# DRAM overclock complete Noob dumb question



## pcwolf (Feb 22, 2020)

I'm in my 60s. Been networking and geeking since the 1970s. I do my research. Reread @1usmus guide about six times over.
Got Taiphoon and DRAM-calc and r/overclocking under my belt. Ready to enter values directly into UEFI bios myself, and turn off XMP

QUESTION:
Do I proceed by selecting, one by one, separate Primary timing values in order :: Reboot :: Test ?
Or, is there a full set of values (all Primary, eight or ten Secondary) I should try all at once?

More simply ... one by one, or groups of values all at once?

Any replies shining a light on my ignorance are welcome.  Thanks


----------



## sneekypeet (Feb 22, 2020)

Most motherboards will take multiple changes at once, but I have seen a few in the past not like it so much.

All you can really do is to try it both ways, primaries, then the others, or slam in the entire profile at once.

Changing it in smaller groups would allow you to see an issue along the way, where if the entire profile wont work, you have no idea why. Easier to diagnose groups of four or five than 30 or more at once.


----------



## NoJuan999 (Feb 22, 2020)

I personally ran Thaiphoon Burner to identify my Exact RAM IC's then input that info into the Ryzen DRAM Calculator.
Thaiphoon Burner (reads RAM information for use in the Calculator):
http://www.softnology.biz/files.html 

DRAM Calculator Instructions:
https://www.overclock.net/forum/27694284-post3363.html 

But, I did NOT just input the results of the DRAM calculator intop my BIOS.
I took it one step at a time.
I tried tighter primary timings (tCL, tRCDWR, tRCDRD, tRP) first, then tested for stability.
Then I tried to tighten some secondary timings (tFAW, tRAS and tRC) and tested for stability again.
Then I tried tighter tRFC, tRFC2 and tRFC4 and tested again.


----------



## Apocalypsee (Feb 22, 2020)

NoJuan999 said:


> I personally ran Thaiphoon Burner to identify my Exact RAM IC's then input that info into the Ryzen DRAM Calculator.
> 
> But, I did NOT just input the results of the DRAM calculator intop my BIOS.
> I took it one step at a time.
> ...


This is what I do too. 

Most of the improvements come from the primary timings, the other timings are there if you really wanted to squeeze every bit of improvements that you can get if you hit frequency wall, or you wanted the best at the frequency you wanted.

Also do tune voltages as well, DRAM can handle certain range of voltages so start the middle of that range and when you wanted to tighten the timings you can try to raise the voltage. Provided the RAM are adequately cooled.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 22, 2020)

First primary timings as a set then others in small groups.
Ryzen 3000 will benefit most by primary, tRFC,tRC, tRAS, tFAW.

After you find a working set, then you can fine-tune each one by one.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Feb 22, 2020)

There's no need to enter all the settings. The quick and dirty eat to good, but maybe not super tuned performance is to set CAS and tRFC as low as you can. Then tune the secondary memory timings a bit. You might have to tweak a few other things as well. I posted screenshots of my UEFI settings in a thread somewhere that had a similar question. Setting all the sub timings in a waste of time imho.


----------



## pcwolf (Feb 23, 2020)

Thanks, Swede! 

I tracked down that thread, "[RAM] DDR4 3200 Mhz speed not working"
Buildzoid's video explanation of Ryzen of mCLK - uCLK - fCLK alone was worth the search.
Your thorough explanation by page four about the relative importance of timings and voltages, along with your screenshots, were well worth two hours of my time, too.

I am learning that this overclocking requires:  1) rigorous logic, and 2) thorough documentation.  I think you are not lost! 

Man ... that Ryzen Master is a pretty handy tool, after all.

I dual boot Manjaro + Win10, and before I started on this memory stuff I only thought it was pretty eye candy.
Now that I'm tuning it in, I find myself spending more time in Windows.  Which is not a great thing, but Ryzen Master beats the snot out of rebooting into UEFI bios to test.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Feb 25, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> Thanks, Swede!
> 
> I tracked down that thread, "[RAM] DDR4 3200 Mhz speed not working"
> Buildzoid's video explanation of Ryzen of mCLK - uCLK - fCLK alone was worth the search.
> ...


Did you manage to get it all working?


----------



## pcwolf (Feb 25, 2020)

Thanks for the follow-up, Swede!

I am working my way through things, complicated by the UEFI being flaky. Hard to tell when my timings affect the boot, or when it is some kind of mismatched "Auto" setting in UEFI. I am guessing this is to be expected and all part of the process.  I won't say part of the "pleasure" of overclocking 

ASRock UEFI also has two pages with duplicated memory timing entries. When I set DRAM timings on "OC Tweaker" and check the second page under "AMD CBS" all the entries show settings as "AUTO" so that basically TRIPLES my work if I must go back and forth between the two to test if there is any difference between setting one, or the other, or both.

One truly irritating thing is that there are so many different names for the same thing.  There is no "fCLK" "mCLK" "uCLK" switch that I can find.  CPU-Z stubbornly shows my North Bridge at 950Mhz while it is booting and running well at 3800Mhz so the other two must be at 1900Mhz, I can only assume.  CAS latency shown on Aida64 is also stubbornly stuck around 74.2ns when this is a very high quality kit of b-die and I see so many lows in the 60s or less.

I have learned that after each successful setting and boot cycle, to save a User Default UEFI to use as fallback when something doesn't work. There are five slots for saving these defaults, so I am gradually building a ladder of successful changes.

So ... as I say ... to be expected.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Feb 25, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> Thanks for the follow-up, Swede!
> 
> I am working my way through things, complicated by the UEFI being flaky. Hard to tell when my timings affect the boot, or when it is some kind of mismatched "Auto" setting in UEFI. I am guessing this is to be expected and all part of the process.  I won't say part of the "pleasure" of overclocking
> 
> ...


Did you update to the latest UEFI release? It makes a huge difference on the Ryzen 3000 CPUs.

You shouldn't have to set the timings in multiple interfaces, one or the other should do.

They're not all the same thing, just do the ones that you're certain about and leave the rest on auto or normal.
Don't forget to set the infinity fabric clocks as well, as that's separate from the FSB and is not found in the memory timing settings.
950 implies that you're running the infinity fabric at a 2:1 ratio, rather than 1:1.

You should also have an option to save multiple settings, although I'm not familiar with your specific board and UEFI, but it's a fairly common feature these days.


----------



## moproblems99 (Feb 25, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> ASRock UEFI also has two pages with duplicated memory timing entries. When I set DRAM timings on "OC Tweaker" and check the second page under "AMD CBS" all the entries show settings as "AUTO" so that basically TRIPLES my work if I must go back and forth between the two to test if there is any difference between setting one, or the other, or both.



I also have the ASRock UEFI...happy, happy, joy, joy.  

I need to double check but I am pretty sure I don't do it in OC Tweaker because I found the settings better laid out in the other section.  It also seems to show correctly in other tools.

I find it interesting you are seeing 950 for controller speed when you have everything else set at 1900.  I'll need to check mine.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 25, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> One truly irritating thing is that there are so many different names for the same thing.  There is no "fCLK" "mCLK" "uCLK" switch that I can find.  *CPU-Z stubbornly shows my North Bridge at 950Mhz while it is booting and running well at 3800Mhz so the other two must be at 1900Mhz*, I can only assume.  CAS latency shown on Aida64 is also stubbornly stuck around 74.2ns when this is a very high quality kit of b-die and I see so many lows in the 60s or less.


I suspect you either run your
DRAM multi X19 with MEMCLK==UCLK (Unlikely)
or
DRAM multi X38 with MEMCLK 2:1 UCLK (I doubt you set this)
or
DRAM multi X38 with MEMCLK/UCLK in auto mode and the board run it on 2:1 ratio (probably this)

This is why you get so high latency.  UCLK is running half the MEMCLK speed. I other words the memory controller running half the DRAM speed.
You need to find the MEMCLK/UCLK mode in there and set it to MEMCLK==UCLK for them to run on same 1900MHz speed.


----------



## moproblems99 (Feb 25, 2020)

So I did a quick run and my frequencies are coming out as expected.  Granted I am x570 and you are x470 but I think we have similar UEFI.  If I had to do it again, I would probably have bought Gygabyte or....ew...MSI.

I'll post the results shortly.  I haven't purchased AIDA because, frankly, I haven't cared enough to bother.  Until I get a better GPU to push these pixels, the tweaks just don't have much impact.


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 25, 2020)

moproblems99 said:


> So I did a quick run and my frequencies are coming out as expected.  Granted I am x570 and you are x470 but I think we have similar UEFI.  If I had to do it again, I would probably have bought Gygabyte or....ew...MSI.
> 
> I'll post the results shortly.  I haven't purchased AIDA because, frankly, I haven't cared enough to bother.  Until I get a better GPU to push these pixels, the tweaks just don't have much impact.


Maybe you can tell him where to find the MEMCLK==UCLK


----------



## moproblems99 (Feb 25, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Maybe you can tell him where to find the MEMCLK==UCLK



As far as I know, there isn't.  From what I can tell, setting XMP is what sets the uclk but that is only a guess from reading others.  It seems that setting XMP sets both memclk and uclk except controlling fclk and memclk is possible independently where uclk does not appear possible.  That said, I have not spent a ton of time with this as I have been super lazy and actually playing games.

And for you Zach, have experimented with dropping LLC to 4 or 5 yet?


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 25, 2020)

moproblems99 said:


> As far as I know, there isn't.


Not even in yours? an X570 board?



moproblems99 said:


> And for you Zach, have experimented with dropping LLC to 4 or 5 yet?


For what matter are we talking about here?


----------



## Schmuckley (Feb 25, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> I'm in my 60s. Been networking and geeking since the 1970s. I do my research. Reread @1usmus guide about six times over.
> Got Taiphoon and DRAM-calc and r/overclocking under my belt. Ready to enter values directly into UEFI bios myself, and turn off XMP
> 
> QUESTION:
> ...



*How to lower ram timings: Lower the 4 settings cL,trcd,trp,tras) 1 setting at a time.one notch at a time .lower it..reboot..see if post..lower 1 more..reboot..etc..until you don't POST;then go back to the last one that worked..this will put you in the ballpark.*

I am pre-DRAM calc, and that saved text is from 2013. It is the method.
Down on the bottom there's also TCKE which I think Splave taught about?
Lowering TCKE can help you tighten all tertiary timings, but do primaries 1st.


----------



## pcwolf (Feb 25, 2020)

Thanks Mo, Zach! Great information I can put to use.

I found great insight with your comment about ranked-order possibility.  I believe you are correct, and will post here my results.

Mo ... there is a keyseller on eBay who offers apparently legitimate keys to Aida64.  Less than ten dollars U.S. Instant email of key to you.


----------



## Schmuckley (Feb 25, 2020)

Here's my current timings on this crap RAM.








						AMD Ryzen 7 2700X @ 4317.58 MHz - CPU-Z VALIDATOR
					

[dvs670] Validated Dump by Schmuckley (2020-02-26 00:09:54) - MB: Asus ROG CROSSHAIR VII HERO - RAM: 32768 MB




					valid.x86.fr
				




2800 Mhz.

I did that myself, no DRAM calc or nuthin'.


----------



## pcwolf (Feb 25, 2020)

Schmuckley said:


> Here's my current timings on this crap RAM.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I know you are a Pioneer. I can tell by the arrows in your back!


----------



## Schmuckley (Feb 25, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> I know you are a Pioneer. I can tell by the arrows in your back!


I used to be an adventurer, until I took an arrow to the knee.
Seriously though, there's been times..and I'm out there with unknown hardware and trying to make something happen, and I did!

No guides, nobody to ask for advice. Wing it! (The less that happens the better)
I came through by sheer luck!

Can't even ask ask Flanker..You gotta feel it out!


----------



## moproblems99 (Feb 25, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> Mo ... there is a keyseller on eBay who offers apparently legitimate keys to Aida64. Less than ten dollars U.S. Instant email of key to you.



While appreciated, if I am going to go keyseller route, I'll go with the ones that took the time to setup a website.  Ebay is already sketchy as ....


----------



## pcwolf (Feb 26, 2020)

moproblems99 said:


> While appreciated, if I am going to go keyseller route, I'll go with the ones that took the time to setup a website.  Ebay is already sketchy as ....


I understand
eBay


----------



## Schmuckley (Feb 26, 2020)

NoJuan999 said:


> I personally ran Thaiphoon Burner to identify my Exact RAM IC's then input that info into the Ryzen DRAM Calculator.
> Thaiphoon Burner (reads RAM information for use in the Calculator):
> http://www.softnology.biz/files.html
> 
> ...


Next time tighten TCKE 1st, then do the secondaries. I bet you like it!


----------



## pcwolf (Feb 26, 2020)

"One truly irritating thing is that* there are so many different names for the same thing. *There is no "fCLK" "mCLK" "uCLK" switch that I can find.*"* -- Me

"*DRAM multi X38 with MEMCLK/UCLK *in auto mode and the board run it on 2:1 ratio (probably this)
You need to find the MEMCLK/UCLK mode in there and set it to MEMCLK==UCLK for them to run on same 1900MHz speed." --Zach_01

"*UCLK DIV1 MODE*
If UclkDiv1Mode==1, UCLK==MEMCLK
If UclkDiv1Mode==0, UCLK==MEMCLK/2"  --AMD CBS/NorthBridge/XFR

Not ONLY do they have three names for the same thing, they also have the UPPER and lower case all effed up.  
SHEESH!


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 26, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> "One truly irritating thing is that* there are so many different names for the same thing. *There is no "fCLK" "mCLK" "uCLK" switch that I can find.*"* -- Me
> 
> "*DRAM multi X38 with MEMCLK/UCLK *in auto mode and the board run it on 2:1 ratio (probably this)
> You need to find the MEMCLK/UCLK mode in there and set it to MEMCLK==UCLK for them to run on same 1900MHz speed." --Zach_01
> ...


Allthough all vendors have in their BIOS/UEFI multiple names and sections for same things, I hear that AsRock BIOSs are kind of messy and clanky more than others.
But you found it...


----------



## moproblems99 (Feb 26, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Allthough all vendors have in their BIOS/UEFI multiple names and sections for same things, I hear that AsRock BIOSs are kind of messy and clanky more than others.
> But you found it...



I didn't think their UEFI could be as bad as it is.


----------



## NoJuan999 (Feb 26, 2020)

Schmuckley said:


> Next time tighten TCKE 1st, then do the secondaries. I bet you like it!


I did, I just forgot to list it.
I have tCKE set at 1.


----------



## pcwolf (Feb 29, 2020)

Well, well, well ... into the battle again, tonight.  Entered a few cautious, minor changes in Ryzen Master, hit the "Apply and Test" button ... sit through yet ANOTHER reboot cycle.
BOOM!  Wha?

At DRAM 3600Mhz, didn't matter what numbers I entered, or none at all, it just flat ran MEMCLK=UCLK=FCLK. Like the DIMMS were just happy to be there.

3800Mhz?  Uh-uh, no way. 3733Mhz?  Ha-hah-ha-haha. Nope. Not gonna give you any North Bridge past 950Mhz 1::2
In my own particular back-asswards way, I was entering the DRAM Calc timings in over and over, never hit the legendary 1::1::1 sweet spot.

My partial success method tonight:  set laughably flat and loose timings, then try varying the *voltages* to the DRAM.
Voltage first; timing later. Back to the original reason for my original post:  I don't know what I am doing.

Big thanks to all, especially Zach and The Swede. You guys know your stuff! 
Onward to 3800, next!


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 29, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> Well, well, well ... into the battle again, tonight.  Entered a few cautious, minor changes in Ryzen Master, hit the "Apply and Test" button ... sit through yet ANOTHER reboot cycle.
> BOOM!  Wha?
> 
> At DRAM 3600Mhz, didn't matter what numbers I entered, or none at all, it just flat ran MEMCLK=UCLK=FCLK. Like the DIMMS were just happy to be there.
> ...


You could tweak timings a little to bring that high latency down to 60ies...
Is your RAM a 3200 XMP rated?
For changing speeds and timings you should have XMP disabled from BIOS.


----------



## pcwolf (Feb 29, 2020)

1.) Memory is Team Group 4x8Gb 4133Mhz rated 93% by DRAM Calc. Single rank.
2.) All week long stuck at 933/950 on uCLK. Used XMP to set the system to the DRAM defaults, then removed it.
3.) I think it was the tweak *down *on VDDCR SoC voltage from 1.2 to 1.125 that locked in coupled mode. Auto set VDDG and VDDP to 1.09v

Next step:  Walk down the primary timings as you suggest. When it won't boot, walk up one step.
Then research your posts again to find the little tweaks down into the secondaries you have suggested.

By the way ... raw memory read and write speeds are both MUCH higher on Aida64 running the RAM at 4133 and uncoupled 2:1.
So, I am basically just chasing latency for bragging rights


----------



## lorry (Feb 29, 2020)

MB manufacturers seem to take delight in renaming things, why I have no idea. Took me a while last night to find the AMD-V switch on my Gigabyte board last night, they renamed it SVM mode for whatever reason


----------



## Zach_01 (Feb 29, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> 1.) Memory is Team Group 4x8Gb 4133Mhz rated 93% by DRAM Calc. Single rank.
> 2.) All week long stuck at 933/950 on uCLK. Used XMP to set the system to the DRAM defaults, then removed it.
> 3.) I think it was the tweak *down *on VDDCR SoC voltage from 1.2 to 1.125 that locked in coupled mode. Auto set VDDG and VDDP to 1.09v
> 
> ...


In the end, only through benchmarks you will find what speed combinations would be best for you. AIDA64 scores are only for memory performance alone. What will benefit you the most in your daily usage or maybe your special usage(if you have any), can be determined only be testing.

Keep in mind, that if your RAM is rated for 4133 CL18-18-18-18-38 when you run it below that speed, like 3600~3800 the primary timings should be set to at least something like CL16-16-16-16-32/34. This will bring down latency and may be increase bandwidth a little. I mean what you have tested so far its not in the optimal way possible.


----------



## pcwolf (Mar 1, 2020)

Closing in ...


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Mar 1, 2020)

Your latency looks stupidly high


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 1, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> Closing in ...
> 
> View attachment 146311


Something is very off. Is FCLK same as those above?
*And most importantly... did you disable XMP? You definitely must because XMP is for 4133. If you disable it the board will set any timings on auto more accordingly to the speed you run.*
Can you give us a home page of RyzenMaster with the above AIDA settings and results?

May also want to try with those primaries:
tRFC: 351
tRFC2: 261
tRFC4: 160
tFAW: 16
TCke: 1


----------



## pcwolf (Mar 1, 2020)

XMP OFF
Used your suggested settings. tFAW 16 throws memory errors.  1usmus recommends tFAW between 4 and 6 times tRRDS so 24 removed the errors.
Ryzen DRAM Calculator memory tester is giving me a clue: inter-CCX latency is twice the innerCCX latency.


----------



## Schmuckley (Mar 1, 2020)

TFAW 16 is too low.


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 1, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> XMP OFF
> Used your suggested settings. tFAW 16 throws memory errors.  1usmus recommends tFAW between 4 and 6 times tRRDS so 24 removed the errors.
> Ryzen DRAM Calculator memory tester is giving me a clue: inter-CCX latency is twice the innerCCX latency.
> 
> View attachment 146364View attachment 146363View attachment 146366


Still memory latency is unreasonably high... by now it should have been under 70ns. About 66-67...


----------



## lorry (Mar 1, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Still memory latency is unreasonably high... by now it should have been under 70ns. About 66-67...



Remember though I also had serious problems getting down to 65


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 1, 2020)

lorry said:


> Remember though I also had serious problems getting down to 65


Yes but 75 is still too high for the given settings.
Hey maybe you can make suggestions!

Take a look at this, with lower settings:




Bandwidth is significant lower because of the significant lower speed and core count. But memory latency is where it suppose to be.


----------



## lorry (Mar 1, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Yes but 75 is still too high for the given settings.
> Hey maybe you can make suggestions!
> 
> Take a look at this, with lower settings:
> ...



Thing is though I've still not got much of a clue as to what we were doing back then, I was pretty much simply following your lead & asking why you suggested what we did next, to try and learn.


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 1, 2020)

lorry said:


> Thing is though I've still not got much of a clue as to what we were doing back then, I was pretty much simply following your lead & asking why you suggested what we did next, to try and learn.


I can’t remember what I eat yesterday, let alone what we came up for your ram 2-3 months ago. Last 5 days I changed so many settings, and bench so much, that all are now a blend in my mind. I was saying, like you can just tell your settings... although your ram and pcwolf’s is not the same...


----------



## moproblems99 (Mar 2, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Bandwidth is significant lower because of the significant lower speed and core count. But memory latency is where it suppose to be.



Perhaps there is a translation issue but core count doesn't really matter.  CCXs and ranks matter.


----------



## lorry (Mar 2, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> I can’t remember what I eat yesterday, let alone what we came up for your ram 2-3 months ago. Last 5 days I changed so many settings, and bench so much, that all are now a blend in my mind. I was saying, like you can just tell your settings... although your ram and pcwolf’s is not the same...



For what my timings are worth, here ya go, you set em though lol


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 2, 2020)

lorry said:


> For what my timings are worth, here ya go, you set em though lol
> 
> View attachment 147035 View attachment 147036


Oh, I forgot that we've made such a good job!  
Yeah... 65ns is very nice!!


----------



## lorry (Mar 2, 2020)

This wouldn't be a temperature related issue, would it? Asking as I don't think anyone has mentioned that.


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 2, 2020)

lorry said:


> This wouldn't be a temperature related issue, would it? Asking as I don't think anyone has mentioned that.


Well done @lorry  Its not temp related but its *Speed related*... What you told reminded me to check his speed and there it is....!!!

@pcwolf *why your CPU is stuck on base clock?*


----------



## Fry178 (Mar 2, 2020)

dont just crank up voltage. you want to run stock/xmp/spd max for start, and v later to see if you can get the next lower timing "stable".
your better off switching ram to 3600 (so 1:1 clocks) and 1.35v, as most ryzens will only do 1800 on IF.
most boards will add a bit of voltage. i can do 3600-16/19, when spd is 3600-18/22@1.35v, so dont raise it from the start.
this will get you the lowest timings without pumping lots of power thru the modules by brute force.

lower primaries to best numbers (you can get), before touching any secondaries,
raising V to check if a timing thats can be "made" stable.


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 2, 2020)

First he needs to get his boost up and running again. The CPU is stuck on base clock. Until #29 I see that boost was working, but on the last screenshots its not...


----------



## damric (Mar 2, 2020)

That latency is way too high.

100% stable Ryzen 1600AF with Hynix RAM <65ns


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Mar 2, 2020)

damric said:


> That latency is way too high.
> 
> 100% stable Ryzen 1600AF with Hynix RAM <65ns
> 
> View attachment 147057




Ryzen plus doesn't really apply here it scales differently with memory with a good kit you can get into the mid 50ns range


----------



## pcwolf (Mar 8, 2020)

Fellas ... broke into the 60s  today ... high 60s, but still 

Lorry, I am halfway through reading your original thread on Ryzen.  Following in your footsteps.


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Mar 8, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> Fellas ... broke into the 60s  today ... high 60s, but still
> 
> 
> View attachment 147490




I've read a lot of people having issues with memory overclocking on asrock Taichi x370/470 boards and even buildzoid comments on it being an issue. I'm guessing it's part of what's going on.


----------



## pcwolf (Mar 8, 2020)

This is on ECO mode with 3750Mhz CPU.  I have a ways to go.


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 8, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> This is on ECO mode with 3750Mhz CPU.  I have a ways to go.


Did you try these settings on nominal speeds? If you like going eco it’s fine, but for testing purposes and finding the best possible DRAM settings the CPU has to clock higher IMO. Otherwise most people, including me, don’t have a clue how it’s suppose to perform in such a low clock. Just a thought!
I know also that having these CPUs clock and boost all over the place when are on auto can affect actual DRAM performance results. But now it’s the low speed of CPU that may confuse us and not know if these results are actually good or not.


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Mar 8, 2020)

I keep forgetting he runs his CPU way lower than neccessary.


----------



## pcwolf (Mar 9, 2020)

Thanks for your feedback as always, Gentlemen.  A couple of questions ...

1) When you "boost" is that only the PBO and Auto Overclocking options in UEFI, or are there other settings to adjust? There is an SOC setting under CPU, and another stand alone SOC on the ASRock Tweaker set of values. I stopped using the Advanced/AMD Overclocking set of DRAM values, because I suspect ASRock has tied some memory training demonry into their settings at boot;

2) I am using TPU's own MemTest64 to test for memory errors, along with the version included in the Ryzen DRAM Calc.  After a half hour on MemTest64 it has completed 22 loops through the memory with no errors.  Why the continuous looping?  It's already gone through the available memory pool 22 times, wouldn't a physically bad RAM have failed at one? Is it a matter of fatigue, or heat build-up, or just trying to establish real-world use with the memory testing?;

2a) What is your opinion of the Karhu memory test out of Finland? I heard it is *very* fast at showing memory errors.

My testing at ECO is because my primary use on the machine is crunching BOINC numbers 24x7 and it gives a 30C degree drop in temperatures 100% cores 100% cycles. Once I wring all I can at this level of power, I will juice it back to 105W and see what else I can get.

Really ... how do I "boost" as you are telling me?




damric said:


> That latency is way too high.
> 
> 100% stable Ryzen 1600AF with Hynix RAM <65ns



I am running 4x8Gb on 3950X.
Check the throughputs on Aida64



oxrufiioxo said:


> Ryzen plus doesn't really apply here it scales differently with memory with a good kit you can get into the mid 50ns range



oxrufiioxo ... it intrigues me your R/W and Copy numbers are reversed from mine.
Makes me wonder if I can learn which memory readings are involved in those actions and tackle the timings that way.
Your latency is impressive, I don't see how you can run 4000 at 1:1 and notice there is no North Bridge frequency in your Aida64 screenshot.
Are you running 1:2 at C2T?  How many banks of DRAM and what brand? What DRAM voltage does it take to get there?

Lorry, Zach ... never mind my boost question above, I've found your thread on trying to understand Ryzen boost.


----------



## pcwolf (Mar 11, 2020)

OK  I am in the neighborhood now.
Zach ... just for you, I threw some boost at it in the second run.


----------



## oxrufiioxo (Mar 11, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> OK  I am in the neighborhood now.
> Zach ... just for you, I threw some boost at it in the second run.
> 
> View attachment 147789View attachment 147790



Nice 66ns is a pretty normal result imo.... I personally haven't noticed anything in testing below 68ns making a difference in gaming maybe when the 3080 ti comes out people will see some gains.


----------



## lorry (Mar 11, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> OK  I am in the neighborhood now.
> Zach ... just for you, I threw some boost at it in the second run.
> 
> View attachment 147789View attachment 147790



Nice  
But, boost?


----------



## thesmokingman (Mar 11, 2020)

Btw, Ryzen calc is a one for one match for Asus ROG bios in regards to memory fields. In other words you don't have to hunt and peck like with other bios'.


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 11, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> OK  I am in the neighborhood now.
> Zach ... just for you, I threw some boost at it in the second run.
> 
> View attachment 147789View attachment 147790


Now that’s nice! I think you are at a very good level now. And as @oxrufiioxo said, hardly you can see any benefit from higher bandwidth or lower latency that those.


----------



## R2DSF (Mar 11, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> Do I proceed by selecting, one by one, separate Primary timing values in order :: Reboot :: Test ?
> Or, is there a full set of values (all Primary, eight or ten Secondary) I should try all at once?


Do this:


My memory OC:


Good luck!


----------



## Zach_01 (Mar 11, 2020)

R2DSF said:


> Do this:
> View attachment 147835View attachment 147834View attachment 147833View attachment 147832View attachment 147831
> 
> My memory OC:
> ...


Dont show please your ZEN+ settings and results because they are completely irrelevant for ZEN2. Different line, different architecture and memory sub-system structure, different settings and results.
Although those steps up there, are relevant and may apply to any Ryzen as a procedure, but not as actual values


----------



## NoJuan999 (Mar 11, 2020)

pcwolf said:


> OK  I am in the neighborhood now.
> Zach ... just for you, I threw some boost at it in the second run.
> 
> View attachment 147789View attachment 147790


You are at a very good place as far as Latency vs throughput goes.
This is the best I get from my rig (3700x/3600 RAM):


----------



## pcwolf (Mar 12, 2020)

lorry said:


> Nice
> But, boost?



Auto Overclocking and 100 Boost override.  Isn't that part of it?



Zach_01 said:


> Now that’s nice! I think you are at a very good level now. And as @oxrufiioxo said, hardly you can see any benefit from higher bandwidth or lower latency that those.



Thank you, could not have gotten here without following the mega-threads you and Lorry left behind 

I am going to carry this UEFI in my pocket for everyday use. The screen flings new windows up a light speed, I am not much of a gamer, but it runs cool, steady and fast crunching numbers.

With this DRAM though, there is probably substantially more to wring out for the simple satisfaction of doing it. I have not figured out how to punch up the CPU power to highest levels ... with four banks filled and closing in on the limit of FCLK::UCLK::MCLK feels like I am driving a cruise liner with an outboard engine. I *really*  want to run after the 3800Mhz edge.



thesmokingman said:


> Btw, Ryzen calc is a one for one match for Asus ROG bios in regards to memory fields. In other words you don't have to hunt and peck like with other bios'.



Yeah, I am pretty jealous about that.  ASRock has me jumping back and forth and translating a bunch of it, made me finally get a three-ring binder and punch holes in my notes and references.
I ran an ASUS M5A99X EVO board for my Phenom 9850 Black Edition and really had a good experience.  But with four memory filled, I wanted a t-top board and heard ASRock VRMs can take a beating.


----------



## R2DSF (Mar 12, 2020)

Zach_01 said:


> Dont show please your ZEN+ settings and results because they are completely irrelevant for ZEN2. Different line, different architecture and memory sub-system structure, different settings and results.
> Although those steps up there, are relevant and may apply to any Ryzen as a procedure, but not as actual values



I reread topic title and OP first post twice. Where is i can know that this thread about Zen 2 only? Btw, Zen 2 has better memory subsystem. And any other Zen results will work at Zen 2.


----------



## pcwolf (Mar 12, 2020)

No harm, no foul R2!  Interesting to see any Ryzen as well.


----------



## Taraquin (Mar 26, 2020)

3533cl16-19-16-32 at 1.39V stable on a ryzen 5 2400G with safe settings, except iGPU became unstable, everything else was rock solid. Micron E-die 2x8 sr at Asus Tuf B450m gaming plus. Also undervolted cpu 38mv.

Got 3733cl16-20-15-30 530 tRFC at 1.32V 100% stable with ryzen 3600, Gigabyte B450m DS3H and Micron E-die 2x8 sr. Also undervolted cpu 42mv.

Aida64 with latter setting.


----------



## lorry (Mar 26, 2020)

3733 cl16 here (from 3200 cl16) 16-16-16--16-32 at 1.45V


----------



## Taraquin (Mar 26, 2020)

lorry said:


> 3733 cl16 here (from 3200 cl16) 16-16-16--16-32 at 1.45V


B-die I guess?


----------



## lorry (Mar 26, 2020)

Taraquin said:


> B-die I guess?



Yep, corsair dominator  platinum 4 x 8GB


----------

