU's this week, takes a while to qualify them.


Thanks for information


----------



## thomasck

Just a heads up, can't go further than FCLK 1500 with a Taichi x370. Even 1533 makes ram unstable.

Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk


----------



## DragonQ

thomasck said:


> Just a heads up, can't go further than FCLK 1500 with a Taichi x370. Even 1533 makes ram unstable.
> 
> Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk


Same on X470 Taichi Ultimate. Not sure if RAM or FLCK is the issue but definitely unstable past 1500 MHz, even with bumping the CLDO_VDDG voltage. Hopefully just a BIOS issue (both boards are on ComboPI 1.0.0.1).


----------



## FlanK3r

mito1172 said:


> C6H doesn't add 3900x to processor support list
> 
> https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/ROG-CROSSHAIR-VI-HERO/HelpDesk_CPU/


It is working very well. I saw two reviews on C6H, one is example there:

http://www.ddworld.cz/pc-a-komponen...yzen-9-3900x-na-x570-proti-x470-a-x370-3.html


----------



## Arni90

After a lot of frustration, tweaking, and more frustration, I have accomplished the following:


----------



## sadjoker

Hey guys! Anyone having a problem with Ryzen 5 3600 and Memory Write speeds? (2x less than Read)
I've posted all the data I have here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1729378-2x8gb-g-skill-b-die-write-problem.html

Is this fixable somehow or I need to change hardware? Thank you in advance!


----------



## FlanK3r

thats very good, I think...


----------



## gupsterg

thomasck said:


> Just a heads up, can't go further than FCLK 1500 with a Taichi x370. Even 1533 makes ram unstable.
> 
> Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk
> 
> 
> 
> DragonQ said:
> 
> 
> 
> Same on X470 Taichi Ultimate. Not sure if RAM or FLCK is the issue but definitely unstable past 1500 MHz, even with bumping the CLDO_VDDG voltage. Hopefully just a BIOS issue (both boards are on ComboPI 1.0.0.1).
Click to expand...

1833MHz seems max with my CPU if I don't OC core, C7H AGESA ComboPi-AM4 1.0.0.2, hoping once newer AGESA drop will gain some improved stability.



sadjoker said:


> Hey guys! Anyone having a problem with Ryzen 5 3600 and Memory Write speeds? (2x less than Read)
> I've posted all the data I have here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1729378-2x8gb-g-skill-b-die-write-problem.html
> 
> Is this fixable somehow or I need to change hardware? Thank you in advance!


Not being rude. Thread is so short at present so easy to read back and see answer.


----------



## Hwgeek

sadjoker said:


> Hey guys! Anyone having a problem with Ryzen 5 3600 and Memory Write speeds? (2x less than Read)
> I've posted all the data I have here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1729378-2x8gb-g-skill-b-die-write-problem.html
> 
> Is this fixable somehow or I need to change hardware? Thank you in advance!


It's OK, only 3900X/3950X will have same write speed [1 chiplet gets half the write speed].


----------



## sadjoker

Hwgeek said:


> It's OK, only 3900X/3950X will have same write speed [1 chiplet gets half the write speed].


Wow, ok then. I shouldn't be worried. Here is my last try @3600 (currently running memtests and seems stable in Windows). Do you guys have some advices for the numbers or should i just leave it like that and see how it goes?


----------



## thomasck

Arni90 said:


> After a lot of frustration, tweaking, and more frustration, I have accomplished the following:


What Infinity Fabric are you using?

Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk


----------



## os2wiz

I have an Ryzen 9 3900x on an MSI X570 MEG Ace motherboard. While working on my memory overclocking I noticed that for the CL setting it will only accept an even integer. Why has this peculiarity returned to haunt us again??? Using latest v 1.2 bios.


----------



## mito1172

FlanK3r said:


> It is working very well. I saw two reviews on C6H, one is example there:
> 
> http://www.ddworld.cz/pc-a-komponen...yzen-9-3900x-na-x570-proti-x470-a-x370-3.html


yes it works well. just does not appear in the processor list still


----------



## elguero

sadjoker said:


> Hey guys! Anyone having a problem with Ryzen 5 3600 and Memory Write speeds? (2x less than Read)
> I've posted all the data I have here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/18051-memory/1729378-2x8gb-g-skill-b-die-write-problem.html
> 
> Is this fixable somehow or I need to change hardware? Thank you in advance!


That's because the 3600 has half the cache of the 3900x, because it has only one chiplet instead of two.


----------



## hazium233

^It's because 16B/clock write on the fabric, read is 32B/clock... for single chiplet that is. Two chiplet is limited to 32B/cycle write.


----------



## Arni90

thomasck said:


> What Infinity Fabric are you using?
> 
> Sent from my HTC U11 using Tapatalk


FCLK is set to 1900 MHz, as seen in the CPU-Z screenshot


----------



## Streetdragon

Arni90 said:


> FCLK is set to 1900 MHz, as seen in the CPU-Z screenshot


wow^^ 1900 is the highest i saw till now. nice nice. i thought 1800 is the highest.
Did you changed any voltages?


----------



## BLUuuE

Arni90 said:


> FCLK is set to 1900 MHz, as seen in the CPU-Z screenshot


The northbridge clock on CPU-Z isn't FCLK. It's actually UCLK (memory controller clock).



The Stilt said:


> Wanted to clear a common misconception people seem to have: The "Northbridge Frequency" displayed by CPU-Z is NOT the FCLK (fabric) frequency. Instead it is the frequency of the memory controller itself (UCLK). Normally both FCLK and UCLK operate at the same speed (MEMCLK). When FCLK and MEMCLK are desynchronised, UCLK will be set to 1/2 mode. Regardless if you lower or raise it below / above the MEMCLK. For example, if MEMCLK = 3200MHz and FCLK is anything else than 1600MHz, the UCLK frequency will be MEMCLK / 2 (i.e. 800MHz).
> 
> No third party software (for the time being) can monitor FCLK frequency.


----------



## rdr09

It looks like some workloads do not really benefit from faster RAM. From the derBauer test using Agesa 1003. My guess would be ST workloads.


----------



## Arni90

Streetdragon said:


> wow^^ 1900 is the highest i saw till now. nice nice. i thought 1800 is the highest.
> Did you changed any voltages?


Yes, SOC is set to 1.15V (can't be bothered to tune it on my broken BIOS, just wanted something that would handle high RAM speeds)
VDDG is set to 1.060V


----------



## thomasck

Arni90 said:


> FCLK is set to 1900 MHz, as seen in the CPU-Z screenshot


Nope, is not. That's MCLK. The only software that reads FCLK so far is Ryzen Master.


----------



## rv8000

rdr09 said:


> It looks like some workloads do not really benefit from faster RAM. From the deBauer test using Agesa 1003. My guess would be ST workloads.


Half a minute going from DDR4 3000 to 3600 is a nice improvement. Free performance if you know how to overclock your memory, and or pay an extra $20 bucks for a better kit (last time I checked ram prices were fairly tame, bought a b-die 16GB 3200 c14 kit for $129). Not to mention there's another few % if you've got the time and patience to tune secondary and tertiary timings.

You're hamstringing yourself by cheaping out on a memory kit with a Ryzen platform IMO.


----------



## mtrai

@elmor I can comfirm it also works on the beta bios 0068 that was just released on the C7H Wifi X470. My 5700 XT just arrived. 

Here is a comparsion of my Vega 64 vs the 5700 XT with the PCIe 4.0 3dmark test. 

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/pcie/22255/pcie/23698


----------



## nick name

mtrai said:


> @elmor I can comfirm it also works on the beta bios 0068 that was just released on the C7H Wifi X470. My 5700 XT just arrived.
> 
> Here is a comparsion of my Vega 64 vs the 5700 XT with the PCIe 4.0 3dmark test.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/compare/pcie/22255/pcie/23698


Wait, how are you testing PCIe 4.0 with a 2700X?


----------



## chakku

nick name said:


> Wait, how are you testing PCIe 4.0 with a 2700X?


Yeah I'm not sure if the comparison link was just an error but the 5700 XT B/W on the 2700X test is within Gen 3 speeds at 14.22GB/s while Elmor's was above 3's limit of 15.8GB/s.


----------



## elmor

os2wiz said:


> I have an Ryzen 9 3900x on an MSI X570 MEG Ace motherboard. While working on my memory overclocking I noticed that for the CL setting it will only accept an even integer. Why has this peculiarity returned to haunt us again??? Using latest v 1.2 bios.


That's nothing new and has been the case since the first Ryzen CPUs. When using Geardown = Enabled you can only use even CAS Latency.


----------



## Mysticial

Does anyone have any results for the 4 x 16GB configuration?

I'm spec'ing out a possible 3950X build in September. And I'm wondering if 4 x 16GB @ 3600 is achievable with absolute 24/7 extreme stress-stability.

-----

The long story is:



I'm interested in playing with the Trident Z Royals. But they only clock up to 3200 stock.
I currently have 8 x 16 GB 3600c17 Trident Z RGB in an X299 rig. (downclocked to 3466 since the IMC can't handle higher)
I need to decide between:


Buy a fresh set 3200c16 Royals for the 3950X.
Steal 4 x 16GB from my X299. Buy a fresh set of 3200c16 8 x 16 GB Royals to replace it. The leftover 4 x 16GB will be set aside for next year's build.

If Zen 2 can easily run 4 x 16GB @ 3600, then I will go with #2. That is, I'll steal the (fast) memory from my X299 and replace it with a slower 8 x 16GB 3200c16 kit that will match better with the chip's IMC.

If Zen 2 cannot reliably run 4 x 16GB @ 3600, then I'll just get 3200c16 Royals for it and call it a day.

-----

Notes:


I do realize that there are 3200c14 Royals that are B-die and will likely OC up to 3600. But they also cost twice as much. So I'm not in the market for them.
Yes, I really do need that much memory. 64 GB isn't actually enough, but it's the most that the platform will take right now.


----------



## Nighthog

Mysticial said:


> Does anyone have any results for the 4 x 16GB configuration?
> 
> I'm spec'ing out a possible 3950X build in September. And I'm wondering if 4 x 16GB @ 3600 is achievable with absolute 24/7 extreme stress-stability.
> 
> -----
> 
> The long story is:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm interested in playing with the Trident Z Royals. But they only clock up to 3200 stock.
> I currently have 8 x 16 GB 3600c17 Trident Z RGB in an X299 rig. (downclocked to 3466 since the IMC can't handle higher)
> I need to decide between:
> 
> 
> Buy a fresh set 3200c16 Royals for the 3950X.
> Steal 4 x 16GB from my X299. Buy a fresh set of 3200c16 8 x 16 GB Royals to replace it. The leftover 4 x 16GB will be set aside for next year's build.
> 
> If Zen 2 can easily run 4 x 16GB @ 3600, then I will go with #2. That is, I'll steal the (fast) memory from my X299 and replace it with a slower 8 x 16GB 3200c16 kit that will match better with the chip's IMC.
> 
> If Zen 2 cannot reliably run 4 x 16GB @ 3600, then I'll just get 3200c16 Royals for it and call it a day.
> 
> -----
> 
> Notes:
> 
> 
> I do realize that there are 3200c14 Royals that are B-die and will likely OC up to 3600. But they also cost twice as much. So I'm not in the market for them.
> Yes, I really do need that much memory. 64 GB isn't actually enough, but it's the most that the platform will take right now.


Not Samsung B-die but even Ryzen gen 1 could do 4x16 @ 3400Mhz with Micron E-die.

I read this today:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cdrgnq/micron_edie_is_awesome_4x16gb_dr_3400mhz_14181432/

Even I could do 4x8Gb 3733Mhz on my gen 1 Ryzen 7 1700 on a Gigabyte B350 board. 

*Though this is motherboard dependant.* the Biostar X470 board could barely do 3200Mhz with the same kit.

All I've seen Ryxen 3xxx will fare better on the IMC side and most boards are better regarding memory compatibility now. Though Samsung B-die might not be as easy to run as Micron E-die. 

I will be soon testing a Ryzen 7 3800X & Aorus Xtreme with this same memory again. I do hope to be able to run faster speeds.


----------



## Nizzen

Nighthog said:


> Mysticial said:
> 
> 
> 
> Does anyone have any results for the 4 x 16GB configuration?
> 
> I'm spec'ing out a possible 3950X build in September. And I'm wondering if 4 x 16GB @ 3600 is achievable with absolute 24/7 extreme stress-stability.
> 
> -----
> 
> The long story is:
> 
> 
> 
> I'm interested in playing with the Trident Z Royals. But they only clock up to 3200 stock.
> I currently have 8 x 16 GB 3600c17 Trident Z RGB in an X299 rig. (downclocked to 3466 since the IMC can't handle higher)
> I need to decide between:
> 
> 
> Buy a fresh set 3200c16 Royals for the 3950X.
> Steal 4 x 16GB from my X299. Buy a fresh set of 3200c16 8 x 16 GB Royals to replace it. The leftover 4 x 16GB will be set aside for next year's build.
> 
> If Zen 2 can easily run 4 x 16GB @ 3600, then I will go with #2. That is, I'll steal the (fast) memory from my X299 and replace it with a slower 8 x 16GB 3200c16 kit that will match better with the chip's IMC.
> 
> If Zen 2 cannot reliably run 4 x 16GB @ 3600, then I'll just get 3200c16 Royals for it and call it a day.
> 
> -----
> 
> Notes:
> 
> 
> I do realize that there are 3200c14 Royals that are B-die and will likely OC up to 3600. But they also cost twice as much. So I'm not in the market for them.
> Yes, I really do need that much memory. 64 GB isn't actually enough, but it's the most that the platform will take right now.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Not Samsung B-die but even Ryzen gen 1 could do 4x16 @ 3400Mhz with Micron E-die.
> 
> I read this today:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/Amd/comments/cdrgnq/micron_edie_is_awesome_4x16gb_dr_3400mhz_14181432/
> 
> Even I could do 4x8Gb 3733Mhz on my gen 1 Ryzen 7 1700 on a Gigabyte B350 board.
> 
> *Though this is motherboard dependant.* the Biostar X470 board could barely do 3200Mhz with the same kit.
> 
> All I've seen Ryxen 3xxx will fare better on the IMC side and most boards are better regarding memory compatibility now. Though Samsung B-die might not be as easy to run as Micron E-die.
> 
> I will be soon testing a Ryzen 7 3800X & Aorus Xtreme with this same memory again. I do hope to be able to run faster speeds.
Click to expand...

Where is gsat stable proof of 4x8Gb 3733Mhz on my gen 1 Ryzen 7 1700 on a Gigabyte B350 board. ?


----------



## Saiger0

@elmor 
If I´m not mistaken the new memory controller also comes with (partial) error correction. How does that affect ram stability testing? I would guess that once your ram reaches like 5000% in Karhu the memoy controller would eliminate all the following error making a ram overclock potential meta stable?


----------



## Nighthog

Nizzen said:


> Where is gsat stable proof of 4x8Gb 3733Mhz on my gen 1 Ryzen 7 1700 on a Gigabyte B350 board. ?


I guess you mean proof? ...(don't use the mobile platform it causes posting errors)


----------



## Zed03

Why are there concerns about 3950x not being able to run 4x16 @ 3600? In the demos we got so far, it was running 100% stock G.SKILL Trident Z Series 64GB(4x16GB) DDR4 3733MHz CL17 without issue. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something?


----------



## Mysticial

Zed03 said:


> Why are there concerns about 3950x not being able to run 4x16 @ 3600? In the demos we got so far, it was running 100% stock G.SKILL Trident Z Series 64GB(4x16GB) DDR4 3733MHz CL17 without issue. Maybe I'm misunderstanding something?


For several reasons:

I'm reading a lot that 3600 is the sweet spot for the 8 GB DIMMs. 16 GB DIMMs can't be better.
My Zen 1 also runs 4 x 16 GB (Hynix 3200c16). But even with the latest AGESA, it was never fully stable above 2800. It was bench and normal-use stable at 3200. But any sort of sustained workstation load, 2933 or higher would error at least once a week. It could also be the mobo though.
There's a big difference between "OC forum stability" and "24/7 workstation stability". Most of us OCers only run a short stress test for a few minutes or a few hours and call it a day. But my usecase is HPC which is much worse than that and sustained. Likewise, workloads will often fail under stock XMP settings - even QVL ones. So I actually find myself downclocking memory more than overclocking it.
I won't necessarily have the best ram. (meaning no B-die) since they are getting absurdly expensive.


----------



## elmor

Saiger0 said:


> @elmor
> If I´m not mistaken the new memory controller also comes with (partial) error correction. How does that affect ram stability testing? I would guess that once your ram reaches like 5000% in Karhu the memoy controller would eliminate all the following error making a ram overclock potential meta stable?


Haven't seen anything about that, got a link? I still get errors as usual when testing memory. AFAIK it's still the same memory controller.


----------



## Saiger0

elmor said:


> Haven't seen anything about that, got a link? I still get errors as usual when testing memory. AFAIK it's still the same memory controller.


I´ve gathered that information from various comments one forums and articles. Guess it´s just a rumor then.


----------



## Boxman

Mysticial said:


> For several reasons:
> 
> I'm reading a lot that 3600 is the sweet spot for the 8 GB DIMMs. 16 GB DIMMs can't be better.
> My Zen 1 also runs 4 x 16 GB (Hynix 3200c16). But even with the latest AGESA, it was never fully stable above 2800. It was bench and normal-use stable at 3200. But any sort of sustained workstation load, 2933 or higher would error at least once a week. It could also be the mobo though.
> There's a big difference between "OC forum stability" and "24/7 workstation stability". Most of us OCers only run a short stress test for a few minutes or a few hours and call it a day. But my usecase is HPC which is much worse than that and sustained. Likewise, workloads will often fail under stock XMP settings - even QVL ones. So I actually find myself downclocking memory more than overclocking it.
> I won't necessarily have the best ram. (meaning no B-die) since they are getting absurdly expensive.


Okay, but unless the 3950x is significantly different from the 3900x (it shouldn't same I/O die and all), why would there be a problem? I am running, as we speak, 4x 16gb dual rank E-die dimms at 3600C16 at 1.4v, no effort at all, on a 3900x. Is there a reason why the 3950x shouldn't be able to do the same?

I still have to fiddle with all other timings. If someone has a good baseline / educated guess for me to start from, that'd be great, and I'd be willing to run long stresstests in return. DRAM calculator keeps saying "not supported" so I'd have to start from scratch.


----------



## Mysticial

Boxman said:


> Okay, but unless the 3950x is significantly different from the 3900x (it shouldn't same I/O die and all), why would there be a problem? I am running, as we speak, 4x 16gb dual rank E-die dimms at 3600C16 at 1.4v, no effort at all, on a 3900x. Is there a reason why the 3950x shouldn't be able to do the same?


I'm not saying it's different. If anything, I'd hope they're better if they are better binned by AMD.

Prior to asking, nobody on this thread had posted anything on 16 GB DIMMs. And the ones I see here now, I question their stability for the reasons described.

From my experience, when someone on an OC forum says they've hit 4000 with a short test, they're probably going to crash at least once a day under sustained HPC. In reality, it's not stable unless they drop down to ~3400 or something. So I'm looking to see how far people have been able to achieve bench/memtest stability with 4x16. If people are reaching 4200+, then I'm more confident that 3600 is stable under 24/7 HPC.

Unlike CPUs, memory has a very long tail of instability.

For example on X299, most people are able to hit 4000+ with their memory and have benchmarks + memtest to prove it. But the vendors that build machines for HFTs never go above 3600 even though they get paid a fortune to try to go higher. Personally, I've had trouble getting 24/7 HPC stability above 3300 on X299 with 8x16GB - but bench stability at 3800 is easy.


----------



## Boxman

Aight, no problem. Tell me which test to run and I'll gladly do it, gotta go away for a few hours soon anyway. Timings are on 16-24-24-something though, i literally only set the CAS for now.


----------



## Mysticial

Boxman said:


> Aight, no problem. Tell me which test to run and I'll gladly do it, gotta go away for a few hours soon anyway. Timings are on 16-24-24-something though, i literally only set the CAS for now.


The workload is proprietary, but the closest thing you could try is:

Prime95 blend. (with AVX*)
y-cruncher stress-test + multiple large and long computations.

*AVX matters because it speeds up the computation thereby putting more stress on the memory.


----------



## briank

elmor said:


> *Bonus: PCI-E Gen4 test on X470*
> 
> With the current available C7H BIOS 2406, PCI-E Gen 4 will work with any PCI-E Gen 4 device connected to the CPU PCI-E lanes without any changes to BIOS settings. Just plug the device and install the driver. Similarly a PCI-E Gen 4 NVMe drive plugged in the CPU M.2-slot should work at Gen 4. The conclusion is that at least on AGESA 1.0.0.2, PCI-E Gen 4 is not actively blocked on non-X570 motherboards. If it will work on your board or in specific slots will be down to the board layout. The closer the slot is to the CPU (shorter trace length) the higher the chance of success. Increased PCB layer count and lack of PCI-E switches will also increase the chance of success.


Great research and post Elmor!

A few comments on your PCIe Gen 4 comments:



elmor said:


> The closer the slot is to the CPU (shorter trace length) the higher the chance of success.


This is true, when the dielectric material used on the motherboard is the same. Not every board uses the same material though. It's possible that a motherboard with 150mm traces from CPU to x16 slot is worse performance with Gen 4 devices than another motherboard with 200mm traces but with higher performance, low loss material. So your statement is mostly true. My point is, you can't compare motherboards on trace length alone.




elmor said:


> Increased PCB layer count ... will also increase the chance of success.


This is similar to the trace length observation. Generally true, but not because layer count directly improves the performance of those CPU to x16 slot PCIe signal traces. Higher layer count is usually a sign of a more expensive board, with perhaps a better dielectric material. Higher layer count also makes it easier to isolate the PCIe traces from noise or crosstalk. However, it is totally possible, with careful design and quality materials, to design a "low" layer count board that can do PCIe Gen4.




elmor said:


> ...lack of PCI-E switches will also increase the chance of success.


Switches actually re-time the signal and don't harm signal integrity at all. If there was a PCIe switch in the path, the chance of success would be related to the factors discussed above (distance, material, design). The reason I wouldn't expect it to work, is that most motherboards out there have a PCIe Gen 3 switch. They are not capable of Gen 4 signals or protocol.

Again, great post. Just wanted to add some insight on motherboard design for those interested.


----------



## Boxman

Mysticial said:


> The workload is proprietary, but the closest thing you could try is:
> 
> Prime95 blend. (with AVX*)
> y-cruncher stress-test + multiple large and long computations.
> 
> *AVX matters because it speeds up the computation thereby putting more stress on the memory.


Running it now. Prime95 Blend with AVX. 98% RAM usage load to HWInfo. Will two hours be enough?


----------



## Mysticial

Boxman said:


> Running it now. Prime95 Blend with AVX. 98% RAM usage load to HWInfo. Will two hours be enough?


Probably not. So I wouldn't bother wasting too much time or power. But being able to hold off P95 blend for several hours is at least a good sanity check.

P95 isn't the most stressful memory test anyway since it's homogeneous and it only touches a fraction of the total memory. The failures that I'm talking about tend to be once-per-week on a mix of workloads if you're right at the edge.


----------



## Nighthog

What I gathered you really needed to push the IMC with voltage in those situations and just getting the settings correct in all fields. That's a lot of tweaking.
It took me a long time to get that 3733Mhz stable for the gen 1 1700 in that screen I shared. Probably tried for a few weeks or more each day when I had time to fiddle with different settings and combinations. I was trying 3800Mhz for the longest time as well which helped me find the right settings to set for the 3733Mhz stable but 3800Mhz was not possible with the voltages my motherboard could deliver. I was already running it maxed the board allowed way above everyone's recommendations for safe voltage. I was still getting some issues at times that was heat related... Like I had to cool the back of the motherboard with 120mm fan to keep it more stable for longer runs or not to put the side-panel on for the case and keep it open when gaming as it was causing too much heat to cause issues with it(heat overall was a issue with it back then).
3600Mhz was easy like set it and forget it it just worked.

I changed motherboard because of those reason but it was a lemon really. I choose the Biostar because of it's 4-phase SoC power hoping it had potential but the board was utterly bad for MEM OC in the BIOS department. Really bad. Just the regular MEM voltage setting was bugged to hell on it and took ages for me to figure out how it was working to be usable but it barely got 3200Mhz working in the end and it was limited to max +0.300V for memory... WHY!

The B350 and 1700 Combo needed 1.350+vSoC for 3733Mhz stability and max 1.400V just to start a Memory test without crashing @ 3800Mhz. And from that I gather why everyone were struggling with high memory speeds and stability I guess they never tried to push voltage into the IMC as I did. 
I kept seeing everyone stay in the 1.050-1.150V range for gen 1 and 2 and trying to get it stable for higher speeds... Really I just kept my mouth shut for most part. No one dares to push voltage on these chips <-- _they really do need some extra on the earlier generations_


----------



## Boxman

Mysticial said:


> Probably not. So I wouldn't bother wasting too much time or power. But being able to hold off P95 blend for several hours is at least a good sanity check.
> 
> P95 isn't the most stressful memory test anyway since it's homogeneous and it only touches a fraction of the total memory. The failures that I'm talking about tend to be once-per-week on a mix of workloads if you're right at the edge.


Geez, at that point surely you’re using an ECC build? Honestly, this goalpost is way too far away for general use, thats not a realistic interpretation of ‘stable’ anymore, at least not for desktops. I’d be surprised if most regular systems pass such test.


----------



## chakku

Has much testing been done on fabric clock scaling? From my little testing done it seems 3600CL14 does a little better than 3733CL16, maybe there's a sweetspot for timings/fabric clock below AMD's 3733 recommendation (for those of us that can't hit 3733CL14 anyway).


----------



## Nighthog

chakku said:


> Has much testing been done on fabric clock scaling? From my little testing done it seems 3600CL14 does a little better than 3733CL16, maybe there's a sweetspot for timings/fabric clock below AMD's 3733 recommendation (for those of us that can't hit 3733CL14 anyway).


3600CL14 is usually better than 3733CL16 I've tested that stuff on gen 1. Depends on workload and how low timings you can push for the higher speed. CL14 is best in all speeds. CL12 on it's own without the other timings matching doesn't net much of anything for the voltages required.

Try for CL14 and the highest speed you can get with it.


----------



## Mysticial

Boxman said:


> Geez, at that point surely you’re using an ECC build? Honestly, this goalpost is way too far away for general use, thats not a realistic interpretation of ‘stable’ anymore, at least not for desktops. I’d be surprised if most regular systems pass such test.


It is a fairly high bar. But it's usually achievable with sufficiently conservative clocks.

Most "regular" systems pass. But I've seen exceptions. My laptop will fail every once in a while under these loads. It's common enough that I can't reliably run such workloads on it that last more than a day since that seems to be the MTTF. But it's still stable enough that I can trust it to other integrity-sensitive loads like code compilation.


----------



## chakku

Nighthog said:


> 3600CL14 is usually better than 3733CL16 I've tested that stuff on gen 1. Depends on workload and how low timings you can push for the higher speed. CL14 is best in all speeds. CL12 on it's own without the other timings matching doesn't net much of anything for the voltages required.
> 
> Try for CL14 and the highest speed you can get with it.


From what I recall Gen 1's IF didn't scale beyond 1600MHz anyway so anything above 3200 was purely latency driven. Wondering if the fabric continues to scale at 1900 on this series or if you're better off at 1800 with tighter timings. Synthetics like GB still seem to favor my 3733CL16 but games like the 3600CL14.


----------



## Boxman

Well, FWIW, 4x16GB Dual Rank E-die 3600c16 1.4v, 1 hour Prime95 AVX Blend. Could've been 2 hours, but Windows10=SmArTt and figured "hey nothing is going on, I can probably go to sleep" after an hour.

https://imgur.com/U2y0Ji6


----------



## Nighthog

Boxman said:


> Well, FWIW, 4x16GB Dual Rank E-die 3600c16 1.4v, 1 hour Prime95 AVX Blend. Could've been 2 hours, but Windows10=SmArTt and figured "hey nothing is going on, I can probably go to sleep" after an hour.
> 
> https://imgur.com/U2y0Ji6


1 hour really isn't enough... that barely is minimum to get started to see if it's ok. Takes several more hours to be even sure. 

I find HCI memtest to be usually better to find initial problems first quicker with regard to IMC/memory. TestMem5 for pure memory errors(real quick) and then finally Prime95 long hours to see if voltages are enough. Prime95 usually finds problems the other two miss but those are usually fixed with a little extra voltage after all else is good like memory settings/timings the two other find issue with.


----------



## majestynl

This is the max i got so far. Will tighten the sub-timings now. And after that i will do some test comparing with 3200mhz CL12 or something. 

*3800mhz on RAM @ 1900 1:1:1*
- Only Base timings CL14, will tighten later
- CPU 3700x @ stock PBO
- RAM Trident-Z 3200CL14 (2x8GB)
- RAM @ 1.5v / SOC 1.1v / CLDO VDDG 1v
- Most settings can be seen in RT screenshot
- Few Extra tweaks: SOC LLC2 and Dram Freq 400

*Stability test done with Actively cooling the ram. Stopped test @3200%. This is second run immediately after the First one stopped at 2K!

Last screenshot is done with same Memory Profile (3800cl14) but with Manual OC @4.3Ghz


----------



## Nighthog

@majestynl

Some great results on IMC/MEMORY there! great work. Gives us hope.

My E-die aren't as good as that B-die you have there but will be start testing tomorrow with the Aorus Xtreme and the 3800X I'll be getting sometime in the day and the day after on Thursday the WC parts as well to tear-down/rebuild it all.


----------



## majestynl

Nighthog said:


> @majestynl
> 
> Some great results on IMC/MEMORY there! great work. Gives us hope.
> 
> My E-die aren't as good as that B-die you have there but will be start testing tomorrow with the Aorus Xtreme and the 3800X I'll be getting sometime in the day and the day after on Thursday the WC parts as well to tear-down/rebuild it all.


Thanks no problem!

Dont know how current platform is doing with E-Die. I know for the 1x and 2x it was not comparable with the B-die's

Anyways... below also a Aida test with same mem profile but now with Manual OC @ 4.3ghz


----------



## Boxman

Nighthog said:


> 1 hour really isn't enough... that barely is minimum to get started to see if it's ok. Takes several more hours to be even sure.
> 
> I find HCI memtest to be usually better to find initial problems first quicker with regard to IMC/memory. TestMem5 for pure memory errors(real quick) and then finally Prime95 long hours to see if voltages are enough. Prime95 usually finds problems the other two miss but those are usually fixed with a little extra voltage after all else is good like memory settings/timings the two other find issue with.


I am aware, and stated as such. I'm not sure what the exact rules are here. If these kind of experiences are not welcome to be shared in this topic, let me know, I'll refrain.


----------



## majestynl

Nighthog said:


> 1 hour really isn't enough... that barely is minimum to get started to see if it's ok. Takes several more hours to be even sure.
> 
> I find HCI memtest to be usually better to find initial problems first quicker with regard to IMC/memory. TestMem5 for pure memory errors(real quick) and then finally Prime95 long hours to see if voltages are enough. Prime95 usually finds problems the other two miss but those are usually fixed with a little extra voltage after all else is good like memory settings/timings the two other find issue with.


HCI Memtest is oke. The free version is frustrating with opening instances  
I would suggest using RamTest from Karhu SW. Finds problems faster and easy to use!

https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/


----------



## Nighthog

Boxman said:


> I am aware, and stated as such. I'm not sure what the exact rules are here. If these kind of experiences are not welcome to be shared in this topic, let me know, I'll refrain.


No need to refrain just sharing experience in regard to what I find efficient to find problems.
Memtest5 first for pure timings checking, HCI for IMC trouble.. (usually voltage not enough when you get shutdown/reboot after a longer time) and then finally Prime95 after the other two have passed for the real long run and here I usually find I need 1 more lick memory or cpu voltage to stabilize when they drop threads or get rounding errors and find no issue on the other two.

You can only use Prime95 if you want but it takes much longer to find issues but it will find them!


----------



## elmor

briank said:


> Great research and post Elmor!
> 
> A few comments on your PCIe Gen 4 comments:
> 
> 
> This is true, when the dielectric material used on the motherboard is the same. Not every board uses the same material though. It's possible that a motherboard with 150mm traces from CPU to x16 slot is worse performance with Gen 4 devices than another motherboard with 200mm traces but with higher performance, low loss material. So your statement is mostly true. My point is, you can't compare motherboards on trace length alone.
> 
> 
> 
> This is similar to the trace length observation. Generally true, but not because layer count directly improves the performance of those CPU to x16 slot PCIe signal traces. Higher layer count is usually a sign of a more expensive board, with perhaps a better dielectric material. Higher layer count also makes it easier to isolate the PCIe traces from noise or crosstalk. However, it is totally possible, with careful design and quality materials, to design a "low" layer count board that can do PCIe Gen4.
> 
> 
> 
> Switches actually re-time the signal and don't harm signal integrity at all. If there was a PCIe switch in the path, the chance of success would be related to the factors discussed above (distance, material, design). The reason I wouldn't expect it to work, is that most motherboards out there have a PCIe Gen 3 switch. They are not capable of Gen 4 signals or protocol.
> 
> Again, great post. Just wanted to add some insight on motherboard design for those interested.



Sure, the point here was not to go into detail on how to do PCB trace layout. It's supposed to be a general suggestion on which boards have a higher chance of working with PCI-E Gen 4. An active PCI-E switch can do re-timing, but most parts used on motherboards are passive switches without re-timing. The switch placement usually adds to total trace lengths as well.


----------



## dgoc18

I am learning new fclk stuff and look at pic below, Not bad after all but I need new version Dram Calc for better memory timings.

Ram 3800/ fclk 1900 Vram 1.45 :thumb:

I just flashed newer bios for MSI X470 Gaming Pro Carbon (7B78_29o) :thumb:


----------



## Kitilan

dgoc18 said:


> I am learning new fclk stuff and look at pic below, Not bad after all but I need new version Dram Calc for better memory timings.
> 
> 
> 
> Ram 3800/ fclk 1900 Vram 1.45 :thumb:
> 
> 
> 
> I just flashed newer bios for MSI X470 Gaming Pro Carbon (7B78_29o) :thumb:


terrible timings

Отправлено с моего SM-G930F через Tapatalk


----------



## os2wiz

elmor said:


> That's nothing new and has been the case since the first Ryzen CPUs. When using Geardown = Enabled you can only use even CAS Latency.



OK. Maybe that is why I avoided using gear down enable in the past. I have two dimm 32GB G.Skill DDR4 4000 CL19-19-19-39 memory kit . It is dual rank. Is gear down enabled important for me to use as a setting? Also for dual rank dimms what about settings for bank group swap and bank group alt?? Right now I have my emory set at 3600mhz CL16-16-17-17-36-59. It is definitrely stable and give me highest scores on synthetic benchmarks.


----------



## lordzed83

majestynl said:


> HCI Memtest is oke. The free version is frustrating with opening instances
> I would suggest using RamTest from Karhu SW. Finds problems faster and easy to use!
> 
> https://www.karhusoftware.com/ramtest/


From all ram testers I tend to use this one most ofc and usually by 500% can check most stability and by 1500% its good to go I think did some 2000-3000 and 5000% runs but if not failed by 1500 dont think it can fail later


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> From all ram testers I tend to use this one most ofc and usually by 500% can check most stability and by 1500% its good to go I think did some 2000-3000 and 5000% runs but if not failed by 1500 dont think it can fail later


If you are talking about Karhu Ramtest. I can assure you 1500% is def not enough. I have dozen tests done and lots of fails around 2k / 3K / 5K and even some of them around 8K!
The only thing 1500% is showing is that your OC-Settings are in the right way..

Best way is to start test, then let it run for approx 2k, then stop restart system, run again to 2-3K, then restart and let it run above 10k!


----------



## Streetdragon

my settings so far:
X570 master + 3900x + 32gig 4*8Gig 3600Cl16 rgb


----------



## gupsterg

majestynl said:


> Thanks no problem!
> 
> Dont know how current platform is doing with E-Die. I know for the 1x and 2x it was not comparable with the B-die's
> 
> Anyways... below also a Aida test with same mem profile but now with Manual OC @ 4.3ghz


Nice share :thumb: , +rep.



lordzed83 said:


> From all ram testers I tend to use this one most ofc and usually by 500% can check most stability and by 1500% its good to go I think did some 2000-3000 and 5000% runs but if not failed by 1500 dont think it can fail later
> 
> 
> 
> majestynl said:
> 
> 
> 
> If you are talking about Karhu Ramtest. I can assure you 1500% is def not enough. I have dozen tests done and lots of fails around 2k / 3K / 5K and even some of them around 8K!
> The only thing 1500% is showing is that your OC-Settings are in the right way..
> 
> Best way is to start test, then let it run for approx 2k, then stop restart system, run again to 2-3K, then restart and let it run above 10k!
Click to expand...

I agree.

For something to be deemed very stable, I'd do full POST run, then a rerun on same POST, then say rerun on warm POST, other wise due to POST to POST training variance could encounter issues.


----------



## os2wiz

lordzed83 said:


> From all ram testers I tend to use this one most ofc and usually by 500% can check most stability and by 1500% its good to go I think did some 2000-3000 and 5000% runs but if not failed by 1500 dont think it can fail later


Karhu is far from being the best memory tester. It is well documented that it gives false negatives and some false positives as well. To me it became a "cult" application becasuse its author is tied in with Ryzen Dram Calculator. I find y-cruncher is quite reliable 3 runs will definitely give you a clear idea if your memory is error free.


----------



## Nighthog

Ok I've got my parts and have it setup on my desk and started it up with 2X8Gb kit of Miron E-die I took from my main/old rig, but I have not moved anything else over just a usb-stick with Memtest86 to be able to test Memory for errors as I test various speeds it can boot.

Already booted XMP @ 3800Mhz all AUTO and seems to be doing ok. Will take a little while knowing as Memtest86 can take it's time but seems promising. Though timings are horrible @ XMP but it's running [email protected]
It didn't do that with my old Ryzen 7 1700 and B350 board.

I noted some ridiculous L1-cache speeds of 250GB/s @ stock.

EDIT: Already running [email protected] @ 1.200V for memory and no apparent issue in booting or Memtest86. (ALL AUTO, optimized defaults)


----------



## briank

elmor said:


> Sure, the point here was not to go into detail on how to do PCB trace layout. It's supposed to be a general suggestion on which boards have a higher chance of working with PCI-E Gen 4. An active PCI-E switch can do re-timing, but most parts used on motherboards are passive switches without re-timing. The switch placement usually adds to total trace lengths as well.


OK, to put it more bluntly, I don't think people should look at the things you suggest at all when determining whether a motherboard can support Gen 4. Until someone tries a Gen 4 add-in-card in that motherboard, I wouldn't rule it out. Test, don't guess.


----------



## gupsterg

os2wiz said:


> Karhu is far from being the mest memory tester. It is well documented that it gives false negatives and some false positives as well. To me it became a "cult" application becasuse its author is tied in with Ryzen Dram Calculator. I find y-cruncher is quite reliable 3 runs will definitely give you a clear idea if your memory is error free.


Any links to info? just curious to read it. I'm an avid user of Kahru, have used also HCI Memtest v5.0, v6.0 and GSAT in Linux.

What do you recommend, also curious to know that?

AFAIK the author of RAM Test and DRAM calculator aren't in "cahoots".

As much as I like to use P95, Y-Cruncher, etc, they really aren't specifically RAM test programs, more of a combined load IMO.


----------



## majestynl

os2wiz said:


> Karhu is far from being the mest memory tester. It is well documented that it gives false negatives and some false positives as well. To me it became a "cult" application becasuse its author is tied in with Ryzen Dram Calculator. I find y-cruncher is quite reliable 3 runs will definitely give you a clear idea if your memory is error free.


Link please! Where is it documented it gives false positives? For false negatives i can only find:

Q: Can CPU cache instability distort the test results?
A: Yes, but on default settings this is very unlikely. You shouldn't start overclocking RAM until your system is otherwise completely stable.

But this is totally logic if you ask me. This can give false negative on any stress-test!

And can you also show the Author is tied with Ryzen Dram Calculator. Never saw 1usmus promoting Karhu


----------



## mtrai

nick name said:


> Wait, how are you testing PCIe 4.0 with a 2700X?


Mainly the same as Elmor did in the first few posts. 3dmark PCIE test and CPU-z are the only ways I know of at the moment.


----------



## lordzed83

@gupsterg @majestynl Think Ill move to HCI memtest from ramtest. Was not Using Ramtest as much on zen1 and zen+ reminded me when I had no problems with passing 2000% on ramtest then moved to HCI could not get 400%


----------



## crakej

briank said:


> OK, to put it more bluntly, I don't think people should look at the things you suggest at all when determining whether a motherboard can support Gen 4. Until someone tries a Gen 4 add-in-card in that motherboard, I wouldn't rule it out. Test, don't guess.


I thought it was quite clear that @elmor was just trying to give a general idea of what's going on with PCIE 4 that most people would understand, without going into all the tech detail most don't want to know.

PCIE 4 devices have been tested in the CH7. NVMe works well and GPU tests indicate much higher bandwidth available, though no cards can make use of it currently. More testing is required but early results are promising.


----------



## crakej

mtrai said:


> Mainly the same as Elmor did in the first few posts. 3dmark PCIE test and CPU-z are the only ways I know of at the moment.


But the 2700x does NOT have PCIE 4!


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> But the 2700x does NOT have PCIE 4!


I know...but my Vega 64 with just PCIe 3.0 would only do 5Gb and my new RX 5700 XT with PCIe 4 does 15 GB and shows PCIe 4.0 in CPU-z same as he used.

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/pcie/23698/pcie/22255


----------



## shadowxaero

So I am running at 3433 with a BCLK of 1.3 taking me to an effective 1785Mhz. FCLK is 1733Mhz. I CAN run high clock up to 3900Mhz but when every I run anything >= 3600Mhz my 3900x stops boosting and downclocking. Not sure if this is just a problem on Gigabyte boards though, but it is a confirmed issue on gigabyte boards. Nonetheless this is the best I could do as far as Aida's memory benchmark is concerned.


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg @majestynl Think Ill move to HCI memtest from ramtest. Was not Using Ramtest as much on zen1 and zen+ reminded me when I had no problems with passing 2000% on ramtest then moved to HCI could not get 400%


Account for POST to POST variance. It could have been profile is unsound and failed on next train up.

I have even seen tests fail on same POST, I believe go full load, idle and then load, destabilise profile.

See below screenies, profile PASS ~3000%, I stop test, restart test and 666% fail.



Spoiler






















Always test on differing POSTs, ie from shutdown and restart from OS, always stop a test and restart on same POST as well.

Only if for all test aspects, profile holds, then it is sound.

I also test on "Sleep" and "resume", another sure way to see weakness in OC profile.



mtrai said:


> I know...but my Vega 64 with just PCIe 3.0 would only do 5Gb and my new RX 5700 XT with PCIe 4 does 15 GB and shows PCIe 4.0 in CPU-z same as he used.
> 
> https://www.3dmark.com/compare/pcie/23698/pcie/22255


Seems to me your hitting max of PCI-E gen 3.0 16x, see Elmor's post.

The seeing PCI-E 4.0 may just be it picking a text read back from somewhere....


----------



## mtrai

gupsterg said:


> Account for POST to POST variance. It could have been profile is unsound and failed on next train up.
> 
> I have even seen tests fail on same POST, I believe go full load, idle and then load, destabilise profile.
> 
> See below screenies, profile PASS ~3000%, I stop test, restart test and 666% fail.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 281142
> 
> 
> View attachment 281144
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Always test on differing POSTs, ie from shutdown and restart from OS, always stop a test and restart on same POST as well.
> 
> Only if for all test aspects, profile holds, then it is sound.
> 
> I also test on "Sleep" and "resume", another sure way to see weakness in OC profile.
> 
> 
> 
> Seems to me your hitting max of PCI-E gen 3.0 16x, see Elmor's post.
> 
> The seeing PCI-E 4.0 may just be it picking a text read back from somewhere....


I just confirmed that 3dmark PCIe test readings are incorrect as far as Vega 64 and Navi are concerned with an AMD engineer. They are not to be trusted. However AIDA drgpu does give correct info. I will not be getting a 3000 series until the 3950x drops in Septemeber.


----------



## majestynl

lordzed83 said:


> @gupsterg @majestynl Think Ill move to HCI memtest from ramtest. Was not Using Ramtest as much on zen1 and zen+ reminded me when I had no problems with passing 2000% on ramtest then moved to HCI could not get 400%


No problem m8, you are free to use any SW you prefer 
But one thing: you cant compare % from HCI vs % from Karhu. Check out the elapsed time. 

Personally I just prefer Karhu, easy to use and finds issues faster in my experience. Anyways.. it just a Ramtester.


----------



## mtrai

briank said:


> OK, to put it more bluntly, I don't think people should look at the things you suggest at all when determining whether a motherboard can support Gen 4. Until someone tries a Gen 4 add-in-card in that motherboard, I wouldn't rule it out. Test, don't guess.


I now have to agree even though I put I PCIe3 into my C7H and it shows PCIe 4.0 in cpu-z and in the bios does not mean it is actually running at that speed. I already confirmed that 3dmark has issues with PCIe 4.0 in the PCIe test, with an AMD employee. They thoroughly tested it and confirmed and reported it to 3dmark or whatever they are called these days. They even found issues with the vega 56/64 and the pcie speed tests. Since I got my RX 5700 XT yesterday we were trying to figure out this in the Vanguard program since we had my Vega 64 to compare to. An engineer popped in today and let us know what was going on. That is about all I can provide about this appearance.


----------



## mtrai

crakej said:


> But the 2700x does NOT have PCIE 4!


Yeah it does not have the controller needed so no matter what the bios or hardware monitoring program show...it is indeed non existent even if it shows. Further I confirmed this a couple of hours ago with an AMD engineer who really explained it all to me and showed some of their testing. And I also in anotehr post explained some of the findings and errors with PCIe testing in 3dmark.


----------



## os2wiz

gupsterg said:


> Any links to info? just curious to read it. I'm an avid user of Kahru, have used also HCI Memtest v5.0, v6.0 and GSAT in Linux.
> 
> What do you recommend, also curious to know that?
> 
> AFAIK the author of RAM Test and DRAM calculator aren't in "cahoots".
> 
> As much as I like to use P95, Y-Cruncher, etc, they really aren't specifically RAM test programs, more of a combined load IMO.


I recommend Y Cruncher. Simple to use has always worked to find instability and with 3 passes I can be confident that my memory is without physical defect. If you choose option 1 it is a very good stresser of the IMC and other memory related components. Option 0 is strictly for memory also.


----------



## jestersvengence

*Ryzen Master Setup*

So in my case I have an x470 Taichi and 3700x running 32gb 3200mhz cl14 mem. In Ryzen master I have the F-clock and mem clock coupled at 1600. Is this correct? The reason I am asking is I am having issues with stuttering watching online vidoes and chatting in google hangouts along with webex. Also my mouse doesnt respond all the time (slight delay).


----------



## jestersvengence

I have a x470 Taichi and recently upgraded from 2700x to a 3700x 32gb of Corsair 3200mhz cl14 mem and wanted to know what the proper setting in Ryzen Master should be for the f-clock and mem clock. I currently have them in the coupled state at 1600mhz. Is that the correct setting for 1:1 ratio? I have encountered stuttering watching video, video chats and webex along with my mouse having delay.


----------



## DragonQ

jestersvengence said:


> I have a x470 Taichi and recently upgraded from 2700x to a 3700x 32gb of Corsair 3200mhz cl14 mem and wanted to know what the proper setting in Ryzen Master should be for the f-clock and mem clock. I currently have them in the coupled state at 1600mhz. Is that the correct setting for 1:1 ratio? I have encountered stuttering watching video, video chats and webex along with my mouse having delay.


Try dropping the RAM to 3000 MHz. I had audio crackling issues (even on an external USB DAC) when running 3200 MHz RAM on the same motherboard, sounds like you're seeing similar problems.


----------



## Nighthog

I've been busy rebuilding my computer for a while now, took much longer than planned but it is up and running as it should for the moment.

Have the CPU under a water-block, Alphacool XPX Eisblock and can start to experiment a little more than before when running a stock cooler and HD5450 temporarily before I got the upgrades ready. 

I notice my CPU will boost to 4.3Ghz all core or more when running for memory errors with TestMem5 and such. I've even seen boosts up to 4.475Ghz on single cores when even less load is on the desktop. It seems to stick @ 1.360V under all core load. It behaved much the same as with the stock cooler but it had a half botched TIM application so I hope it managed better with the Eisblock the second try around and I noticed some better boost performance probably because of the lower temperatures it gives. 

Either way I have TestMem5 "stable" 3966Mhz XMP running with 1.200V. provided I don't have them get too hot, temperatures on the sticks can get warm if not cooled somehow.

That's maybe why my 4000Mhz XMP was not stable in Windows even though it managed without a single problem in using a USB-stick Memtest86 to run all 4x8Gb like that on the table while I rebuilt(not as enclosed or intense workload). 
Kept getting random errors in HCImemtest and I tried various things but didn't really find the problem. I only got worse and worse result the more I tinkered and fresh clear-cmos with optimized defaults & XMP enabled and putting 4000Mhz was most useful. 
The BIOS options are a little mess of to find in the Aorus Xtreme BIOS. 
They are in the "tweaker", "AMD CBS" & AMD "OVERCLOCKING" menus located in their own submenus and many settings are duplicated here and there.
I had trouble mostly with the voltage settings that can be found all over the place to be adjusted in each their own way in the different sub-menus. 
Some need Hex-values others type-in mV (like 1000mV), others are offsets. No particular consistency yet I've managed to get my head around.
All settings weren't available under the tweaker menu.

I hope to figure out which voltage is for which part in the BIOS so I can set them accordingly.

EDIT: CinebenchR20 boosts 4.2Ghz all-core @ ~1.320V for ~4997pts. 5059 etc(without all the applications in the background)


----------



## majestynl

Nighthog said:


> I've been busy rebuilding my computer for a while now, took much longer than planned but it is up and running as it should for the moment.
> 
> Have the CPU under a water-block, Alphacool XPX Eisblock and can start to experiment a little more than before when running a stock cooler and HD5450 temporarily before I got the upgrades ready.
> 
> I notice my CPU will boost to 4.3Ghz all core or more when running for memory errors with TestMem5 and such. I've even seen boosts up to 4.475Ghz on single cores when even less load is on the desktop.


Yeap probably Remtest app is using all available threads and core but not at 100%. So it can boost a bit higher compared vs full full load on all cores!



Nighthog said:


> The BIOS options are a little mess of to find in the Aorus Xtreme BIOS.
> They are in the "tweaker", "AMD CBS" & AMD "OVERCLOCKING" menus located in their own submenus and many settings are duplicated here and there.
> I had trouble mostly with the voltage settings that can be found all over the place to be adjusted in each their own way in the different sub-menus.
> Some need Hex-values others type-in mV (like 1000mV), others are offsets. No particular consistency yet I've managed to get my head around.
> All settings weren't available under the tweaker menu.


Even on a well organised ASUS bios some options are duplicated! Some are related bc the default AMD pages and Bios makers also activating some of the options in their own menu's .
Can understand your frustration here 




Nighthog said:


> EDIT: CinebenchR20 boosts 4.2Ghz all-core @ ~1.320V for ~4997pts. 5059 etc(without all the applications in the background)


For CB all cores are boosting to full so you will see lower all core boosts!


----------



## Nighthog

I even have a waterblock for the memory ready to install just as soon as I figure out how to remove the old heatsinks and find the time I want to put into it without actually destroying the kits. 
They weren't the most cheap E-die available in April 2018... when RAM prices where the highest... Can get ~equal kits for less than half what I paid for these sticks today from the Crucial assortment if you don't aim for their binned 3600Mhz kit of E-die.

That will fix all heat issues that might arise but unsure of when I will end up using it.
Want to see what I can achieve with semi-passive and fan next to them first.

Either way down to having some relaxing and tinker with setting instead for awhile. 

I was expecting worse boost performance than I saw with reading all stuff on the internet about it not working etc. It wasn't that bad as I thought it would be. Well within reasonable limits running stock. I see it's mostly limited by CPU Package power hitting it's limit for 105Watt TDP or some other stock parameter.


----------



## majestynl

Nighthog said:


> I even have a waterblock for the memory ready to install just as soon as I figure out how to remove the old heatsinks and find the time I want to put into it without actually destroying the kits.
> They weren't the most cheap E-die available in April 2018... when RAM prices where the highest... Can get ~equal kits for less than half what I paid for these sticks today from the Crucial assortment if you don't aim for their binned 3600Mhz kit of E-die.
> 
> That will fix all heat issues that might arise but unsure of when I will end up using it.
> Want to see what I can achieve with semi-passive and fan next to them first.
> 
> Either way down to having some relaxing and tinker with setting instead for awhile.
> 
> I was expecting worse boost performance than I saw with reading all stuff on the internet about it not working etc. It wasn't that bad as I thought it would be. Well within reasonable limits running stock. I see it's mostly limited by CPU Package power hitting it's limit for 105Watt TDP or some other stock parameter.


Well I pushed 3800mhz/1900mhz with my Bdie @CL14. It's fully stable now. Ran multiple times long RamTest sessions. And also using that particular system + high memory usage with Adobe CC Sw's. No problems and running smooth.

To get this Ram OC stable I'm blowing air on the ram sticks. Otherwise I got error around 500-1000%. I get instantly errors if my Ram temp are getting above 42c. With air cooling a can keep them around 36c

Will let it run for a week and then install a block on the ram. Need to remove the nice RGB covers from my Gskills


----------



## Nighthog

majestynl said:


> Well I pushed 3800mhz/1900mhz with my Bdie @CL14. It's fully stable now. Ran multiple times long RamTest sessions. And also using that particular system + high memory usage with Adobe CC Sw's. No problems and running smooth.


That's some great results there. Wish mine E-die could achieve such great timings at such speeds. But will have to see when I get around to it. 
The speed is there but it's like spinning wheels that doesn't achieve much with 20-23-23-23-42 as main timings for *3933*-4000Mhz...

I will have to check later about mclk and fclk but they probably can't reach the same speed the kit can do. Would be nice with 1:1:1 @ 4000Mhz but seems like dreaming.

Trying to get stable 4.4Ghz all-core for now and then doing everyday stuff for a while.


----------



## evilhf

These were the results that I was able to adjust some superficial times.
Is there a program that calculates timings and subtimings for 3733mhz?
Ryzen Dram Calculator does not accept more than 3600mhz.


----------



## rdr09

majestynl said:


> Well I pushed 3800mhz/1900mhz with my Bdie @CL14. It's fully stable now. Ran multiple times long RamTest sessions. And also using that particular system + high memory usage with Adobe CC Sw's. No problems and running smooth.
> 
> To get this Ram OC stable I'm blowing air on the ram sticks. Otherwise I got error around 500-1000%. I get instantly errors if my Ram temp are getting above 42c. With air cooling a can keep them around 36c
> 
> Will let it run for a week and then install a block on the ram. Need to remove the nice RGB covers from my Gskills


Great job! Part number of kit pls.


----------



## majestynl

Nighthog said:


> That's some great results there. Wish mine E-die could achieve such great timings at such speeds. But will have to see when I get around to it.
> The speed is there but it's like spinning wheels that doesn't achieve much with 20-23-23-23-42 as main timings for *3933*-4000Mhz...
> 
> I will have to check later about mclk and fclk but they probably can't reach the same speed the kit can do. Would be nice with 1:1:1 @ 4000Mhz but seems like dreaming.
> 
> Trying to get stable 4.4Ghz all-core for now and then doing everyday stuff for a while.


Thanks. You need to try and see. But 4000 and 1:1:1 will be a challenge yes. Maybe with high CL and GD enabled on 2T.

Good luck with your OC m8!



rdr09 said:


> Great job! Part number of kit pls.


Thanks. Those are the F4-3200C14D-16GTZR


Post to link with stock on CPU:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/28046210-post144.html

Same RAM OC but with 4.3 manual CPU OC:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...ry-fabric-x370-x470-x570-15.html#post28046278


----------



## Xuper

From AMD_Robert :



> The way that it works is that each chiplet has 16B/cyc write and 32B/cyc read to the IOD. Therefore a 2xCCD solution will have bytes * fclk * 2 write bandwidth.
> 
> The write link was reduced to save area and power for other SoC optimizations, since client workloads do so little writing compared to read.


Source : https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/c...eed/eu9d8qu?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x


----------



## Mysticial

Mysticial said:


> I need to decide between:
> 
> 
> Buy a fresh set 3200c16 Royals for the 3950X.
> Steal 4 x 16GB from my X299. Buy a fresh set of 3200c16 8 x 16 GB Royals to replace it. The leftover 4 x 16GB will be set aside for next year's build.



So much for that. Just discovered that the mobo that I'm looking at supports 32GB DIMMs which also just got released.

RGB or not, fast or slow, it's going to be 4 x 32GB.


----------



## Nighthog

majestynl said:


> Thanks. You need to try and see. But 4000 and 1:1:1 will be a challenge yes. Maybe with high CL and GD enabled on 2T.
> 
> Good luck with your OC m8!


Well I was dreaming after all could only get 1:1 to 3800Mhz thus far. Maybe it's a AGESA/bios limit to go higher. But I got GDM disabled working with 1T at least!

Crap timings but I'll get around to it.


----------



## gupsterg

Below is WIP, R5 3600, F4-3200C14D-16GVK, 3800MHz 1:1:1, compared with initial testing I've lowered SOC/VDDG/VDIMM, gained some lower timings.

First set is just 16-16-16-16 set, rest auto timings.



Spoiler














Second set is 16-16-16-16-40-56 tRTP: 8



Spoiler














So far back to back testing as such in this ZIP.


----------



## gupsterg

os2wiz said:


> Karhu is far from being the best memory tester. It is well documented that it gives *false negatives and some false positives* as well. To me it became a "cult" application becasuse its author is tied in with Ryzen Dram Calculator. I find y-cruncher is quite reliable 3 runs will definitely give you a clear idea if your memory is error free.
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any links to info? just curious to read it. I'm an avid user of Kahru, have used also HCI Memtest v5.0, v6.0 and GSAT in Linux.
> 
> What do you recommend, also curious to know that?
> 
> AFAIK the author of RAM Test and DRAM calculator aren't in "cahoots".
> 
> As much as I like to use P95, Y-Cruncher, etc, they really aren't specifically RAM test programs, more of a combined load IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> os2wiz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I recommend Y Cruncher. Simple to use has always worked to find instability and with 3 passes I can be confident that my memory is without physical defect. If you choose option 1 it is a very good stresser of the IMC and other memory related components. Option 0 is strictly for memory also.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
Click to expand...

So no links to documented false negatives/positives with Kahru RAM test?

As much as I like Y-Cruncher 3 passes is hardly wise to determine stability IMO. Mysticial above is author of Y-Cruncher.


----------



## Miiksu

gupsterg said:


> os2wiz said:
> 
> 
> 
> Karhu is far from being the best memory tester. It is well documented that it gives *false negatives and some false positives* as well. To me it became a "cult" application becasuse its author is tied in with Ryzen Dram Calculator. I find y-cruncher is quite reliable 3 runs will definitely give you a clear idea if your memory is error free.
> 
> 
> 
> gupsterg said:
> 
> 
> 
> Any links to info? just curious to read it. I'm an avid user of Kahru, have used also HCI Memtest v5.0, v6.0 and GSAT in Linux.
> 
> What do you recommend, also curious to know that?
> 
> AFAIK the author of RAM Test and DRAM calculator aren't in "cahoots".
> 
> As much as I like to use P95, Y-Cruncher, etc, they really aren't specifically RAM test programs, more of a combined load IMO.
> 
> 
> 
> os2wiz said:
> 
> 
> 
> I recommend Y Cruncher. Simple to use has always worked to find instability and with 3 passes I can be confident that my memory is without physical defect. If you choose option 1 it is a very good stresser of the IMC and other memory related components. Option 0 is strictly for memory also.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> So no links to documented false negatives/positives with Kahru RAM test?
> 
> As much as I like Y-Cruncher 3 passes is hardly wise to determine stability IMO. Mysticial above is author of Y-Cruncher.
Click to expand...

 Somehting like five hours atleast is a good start with y-cruncher numa test.


----------



## Hwgeek

*Do you think that new Threadripper must use 4 chiplets to offer 100% of the quad channel Write speeds? *
If so then the 16C must be with 128MB l3 cache model .


----------



## majestynl

Nighthog said:


> Well I was dreaming after all could only get 1:1 to 3800Mhz thus far. Maybe it's a AGESA/bios limit to go higher. But I got GDM disabled working with 1T at least!
> 
> Crap timings but I'll get around to it.


I see, still nice! Try to lower timings if possible. But at least your are running 4.4Ghz on your 3800x ! Nice.. Did you try to push it harder? Saw some impressive results like 4.5 
!


----------



## crakej

Nighthog said:


> Well I was dreaming after all could only get 1:1 to 3800Mhz thus far. Maybe it's a AGESA/bios limit to go higher. But I got GDM disabled working with 1T at least!
> 
> Crap timings but I'll get around to it.


What did you have to do to disable geardown??


----------



## rdr09

majestynl said:


> Thanks. You need to try and see. But 4000 and 1:1:1 will be a challenge yes. Maybe with high CL and GD enabled on 2T.
> 
> Good luck with your OC m8!
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks. Those are the F4-3200C14D-16GTZR
> 
> 
> Post to link with stock on CPU:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/28046210-post144.html
> 
> Same RAM OC but with 4.3 manual CPU OC:
> https://www.overclock.net/forum/13-...ry-fabric-x370-x470-x570-15.html#post28046278


Thank you. +rep.


----------



## gupsterg

3800MHz 1:1:1 C16 ~18000% Kahru RAM Test.



Spoiler











Profile in ZIP of this post.

Last 6 screenies of this album are benches of profile, in regard to scaling in CB R15, see this post.


----------



## Nighthog

majestynl said:


> I see, still nice! Try to lower timings if possible. But at least your are running 4.4Ghz on your 3800x ! Nice.. Did you try to push it harder? Saw some impressive results like 4.5
> !


Sorry didn't run 4.4Ghz all-core on the tests. Just what AIDA64 wants to report @ stock cpu. But I will probably go for again if I don't need to increase above 1.400V for it. 4.5Ghz isn't feasible I think.
The one who got that 4.5Ghz @ 1.350V result I think he got a EPYC quality chip... I'm a little sad we might not see to many of those on mainstream platform.

I've now lowered the timings and sadly they aren't that great on the main ones but the subs/tertiary ones are easy. 
This kit can't do too low timings overall. I basically reached similar results on gen 1 Ryzen with the gigabyte B350 but topped out at 3733Mhz instead for a stable result.

It seems the way to increase performance on this kit is to increase speed rather than the main-timings as the sub-timings are easy to max out on any and all settings & speeds.



crakej said:


> What did you have to do to disable geardown??


Increase ClkDrvStrength in CAD Bus Drive Strength settings. It's specific to this memory I think.


----------



## gupsterg

Today managed to knock down SOC/VDDG. Originally set in UEFI 1.062/1.013, now 1.037/0.987. 
This ZIP has initial test pass ~3000%, next rerun on full POST from shutdown pass ~15300%, next rerun on same POST ~3300% tested.


----------



## Grin

Mysticial said:


> So much for that. Just discovered that the mobo that I'm looking at supports 32GB DIMMs which also just got released.
> 
> RGB or not, fast or slow, it's going to be 4 x 32GB.


If you’re want to build a WS like rig for 24/7 workloads, your need to get ECC UDIMMs and forget about memory overclocking imho


----------



## Mysticial

Grin said:


> If you’re want to build a WS like rig for 24/7 workloads, your need to get ECC UDIMMs and forget about memory overclocking imho


10 years ago, 4 GB of ram was standard. When I tried to run 16 GB, people called me crazy because no ECC means lots of data corruption. Never had any problems at the right clock speeds.

5 years ago, 8 GB of ram was standard. When I tried to run 64 GB, people called me crazy because no ECC means lots of data corruption. Never had any problems at the right clock speeds.

Today, 16 GB of ram is standard. When I try to run 128GB, people call me crazy because no ECC means lots of data corruption. So far no problems at the right clock speeds.


Reliability improves with time. Otherwise, everybody's 2x8GB configurations today would be erroring all over the place at stock without ECC. If they couldn't make 32 GB DIMMs reasonably reliable without ECC, they wouldn't be selling them without it.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> 3800MHz 1:1:1 C16 ~18000% Kahru RAM Test.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://youtu.be/x5eispG7q7k
> 
> 
> 
> Profile in ZIP of this post.
> 
> Last 6 screenies of this album are benches of profile, in regard to scaling in CB R15, see this post.


Very nice. And after tests I'w run I gotta agree that i like 3800dcl16 more than 3733cl14 scores better in everything and does not need as much volts. I have not tried how Low can I go on this memories. Your's test on 1.4 made me want to try it see if my profile will get this low.


----------



## Grin

Mystical,

Never had any problems or never got any information about hidden existing problems it’s a two different things. From my own experience it’s definitely depends on your tasks. If you are working with multimedia, any corrupted byte probably does nothing for your video/audio files. If you are calculating during a couple of weeks Bayesian chains it may affect it and only ECC may help to get a correct result. I have a number of logs on my WS with dozens of reported and corrected memory errors during 10-15 days of continuous calculations. All Ryzen processors are supported ECC, so why not?


----------



## AlphaC

https://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/amd-ryzen-3000-part-iv-ddr4-scaling-english-version/25


Lab501 also did an analysis


----------



## Roboionator

AlphaC said:


> https://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/amd-ryzen-3000-part-iv-ddr4-scaling-english-version/25
> 
> 
> Lab501 also did an analysis


i see for video editing is no big difference, what about coming Trident Z Neo 3600mhz cl16 is some test yet?


----------



## Mysticial

Grin said:


> Mystical,
> 
> Never had any problems or never got any information about hidden existing problems it’s a two different things. From my own experience it’s definitely depends on your tasks. If you are working with multimedia, any corrupted byte probably does nothing for your video/audio files. If you are calculating during a couple of weeks Bayesian chains it may affect it and only ECC may help to get a correct result.


The stuff I do is in that latter category. Even a single-bit error in an in-use section of memory will show will show up as a checksum failure in the software. The workload typically maxes out the memory usage. So much of it will be "in-use" at all times.

I typically see these errors for new builds either where I haven't nailed down the OC yet, or there's some incompatibility between some of the parts. (My 1800X build didn't like my 2014-era memory at all - kept erroring even when underclocked.)



> I have a number of logs on my WS with dozens of reported and corrected memory errors during 10-15 days of continuous calculations.


Maybe some sort of defective part or incompatibility?




> All Ryzen processors are supported ECC, so why not?



ECC memory is slow. You can't really buy 3200+ ECC memory.
From what I've heard: ECC memory isn't binned as well as desktop memory since they were never meant to be overclocked. So they won't overclock as well.
They don't have the aesthetics of desktop memory. So there's no RGB or shiny heat-spreaders for glass cases.

The point is: Desktop and ECC memory are at opposite extremes of the market segmentation divide with nothing in between. (They don't sell 3200c14 B-die with ECC.) This leaves a lot of "enthusiast prosumers" with no place to be.

I lean towards the desktop side because I've found that properly configured desktop systems (even overclocked) to be comparable in reliability to server parts.


----------



## majestynl

AlphaC said:


> https://lab501.ro/procesoare-chipseturi/amd-ryzen-3000-part-iv-ddr4-scaling-english-version/25
> 
> 
> Lab501 also did an analysis


Nice article! Thanks! Shame they didn't provide Gaming benchmarks with the 3800 (1:1) profiles as they did with Aida


----------



## centvalny

Testing A2 B-die @ 4733c14 really tight subs and fclk 1900: 

gb3 mem. perf. 7.9K single and 9.6K multi.


----------



## Nizzen

centvalny said:


> Testing A2 B-die @ 4733c14 really tight subs and fclk 1900:
> 
> gb3 mem. perf. 7.9K single and 9.6K multi.


Can you please post Aida 64 memorybench?


----------



## mdcobra

What can you do to improve fabric speed? Raise/lower certain voltages? Everything above 1600 gives me trouble with a 3900x @X570 Strix-E.


----------



## AlphaC

MSI memory clock spec based on PCB layers









I think what this means is that most people shouldn't be caring about PCB layers.


----------



## rv8000

gupsterg said:


> Below is WIP, R5 3600, F4-3200C14D-16GVK, 3800MHz 1:1:1, compared with initial testing I've lowered SOC/VDDG/VDIMM, gained some lower timings.
> 
> First set is just 16-16-16-16 set, rest auto timings.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 282510
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Second set is 16-16-16-16-40-56 tRTP: 8
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 282508
> 
> 
> 
> 
> So far back to back testing as such in this ZIP.


 @gupsterg

Out of curiosity what voltages are you using for SOC and VDDG at these speeds? I can run with decoupled fclk @ 4200 c16 so far, but I cannot get 3600 to post with 1:1 mclk/fclk. Rather annoying as I know this c14 b-die set is pretty decent after pulling it off my intel build.


----------



## Streetdragon

rv8000 said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> Out of curiosity what voltages are you using for SOC and VDDG at these speeds? I can run with decoupled fclk @ 4200 c16 so far, but I cannot get 3600 to post with 1:1 mclk/fclk. Rather annoying as I know this c14 b-die set is pretty decent after pulling it off my intel build.


Try this settings here:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/10-...nical-matisse-not-really-42.html#post28058194
i was able to get 3800/1900 1:1 stable with 1.16XV SOC and 1.060V VDDG with a bit tuned ram timings


----------



## gupsterg

rv8000 said:


> @gupsterg
> 
> Out of curiosity what voltages are you using for SOC and VDDG at these speeds? I can run with decoupled fclk @ 4200 c16 so far, but I cannot get 3600 to post with 1:1 mclk/fclk. Rather annoying as I know this c14 b-die set is pretty decent after pulling it off my intel build.


SOC: 1.068V
CLDO_VDDG: 1.013
CLDO_VDDP: 0.901

I have passed stability testing with lower, but lose performance in benches if use those values.

As I use LLC [Auto] (ie as AMD would intend it to be) effective SOC on DMM is ~1.05V. Pretty static as the R5 3600 isn't heavy on load line IMO.

CLDO_VDDG & CLDO_VDDP take supply from SOC plane, but use LDO regulators, their tracking for set voltage is tight. Even though the setting takes 1mV increment Ryzen Master does not seem to show this. If I set 1.013 it say I'm using ~1.012, 0.901 it say I'm using ~0.900V.

3800MHz, 1:1:1 (MEMCLK:FCLK:UCLK) I initiated setup midday on 21st July, the rig only had downtime last night to give it a break  . The files shown below are linked in ZIPs in the Strictly Matisse thread here on OCN in my posts and also in my ROG thread in signature.



Spoiler














This ZIP has what is my base profile (ie no CPU/RAM OC), just my preferences on things, then the PBO+150 3800v42 is CPU/RAM OC setup, the JPGs show menus I change which are not in txt.

There are plenty of quirks on say UEFI 2406/2501/0068, not tried latest 2602. For example it's good idea to set VBoot/VDIMM the same and set at least 1.35V prior to going with RAM OC. I found UEFI 2406/2501 if I use SOC voltage adjustment on Extreme Tweaker page at POST process it can shoot to ~1.1V then what you set, so it is best to use the AMD Overclocking Menu in UEFI, as then this does not happen, all through POST process you get what you set. On UEFI 0068 ASUS seem to have fixed this as you can use either Extreme Tweaker page adjustment or AMD Overclocking and you don't get bounce to ~1.1V and later what you set. Another quirk is VTTDDR, on UEFI 2501 it does not automatically set to 1/2 of VDIMM, on UEFI 2602 it does, dunno about UEFI 2406/0068 as was using manual set all the time.

I wouldn't be surprised if the X570 board your using has it's own UEFI quirks...


----------



## Nighthog

Just a report on testing y-cruncher 0-1-8 -> 85-89C degrees MAX-peaks with VDDG @ 800mv | VDDP @ 750mv | SoC @ 1.100V no issues with my 3800 1:1 15-23-17-32-66 timings. Stock CPU.

Really hot today. water temp is at 37C degrees when it was ~25-27 yesterday.


----------



## Streetdragon

Are you using 2 ram slots or all 4?

I need VDDG 1.06V and SOC 1.067V. Everything less than that is not stable ebough to pass this test 2-3 Times + the stress test.
Option 1 i think. needs around 12 mins


----------



## Nighthog

Streetdragon said:


> Are you using 2 ram slots or all 4?
> 
> I need VDDG 1.06V and SOC 1.067V. Everything less than that is not stable ebough to pass this test 2-3 Times + the stress test.
> Option 1 i think. needs around 12 mins


4x8Gb configuration.

I've now testing [email protected], [email protected] with UCLK/2 to MEM. CL15-23-17-67

VDDG/VDDP 800/750 no issue in y-cruncher for 1hour stress test.


----------



## Streetdragon

Wow^^ i think i got a bad silicon like always^^


----------



## Nighthog

Streetdragon said:


> Wow^^ i think i got a bad silicon like always^^


Might be, or it depends on settings and memory?

I tried VDDP/VDDG 750/750 again in 3800 1:1 mode and it failed the benchmark.

Trying VDDP/VDDG 750/760 now and have 1 pass already, trying another seems to pass round 2 as well. Stress test next. 

I've noted before VDDP @ 700 fails to boot. 750 for that seems ok.

EDIT: VDDG @ 760 failed the stress test. Testing 770mv next.

EDIT2: I might have set a memory timing wrong/too tight and was causing stability issues. Might need to retest 750mv etc if it was that causing the failure for these lower voltages.

EDIT3: YEP seems I had a timing issue, retesting 750/750 again.

EDIT4: After finally nailing down a stable timing I've been testing VDDG @ 770mv and been running ok 5 rounds off stress test in y-cruncher for ~60min++ now. Stable? seems so.
EDIT5: VDDG 750mv is unstable... it fails the VST test. *AVX2 Float* for Vector Transform.
EDIT6: VDDG 760 is unstable... *770mv is ok* and I can also lower vSoC to 1.050 without issue with it. Seems I found my cpu limit for VDDG @ 770mv @ 3800Mhz(1900) MEM/FCLK/UCLK.
EDIT7: After a while I've come to reason it's not really worthwhile to use 770 as such. It basically only works with the timings I had for it but tighter/faster and it stops working. Need to increase VDDG then. 
800mv seems to be the minimum as a whole for the speeds I'm running. I get problems with VST in y-cruncher with it too low when I keep tweaking settings.


----------



## lordzed83

gupsterg said:


> SOC: 1.068V
> CLDO_VDDG: 1.013
> CLDO_VDDP: 0.901
> 
> I have passed stability testing with lower, but lose performance in benches if use those values.
> 
> As I use LLC [Auto] (ie as AMD would intend it to be) effective SOC on DMM is ~1.05V. Pretty static as the R5 3600 isn't heavy on load line IMO.
> 
> CLDO_VDDG & CLDO_VDDP take supply from SOC plane, but use LDO regulators, their tracking for set voltage is tight. Even though the setting takes 1mV increment Ryzen Master does not seem to show this. If I set 1.013 it say I'm using ~1.012, 0.901 it say I'm using ~0.900V.
> 
> 3800MHz, 1:1:1 (MEMCLK:FCLK:UCLK) I initiated setup midday on 21st July, the rig only had downtime last night to give it a break  . The files shown below are linked in ZIPs in the Strictly Matisse thread here on OCN in my posts and also in my ROG thread in signature.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> View attachment 283570
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This ZIP has what is my base profile (ie no CPU/RAM OC), just my preferences on things, then the PBO+150 3800v42 is CPU/RAM OC setup, the JPGs show menus I change which are not in txt.
> 
> There are plenty of quirks on say UEFI 2406/2501/0068, not tried latest 2602. For example it's good idea to set VBoot/VDIMM the same and set at least 1.35V prior to going with RAM OC. I found UEFI 2406/2501 if I use SOC voltage adjustment on Extreme Tweaker page at POST process it can shoot to ~1.1V then what you set, so it is best to use the AMD Overclocking Menu in UEFI, as then this does not happen, all through POST process you get what you set. On UEFI 0068 ASUS seem to have fixed this as you can use either Extreme Tweaker page adjustment or AMD Overclocking and you don't get bounce to ~1.1V and later what you set. Another quirk is VTTDDR, on UEFI 2501 it does not automatically set to 1/2 of VDIMM, on UEFI 2602 it does, dunno about UEFI 2406/0068 as was using manual set all the time.
> 
> I wouldn't be surprised if the X570 board your using has it's own UEFI quirks...


My todays playaround. Changed tcwl from 16 to 14. Its faster on read copy. And now to get that change to pass ycruncher pi. I had to get vddg back to 1.06 and get cpu volts up. I teverted cmoc clear 3 times to be sure. And thats what with my mem timings happens. Need 160mv extra on vddg and 130mv on cpu. It is faster in all benchmarks. Im just running my 3900x on edge of its stability for those heavy workloads on all fronts temps clock speed volts hehe. Thats why i like to aks You to check me something as You run more of an stock stable not brutal settings. To see how its in normal conditions 

If cold vddp is 900 stock on zen 2 need to have a look how more behaves if it affects scores


----------



## gupsterg

lordzed83 said:


> Very nice. And after tests I'w run I gotta agree that i like 3800dcl16 more than 3733cl14 scores better in everything and does not need as much volts. I have not tried how Low can I go on this memories. Your's test on 1.4 made me want to try it see if my profile will get this low.


Cheers, you're not doing too shabby on your kit either chap! :thumb: .



lordzed83 said:


> My todays playaround. Changed tcwl from 16 to 14. Its faster on read copy. And now to get that change to pass ycruncher pi. I had to get vddg back to 1.06 and get cpu volts up. I teverted cmoc clear 3 times to be sure. And thats what with my mem timings happens. Need 160mv extra on vddg and 130mv on cpu. It is faster in all benchmarks. Im just running my 3900x on edge of its stability for those heavy workloads on all fronts temps clock speed volts hehe. Thats why i like to aks You to check me something as You run more of an stock stable not brutal settings. To see how its in normal conditions
> 
> If cold vddp is 900 stock on zen 2 need to have a look how more behaves if it affects scores


Will try lower tCWL soon  , as 2x8GB @ 3800MHz seemed solid it was time to move to 4x8GB .

Data ZIP (organise files by time) which has 3666MHz/3733MHz 4x8GB tested upto ~1000% in Kahru RAM Test, then some preliminary testing of 3800MHz.

UEFI 2406/2501 on C7H defaults ProcODT as 60, where as UEFI 0068 is 40, like the C8H/F. ProcODT 60 was fine for 3666MHz, but 3733MHz would get stuck at POST in Q-CODE: C5 (instantly), once I set manually 40 I gained POST. 3800MHz would do the same, until I set 34.6. Crazy thing is on 2x8GB 3800MHz ProcODT of 60 which [Auto] shows as in RM is fine.

ZIP below has settings txt, screenies of menu which may not be in txt, plus it shows 6 timings which I think best to leave on [Auto] as I believe MC may prefer these as is.

View attachment R532GPBO1503800.zip


Currently system been rebooted and rerunning further testing of PBO+150MHz 3800MHz 4x8GB.



Spoiler














Currently using SOC: 1.081 VDDG: 1.018 vs 1.068 & 1.013 when on 2x8GB same MEMCLK.

Some AIDA64 compares below.



Spoiler














*** edit ***

After several reruns of profile from say POST from shutdown, re-POST from OS, same POST rerunning of a test load, I could still have Q-CODE: C5 when board was posting.

Going to SOC: 1.087 VDDG: 1.025 seemed to help. Then yesterday when I did RAM Test of ~2600% (~1.5hrs), then stopped test, let rig idle, then on same POST reloaded RAM test, system rebooted ~1700% (~1hr) in and went Q-CODE: C5.

I bumped SOC to 1.093V, I then had pass of 3525%, stopped test let system idle, rerun 2200% on same POST, stopped test let system idle, rerun 4000% on same POST, so ~4hrs 43min uptime. Then I rebooted system (ie warm POST), RAM test failed at ~2600%.

The ***** in profile was when a warm POST was done it could fail.

I tried upping SOC/VDDG/VDIMM/lowering CAD Bus to increase signalling, this did not fix the breaking of profile on warm POST. Increasing CLDO_VDDP did. Went from 0.901 to 0.925, ~13200% (~8hrs) PASS on warm POST as shown in spoiler below.



Spoiler


----------



## Duvar

I am waiting for final Bios, running BIOS 2501 on my CH VII atm.
https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/18817881

Edit: Here some Passmark results from my lil 3600: https://extreme.pcgameshardware.de/prozessoren/470191-sammelthread-amd-ryzen-1961.html#post9956706


----------



## Roboionator

what do you think, what is point to buy,....high frequency and low latency ram


----------



## Pilotasso

...and this


----------



## Nighthog

Hmm I'm in a little bit of thought at the moment as I've been trying to get my memory stable in 3800Mhz 1:1 mode. Been trying all kinds of things but keep getting errors. Now last night I left it running for a long time.

The result I found was interesting.

Half my threads are failing Memtest the other half is passing. They fail in bits of 8 errors at a time in row per section at once. The failure seems random but consistent on the one half. 

You guys have any suggestion what the issue might be? Solutions? 
You guys seen anything similar before?

EDIT:
I seem to have found the issue. Currently Ok @ 430% now.

I had set my *DriveStr* values "wrong" from earlier and was thinking it was something else looking and testing all kinds of things these last couple days, thinking I had set some timing too tight. (I hadn't tested that long period as above to see that pattern thinking it was random errors)
Either way I need 60.20.20.40 to function Ok thus far and a slight increase on DRAM_VDDP? The one @ 2.500 stock -->2.660V works out better for long term stability.
I'll wait to 1000% and call it stable at that point. I hope it will pass, wasted too much time chasing this thing.

EDIT2: 1 error 500%..... (&/%¤


----------



## mongoled

Right, somehow I have fallen upon an accidental improvement in stability

:0

While playing around in pursuit of a stable 3800/1900 mhz rig with nice timings I was stuck in a boot loop where I was simply using other people's settings.

After some frustration in getting a stable rig, I decided to opt for a semi custom approach to the issue.

Quite simply I left everything on auto and dialled in the following config 

tCL16 / tRCDRD15 / tRCDWR15 / tRP15 / tRAS30 / tRC52 / tRFC303 / tFAW36 / tWR24

3800/1900 mhz coupled

AIDA64 is 65ns / 560xx / 300xx / 520xx

So far its done memtest 2000%, realbench 1hr, currently running prime95 (29.2 beta5) blend.

And the best thing about this RAM voltage is only 1.35v!


----------



## lordzed83

Roboionator said:


> what do you think, what is point to buy,....high frequency and low latency ram
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CloyuBw_E_0&feature=youtu.be


Point is tweeking fun but generally not much gain besides that


----------



## Jackalito

mongoled said:


> Right, somehow I have fallen upon an accidental improvement in stability
> 
> :0
> 
> While playing around in pursuit of a stable 3800/1900 mhz rig with nice timings I was stuck in a boot loop where I was simply using other people's settings.
> 
> After some frustration in getting a stable rig, I decided to opt for a semi custom approach to the issue.
> 
> Quite simply I left everything on auto and dialled in the following config
> 
> tCL16 / tRCDRD15 / tRCDWR15 / tRP15 / tRAS30 / tRC52 / tRFC303 / tFAW36 / tWR24
> 
> 3800/1900 mhz coupled
> 
> AIDA64 is 65ns / 560xx / 300xx / 520xx
> 
> So far its done memtest 2000%, realbench 1hr, currently running prime95 (29.2 beta5) blend.
> 
> And the best thing about this RAM voltage is only 1.35v!



Awesome stuff, mate!!! Quite impressive!! :specool:
+Rep! 

So, I recently got that exact RAM kit, which I intend to use once I put together my new 3700X with a Crosshair VIII Hero. So after reading such a great success, I would like to ask you a few questions regarding your settings:


Did you enable Gear Down Mode?
What about SoC and VDDG voltages?
ProcODT setting?
RttNom, RttWr, RttPark settings?
Mem CAD Bus values?

Thanks in advance!! :thumb:


----------



## mongoled

Jackalito said:


> Awesome stuff, mate!!! Quite impressive!! :specool:
> +Rep!
> 
> So, I recently got that exact RAM kit, which I intend to use once I put together my new 3700X with a Crosshair VIII Hero. So after reading such a great success, I would like to ask you a few questions regarding your settings:
> 
> 
> Did you enable Gear Down Mode?
> What about SoC and VDDG voltages?
> ProcODT setting?
> RttNom, RttWr, RttPark settings?
> Mem CAD Bus values?
> 
> Thanks in advance!! :thumb:


Hi!


you are in luck, i finished earlier today a load of stability tests so will post the results below


----------



## mongoled

Now I have the following to say.

Im unsure if the 1.35v for the RAM is some type of anomaly.

Im saying this because as per usual I am seeing weird things occurring which I cannot explain.

For example

The stress test done above were done over multiple reboots, for all intents and purposes it looks like my rig is stable at those settings.

Now get this, after I decided I was happy with these settings I played around with the PBO settings in the BIOS and found the "Enhanced 4" level.

I applied this and rebooted my computer.

AVX2 workloads were hitting +92C after a few minutes so I decided against running any PBO settings until more mature BIOS appear.

So I go about my way to reverse the PBO settings in the BIOS while leaving everything 'as it was' for my stable runs.

Boot the PC run prime95 blend, instant failures



I then tried to run memtest, guess what? Instant failures again.

So I switch off the PC, reset the CMOS and dial in the exact settings that had been prime95 stable for over 12 hours and tried to run prime95/memtest and guess what? Yup instant failures crashes.

I was like, ***, did I destroy my chip by running the PBO Extended 4 level ????

But noooooooo, I didnt harm anything



This is what I had to do to get my rig to stable again with 1.35v and the settings you can see in the screen shots above.

Basically, I had to dial in 3800/1900 mhz and change nothing else, leave all on AUTO.

Booted the PC, checked RAM settings

28-27-27-27 .... huh w t f

Reboot again.

One by one I input my settings,

tCL16 reboot, tRCDRD15 reboot, tRCDWR15 reboot, tRP15 / tRAS30 / tRC52 / tRFC303 / tFAW36 / tWR24 reboot.

After that I went to run some stress tests and everything is stable again.

So many weird anomalies ............


----------



## mongoled

Also as per topic title,

It was not possible for me to boot with an IF frequency of 1933mhz.

So here is hoping that this is not a silicon wall but a platform wall which will be fixed with newer BIOS's.

There may be a memory hole in the IF frequency range, but didnt want to try a higher IF frequency of lets say 2000mhz plus just incase I end up destroying some hardware because of an immature BIOS!


----------



## Nighthog

@mongoled

You don't mention sub-timings? AUTO? No wonder you had trouble. 
Basically it set something different from your "stable" settings. Look over what they are set when stable and input them manually. Easy as opening RyzenMaster and checking the values.

Otherwise you can get trouble onwards when you get different training results for the auto values time to time. It's not consistent what the motherboard picks every run.

And I could hardly say your stable for that Membench result for total 2000%?

I had *failure* when all instances where 500% and got 1 error! I call success when they all hit 1000% each instance. Though that takes a whole day to run... (why it taking me time)


----------



## mongoled

Nighthog said:


> @*mongoled*
> You don't mention sub-timings? AUTO? No wonder you had trouble.
> Basically it set something different from your "stable" settings. Look over what they are set when stable and input them manually. Easy as opening RyzenMaster and checking the values.
> 
> Otherwise you can get trouble onwards when you get different training results for the auto values time to time. It's not consistent what the motherboard picks every run.
> 
> And I could hardly say your stable for that Membench result for total 2000%?
> 
> I had *failure* when all instances where 500% and got 1 error! I call success when they all hit 1000% each instance. Though that takes a whole day to run... (why it taking me time)


Hi mate!

Ryzen master was showing the same AUTO settings for sub timings. It had not set anything different as per Ryzen Master!

Did you not see the 12+ hours prime95 blend run I did ?

That was 'ontop' of the 2000% Membench + the 1 hour realbench test that ive done.

I am happy with the stability, providing there are no more anomalies.



** edit **
was also meant to say im in agreement with you thats its best NOT to leave things on auto. Its just that im getting more consistent and stable results with somethings on AUTO rather than manually setting them.

Hopefully once BIOS mature I can go back to regular method of setting up BIOS

** edit2 **
Ive also done what I said I wouldnt, that is im trying out the "Enhanced Level 4"

AMD says 95C is max limit, so hopefully my chip will be alive tomorrow morning after another prime95 blend test

 


** edit3 **
Think ive found the culprit!

When I leave the command rate on "AUTO" in Ryzen master I see the following

Cmd2t:1T
GearDownEn:Enabled

Everything is stable, once I run the PBO "Enhanced Level", something happens.

BIOS settings are ALL identical, but prime95/Memtest have instant crashes.

Now get this, putting PBO back to AUTO does not resolve the issue.

Here is how I resolve it, without having to reset bios, reinout settings etc etc.

I go into BIOS and set Cmd2t to 1T, reboot (if i went into Windows and ran stress tests it would be instant crashes).

Back into the BIOS I go and again go to Cmd2t and place it on AUTO.

Now back to Windows, stress tests are stable again !!

Ryzen is still showing 

Cmd2t:1T
GearDownEn:Enabled

And all other settings the same.

So it looks like something gets borked when using PBO enhanced levels which even resetting BIOS does not resolve!!


----------



## Jackalito

mongoled said:


> Hi!
> you are in luck, i finished earlier today a load of stability tests so will post the results below





mongoled said:


> Now I have the following to say.
> 
> Im unsure if the 1.35v for the RAM is some type of anomaly.
> 
> Im saying this because as per usual I am seeing weird things occurring which I cannot explain.
> 
> For example
> 
> The stress test done above were done over multiple reboots, for all intents and purposes it looks like my rig is stable at those settings.
> 
> Now get this, after I decided I was happy with these settings I played around with the PBO settings in the BIOS and found the "Enhanced 4" level.
> 
> I applied this and rebooted my computer.
> 
> AVX2 workloads were hitting +92C after a few minutes so I decided against running any PBO settings until more mature BIOS appear.
> 
> So I go about my way to reverse the PBO settings in the BIOS while leaving everything 'as it was' for my stable runs.
> 
> Boot the PC run prime95 blend, instant failures
> 
> 
> 
> I then tried to run memtest, guess what? Instant failures again.
> 
> So I switch off the PC, reset the CMOS and dial in the exact settings that had been prime95 stable for over 12 hours and tried to run prime95/memtest and guess what? Yup instant failures crashes.
> 
> I was like, ***, did I destroy my chip by running the PBO Extended 4 level ????
> 
> But noooooooo, I didnt harm anything
> 
> 
> 
> This is what I had to do to get my rig to stable again with 1.35v and the settings you can see in the screen shots above.
> 
> Basically, I had to dial in 3800/1900 mhz and change nothing else, leave all on AUTO.
> 
> Booted the PC, checked RAM settings
> 
> 28-27-27-27 .... huh w t f
> 
> Reboot again.
> 
> One by one I input my settings,
> 
> tCL16 reboot, tRCDRD15 reboot, tRCDWR15 reboot, tRP15 / tRAS30 / tRC52 / tRFC303 / tFAW36 / tWR24 reboot.
> 
> After that I went to run some stress tests and everything is stable again.
> 
> So many weird anomalies ............



Thank you so much for sharing your experience with this setup, including some woes here and there - +REP! :thumb:


----------



## mongoled

Jackalito said:


> Thank you so much for sharing your experience with this setup, including some woes here and there - +REP! :thumb:


 Thanks mate your welcome, wish you all the overclocking happiness in the World


----------



## evilhf




----------



## crakej

evilhf said:


> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwBmtZ0QIU8


No way - if it seems to good to be true....

Ram is not going to work at same speed as L3!


----------



## centvalny

Awesome memory clocking from our friend Safedisk!


----------



## centvalny

Heres Samsung B-die A2 @ 4800C16


----------



## thegr8anand

What voltages?


----------



## mongoled

@*Nighthog* 

Hi!



The following screenshot is for you.

I imagine that this level of stability testing is not good enough for yourself, but im sure for most people it is relevant.

I also did an 8 hour realbench stress test and then right after it finished I started a 5000% Memtest ALL ram stress test.

All I have left to do is test a few games to see if I have crashes


----------



## crakej

centvalny said:


> Awesome memory clocking from our friend Safedisk!


Can you get the settings?


----------



## CaptnJones

I'm having issues with my memory kit. When i enable XMP im getting crackling noise when listening to music/youtube it's really annoying

My ram

My ram is supported by the motherboard






Bios settings 



 


What am i doing wrong?


cheers


----------



## majestynl

CaptnJones said:


> I'm having issues with my memory kit. When i enable XMP im getting crackling noise when listening to music/youtube it's really annoying
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> My ram
> 
> My ram is supported by the motherboard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bios settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What am i doing wrong?
> 
> 
> cheers



Did you test same setting but entering manual ? Ram Freq / Voltage / Timings
Have heard few people about crackling noise etc.. weird!


----------



## CaptnJones

Actually if i don't write the dram voltage manually it won't even boot.


----------



## majestynl

CaptnJones said:


> Actually if i don't write the dram voltage manually it won't even boot.


probably the voltage is not set or set to low from xmp!
But again i would try manually setting everything. and dont forget the dram boot voltage (same as dram voltage)


----------



## CaptnJones

You can see on the screenshots there's still a bug in the bios which adds 30mV to the manually added value. 1.350 > 1.380
I've tried testing the latency with LatencyMon and im getting error reports.


----------



## majestynl

CaptnJones said:


> You can see on the screenshots there's still a bug in the bios which adds 30mV to the manually added value. 1.350 > 1.380
> I've tried testing the latency with LatencyMon and im getting error reports.


- Did you double check the voltage reading with RM or HWinfo??? Still different?
- You can select the XMP profile then open RM , screenshot it.. compare all DRAM OC settings with your manual setup!


----------



## CaptnJones

I just checked it in the RM and it shows a completely different number(-30mV). 

So is Bios Dram reading bugged or is RM bugged?


edit:


tried these settings and got horrible crackling noise in game
 




edit2: tried to manually input
  



And got completely different timings on RM


----------



## majestynl

CaptnJones said:


> I just checked it in the RM and it shows a completely different number(-30mV).
> 
> So is Bios Dram reading bugged or is RM bugged?
> 
> 
> edit:
> 
> 
> tried these settings and got horrible crackling noise in game
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> edit2: tried to manually input
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And got completely different timings on RM


- Bios readings are off on most boards. RM and HwInfo will give you the right values!
- You probably didnt manually entered your subtimings!


----------



## CaptnJones

Where can i get the xmp profile timings?


----------



## muzz

In CPUZ, the SPD tab should show you the ram XMP profile on the right.
Sometimes you have to add more voltage than it says to get it stable at the timings listed.


----------



## CaptnJones

I've already used these timings in the bios and it doesn't work - get some completely different timings with cas 22.
In bios there's an advanced timing settings but i don't know what values to add in.


----------



## majestynl

CaptnJones said:


> Where can i get the xmp profile timings?


like i mentioned before. Load the xmp profile you want > Boot in to Windows and Open Ryzen Master.
Sub-timings and all other Dram related settings will be shown.

Screenshot below with yellow marked rectangle:


----------



## PiCoTTo

Hi all. Motivated by the current RAM prices, their current rising risk (due to Japan-Korea trade war, despite this new https://www.techradar.com/news/ram-...ing-2019-making-pc-upgrades-cheaper-than-ever), and moreover, the end of B-Die chips, I've done quite a bit of investigation to renovate my PC. I've opted for a 3900X with an Asus ROG Strix X570-E. But I’ve serious doubts to choose the RAM memory kit.

Having read that the current best sweet spot (I guess it could change in the future) for Ryzen 3000 with a little IF overclock to 1900 is 3800 MCLK with low latency (C18 or less), and loving the G.Skill look and its RGB, I want to optimize my RAM purchase without wasting my money.

I want 32GB and due to the Daisy Chain topology of this MB, it must be a 2x16GB kit. I need to decide between these three G.Skill Trident Z RAM kits:

1. Trident Z Neo F4-3600C16D-32GTZNC, 16-19-19-39, which seems to mount Hynix CJR (C-Die) chips. https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232861 with a price of 259€ ($233)

2. Trident Z RGB F4-3600C17D-32GTZR, 17-19-19-39, B-Die. https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232575 with a price of 334€ ($301)

3. Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-32GTZR, 14-14-14-34, well binned B-Die. https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232560 with a price of 329€ ($296)

Every of them are in the QVL list, but I would like to reach 3800C16 easily and completely stable, with 1,40v at most. Your experience with Ryzen 3000 or simply your RAM kits matching in X570, could help me a lot.

Edit: The comparison review which inspired me is this https://www.techspot.com/review/1891-ryzen-memory-performance-scaling/


----------



## gupsterg

@PiCoTTo

3.

I have F4-3200C14Q-32GVK with decent stability at 3800MHz C16.


----------



## stinger2k

4x16 GB 3800CL16 IF 1900 per BCLK OC + UV @1,3Vcore

3800 1:1 has trouble to train memory before boot, does anyone know suggestions?


----------



## pr0g4m1ng

I am looking for a 32GB Ram Kit for a Ryzen 3000/ x570 System. 

I am aiming for DDR4 3600 CL16 and am torn between these two kits: 

1. Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB): https://www.gskill.com/product/165/326/1562840211/F4-3600C16D-32GTZNC
2. Ripjaws V DDR4-3200MHz CL14-14-14-34 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB): https://www.gskill.com/qvl/165/184/1536055632/F4-3200C14D-32GVK-Qvl

According to this review both should be about equally fast @ stock: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-zen-2-memory-performance-scaling-benchmark/4.html

However, I'd really like to go to 3600Mhz and the Trident Z Neo is a bit cheaper (about 35-40€). So I wonder: What's the probability that you can reach DDR4-3600MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.35V or better with the Ripjaws V? 

@gupsterg: What voltage?


----------



## stinger2k

@pr0g4m1ng

The Trident Z Neo 3600 CL16-19-19-19-39 should be Hynix C-Dies and the Ripjaws Samsung B-Die.
The Ripjaws should better perform on Ryzen 3xxx Series, and gain easily High Clocks.
Other thing is Trident Z 3600 CL16-16-16-16-39 should be also B-Dies


----------



## pr0g4m1ng

The Trident Z Neos are Hynix CJR. The Ripjaws are Samsung B-dies. 

I read somewhere that B-dies in 16GB modules don't reach higher clocks that easy and I'd like to stay at ~1,35-1,4 V. Do you think it's possible to reach 3600 CL16-19-19-19-39 @ 1,35V with the Ripjaws (B dies)?


----------



## Streetdragon

stinger2k said:


> 4x16 GB 3800CL16 IF 1900 per BCLK OC + UV @1,3Vcore
> 
> 3800 1:1 has trouble to train memory before boot, does anyone know suggestions?


over 20 watt on the SOC? looks high


----------



## gupsterg

pr0g4m1ng said:


> I am looking for a 32GB Ram Kit for a Ryzen 3000/ x570 System.
> 
> I am aiming for DDR4 3600 CL16 and am torn between these two kits:
> 
> 1. Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB): https://www.gskill.com/product/165/326/1562840211/F4-3600C16D-32GTZNC
> 2. Ripjaws V DDR4-3200MHz CL14-14-14-34 1.35V 32GB (2x16GB): https://www.gskill.com/qvl/165/184/1536055632/F4-3200C14D-32GVK-Qvl
> 
> According to this review both should be about equally fast @ stock: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-zen-2-memory-performance-scaling-benchmark/4.html
> 
> However, I'd really like to go to 3600Mhz and the Trident Z Neo is a bit cheaper (about 35-40€). So I wonder: What's the probability that you can reach DDR4-3600MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.35V or better with the Ripjaws V?
> 
> @gupsterg: What voltage?


My F4-3200C14D-32GVK 3600MHz C15 1T (Gear Down Mode: Off) @ 1.355V, not tested 3733MHz C16 much at all TBH, 3800MHz C16 (Gear Down Mode: On) 1.405V.


----------



## reqq

So these new Gskill Neo3600mhz 14-15-15-35 are not b-die but rather Hynix CJR. You think these are topped out or anything left in the tank on normal voltage <1.5v?


----------



## pr0g4m1ng

I have the Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.35V right here. They have CJRs and run are rock stable at 3733 CL16-19-19-39 1.40V 3800 CL16-19-19-39 1.40V didn't boot though. Haven't tried more as of now.


----------



## stinger2k

Streetdragon said:


> over 20 watt on the SOC? looks high


you think? why?


----------



## stinger2k

reqq said:


> So these new Gskill Neo3600mhz 14-15-15-35 are not b-die but rather Hynix CJR. You think these are topped out or anything left in the tank on normal voltage <1.5v?


CJR do it well <1.5V but not with Timings as B-Die do... (specially Latency at higher clocks)

On best performance i would ever get the B-Dies with better Binning, because of that i mentioned...


----------



## PiCoTTo

PiCoTTo said:


> ... I want 32GB and due to the Daisy Chain topology of this MB, it must be a 2x16GB kit. I need to decide between these three G.Skill Trident Z RAM kits:
> 
> 1. Trident Z Neo F4-3600C16D-32GTZNC, 16-19-19-39, which seems to mount Hynix CJR (C-Die) chips. https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232861 with a price of 259€ ($233)
> 
> 2. Trident Z RGB F4-3600C17D-32GTZR, 17-19-19-39, B-Die. https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232575 with a price of 334€ ($301)
> 
> 3. Trident Z RGB F4-3200C14D-32GTZR, 14-14-14-34, well binned B-Die. https://www.newegg.com/g-skill-32gb-288-pin-ddr4-sdram/p/N82E16820232560 with a price of 329€ ($296)
> ...


When thought I had read enough, still finding valuable documents: "2 CCD Ryzen 3000 CPUs (3900X and 3950X) seem to prefer 4 single rank sticks over 2 dual rank sticks." from https://github.com/integralfx/MemTestHelper/blob/master/DDR4 OC Guide.md

Now I must rethink again if I choose 2x16GB or 4x8GB. :jealoussm



pr0g4m1ng said:


> I have the Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.35V right here. They have CJRs and run are rock stable at 3733 CL16-19-19-39 1.40V 3800 CL16-19-19-39 1.40V didn't boot though. Haven't tried more as of now.


Trident Z Neo are much more beautiful than Ripjaws IMO. But I'm seeing that 3200C14 B-Die kits give you quite more margin to tweak timings and subtimings, which in some cases could give you notably performance gain. More necessary with DR sticks, as they can't achieve as high frequencies as SR. What processor and MB are you pairing memory with?


----------



## Streetdragon

stinger2k said:


> you think? why?


im at like 10W with 1.083V. Just wondering


----------



## reqq

pr0g4m1ng said:


> I have the Trident Z Neo DDR4-3600MHz CL16-19-19-39 1.35V right here. They have CJRs and run are rock stable at 3733 CL16-19-19-39 1.40V 3800 CL16-19-19-39 1.40V didn't boot though. Haven't tried more as of now.


Have you tried lowering the timings?


----------



## Nizzen

reqq said:


> So these new Gskill Neo3600mhz 14-15-15-35 are not b-die but rather Hynix CJR. You think these are topped out or anything left in the tank on normal voltage <1.5v?


Neo 3800c14 IS b-die. According to:

"G.Skill’s Trident Z Neo DDR4-3800 CL14 8 GB modules (F4-3800C14-8GTZN) are based on Samsung’s 8 Gb B-die memory chips and use a custom PCB. The unbuffered DIMMs come with aluminum heat spreaders as well as RGB LEDs. To set up rather extreme clocks and low latencies, users will need to enable an XMP 2.0 profile. "

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1469...nt-z-neo-ddr43800-cl14-kit-for-amd-ryzen-3000

So maybe 3600 c14 is b-die too


----------



## spirch

anyone got experience with this kit ? Corsair CMK32GX4M2B3200C16


mine got b-die, double rank



what should i realistically get, I don't want the extreme / best OC ever, I would simply like to get "more" out of it


----------



## mito1172

C6H 7403 came back with a cold boot with bios. what is asus doing?


----------



## psyxeon

I was going to buy 2x 8 and run 4 x 8 B-die Cl14 but for the same price I can buy an E-die 32Gb kit. I see good results

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...FQZp15rwWadbPTVDNgO8vtyDCM/edit#gid=509536383


----------



## Synoxia

Anyone has been able to run FCLK at 1933? How? My c7h + 3700x runs 1900 stable but 1933 doesn't boot even with 1.15vsoc, 1.10 vddg and 1000 vddp lol


----------



## Nighthog

Synoxia said:


> Anyone has been able to run FCLK at 1933? How? My c7h + 3700x runs 1900 stable but 1933 doesn't boot even with 1.15vsoc, 1.10 vddg and 1000 vddp lol


I've seen NO ONE be able to use 1933Mhz FCLK.

With some BCLK adjustment we have been able to use ~1917FCLK at best. There is some hard limit here where most see the same result for MAX.


----------



## psyxeon

Synoxia said:


> Anyone has been able to run FCLK at 1933? How? My c7h + 3700x runs 1900 stable but 1933 doesn't boot even with 1.15vsoc, 1.10 vddg and 1000 vddp lol


I can't. I can push ram to 3886+ but not FCLK


----------



## Synoxia

Nighthog said:


> I've seen NO ONE be able to use 1933Mhz FCLK.
> 
> With some BCLK adjustment we have been able to use ~1917FCLK at best. There is some hard limit here where most see the same result for MAX.


I am using 101,2 bclk now with 1900 fclk which should be 1922. HCI memtest fail at 400% with 2 errors, i have to investigate if it's the ram or either the FCLK. Maybe FCLK because i could run 3800 c15-16-17-15-30-45-294 gdm off 1.44v but 3845 c16-17-16-16-32-48-336 GDM off is unstable even at 1.46v


----------



## Nighthog

Synoxia said:


> I am using 101,2 bclk now with 1900 fclk which should be 1922. HCI memtest fail at 400% with 2 errors, i have to investigate if it's the ram or either the FCLK. Maybe FCLK because i could run 3800 c15-16-17-15-30-45-294 gdm off 1.44v but 3845 c16-17-16-16-32-48-336 GDM off is unstable even at 1.46v


I've tried 101.2bclk but my Aorus Xtreme drops ALL SATA, unusable as my OS is on those. Doesn't drop the NVME m2 though.


----------



## Synoxia

Nighthog said:


> I've tried 101.2bclk but my Aorus Xtreme drops ALL SATA, unusable as my OS is on those. Doesn't drop the NVME m2 though.


I have none of such problems, i remember having idle crashes with 2700x above 102 bclk, let's see what happens with 3700x. If this proves stable i essentially turned a 3700x into a 3800x.


----------



## Nighthog

Synoxia said:


> I have none of such problems, i remember having idle crashes with 2700x above 102 bclk, let's see what happens with 3700x. If this proves stable i essentially turned a 3700x into a 3800x.


It's a X570 thing, X470 doesn't have that issue to the same extent and more reasonable.


----------



## roco_smith

Synoxia said:


> Anyone has been able to run FCLK at 1933? How? My c7h + 3700x runs 1900 stable but 1933 doesn't boot even with 1.15vsoc, 1.10 vddg and 1000 vddp lol


 I already sucess on my Asus Crosshair Extreme FLCK at 1966 memory speed 3933


----------



## Synoxia

roco_smith said:


> I already sucess on my Asus Crosshair Extreme FLCK at 1966 memory speed 3933


How you did this?


----------



## BLUuuE

roco_smith said:


> I already sucess on my Asus Crosshair Extreme FLCK at 1966 memory speed 3933


Latency seems a bit high...


----------



## roco_smith

BLUuuE said:


> Latency seems a bit high...




yeah working on that , but pretty happy with the performance on my 3900X and the X370 Crosshair VI Extreme, I definitely will keep this board , doesn't need PCIE 4.0 at this moment 





https://www.userbenchmark.com/UserRun/21164719


----------



## roco_smith

Synoxia said:


> How you did this?



My good Bdie memory did the dirty work :specool:


----------



## MishelLngelo

I had my Kingston b-die 3600 at 4000MHz, BCLK on auto stable but but memory scores were lower than at 3600MHZ on account of too high Cl 20 and final latency at 79.1 as opposed of Cl16 and latency 64.3 on 3600MHz.


----------



## Synoxia

roco_smith said:


> My good Bdie memory did the dirty work :specool:


The problem is not memory, but rather the FCLK. My mems can 4000 c18 without problems (dram calc says they can 4100 c16) but fclk doesn't go over 1900


----------



## Zed03

Could you guys give this a quick look and see if I made any big mistakes?

I'm looking to run 32gb @ 3800 mhz / cl 16 / 1900mhz fclock on 3950x

The memory is going into an x570 Aurus Extreme. QVL here: http://download.gigabyte.us/FileList/Memory/mb_memory_x570-aorus-xtreme_matisse_190812.pdf



 3800 mhz and 1900 mhz fclock is the fastest 3950x will run 1:1. The 2:1 penalty isn't worth it. Correct?
Benches:


Code:


https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3508-ryzen-3000-memory-benchmark-best-ram-fclk-uclock-mclock


 I wasn't able to find anything stable & faster than CL16 @ 3800 mhz. Correct?

 According to AHO, Dual Rank memory has an advantage on Matisse. Correct? 
Source:


Code:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nugwAOvijHQ


 Will the kit below do CL16 @ 3800? Gamers Nexus ran a similar kit by underclocking from 3866 mhz CL* to 3800 mhz CL16.
Source:


Code:


https://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/3508-ryzen-3000-memory-benchmark-best-ram-fclk-uclock-mclock


 Is the kit below even Samsung b-dye? Am I missing anything?

F4-3866C18D-32GTZR
DDR4 3866 (PC4 30900)
Dual Channel, Dual Rank (2x 16GB sticks, 2x 8GB ranks per stick)
Timing 18-18-18-38
CAS Latency 18
Voltage 1.35V


----------



## FlyInfinity

CaptnJones said:


> I'm having issues with my memory kit. When i enable XMP im getting crackling noise when listening to music/youtube it's really annoying
> 
> My ram
> 
> My ram is supported by the motherboard
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Bios settings
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What am i doing wrong?
> 
> 
> cheers


Did you ever figure this out? I’m having the same problem with my 3200 b die on a X570 aorus master. Setting xmp results in random whole system stutters, but dropping the memory to 3133 makes everything run perfect. But if I leave the memory at 3133 and manually set the fabric to 1600 the system stutters come back. So it seems like it’s the fabric speed of 1600 that the system doesn’t like. This same memory kit works perfect at xmp 3200 in my gen 1 ryzen rig.

X570 aorus master f10c bios
2x8 gskill trident z 3200c14
3900x


----------



## FlyInfinity

FlyInfinity said:


> Did you ever figure this out? I’m having the same problem with my 3200 b die on a X570 aorus master. Setting xmp results in random whole system stutters, but dropping the memory to 3133 makes everything run perfect. But if I leave the memory at 3133 and manually set the fabric to 1600 the system stutters come back. So it seems like it’s the fabric speed of 1600 that the system doesn’t like. This same memory kit works perfect at xmp 3200 in my gen 1 ryzen rig.
> 
> X570 aorus master f10c bios
> 2x8 gskill trident z 3200c14
> 3900x


I figured it out. My aorus master x570 was setting vddg to 950mv which caused whole system stutters randomly. I tried the suggested vddg 900mv from the ryzen calculator and it made the system very unstable and all audio was garbled. At that point I knew lowering vddg was the wrong direction, so I bumped up vddg to 980mv and now the system is stable and passing memtest.


----------



## Awsan

Sorry for my ignorance but does 3800mhz/FCLK1900 with tight timing still hold the best "Gaming performance"? - considering a 3900/3950 or would a 4200mhz/FCLK1900 with tight timing perform better?

And right now I see that the 3800mhz cl14 neos are the most efficient ryzen ram, but what if I get a 4200mhz kit and lower it to 3800mhz with cl14 will that be possible? or will I need to get good timing ram from the get start.


----------



## Jazek

I cant go over 1866MHz on the IF, it doesnt matter the memory frequency. My ram is b-die 3200 cl14, my mobo is a crosshair vi hero and my cpu is a 3800X.

I have even tried to go 3800Mhz CL16 but I cant go over 1866 on the IF, any help would be appreciated.


----------



## Advil000

For gaming? Memory latency. Once you've got 3800 / 1900 FCLK stable, and found your fastest memory timings with best read throughput THEN you need to turn around and trade some of the read speed back for faster latency.

Go to work trying to get memory latency down as close to 59ns as you can.

Do some before and after game benchmarks. One with your "tightest" primary timings and highest RAM read speed and compare with whatever settings get you best latency.

If you go from 66-75ns down to 59-63ns you'll probably see a decent size bump in gaming performance, even if it means giving up a bit of max read performance.


----------



## Awsan

Advil000 said:


> For gaming? Memory latency. Once you've got 3800 / 1900 FCLK stable, and found your fastest memory timings with best read throughput THEN you need to turn around and trade some of the read speed back for faster latency.
> 
> Go to work trying to get memory latency down as close to 59ns as you can.
> 
> Do some before and after game benchmarks. One with your "tightest" primary timings and highest RAM read speed and compare with whatever settings get you best latency.
> 
> If you go from 66-75ns down to 59-63ns you'll probably see a decent size bump in gaming performance, even if it means giving up a bit of max read performance.



I saw this photo on techpowerup forums and want to know if its true.


----------



## gerardfraser

Awsan said:


> I saw this photo on techpowerup forums and want to know if its true.


It is true because I did the testing.

RAM TIMINGS USED

♦ 2133Mhz (16GB)CL10-10-10-10-21 
♦ 2400mhz (16GB)CL10-11-11-11-21 
♦ 2933mhz (16GB)CL12-14-13-13-26
♦ 3200mhz (16GB)CL14-14-14-14-28 
♦ 3733mhz (16GB)CL16-17-16-16-34
♦ 4000mhz (16GB)CL16-18-17-17-36 -(memory clock 2000x2/fabric clock 1800x2/memory controller 1000x2)
♦ 4200mhz (16GB)CL16-18-17-17-36 -(memory clock 2100x2/fabric clock 1800x2/memory controller 1100x2)

2133Mhz 
https://i.postimg.cc/BSGHnGTm/2133.png

2400Mhz
https://i.postimg.cc/J1Xj8hky/2400.png

2933Mhz
https://i.postimg.cc/WsC0xZhL/2933.png

3200Mhz
https://i.postimg.cc/CYgsFbJw/3200.png

3733Mhz
https://i.postimg.cc/mBZ39R0q/3733.png

4000Mhz
https://i.postimg.cc/R9LQqqbK/4000.png

4200Mhz
https://i.postimg.cc/JMTNcv8h/4200.png


COMPUTER USED 

♦ CPU - AMD 3600X With MasterLiquid Lite ML240L RGB AIO (Fans 55%)
♦ GPU - Nvidia RTX 2080 
♦ RAM - G.Skill Trident Z 16gb DDR4 (F4-4000C18D-16GTZ) (2x8GB) 
♦ Mobo - MSI X470 - Gaming Plus
♦ SSD - M.2 2280 WD Blue 3D NAND 500GB 
♦ DSP - LG 27" 4K UHD FreeSync Gaming Monitor (27UD59P-B.AUS) 
♦ PSU - Antec High Current Pro 1200W


----------



## Awsan

gerardfraser said:


> It is true because I did the testing.
> 
> RAM TIMINGS USED
> 
> ♦ 2133Mhz (16GB)CL10-10-10-10-21
> ♦ 2400mhz (16GB)CL10-11-11-11-21
> ♦ 2933mhz (16GB)CL12-14-13-13-26
> ♦ 3200mhz (16GB)CL14-14-14-14-28
> ♦ 3733mhz (16GB)CL16-17-16-16-34
> ♦ 4000mhz (16GB)CL16-18-17-17-36 -(memory clock 2000x2/fabric clock 1800x2/memory controller 1000x2)
> ♦ 4200mhz (16GB)CL16-18-17-17-36 -(memory clock 2100x2/fabric clock 1800x2/memory controller 1100x2)
> 
> 2133Mhz
> https://i.postimg.cc/BSGHnGTm/2133.png
> 
> 2400Mhz
> https://i.postimg.cc/J1Xj8hky/2400.png
> 
> 2933Mhz
> https://i.postimg.cc/WsC0xZhL/2933.png
> 
> 3200Mhz
> https://i.postimg.cc/CYgsFbJw/3200.png
> 
> 3733Mhz
> https://i.postimg.cc/mBZ39R0q/3733.png
> 
> 4000Mhz
> https://i.postimg.cc/R9LQqqbK/4000.png
> 
> 4200Mhz
> https://i.postimg.cc/JMTNcv8h/4200.png
> 
> 
> COMPUTER USED
> 
> ♦ CPU - AMD 3600X With MasterLiquid Lite ML240L RGB AIO (Fans 55%)
> ♦ GPU - Nvidia RTX 2080
> ♦ RAM - G.Skill Trident Z 16gb DDR4 (F4-4000C18D-16GTZ) (2x8GB)
> ♦ Mobo - MSI X470 - Gaming Plus
> ♦ SSD - M.2 2280 WD Blue 3D NAND 500GB
> ♦ DSP - LG 27" 4K UHD FreeSync Gaming Monitor (27UD59P-B.AUS)
> ♦ PSU - Antec High Current Pro 1200W


I see, But can I understand why then? is the CPU looking for total bandwidth (A mixture of read write and tight timing) like delicate dough or does it want max write read or tightest timings?

Thanks


----------



## gerardfraser

Awsan said:


> I see, But can I understand why then? is the CPU looking for total bandwidth (A mixture of read write and tight timing) like delicate dough or does it want max write read or tightest timings?
> 
> Thanks


Take this below as you will,some people would never believe the chart posted or what I am saying.Also Iposted all the timings,read/write it does not make a difference in PC gaming at higher resolutions in 99% of games.

If you game on low resolutions ,then memory will have an affect on gaming.Plenty of 720p/1080p testing with CPU's where memory can have an affect in certain games.People get confused especially about Ryzen RAM when reviewers keep pushing the narrative that you need fast RAM for Ryzen and then even faster Ram @ 3800Mhz and IF 1900Mhz.

It is mostly bull crap 99% of games ,when people actually game at higher resolutions, you can use any Ram as long as you set your Ram timings/sub timings so you get all the benefits of faster RAM out of the box.

Gaming at higher resolutions ,like in the chart at timings on RAM ,has no real affect on 99% of the PC games out there,you do not lose performance ,except for mainly margin of error.

For me,I game 4K on freesync monitor.

If I was recommending RAM I would suggest cheap 3200Mhz Ram and set your own tight timings,if you game at higher resolutions.

So lets look at 2133 RAM Vs 3733Mhz vs 4200 RAM Ram @ 2560x1440 PC gaming

2133Mhz RAM with IF Clock 1066Mhz =93.8ns latency is just as fast as 

3733Mhz Ram with IF Clock 1866Mhz =64.9 latency which is just as fast as

4200Mhz RAM with IF Clock 1049 Mhz= 71.3ns latency

Also I can run CL14 3800Mhz 61ns latency @ 1900 IF and there is still no difference ,gaming at higher resolution.


----------



## ziocomposite

Thanks for the massive work Gerard! So basically as long as the GPU and CPU are not the bottleneck will RAM make a difference. Am I right to assume this would be the same for running 4 dimms/Dual Channel?


----------



## Awsan

gerardfraser said:


> Take this below as you will,some people would never believe the chart posted or what I am saying.Also Iposted all the timings,read/write it does not make a difference in PC gaming at higher resolutions in 99% of games.
> 
> If you game on low resolutions ,then memory will have an affect on gaming.Plenty of 720p/1080p testing with CPU's where memory can have an affect in certain games.People get confused especially about Ryzen RAM when reviewers keep pushing the narrative that you need fast RAM for Ryzen and then even faster Ram @ 3800Mhz and IF 1900Mhz.
> 
> It is mostly bull crap 99% of games ,when people actually game at higher resolutions, you can use any Ram as long as you set your Ram timings/sub timings so you get all the benefits of faster RAM out of the box.
> 
> Gaming at higher resolutions ,like in the chart at timings on RAM ,has no real affect on 99% of the PC games out there,you do not lose performance ,except for mainly margin of error.
> 
> For me,I game 4K on freesync monitor.
> 
> If I was recommending RAM I would suggest cheap 3200Mhz Ram and set your own tight timings,if you game at higher resolutions.
> 
> So lets look at 2133 RAM Vs 3733Mhz vs 4200 RAM Ram @ 2560x1440 PC gaming
> 
> 2133Mhz RAM with IF Clock 1066Mhz =93.8ns latency is just as fast as
> 
> 3733Mhz Ram with IF Clock 1866Mhz =64.9 latency which is just as fast as
> 
> 4200Mhz RAM with IF Clock 1049 Mhz= 71.3ns latency
> 
> Also I can run CL14 3800Mhz 61ns latency @ 1900 IF and there is still no difference ,gaming at higher resolution.


Thanks a lot for the Info

One more question, I found a 4200mhz c17 kit for cheap, will that kit be able to downclock to 3800 with tight timing?


----------



## gerardfraser

ziocomposite said:


> Thanks for the massive work Gerard! So basically as long as the GPU and CPU are not the bottleneck will RAM make a difference. Am I right to assume this would be the same for running 4 dimms/Dual Channel?


I agree and I have not tested 4 DIMMS myself ,I would assume still be the same results as I have in the chart posted.




Awsan said:


> Thanks a lot for the Info
> 
> One more question, I found a 4200mhz c17 kit for cheap, will that kit be able to downclock to 3800 with tight timing?


Yes of course you would be able to,and with a lot less hassle then trying to overclock a 3200Mhz kit.


----------



## elmor

ziocomposite said:


> Thanks for the massive work Gerard! So basically as long as the GPU and CPU are not the bottleneck will RAM make a difference. Am I right to assume this would be the same for running 4 dimms/Dual Channel?





gerardfraser said:


> I agree and I have not tested 4 DIMMS myself ,I would assume still be the same results as I have in the chart posted.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes of course you would be able to,and with a lot less hassle then trying to overclock a 3200Mhz kit.



Going to 4x DIMM, or 2x Dual-Rank DIMM, would allow rank interleaving that improves read/write bandwidth. At the same time going to such a configuration will also worsen the memory frequency and/or timings. Either way, if you're already not benefiting from higher memory bandwidth this would have the same results.


----------



## gupsterg

Sticking to 1:1:1 (FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK), using 4x8GB single rank/sided Samsung B die 3200MHz C14 bin, I've snagged 3800MHz/1900MHz on 2 CPUs, 1 CPU only 3733MHz, this falls short of FCLK 1900MHz by ~3.5MHz.

R5 3600 BF 1922SUT (IHS UF Stamped) 1:1:1 (FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK) 3800MHz/1900MHz 4x8GB, without changing anything on this profile FCLK maxes out at ~1911MHz with BCLK tweak.

R7 3700X BF 1943PGT (IHS UF Stamped) 1:1:1 (FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK) 3733MHz/1867MHz 4x8GB, without changing anything on this profile FCLK maxes out at ~1896.5MHz with BCLK tweak.

R9 3900X BF 1944SUT (IHS UG Stamped) 1:1:1 (FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK) 3800MHz/1900MHz 4x8GB, not yet checked for max FCLK with BCLK tweak.

So far all cases VDIMM been 1.35V, VTTDDR 0.675V, SOC/CLDO_VDDP/CLDO_VDDG pretty close between each other, once test R9 3900X for max FCLK will edit post with info.


----------



## rastaviper

Jazek said:


> I cant go over 1866MHz on the IF, it doesnt matter the memory frequency. My ram is b-die 3200 cl14, my mobo is a crosshair vi hero and my cpu is a 3800X.
> 
> I have even tried to go 3800Mhz CL16 but I cant go over 1866 on the IF, any help would be appreciated.


U dont need 3800mhz to get a low latency (under 64ns).
Even at 3733 you can get around 63ns, if you lower your timings to 14s


----------



## Nighthog

elmor said:


> Going to 4x DIMM, or 2x Dual-Rank DIMM, would allow rank interleaving that improves read/write bandwidth. At the same time going to such a configuration will also worsen the memory frequency and/or timings. Either way, if you're already not benefiting from higher memory bandwidth this would have the same results.


If you find the right settings one can go quite far with 4x DIMM single rank configuration. For sure 2x DIMM is much simpler and easier to do but it's not like you loose much for 4x DIMM as it's in the 4000Mhz+ range for some boards that people don't bother with in general.


----------



## Ne01 OnnA

*THX*

Great read, THX 

IMhO Best is to have (If You can) 3800MHz CL14 or CL16 at FLCK 1900.
Great Latency (63ns) & Very high Read/Write/Copy -> All of this is good for Gaming.

3. 3600 CL14
2. 3733CL16
1. 3800CL16

My Timings:
3800MHz CL16-17-17-15 31-40 6-8 314-242-142 1T GD On 1.42v (Real is 1.395v) SOC 1.125v (Real 1.090v)
All Tests conducted at the same OC/Voltages -> 4.3GHz All core 1.35v (Real 1.33v)

My CPU can be OCed with 1CCX up to 4.4Ghz with resonable V at ~1.395v (i saw guys at 4.650MHz! with less than 1.5v!).... Too much heat IMO.

===
Note: There is new BIOS already 
Crosshair VI Hero:
ComboPI_1004 PatchB

Hero VI
-> https://cloud.asustreiber.de/s/W67yXWWwSwYbbEK
Hero VI WiFi
-> https://cloud.asustreiber.de/s/X7EDJBPgNoBQTfD

From here -> https://www.hardwareluxx.de/community/f248/

===
I hope it Helps You all with Tweaking MOAR 
Happy HolyDays for everyone!
===


----------



## rastaviper

Or even better 3733 15-14-14, with 62.7 ns latency at Aida.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


----------



## olegdjus

My best resalt


----------



## gupsterg

olegdjus said:


> My best resalt
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler


I don't think I've seen a share with FCLK:UCLK:MEMCLK all 1:1:1 @ 1933MHz, so that's a damn fine sample/result :thumb:.


----------



## gerardfraser

Testing some FCLK overclock for stability.For anyone interested.

DDR4 CL16 3866Mhz Single Rank RAM
1933Mhz Fabric clock (FCLK) 
1933Mhz Memory Controller(UCLK=MEMCLK)

Tested for about 3 hours ,best I seen on latency was 60.6ns/60.7ns but consistent readings was 61ns on latency.





Spoiler



♦ CPU - AMD 3800X With MasterLiquid Lite ML240L RGB AIO 
♦ GPU - Nvidia RTX 2080 
♦ RAM - G.Skill Trident Z 16GB DDR4(F4-4000C18D-16GTZ) (2x8) 
♦ Mobo - MSI X470 - Gaming Plus(E7B79AMS.AA0-AMD ComboPI1.0.0.4b) 
♦ SSD - NVME SSD Intel 512GB 
♦ DSP - LG 27" 4K UHD 5ms GTG IPS LED FreeSync Gaming Monitor (27UD59P-B.AUS) - Black 
♦ PSU - Antec High Current Pro 1200W


----------



## gupsterg

gerardfraser said:


> Testing some FCLK overclock for stability.For anyone interested.
> 
> DDR4 CL16 3866Mhz Single Rank RAM
> 1933Mhz Fabric clock (FCLK)
> 1933Mhz Memory Controller(UCLK=MEMCLK)
> 
> Tested for about 3 hours ,best I seen on latency was 60.6ns/60.7ns but consistent readings was 61ns on latency.
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> ♦ CPU - AMD 3800X With MasterLiquid Lite ML240L RGB AIO
> ♦ GPU - Nvidia RTX 2080
> ♦ RAM - G.Skill Trident Z 16GB DDR4(F4-4000C18D-16GTZ) (2x8)
> ♦ Mobo - MSI X470 - Gaming Plus(E7B79AMS.AA0-AMD ComboPI1.0.0.4b)
> ♦ SSD - NVME SSD Intel 512GB
> ♦ DSP - LG 27" 4K UHD 5ms GTG IPS LED FreeSync Gaming Monitor (27UD59P-B.AUS) - Black
> ♦ PSU - Antec High Current Pro 1200W


Nice  , so that's a count of 2 @ 1933MHz  . What was the testing for 3hrs?


----------



## gerardfraser

Testing was just the regular stuff,mem test for awhile to make sure no errors ,since I have owned some 2x3600X and 3800X and know how the ram works for me.
I could always run 1933Mhz FCLK ,I just never did run at 1933Mhz FCLK because from my testing there is just no benefit for how I use my computer for gaming.
I know your into computers and you know your stuff, I just do not think it is a rare thing that people can run 1933Mhz FCLK.I may be wrong on that because of my small sample size but I am also sure I did not have extreme luck with good CPU's that can run 1933Mhz FCLK.


----------



## gupsterg

gerardfraser said:


> Testing was just the regular stuff,mem test for awhile to make sure no errors ,since I have owned some 2x3600X and 3800X and know how the ram works for me.
> I could always run 1933Mhz FCLK ,I just never did run at 1933Mhz FCLK because from my testing there is just no benefit for how I use my computer for gaming.
> I know your into computers and you know your stuff, I just do not think it is a rare thing that people can run 1933Mhz FCLK.I may be wrong on that because of my small sample size but I am also sure I did not have extreme luck with good CPU's that can run 1933Mhz FCLK.


Thanks for share, +rep :thumb. .

1933MHz does seem rare to me from all the threads I view. Then also from my experience with CPUs I've had.

Perhaps mobo does have an effect as well. There was a post by a member in the Crosshair VIII thread where he had a few boards (all C8x) and when he took a combo of CPU & RAM which did 1900MHz on one board and moved it to another it didn't.

I had something similar with Threadripper setup. I moved CPU & RAM from ZE to ZEA. I had to do a tweak which was not needed on ZE, to attain same RAM MHz on ZEA.


----------



## gerardfraser

gupsterg said:


> Thanks for share, +rep :thumb. .
> 
> 1933MHz does seem rare to me from all the threads I view. Then also from my experience with CPUs I've had.
> 
> Perhaps mobo does have an effect as well. There was a post by a member in the Crosshair VIII thread where he had a few boards (all C8x) and when he took a combo of CPU & RAM which did 1900MHz on one board and moved it to another it didn't.
> 
> I had something similar with Threadripper setup. I moved CPU & RAM from ZE to ZEA. I had to do a tweak which was not needed on ZE, to attain same RAM MHz on ZEA.


You know what it may just be motherboard that is the factor of running certain settings . Do I know for sure ,no I do not I,I can only relay my experience.F that is a lot of commas.Still I stand by Ryzen tuned timings is better than FCLK clocking for normal use.


----------



## gupsterg

Thanks again for share of your testing  .

Techspot/HUB did some testing with a RTX 2080 Ti. You'll note in some games 3000MHz [Manual] matching/closing in on 3800MHz [CL16], 3800MHz [Manual] takes the top spot. They used 3 differing modules.



> We ran the T-Force Dark DDR4-3000 memory in its out of the box configuration with the XMP profile loaded and nothing else altered. Then we manually tuned all timings for an optimal Samsung S-die configuration at 3000 MT/s. The G.Skill FlareX memory was tested in its out of the box spec with XMP loaded and then also lowered the memory speed to 3000 MT/s, so we have a CL14 and CL16 comparison between the FlareX and T-Force memory. Finally, the TridentZ Neo also in the out of the box spec at 3600 MT/s, a 3800 MT/s overclocked configuration using the XMP timings, and then a max OC configuration at 3800 MT/s with manual timings.


From Techspot's review and say what we know of other RAM ICs. I think it's also clear that you may gain the MHz on say another RAM IC, but you may not see the full benefits until timings are tightened and then it seems Samsung B die tightens the most.

The other factor is what resolution you use IMO. Techspot's testing was all at 1080P, perhaps if it had 1440P results, we'd see that for a gamer at that resolution there may be less justification to vie for higher RAM MHz, etc, etc.

I hope by my post it is clear I detract no value from your shares and in a way echo your share. To see the gains from FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK several factors must be considered.


----------



## Nighthog

@olegdjus & @gerardfraser

Great result on getting 1933FLCK to work on your end. I've only seen you two get that working now. It's really rare I can gather!

I've been tinkering on and off a little but not gotten my Micron Rev.E to improve that much.

I've gotten 4333Mhz 4x8GB to work error free but it has cold-boot issues. A major hassle to get it to work/train from cold. Horrible timings etc and performance was basically equal and worse then the less hassles 4266Mhz I've been using for a while.

I got my RAM cooling installed and I've tried 1933 but no luck with that but I managed to squeeze 3800 CL13, 23, 17, 17, 30, 67... 590 1T Geardown:disabled. 1.680V, CL14 only needs ~1.600V.

I've found rev.E don't scale well with voltage... Well they do. But voltage only improves you chances of lowering tCL. No other timings scale to voltage increases. It might allow you to push higher speeds but the other timings have to increase with the speed.
A little disappointing anyway.


----------



## gerardfraser

gupsterg said:


> Thanks again for share of your testing  .
> 
> Techspot/HUB did some testing with a RTX 2080 Ti. You'll note in some games 3000MHz [Manual] matching/closing in on 3800MHz [CL16], 3800MHz [Manual] takes the top spot. They used 3 differing modules.
> 
> 
> 
> From Techspot's review and say what we know of other RAM ICs. I think it's also clear that you may gain the MHz on say another RAM IC, but you may not see the full benefits until timings are tightened and then it seems Samsung B die tightens the most.
> 
> The other factor is what resolution you use IMO. Techspot's testing was all at 1080P, perhaps if it had 1440P results, we'd see that for a gamer at that resolution there may be less justification to vie for higher RAM MHz, etc, etc.
> 
> I hope by my post it is clear I detract no value from your shares and in a way echo your share. To see the gains from FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK several factors must be considered.


I agree there are several factors to be considered to see the gains from FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK. I just do not think the gains are as great as people think they are. People are entitled to there opinion and I am in no way trying to influence people but just sharing stuff.

Added 1920x1080 with the video above and it is margin of error stuff in these games as you can get 5FPS-10FPS difference between runs.Just my opinion.




 @Nighthog
It is certainly nothing I did to be able to hit 1933MHz on FCLK like gupsterg said , a few factors are involved.It is also not important to hit the 1933Mhz FCLk but can just be fun trying .I just happened to be able to hit the clock on more than one AMD Ryzen.


----------



## gupsterg

gerardfraser said:


> I agree there are several factors to be considered to see the gains from FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK. I just do not think the gains are as great as people think they are. People are entitled to there opinion and I am in no way trying to influence people but just sharing stuff.
> 
> Added 1920x1080 with the video above and it is margin of error stuff in these games as you can get 5FPS-10FPS difference between runs.Just my opinion.
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zt-ui15zAZ8&t=0s


Thanks for the share of testing data, been interesting to see for sure :thumb: .


----------



## Nighthog

gerardfraser said:


> @Nighthog
> It is certainly nothing I did to be able to hit 1933MHz on FCLK like gupsterg said , a few factors are involved.It is also not important to hit the 1933Mhz FCLk but can just be fun trying .I just happened to be able to hit the clock on more than one AMD Ryzen.


Was there anything specific you had to do it to be able to run 1933FCLK? Or was it down to particular CPU & motherboards that could do it only?


----------



## gerardfraser

Nighthog said:


> Was there anything specific you had to do it to be able to run 1933FCLK? Or was it down to particular CPU & motherboards that could do it only?


No it just worked on 3600X and 3800X. I have not done anything special .
I have one of the cheapest motherboards - MSI X470 - Gaming Plus you can buy.
The motherboard has worked great from 2600X-3800X over every BIOS.I can not say for sure what exactly lets my AMD Ryzen 3xxx CPU run at 1933Mhz FCLK


----------



## Schmuckley

Why does elmor look like Uncle Fester and Uncle Fester doesn't?

Things that make you go hmm..

Thanks for the great info!


----------



## elmor

Schmuckley said:


> Why does elmor look like Uncle Fester and Uncle Fester doesn't?
> 
> Things that make you go hmm..
> 
> Thanks for the great info!


Haha what

Haven't seen Fester in a long time


----------



## mongoled

Can people post what their CPU 1P8 otherwise known as CPU PLL auto voltage is ?

Mine defaults to 1.8v, ive found reducing this to 1.75v improves stability at 3800/1900 mhz.

Keep returning on getting 3800/1900 mhz stable and 1.75v so far is showing alot of promise.

My sure fire way to check stability without having to run hours of benchmarks is to fire up winamp, load a AAC+ stream, than start TM5.

If the sound starts getting crackly than infinity fabric is not going to be 100% stable.

Keep finding myself returning to this as the throughput numbers at 3800/1900 15-15-15-28-44-288 look so much nicer than at 3733/1866 14-15-14-26-42-266

 

But when I can use BCLK 100.625 at 3733/1866 (3760/1880) than the CPU performance improvement outweighs the gains from being at 3800/1900 with 100 BCLK.

So hoping to be able to get IF over 1900 with stability to have the best of both worlds



** EDIT **
scrub that off, ran a TM5 26 pass, no issue.

Rebooted then tried to run TM5 again, PC randomly reboots

Back to BCLK 100.625 at 3733/1866 (3760/1880) 14-15-14-26-42-266 ......... ......... .........


----------



## rares495

So, from what I've read so far, one's best bet would be getting a 4000/4400 CL19 B-die kit and trying to scale it down to 3800 CL14/15/16 + 1900 FCLK, right? And if 1900 fails, go down to 3733/3600.


----------



## Streetdragon

or just buy 3200 cl14 or 3600 cl16 and tune that up


----------



## gupsterg

Just wanted to share this ZIP, order files by time, ~49hrs back to back mixed testing of [email protected]

I have owned Zen/Zen+/Zen2, on AM4 & sTR4, used several kits of G.Skill, all Samsung B die, bins 3200C14, 3600C15, 4000C18. None of those have given me the OC buzz that the Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 2x16GB kit (BLS2K16G4D32AESB) have. Main reason being is for ~£100 I got 32GB of DDR4 with nice OC headroom and not lacking in performance vs Samsung B die.

Phenomenal value for sure.


----------



## Streetdragon

Samsung B-Die are harder to get the IF to 1900. More stress on it or something like that


----------



## gupsterg

Streetdragon said:


> Samsung B-Die are harder to get the IF to 1900. More stress on it or something like that


I think it's "snake oil", after having had both and used with same FW/HW, etc.

Currently the R5 3600 & R9 3900X I have, regardless of RAM IC in use, both top out same FCLK/UCLK/MEMCLK. Even if I say set 1900MHz and bump BCLK per 0.2MHz step the C7H allows.


----------



## rares495

Streetdragon said:


> or just buy 3200 cl14 or 3600 cl16 and tune that up


Right, but it should be much easier to go down, no?


----------



## Streetdragon

Easier.... hard to say. The higher stuff will be better clockers, but is it worth the extra cost for you?
With more time and mybe a bit more vdimm you can reach the same clocks/timings

And with my 3900x i CANT get 3800/1900 stable with 4x8gig b-die 3600cl16 stable. from time to time it boots up, but crashes or frezze. MAYBE with 1.2v SOC and vddg at 1.15v, but dont wanna go so high for a bit more performence. dont wanna **** it


----------



## Awsan

Hello everyone I am trying to lower the latency as much as possible right now.

These are the timings I am on right now, and its really overwhelming to get every small detail perfectly for the mobo to even boot, So for the experts out there i am now sitting on (66.4) and want to get as close to 60 as possible what do you think I should start tightening first.

Thanks


----------



## nick name

Hi all. I just got a 3900X so please excuse my ignorance as I didn't keep up with this thread after it was created. 

I'm running 3800MHz/1900MHz and the only voltage I set was DRAM and SOC. Leaving the rest on Auto I assumed would produce predictable results as I understood VDDG to be a derived from SOC. However Ryzen Master shows much higher voltage than I expected. Is an explanation available? Is concern warranted? Instruction welcomed.


----------



## rares495

nick name said:


> Hi all. I just got a 3900X so please excuse my ignorance as I didn't keep up with this thread after it was created.
> 
> I'm running 3800MHz/1900MHz and the only voltage I set was DRAM and SOC. Leaving the rest on Auto I assumed would produce predictable results as I understood VDDG to be a derived from SOC. However Ryzen Master shows much higher voltage than I expected. Is an explanation available? Is concern warranted? Instruction welcomed.


Could you tell me where to download the "Zen2 Timing Checker"?


----------



## nick name

rares495 said:


> Could you tell me where to download the "Zen2 Timing Checker"?


I got it from here:
https://www.computerbase.de/forum/threads/amd-ryzen-ram-oc-community.1829356/page-893#post-23529759

Though I saw another version with a GUI. So if you learn where to get that one gimme a shout.


----------



## gupsterg

nick name said:


> Though I saw another version with a GUI. So if you learn where to get that one gimme a shout.


See this thread.


----------



## nick name

gupsterg said:


> See this thread.


Sweeeet. Thank you, sir.


----------



## Mokona512

Can't seem to find much info on dual rank 16GB per module kits. I am currently interested in the G.Skill F4-3600C16D-32GTZN (32GB kit, 16-16-16-36) https://www.gskill.com/specification/165/326/1562839473/F4-3600C16D-32GTZN-Specification. There does not seem to be much info available but some user reviews have speculated that it may be B-die.

What I am most interested in before making a purchase, getting some ballpark understanding if it is used with the R9 3900x and infinity fabric set to 1800MHz, and DRAM kept at the 3600 speeds, but attempting to tighten timings (increasing voltages as needed and where safe to do so).


----------



## Hale59

Mokona512 said:


> Can't seem to find much info on dual rank 16GB per module kits. I am currently interested in the G.Skill F4-3600C16D-32GTZN (32GB kit, 16-16-16-36) https://www.gskill.com/specification/165/326/1562839473/F4-3600C16D-32GTZN-Specification. There does not seem to be much info available but some user reviews have speculated that it may be B-die.
> 
> What I am most interested in before making a purchase, getting some ballpark understanding if it is used with the R9 3900x and infinity fabric set to 1800MHz, and DRAM kept at the 3600 speeds, but attempting to tighten timings (increasing voltages as needed and where safe to do so).


1.5v

@KedarWolf


----------



## Spectre73

The selectzed kit has to be b-die because of the timings. You can be quite sure about this. The rest of the question I do not understand. After you bought the kit, you should extract the profile with taiphoon burner and import it in the ryzen timing checker to to see how far you can go at any given speed.
There are probably profiles of this kit online that you can search for to get an impression of the capabilities and play with them in dram calc.


----------



## Spectre73

Hale59 said:


> 1.5v
> 
> @KedarWolf


Your performance numbers are awesome. I would not be comfortable with the voltage, even though it is said that 1.5 should be safe.
What stability test did you run? I can not imagine 100% stability under these settings.....


----------



## Hale59

Spectre73 said:


> Your performance numbers are awesome. I would not be comfortable with the voltage, even though it is said that 1.5 should be safe.
> What stability test did you run? I can not imagine 100% stability under these settings.....


1.5v is safe. And you can apply more v. Depends how you cool them.
Those results are @KedarWolf's.

I have the same kit, but with a 3600 and my IMC can't run more than 3733.


----------



## Mokona512

Got some bad luck, purchased the kit from newegg, arrived in one day, but 1 of the sticks was bad, and would fail to post at anything near XMP. though the other stick was fine.
Didn't have access to much hardware to test it on, but 1 stick was confirmed bad on a Asus ROG Strix X570-E (has the memory in the QVL), as well as an old Gigabyte Z170 Gaming 6 (too old to have such a kit in the QVL).

I will be sending it back to newegg, and I will try to get a replacement as it is b-die, and would love to get a stable pair that I can then hopefully have some luck on tightening timings on.

While the box that it came in had a few dents, the memory sticks did not have any visible damage. Newegg mails the RAM out in a padded envelope instead of a larger box.


----------



## rastaviper

Mokona512 said:


> Got some bad luck, purchased the kit from newegg, arrived in one day, but 1 of the sticks was bad, and would fail to post at anything near XMP. though the other stick was fine.
> 
> Didn't have access to much hardware to test it on, but 1 stick was confirmed bad on a Asus ROG Strix X570-E (has the memory in the QVL), as well as an old Gigabyte Z170 Gaming 6 (too old to have such a kit in the QVL).
> 
> 
> 
> I will be sending it back to newegg, and I will try to get a replacement as it is b-die, and would love to get a stable pair that I can then hopefully have some luck on tightening timings on.
> 
> 
> 
> While the box that it came in had a few dents, the memory sticks did not have any visible damage. Newegg mails the RAM out in a padded envelope instead of a larger box.


The QVL doesn't mean anything.
Many good ram kits are not included there.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6003 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mokona512

While that is the case, it does make it more tricky to fully troubleshoot, though in my case, 1 stick was bad enough that it was clear that it was faulty.

In a worst case scenario, if I end up getting errors while it is just at the XMP profiles and increasing voltages to the SOC and other aspects for stability do not help, then it will be hard or impossible for me to accurately narrow things down, thus I will have to hope I don't get 2 bad kits in a row.


----------



## mongoled

Anybody experienced regression with the new AGESA ComboAm4PI 1.0.0.6 BIOS that MSI released ?

I am no longer TM5 stable when testing 1900 mhz fclk.

Previous BIOS was rock stable at 1900 mhz.

Cheers


----------



## gerardfraser

mongoled said:


> Anybody experienced regression with the new AGESA ComboAm4PI 1.0.0.6 BIOS that MSI released ?
> 
> I am no longer TM5 stable when testing 1900 mhz fclk.
> 
> Previous BIOS was rock stable at 1900 mhz.
> 
> Cheers



No regression here and I even changed my RAM from DDR4 4000Mhz 16GB to DDR4 3600Mhz 32GB and still can run 1933Mhz FCLK without errors . Also tested DDR4 3600Mhz @3733Mhz/3800Mhz .

Also forgot Tested my DDR4 4133Mhz without problems also in mem test. DDR4 4133Mhz could run any speed but with 4 sticks of 4133Mhz was limited to DDR4 3600Mhz speed,motherboard limit with four dimms on this board
MSI X470 Gaming Plus with 3800X

EDITOH your talking about Ram but I forgot to add a stupid Cinebench20 test with my new DDR4 3600Mhz Ram

My 3800X is getting Jealous of the New 3800XT but it is still fighting strong with a little BCLK 
Score
Single 537
Multi 5333

Rant


Spoiler



Oh the nuts with the CPU voltage is too high ,just FO and learn how the CPU works.Also scores are lower when recording in real time and not using processor affinity to real time to get a higher score and then tell me about how your 3800X got a better score when I know the real truth.
NON OF THE RANT IS DIRECTED AT YOU mongoled,it is just for the nuts out there.


----------



## mongoled

gerardfraser said:


> No regression here and I even changed my RAM from DDR4 4000Mhz 16GB to DDR4 3600Mhz 32GB and still can run 1933Mhz FCLK without errors . Also tested DDR4 3600Mhz @3733Mhz/3800Mhz .
> 
> Also forgot Tested my DDR4 4133Mhz without problems also in mem test. DDR4 4133Mhz could run any speed but with 4 sticks of 4133Mhz was limited to DDR4 3600Mhz speed,motherboard limit with four dimms on this board
> MSI X470 Gaming Plus with 3800X
> 
> EDITOH your talking about Ram but I forgot to add a stupid Cinebench20 test with my new DDR4 3600Mhz Ram
> 
> My 3800X is getting Jealous of the New 3800XT but it is still fighting strong with a little BCLK
> Score
> Single 537
> Multi 5333
> 
> Rant
> 
> 
> Spoiler
> 
> 
> 
> Oh the nuts with the CPU voltage is too high ,just FO and learn how the CPU works.Also scores are lower when recording in real time and not using processor affinity to real time to get a higher score and then tell me about how your 3800X got a better score when I know the real truth.
> NON OF THE RANT IS DIRECTED AT YOU mongoled,it is just for the nuts out there.
> 
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP4jJ9IImNo


The rant

 

I understand exactly where you are coming from, lol

So some new information and thanks for relaying your experiences.

I am having to retest again as settings that were "known" to work at different fclk are no longer "valid" with this new BIOS for my X370.

Managed to determine that VDDP voltage now needs to be alot lower than previous agesa version otherwise TM5 errors with codes that I have rarely seen and with no specific "pattern".

Before 3800/1900 required [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected]

Dropping VDDP to 0.805 - 0.850 (still testing) stops almost all of those weird and wonderous error codes in TM5.

Still need to play with vSOC as this probably needs further tweaking along with VDDG CCD/IOD.

And back to your rant, 

Currently running/testing [email protected], this gives me 3800/1900, previous fully tested stable BCLK was 106.725 which gave me 3766/1888.

Attempting to balance alot of things with TM5 running all core loads between 4490-4520 mhz while finding the right balance of voltages and LLC to keep everything nice and stable while at the same time maintaining a clean 3800/1900 mclk/fclk combo while at the same time using [email protected]

 

Performance is amazing for this 3600 with the combination described above.

Oh and one small cavet, I have to reduce my PCIe to Gen2 to be able to get to OS with such high BCLK otherwise the VGA goes all wonky

 

I actually get better 3D performance with my hardware using Gen2 rathar than Gen3 even when not using BCLK, so really no loss.

Have yet to experience any anomolies with my nVme/SATA/USB device so far

:thumb:


----------



## gerardfraser

Some good info there and thanks for the tip using Gen2 rathar than Gen3,I am going to test this out.My cheap Motherboard can not handle high BCLK.


----------



## mongoled

gerardfraser said:


> Some good info there and thanks for the tip using Gen2 rathar than Gen3,I am going to test this out.My cheap Motherboard can not handle high BCLK.


Did you get to do some testing ?


----------



## rent0n

I know this is a X370/X470/X570 thread, but I didn't find a dedicated one for the B Series chipsets, so I'm going to ask here: has anyone had any luck pushing Samsung B-Dies to 3800MHz CL12 on a B450 board? I have a F4-3600C16D-16GVK Kit, which was bought last month. According to Thaiphoon each module has an A1 10-layer PCB, but I'm pretty sure it's an A2 layout, so that reading should be wrong. Anyways, I am running a Ryzen 5 3600, which can go as high as 4.6-4.7GHz on air for benchmarking and so far the memory sticks have been running at 3800MHz (1900MHz FCLK) 14-14-14-28-1T-42-260, GDM off. I haven't had any luck booting at CL12 even with GDM enabled, so I'm thinking either the bin of the kit is not that good, or the mainboard is just bad at memory overclocking, it's only a MSI B450 Tomahawk MAX. If anyone has any experience or suggestions, I would be glad to hear them. Cheers.


P.S.: I am about to try the latest BIOS update with the AGESA 1.0.0.6 tonight, gonna report if that makes any difference.


----------



## Massive

rent0n said:


> I know this is a X370/X470/X570 thread, but I didn't find a dedicated one for the B Series chipsets, so I'm going to ask here: has anyone had any luck pushing Samsung B-Dies to 3800MHz CL12 on a B450 board? I have a F4-3600C16D-16GVK Kit, which was bought last month. According to Thaiphoon each module has an A1 10-layer PCB, but I'm pretty sure it's an A2 layout, so that reading should be wrong. Anyways, I am running a Ryzen 5 3600, which can go as high as 4.6-4.7GHz on air for benchmarking and so far the memory sticks have been running at 3800MHz (1900MHz FCLK) 14-14-14-28-1T-42-260, GDM off. I haven't had any luck booting at CL12 even with GDM enabled, so I'm thinking either the bin of the kit is not that good, or the mainboard is just bad at memory overclocking, it's only a MSI B450 Tomahawk MAX. If anyone has any experience or suggestions, I would be glad to hear them. Cheers.
> 
> 
> P.S.: I am about to try the latest BIOS update with the AGESA 1.0.0.6 tonight, gonna report if that makes any difference.


Wow...can you tell me your specific setting on timing and voltage on yours?

I find it strange on mine, I have F4-3600C16D-32GTZN and MSI B550 Tomahawk on Ryzen [email protected]@1.275v
I have be able to boot and benchmark with IF:MCLK 1:1 @1900Mhz with CL14-14-14-36-1T GDM on @1.5v, however its not past the memtest as it resulted in error. Than I follow all instructions from Ryzen DRAM Calculactor v1.7.3 in safe and fast setting, and it worsen the error in memtest.

In my testing, upping SoC voltage give negative result on memtest. If I run with all the timing stated in DRAM calculator v1.7.3 and it provide more error in memtest even with DRAM voltage @1.55v. Recently I lowering the timing to CL16-16-16-32-48-1T-GDM on-358, lowering the SoC to only 1.05v, change the setting to AMD overclock in SoC voltage, change the DRAM voltage to only 1.43v, and all the rest of timing to voltage to AUTO, and it PASSED the memtest over 100%. (other setting on RAM are, BGS Disable are Powerdown Disable)

So, it might be in case of B550 or only in my case of RAM and mobo, rising the voltage sometimes not beneficial in RAM overclocking. 

I attached my stable setting against safe timing recommended by DRAM Ryzen Calculator v1.7.3 which is not stable.

And since I can boot and bench at 3800Mhz CL14 but not stable in memtest (I have tried 14-15 and 14-16 as well), I am very curious in case any of you with the same ram and mobo can push it to 3800Mhz at CL14 stable?


----------



## mongoled

Massive said:


> Wow...can you tell me your specific setting on timing and voltage on yours?
> 
> I find it strange on mine, I have F4-3600C16D-32GTZN and MSI B550 Tomahawk on Ryzen [email protected]@1.275v
> I have be able to boot and benchmark with IF:MCLK 1:1 @1900Mhz with CL14-14-14-36-1T GDM on @1.5v, however its not past the memtest as it resulted in error. Than I follow all instructions from Ryzen DRAM Calculactor v1.7.3 in safe and fast setting, and it worsen the error in memtest.
> 
> In my testing, upping SoC voltage give negative result on memtest. If I run with all the timing stated in DRAM calculator v1.7.3 and it provide more error in memtest even with DRAM voltage @1.55v. Recently I lowering the timing to CL16-16-16-32-48-1T-GDM on-358, lowering the SoC to only 1.05v, change the setting to AMD overclock in SoC voltage, change the DRAM voltage to only 1.43v, and all the rest of timing to voltage to AUTO, and it PASSED the memtest over 100%. (other setting on RAM are, BGS Disable are Powerdown Disable)
> 
> So, it might be in case of B550 or only in my case of RAM and mobo, rising the voltage sometimes not beneficial in RAM overclocking.
> 
> I attached my stable setting against safe timing recommended by DRAM Ryzen Calculator v1.7.3 which is not stable.
> 
> And since I can boot and bench at 3800Mhz CL14 but not stable in memtest (I have tried 14-15 and 14-16 as well), I am very curious in case any of you with the same ram and mobo can push it to 3800Mhz at CL14 stable?


CL14 needs more voltage than 1.5v and fan on dimms.


----------



## rares495

rent0n said:


> I know this is a X370/X470/X570 thread, but I didn't find a dedicated one for the B Series chipsets, so I'm going to ask here: has anyone had any luck pushing Samsung B-Dies to 3800MHz CL12 on a B450 board? I have a F4-3600C16D-16GVK Kit, which was bought last month. According to Thaiphoon each module has an A1 10-layer PCB, but I'm pretty sure it's an A2 layout, so that reading should be wrong. Anyways, I am running a Ryzen 5 3600, which can go as high as 4.6-4.7GHz on air for benchmarking and so far the memory sticks have been running at 3800MHz (1900MHz FCLK) 14-14-14-28-1T-42-260, GDM off. I haven't had any luck booting at CL12 even with GDM enabled, so I'm thinking either the bin of the kit is not that good, or the mainboard is just bad at memory overclocking, it's only a MSI B450 Tomahawk MAX. If anyone has any experience or suggestions, I would be glad to hear them. Cheers.
> 
> 
> P.S.: I am about to try the latest BIOS update with the AGESA 1.0.0.6 tonight, gonna report if that makes any difference.



3800 CL12 ain't happening without at least 1.8V DRAM Voltage which isn't really ideal for daily use. It's almost XOC stuff. Flat 14s at 3800 is already great stuff if it's actually stable.


----------



## jamie1073

I run CL14 and have my mem V set at 1.48V in the BIOS which seems to bring it to 1.51 when in Windows according the HWInfo62.


----------



## mongoled

jamie1073 said:


> I run CL14 and have my mem V set at 1.48V in the BIOS which seems to bring it to 1.51 when in Windows according the HWInfo62.


Did you stress test that with 25 cycles of TM5 and than a couple of hours of Y-Cruncher with all tests enabled ??

As its very easy to complete membench easy and AIDA....


----------



## jamie1073

mongoled said:


> Did you stress test that with 25 cycles of TM5 and than a couple of hours of Y-Cruncher with all tests enabled ??
> 
> As its very easy to complete membench easy and AIDA....





Yes I did and it was fine. TM5 that is not Y-Cruncher.


----------



## mongoled

jamie1073 said:


> Yes I did and it was fine. TM5 that is not Y-Cruncher.


OK, TM5 is good, hope you did some large FFT testing also which is what the Y-Cruncher suite does as TM5 is not the be all and end all of stability, many have been TM5 25 cycle stable, but then they find they have instabilities because they didnt do any FFT testing...


----------



## KedarWolf

jamie1073 said:


> Yes I did and it was fine. TM5 that is not Y-Cruncher.


Y-Cruncher is a terrible idea on 3000 series CPUs. Open HWInfo when it's running. Second test and beyond with my BIOS voltage at 1.2625v, 1.248v VR VOUT In HWInfo I'm getting 90c temps while running it with an Optimus Foundation block, 1 360 rad, CPU only on it and cool ambient temps. 

If I run my 24/7 CCX overclock voltages it hits 95C. 

I never like to go above 80c while stress testing.

Better to use Prime95 1344 FFTs In Place with a 15 minute time interval. Temps stay around 70C and it if passes that overnight you can be sure your CPU is stable with TM5 1usmus_v3 passing 25 rounds done separately.


----------



## mongoled

KedarWolf said:


> Y-Cruncher is a terrible idea on 3000 series CPUs. Open HWInfo when it's running. Second test and beyond with my BIOS voltage at 1.2625v, 1.248v VR VOUT In HWInfo I'm getting 90c temps while running it with an Optimus Foundation block, 1 360 rad, CPU only on it and cool ambient temps.
> 
> If I run my 24/7 CCX overclock voltages it hits 95C.
> 
> I never like to go above 80c while stress testing.
> 
> Better to use Prime95 1344 FFTs In Place with a 15 minute time interval. Temps stay around 70C and it if passes that overnight you can be sure your CPU is stable with TM5 1usmus_v3 passing 25 rounds done separately.


So you are cheating your way to stability


----------



## jamie1073

mongoled said:


> OK, TM5 is good, hope you did some large FFT testing also which is what the Y-Cruncher suite does as TM5 is not the be all and end all of stability, many have been TM5 25 cycle stable, but then they find they have instabilities because they didnt do any FFT testing...



I am also happy that it never crashes when using it. I do also have a fan over the RAM to keep it cooler as it was warmer than I liked with no fan, I like to keep in in the 30's during normal use and gaming. Running the tests it hit the mid 40's so I am all good.


----------



## KedarWolf

mongoled said:


> So you are cheating your way to stability


Open HWInfo when it's running and check your temps Test 2 and past it, it isn't good.

No way you want those temps even while stress testing.


----------



## mongoled

KedarWolf said:


> Open HWInfo when it's running and check your temps Test 2 and past it, it isn't good.
> 
> No way you want those temps even while stress testing.


It was just in jest



Yeah I am well aware of the temps,

that why I stopped using all core overclock with fixed voltage and reverted to BCLK with EDC bug



And even using PBO to do the clocking I do see such temps but thats the norm for AVX2 workloads, the CPUs are designed for that.

So I abuse it a little with the EDC bug, but im not going to be keeping the CPU for a decade and the stess test is just for several hours so I know its stable with whatever I happen to throw at it.

I prefer peace of mind with regards to stability over worrying about a little heat.


----------



## Massive

mongoled said:


> CL14 needs more voltage than 1.5v and fan on dimms.


how many volt needed, and is it save to run it daily?


----------



## mongoled

Massive said:


> how many volt needed, and is it save to run it daily?


As long as you got a fan over the dimms you can go up to 1.6v (b-die).

But most people seems to stop around 1.55v maximum.

"Safe", safe differs to who you ask



For me its "safe" up to 1.5x v


----------

