# Phenom II AM3 Plagued with DDR3-1333 Issue



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

Barely a week into the introduction of the DDR3-supportive AM3 socket CPUs, the processors seem to be having design flaws. This, as circulated by AMD in its revision guide document for the 10h family of processors (found here, page 80). The issue, as described by AMD, centers around the DDR3 memory sub-system. On machines with more than one PC3-10600 (1333 MHz) memory module populating a memory channel, the users may experience unreliable operation. The company does not get into the specifics of the symptoms. This issue however, does not affect systems with a module per channel (one or two modules installed in the motherboard), and only those with three to four modules installed. 

The AMD K10 memory controllers on AM3-socket processor provide a 128-bit wide memory interface (with DRAM Ganged mode enabled), which amount to two 64-bit wide memory channels. On most motherboards, four DIMM slots with two slots sharing a memory channel are present. With this issue, one is not recommended to use more than one DDR3-1333 memory module per channel. AMD recommends a quick fix for the issue for systems using more than one DDR3-1333 module per memory channel: to manually specify the memory to run at 533 MHz (1066 MHz DDR), and accordingly set DRAM timings. As a little compensation, one can tighten DRAM timings with the drop in frequency. AMD will fix this issue in the next stepping (sub-version) of the CPUs. The "x-factor" with this erratum revolves around DRAM voltage, a significant factor. One might note AMD saying "the processor memory subsystem may exhibit unreliable operation over the allowable VDDIO voltage range", which leads us to think if there is a potential workaround with adjusting the DRAM voltage beyond the allowable range (read: over-volting the memory). We hope to hear more from AMD on this.

*UPDATE (02/13)*: AMD replied to the report, saying that work is in progress toward fixing the issue. While not getting into the specifics, AMD indicated to us that apart from addressing the issue, the company is also working toward something "which will make you 'feel cozy' about the DDR3 support". The statement is ambiguous, and is best left uninterpreted at this point in time.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Konceptz (Feb 12, 2009)

AMD is struggling to compete with intel and now they are having these problems? What happened to AMD? I remember my first PC opteron 170 @ 2.8ghz used to scream. Its like their engineering has just gave up.


----------



## DOM (Feb 12, 2009)

this is going to suck for ppl that have been waiting to go to DDR3 with AMD cuz there going to want DDR3 for high frequency


----------



## Konceptz (Feb 12, 2009)

this is going to suck for everybody, if AMD can't compete it will drive prices up for everybody.


----------



## DOM (Feb 12, 2009)

Qx9770 

your talking about prices 

but im sure there on it already with a new steping


----------



## Urbklr (Feb 12, 2009)

Well, guess I'm buying an Intel again until the new steppings. Was sooo excited for the 925 tooo


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

Unless you need >4GB (2x 2GB) of memory, this issue won't affect you.

Digg please: http://digg.com/hardware/Phenom_II_AM3_Plagued_with_DDR3_1333_Issue


----------



## AlCabone (Feb 12, 2009)

DDR3 isn't worth the price anyway, and it doesn't even have a real performance benefit (for AMD)


----------



## kid41212003 (Feb 12, 2009)

Only affect who uses more than 1 module per channel, which mean this only affect people who use 3 or 4 sticks.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 12, 2009)

Its amazing I have DDR3 issues just like AMD. My problem is I cant afford DDR3.


----------



## Urbklr (Feb 12, 2009)

btarunr said:


> Unless you need >4GB (2x 2GB) of memory, this issue won't affect you.



I will soon, besides...if it doesn't work the way it's meant too...I'm not spending $230+ on it..


----------



## Konceptz (Feb 12, 2009)

DOM said:


> Qx9770
> 
> your talking about prices
> 
> but im sure there on it already with a new steping



The 9770 was handed down to me, you honestly didn't think......


----------



## phanbuey (Feb 12, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Its amazing I have DDR3 issues just like AMD. My problem is I cant afford DDR3.


----------



## mtosev (Feb 12, 2009)

TheMailMan78 said:


> Its amazing I have DDR3 issues just like AMD. My problem is I cant afford DDR3.



sell your car, house, wife, yourself JUST GET DDR3


----------



## suraswami (Feb 12, 2009)

not again AMD.  Why can't you shut up, not blow your trumpet  and get back to the works to bring a real CPU?  Why do you want to shoot yourself twice?


----------



## newtekie1 (Feb 12, 2009)

This sucks, kind of defeats the purpose of moving to DDR3 if you have to run it at DDR2 speeds.

I'd still consider one of these, their DDR2 performance is more than enough to justify buying one to me.  Though, as already stated, perhaps a simple over-volt will solve the issue.


----------



## Castiel (Feb 12, 2009)

When I rebuild my next system(Damn College Funds!!) I will be going INTEL. I am not going to wait for AMD to come out with some good hardware. There 2 years behind Intel and they need to get there work together and start putting out some good stuff. Come on they can't even put a freakin Phenom with DDR3 memory? I rather have a faster chip with DDR2. 

*I officially announce today I am going full Intel!!*


----------



## DOM (Feb 12, 2009)

Konceptz said:


> The 9770 was handed down to me, you honestly didn't think......



can you handed it down to me


----------



## jbunch07 (Feb 12, 2009)

I'm glad I didn't go ddr3, i figured that something like this might happen, DDR2 FTW! 
Not that this is a huge problem for most people, but I think I'll wait till they get all the kinks worked out of it.


----------



## devguy (Feb 12, 2009)

Seriously, though.  How many of you are going to afford 8GB ddr3 memory?  Perhaps by the time that would be a reasonable purchase (pricewise and necessity wise), one could buy 2x4GB ram modules and there is your 8GB.  Also, I wouldn't be surprised if they find a way around this with bios updates for the motherboards.

If there is one thing I've learned from running two AMD machines with all DIMM slots filled, it is to not do that again.  And so I certainly don't care about this.

Edit: also remember that most of the current gen Phenoms allow for DDR2 1066mhz memory modules.  However, when you populate all four DIMM slots, you usually cannot keep that option and must run them at 800mhz.  The solution is to up the reference clock until you get the modules back at 1066 and problem solved.  I don't hear too many complaints about that.  And I'm pretty sure it will be the same with Phenom II.


----------



## ShadowFold (Feb 12, 2009)

Meh DDR2 is still more than fast enough. Kinda sad to see there is a problem with DDR3. I'm sure they will get a revision out like they did with the TLB 9600/9500.
And seriously, it says they are gonna fix it. How many retail DDR3 boards and CPU's are even out yet? Jump to conclusions why don't you..


----------



## Castiel (Feb 12, 2009)

jbunch07 said:


> Yeah that's a good idea. let's turn this into a fanboy war.



lol, well better watch what you say, don't want a MOD to come in here and start swinging the ban stick.


----------



## Jakl (Feb 12, 2009)

Why AMD!!! Why!?!?!



There are pushed back again


----------



## uber_cookie (Feb 12, 2009)

jbunch07 said:


> Yeah that's a good idea. let's turn this into a fanboy war.



actually i am fan of AMD but this is turning into joke now  they should of scraped phenom architecture and start again 

Just hope they can cope with the loss...


----------



## xfire (Feb 12, 2009)

Castiel said:


> lol, well better watch what you say, don't want a MOD to come in here and start swinging the ban stick.


Yes ban the use of the word Intel.(evil intel)
The proccy the must not be named.


----------



## mtosev (Feb 12, 2009)

Castiel said:


> *I officially announce today I am going full Intel!!*



welcome to the dark side.


----------



## ShadowFold (Feb 12, 2009)

If I am reading it correctly it's gonna get fixed. Calm the hell down. And it only affects two DIMMs right now, I would never get 4 dimms anyway.
Lrn2read


----------



## Castiel (Feb 12, 2009)

ShadowFold said:


> If I am reading it correctly it's gonna get fixed. Calm the hell down. And it only affects two DIMMs right now, I would never get 4 dimms anyway.
> Lrn2read



Well I am getting tired of waiting. But I rather have performance than lag.

It will get fixed. I'm just making jokes. Except the part about switching to Intel. I really am going intel.


----------



## jbunch07 (Feb 12, 2009)

ShadowFold said:


> If I am reading it correctly it's gonna get fixed. Calm the hell down. And it only affects two DIMMs right now, I would never get 4 dimms anyway.
> Lrn2read



LOL,Right. 

It's not like ddr3 wont work at all, just an issue when using certain amount. It's not the end of the world people. 

But I'll stick with what I said, untill ddr3 is more affordable and less problematic ill stick with ddr2.


----------



## r9 (Feb 12, 2009)

DDR3 why spend a ton of money for 5% speed boost. If you want the top performance and money are not the problem you know where to go. Whole DDR3 Phenom II is illogical.


----------



## johnnyfiive (Feb 12, 2009)

Eh, long live DDR2, for now. DDR3 cost too damn much.


----------



## Mega-Japan (Feb 12, 2009)

I love AMD but... WTH is this?! Sorry AMD, I'll be abandoning you for the upcoming Core i7 975 coming in the next couple of months...


----------



## newtekie1 (Feb 12, 2009)

Has any of you claiming DDR3 is expensive actually looked at DDR3 prices recently.  You can get 4GB of decent quality DDR3 for under $80, that isn't expensive at all.


----------



## devguy (Feb 12, 2009)

newtekie1 said:


> Has any of you claiming DDR3 is expensive actually looked at DDR3 prices recently.  You can get 4GB of decent quality DDR3 for under $80, that isn't expensive at all.



You are absolutely correct.  It is not THAT bad right now.  But look at the price for 8GB ddr3 RAM.  Now, would you see yourself paying that much?  If no, then why is this issue even relevant?  And yes, I expect the prices of 4x2GB ddr3 to go down eventually, but I also expect the price of 2x4GB ddr3 to also go down as well, thus re-evading the problem whilst not having to occupy 4 DIMMs.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 12, 2009)

newtekie1 said:


> Has any of you claiming DDR3 is expensive actually looked at DDR3 prices recently.  You can get 4GB of decent quality DDR3 for under $80, that isn't expensive at all.



Currently it doesn't seem like it gives you much of an advantage except in benchmarks. And even then its minimal.


----------



## newtekie1 (Feb 12, 2009)

devguy said:


> You are absolutely correct.  It is not THAT bad right now.  But look at the price for 8GB ddr3 RAM.  Now, would you see yourself paying that much?  If no, then why is this issue even relevant?  And yes, I expect the prices of 4x2GB ddr3 to go down eventually, but I also expect the price of 2x4GB ddr3 to also go down as well, thus re-evading the problem whilst not having to occupy 4 DIMMs.



$160 for 8GB, yeah I could see myself paying that much if I felt I needed 8GB of RAM.  Nothing I do really needs that much RAM, but there are plenty of other applications that do.  And the truth is that the people that do need that much RAM will probably see far more benefit from having 8GB running at the slower speed than 4GB running at the faster.



TheMailMan78 said:


> Currently it doesn't seem like it gives you much of an advantage except in benchmarks. And even then its minimal.



This is true, the gains are minimal, but I've heard the real gains are in overclocking headroom.


----------



## Binge (Feb 12, 2009)

DDR3 can always go down in value, but since I know that you can get high end micron sticks that don't have XMP profiles for $30 per 2gb then I have to say all complains about cost are bogus.

AMD has a minor issue and it may be setting them back, but they still have a market even if it's the one some people might not want to be a part of.  I still say phenom II is the ultimate lanbox cpu and if anyone contests that fine.  DDR2-3 whatever, these processors have a purpose, and bugs will be fixed/put up for errata prior to a large scale launch.

Now if you all won't mind... if we're going to riot can we manage to swing by a Dunkin Donuts?  I'm craving everything bagels.


----------



## devguy (Feb 12, 2009)

newtekie1 said:


> And the truth is that the people that do need that much RAM will probably see far more benefit from having 8GB running at the slower speed than 4GB running at the faster.



So then they downclock their 2x4GB RAM modules to PC3-8500 speeds and run their 8GB like AMD advises.  Problem solved.

And if I wanted more overclocking headroom, I'd probably buy at least ddr3-1600mhz RAM.  And for 2x2GB of decent RAM at that speed (I don't mean the crappy 8/9 CAS modules), I'd be spending a little more (although MIR helps to make it only 20-30 more expensive than ddr3-1333, but I hate MIR).  Hopefully the prices on those will go down to.  It is nice to see that both Gigabyte AM3 boards natively support DDR3-1600, so maybe this issue is motherboard dependent?  I wanna see someone use either of Gigabytes new AM3 boards and fill in all DIMM slots and see what happens.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 12, 2009)

Binge said:


> Now if you all won't mind... if we're going to riot can we manage to swing by a Dunkin Donuts?  I'm craving everything bagels.


  Ill drive! I already got Pearl Jam "Do the evolution" playing


----------



## adrianx (Feb 12, 2009)

so this is the same bug like the frist phenom.... "you can not user 4 memory module in 1066mhz the memory controller will set the speed in 800mhz" and now if you want to use 4 dims... will be set in 1066mhz not in 1333mhz like normal  (but this time ... is not speed it's the voltage or the phenom memory controller 

from that I have 2 ideea 

one is that will a cpu revision soon (aka stepping)

two it's possible to be only the amd marketing idea, like the new stepping/version of cpu to give as a bug resolved and possible a higher speed for memory (1600/1800 or 2000 (if santa wants...) 


also I want a hybrid mobo with ddr2 and ddr3 (evident optional)


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Feb 12, 2009)

I am not sure there is really enough information to formulate an opinion at this time.  What is the allowed VDDIO voltage range for DDR3 1333 or DDR3 1600?


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> I am not sure there is really enough information to formulate an opinion at this time.



It was an inquiry, not an opinion. We contacted AMD with it, and are expecting a reply.


----------



## newtekie1 (Feb 12, 2009)

devguy said:


> So then they downclock their 2x4GB RAM modules to PC3-8500 speeds and run their 8GB like AMD advises.  Problem solved.
> 
> And if I wanted more overclocking headroom, I'd probably buy at least ddr3-1600mhz RAM.  And for 2x2GB of decent RAM at that speed (I don't mean the crappy 8/9 CAS modules), I'd be spending a little more (although MIR helps to make it only 20-30 more expensive than ddr3-1333, but I hate MIR).  Hopefully the prices on those will go down to.  It is nice to see that both Gigabyte AM3 boards natively support DDR3-1600, so maybe this issue is motherboard dependent?  I wanna see someone use either of Gigabytes new AM3 boards and fill in all DIMM slots and see what happens.



Correct, I don't know why you are getting so defensive, I'm not saying there is a issue here.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Feb 12, 2009)

btarunr said:


> It was an inquiry, not an opinion. We contacted AMD with it, and are expecting a reply.



When the title reads "Phenom II AM3 Plagued with DDR3-1333 Issue" it reads like an opinion.  That's why I asked about the VDDIO voltage range. In order for me (us, whoever) to have an understanding "what's being plagued" I inquired about the VDDIO voltage range.  That way I understand what plague you are talking about. Once we have this understanding would we know why you have to downclock the ram, use one memory channel, etc.


----------



## Haven (Feb 12, 2009)

Well at least amd has the 920 and the 940 goin for them.


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> When the title reads "Phenom II AM3 Plagued with DDR3-1333 Issue" it reads like an opinion.  That's why I asked about the VDDIO voltage range.



That needn't be an opinion. It is an adequately established fact. The VDDIO range afaik is 1.5~1.8V. The influence of voltage on the issue is the area of uncertainty and we're waiting to hear from AMD on that.


----------



## Darren (Feb 12, 2009)

btarunr said:


> one is not recommended to use more than one DDR3-1333 (or beyond) memory module per channel. This issue however, does not affect systems with a module per channel (two modules in all). AMD recommends a quick fix for the issue for systems using more than one DDR3-1333 module per memory channel: to* manually specify the memory to run at 533 MHz (1066 MHz DDR), *and accordingly set DRAM timings. As a little compensation, *one can tighten DRAM timings with the drop in frequency*. *AMD will fix this issue *in the next stepping (sub-version) of the CPUs.




Seems like a lot of people are talking bad about AMD already without reading the text thoroughly. *DDR3 will* work. However if you have ultra fast DDR3 such as DDR3-1333 or faster you have to manually configure it (opposed to automatic configuration) and reduce the bus slightly to 1066 MHz The user will benefit from faster latency timings.

However not all ram stick will cause incompatibility because it says "the users *may *experience unreliable operation" and hence you may have no problems with DDR3-1333 or faster memory, and therefore this issue is 100% hyperthetical and it might materalise that users having no problems whatso-ever! in essence it will vary user to user.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Feb 12, 2009)

btarunr said:


> That needn't be an opinion. It is an adequately established fact. The VDDIO range afaik is 1.5~1.8V. The influence of voltage on the issue is the area of uncertainty and we're waiting to hear from AMD on that.


btarunr, to me your title reads as an opinion.  Re-read my previous post, I've edited it. Until we hear from AMD I really don't see what's being plagued here.


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> In order for me (us, whoever) to have an understanding "what's being plagued" I inquired about the VDDIO voltage range.  That way I understand what plague you are talking about. Once we have this understanding would we know why you have to downclock the ram, use one memory channel, etc.



It is pretty understandable from the title and the subsequent post itself that product is not functioning as intended and hence "plagued" with an issue, description of which from whatever we learn from the AMD document, is provided below (the title).


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Feb 12, 2009)

btarunr said:


> It is pretty understandable from the title and the subsequent post itself that product is not functioning as intended and hence "plagued" with an issue, description of which from whatever we learn from the AMD document, is provided below.


I see, ok let's do a quick example then because I really don't understand.  For example, a Asus M4A79T Deluxe, PII 925, twin kit of DDR3 1600/1333.  Without knowing the VDDIO voltage range when should a user expect a problem?


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> I see, so under what circumstances will this plague happen?  For example, a Asus M4A79T Deluxe, PII 925, twin kit of DDR3 1600.  Without knowing the VDDIO voltage range when should a user expect a problem?



"the allowable VDDIO voltage range". Since AMD didn't specify that range and yet went on to issue it as an erratum, AMD makes you believe it is the common range in which memory modules operate in.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Feb 12, 2009)

Darren said:


> EastCoasthandle, read my post above (you may very well not have any problems)



Yeah, I just caught it.  Thanks for the input here.  This news had me scratching my head on what's being plagued here.  Perhaps the title needs to be re-worded until it's confirmed that we have a problem perhaps?  In the example I posted earlier one would want to know if he/she can expect any problems.  So far, no one can answer that as of yet (until AMD provide further information about it).


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> Perhaps the title needs to be re-worded until it's confirmed that we have a problem perhaps?



It won't happen. The processors suffer from an issue, hence listed as an erratum. If you're still in doubt, educate yourself by running four modules on a test-bed at default settings.


----------



## Kei (Feb 12, 2009)

While this does prove to suck for some people out there, am I the only person here that read this was an "issue" before they were even released?

As a matter of fact I believe that one or more of the reviews put out stated that if you wanted to use more than one dimm per channel then you would have to decrease the speed to 1066Mhz so I'm not surprised in the least bit.

I'll see if I can find the reviews that state that.  See reviews at bottom of post!

Kei

*Edit: Here are 2 I found real quick, I'd be willing to bet that many more stated the same fact. Always read before you buy...then again majority of the people complaining wouldn't be reading or buying anyway.* 

http://www.hexus.net/content/item.php?item=17113&page=2

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3512&p=3


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Feb 12, 2009)

btarunr said:


> It won't happen. The processors suffer from an issue, hence listed as an erratum. If you're still in doubt, educate yourself by running four modules on a test-bed at default settings.


btarunr, erratums happen all the time, be it AMD or Intel etc.  This is why I asked for clarification from the example I posted earlier regarding a specific PC setup (which I really have no answer to).  No need to get excited about it. For me, the title offers an opinion. Having followed up with issue with you we are left awaiting more information from AMD.


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

EastCoasthandle said:


> btarunr, erratums happen all the time, be it AMD, Intel etc.  This is why I asked for clarification from the example I posted earlier.  No need to get excited about it.



I am not excited about it. Errata happen all the while, and the news article covers it within its right proportions and quantum of relevance to most users. All required facts known are covered, all information sought from AMD are on the sidelines of the core issue. "allowed range" corresponds to the voltage range AM3 processors support DDR3 modules in, safely, by default.


----------



## farlex85 (Feb 12, 2009)

Darren said:


> Seems like a lot of people are talking bad about AMD already without reading the text thoroughly. *DDR3 will* work. However if you have ultra fast DDR3 such as DDR3-1333 or faster you have to manually configure it (opposed to automatic configuration) and reduce the bus slightly to 1066 MHz The user will benefit from faster latency timings.
> 
> However not all ram stick will cause incompatibility because it says "the users *may *experience unreliable operation" and hence you may have no problems with DDR3-1333 or faster memory, and therefore this issue is 100% hyperthetical and might materalise users having no problems whatso-ever! in essence it will vary user to user.



1333mhz is not ultra-fast, that's the slowest ddr3 will go and be faster than ddr2. If you take it down to 1066 it's probably gonna have higher latencies than ddr2, making ddr3 in these particular circumstances utterly worthless. A problem that doesn't effect everyone is still a problem, but in this case it seems to be easily sidestepped. 

Although, really, at this point there isn't much point to ddr3 anyway. Aside from lower voltages and higher mem benches there seems to be no compelling advantage to ddr3 over ddr2. We seemed to have reached a point (like processor speed) where in most applications more memory speed simply isn't needed, and yields very little gains. Might as well stick w/ ddr2 for now.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Feb 12, 2009)

Darren said:


> EastCoasthandle,
> 
> There is definitely a problem, but to what extent might vary user to user. e.g. I might put in OCZ DDR3 1600 and be 100% stable on MSI board, however you might put in Kingston DDR3 1600 in a Asus board and get incompatibilities and hence forcing you to reduce the bus to 1033 MHz and tighten the timings to compensate



Darren, that's not the confusing part.  That's what having erratums are all about.  But as you pointed out, I would like to know the extent of this issue.  If you purchased said setup (in the other post) do you have to tweak the bios a certain way?  Are you stuck with the problem with no real fix except get a new CPU and or motherboard?  These questions will hopefully be answered once AMD further expands on the erratum. That will determine (at least for me) if this is a plague or not.


----------



## Darren (Feb 12, 2009)

EastCoasthandle,

There is definitely a problem, but to what extent might vary user to user. e.g. I might put in OCZ DDR3 1600 and be 100% stable on MSI board, however you might put in Kingston DDR3 1600 in a Asus board and get incompatibilities and hence forcing you to reduce the bus to 1066 MHz and tighten the timings to compensate 



btarunr said:


> I am not excited about it. Errata happen all the while, and the news article covers it within its right proportions and quantum of relevance to most users.



Intel has a huge budget so there errata issues probably get fixed before the press find out, also Intel's budget allows for them to enhance their advantages through propaganda to cover up the bad media regarding their errata issues.



Edit:



EastCoasthandle said:


> do you have to tweak the bios a certain way?  Are you stuck with the problem with no real fix except get a new CPU and or motherboard?  These questions will hopefully be answered once AMD further expands on the erratum.





I would presume that if the issue effected your system it would be a matter of going into the bios and turning off "Auto" in the settings and selecting "manual" and reducing the memory bus. Typically, when you reduce the memory bus the latency timings also tighten in concert.

As for a fix, it might be that AMD say "forget a fix" only 5% of users are having issues why invest money.

There will be a definite fix on the next revision of CPU stepping which would indeed mean that a new CPU would have to be purchased (presuming you are one of the effected few). Perhaps motherboard manufacturers are able to fix it via a bios update which I doubt.


----------



## OnBoard (Feb 12, 2009)

Good, now sell me one of these "faulty" processors for half the price 

If I were to buy one I'd use 2x2GB DDR2, so no problem at all, but I wouldn't say that buying one.


----------



## EastCoasthandle (Feb 12, 2009)

Darren said:


> Intel has a huge budget so there errata issues probably get fixed before the press find out, also Intel's budget allows for them to enhance their advantages through propaganda to cover up the bad media regarding their errata issues.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks for the input.  Hopefully we can see some sort motherboard/bios fix while they revise their CPUs.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 12, 2009)

I find this whole thing kinda funny. I think it should be a problem that needs to be addressed. On the other hand this is the nature of new technology. 

Anyone who buys the "latest" revision or release is prone to hit problems. I never EVER buy a first revision of anything. Electronics or cars. Let someone else iron out the bugs......except women. I like first revisions of women 

Edit: Can me and Binge still riot in the name of AMD?


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

OnBoard said:


> Good, now sell me one of these "faulty" processors for half the price
> 
> If I were to buy one I'd use 2x2GB DDR2, so no problem at all, but I wouldn't say that buying one.



I'd use 2x2GB DDR3, and at the expense of expandability, get the performance/OC potential I need, not to mention, modules with higher densities coming up (4GB), which hopefully become mainstream by the time I find 4GB of system memory insufficient for my applications.


----------



## Darren (Feb 12, 2009)

I plan on hanging onto my OCZ PC6400 for a while, running it @ 929 MHz at the moment, can reach around 1000MHz if pushed. 

Here in the UK DDR3 is stupidly priced. DDR3 @ 1333MHz will not be a big enough performance boost to justify it over my current stick. Unless I can get DDR3 1800MHz or better I can't see myself buying DDR3 unless their is a drastic price reduction.

At present I can buy 16 GB of premium DDR2 PC6400 or DDR2 PC8500 for the price of 4 GB of basic DDR3 :shadedshu


----------



## OnBoard (Feb 12, 2009)

btarunr said:


> I'd use 2x2GB DDR3, and at the expense of expandability, get the performance/OC potential I need, not to mention, modules with higher densities coming up (4GB), which hopefully become mainstream by the time I find 4GB of system memory insufficient for my applications.



Does it need high mhz mem? Don't Black Editions have unlocked multiplier, so it doesn't matter what mem you have.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 12, 2009)

one thing AMD, MOVE THE MEMORY CONTROLLER BACK TO THE MOTHERBOARD!!!

I wish their techies were listening to this thread.

Also on the current note, AMD may delay the launch of these CPUs or send these with OEM machines and then launch a stepping revision that has the permanent fix.


----------



## brian.ca (Feb 12, 2009)

btarunr said:


> It is pretty understandable from the title and the subsequent post itself that product is not functioning as intended and hence "plagued" with an issue, description of which from whatever we learn from the AMD document, is provided below (the title).



I think the issue is that the word "plague" is associated with a certain level of importance/severity that is not really representative of / uniform with this problem.... I'm not familiar with all the technical aspects but it seems like for a lot of people (those opting for ddr2, those not using that much ddr3, or those able to simply find a suitable work around) this isn't even a problem at all.   I don't think it's fair to call something a "plague" when it will for most people pose absolutely 0 problems, and for those who will see the problem, might still be something they can work around.

And it does seem to be effecting the response... compare the first set of replies to this article vs. the replies on VR-zone.


----------



## btarunr (Feb 12, 2009)

I could care less. The issue is an issue. The product doesn't function the way it is intended to, memory support being a major part of the product. The title is justified, so is its wording, and will not be further discussed upon.


----------



## Kei (Feb 12, 2009)

So.....nobody else read this information in the cpu reviews? Did you all just skip straight to the benchmarks instead of reading the rest of the review that told you beforehand about the memory usage ability of the motherboard/cpu? 

I don't see how this is a surprise to anyone at all that actually read the review of the cpus before they bought one.

To me the title of the thread does suck, but hey it's the news that's what news reporters do so he's just doing his job. Don't get caught up on the wording when you already know better anyway. Read fine print and let our awesome news man do his job. 

Kei


----------



## kid41212003 (Feb 12, 2009)

Because it's "unusual" for most people. 

For most users, they read about mobos when they want to know the memory supports, not the CPU itself, because:

You put the CPU on the mobo which supported that cpu, and you put the memory on the mobo, which supported that memory.

You don't put a memory on a mobo, because the CPU supports it.

It's obvious isn't it...?


----------



## wiak (Feb 12, 2009)

basicly this is saying if you got four ddr3 ram sticks at 1333 it will be down graded to 1066 
if you got two ddr3 ram sticks you still got 1333 speed 
who buys 4 sticks of ddr3?
its freaking expensive even two sticks

bit-tech quote!


> The thing is, AMD is forced to move to DDR3 eventually - simply because DDR3's data density is designed to be higher, so should we start wanting 4/8GB sticks of memory, DDR3 is our only option. Here's the problem though: to get 1,333MHz DDR3 running, the current Deneb core limits it to just one DIMM per channel - this effectively makes the DDR3 performance limit to just 4GB in today's markets.


http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/02/11/amd-phenom-820-810-720-710-am3-cpus/1

Spotify » Mandy Moore - One Way or Another


----------



## Assimilator (Feb 12, 2009)

Congratulations AMD, for once again managing to deliver a product that (a) cannot compete with the latest from Intel and (b) suffers from another crucial design flaw!

AMD needs to do what Intel did with the Pentium 4/Core 2: accept that their current architecture (K10) is fundamentally flawed, throw it in the bin, then build a new architecture based on one that's proven and reliable (K8). If they don't (won't) do this, they are, quite simply, doomed.

I only hope that ATI comes out of this intact.


----------



## J-Man (Feb 12, 2009)

Castiel said:


> When I rebuild my next system(Damn College Funds!!) I will be going INTEL. I am not going to wait for AMD to come out with some good hardware. There 2 years behind Intel and they need to get there work together and start putting out some good stuff. Come on they can't even put a freakin Phenom with DDR3 memory? I rather have a faster chip with DDR2.
> 
> *I officially announce today I am going full Intel!!*


Good!


----------



## cdawall (Feb 12, 2009)

no one has had issues with DDR3+phenom II on XS and andreyang pushed the crap outta his


----------



## LittleLizard (Feb 12, 2009)

most people who are buying am3 cpu are going to use ddr2 as is dirt cheap now and when ddr3 comes down, most people are going to go to the next arquitecture or there will be a fix already released


----------



## ShadowFold (Feb 12, 2009)

LittleLizard said:


> most people who are buying am3 cpu are going to use ddr2 as is dirt cheap now and when ddr3 comes down, most people are going to go to the next arquitecture or there will be a fix already released



Thank you.. By the time DDR3 boards are out and 8gb is cheap AMD will have a fix. I'm surprised they announced this. Now people are having anxiety attacks for no reason because of it.


----------



## RevengE (Feb 12, 2009)

Wow this is sad.AMD is going even further downhill. I never
Want to buy an intel but I might have to someday.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 12, 2009)

Its expected that they would have problems considering Phenom 2 was rushed to market. Thats what happens when you are not ready.


----------



## J-Man (Feb 12, 2009)

Sometimes I consider going to AMD but now this... no chance.


----------



## breakfromyou (Feb 13, 2009)

this isn't that big of a deal. remember how s939 A64's responded to 4 memory modules? They would usually get clocked down, or would run a 2T command rate...kind of the same thing.


----------



## LittleLizard (Feb 13, 2009)

im wondering wtf happened to the good ol kickin as amd that we all miss


----------



## FreedomEclipse (Feb 13, 2009)

LittleLizard said:


> im wondering wtf happened to the good ol kickin as amd that we all miss



their staff are too busy Voting off their chairman/Director under the 'Loss Of Confidence' act - Amd staff no longer see AMD as a place of work - more like a Dakota C47 to bail out of when the engines or pilots get smoked, to focus on more important issues such as actually making sure they release quality products & not half baked ones then claim they are trying like really really hard.

with no incentive to work for/towards & being in the middle of the credit crunch I suppose being part of AMDs workforce must be a pretty demoralising job not to mention how low the moral is in the work place. im guessing - to some workers they think:

# AMD has already had its day so theirs no longer a need to be work like a dog. 

# AMD are probably gonna cut staff anyway - why work like a dog if you're not gonna be in the same seat next week??

# AMD are fighting a losing battle - why work like a dog if their efforts will never achieve anything??

#AMD care cutting staff salaries & bonus's - great! why come into work at all.


& so the curtain calls.....


----------



## Steevo (Feb 13, 2009)

Since the IO voltage on the RAM (NOT the RAM chip voltage) needs tweaked and turned up a bit to carry the signal cleanly for lower latencies you might get even more overclocking headroom. Really it oculd also be a motherboard fault, the emi causing more signal deviation, and or lower quality traces in certain boards that cause resistance at higher speeds and a standing wave issue.


----------



## PP Mguire (Feb 13, 2009)

Edit: Didnt see the second page


----------



## sno.lcn (Feb 13, 2009)

Hopefully I don't encounter problems in a few days when my boards and CPUs arrive.  I'm not running my 2000mhz DDR3 sticks at half their rated speed just because AMD can't get their act together and plan ahead.  I'll finish my reviews and immediately drop all this AMD stuff faster than you can say pineapple.

But whenever a solution pops up I'll play again, I've been having fun with the 'new AMD' so far


----------



## J-Man (Feb 13, 2009)

Pineapple.


----------



## sno.lcn (Feb 13, 2009)

J-Man said:


> Pineapple.



Exactly.  I can do it  that quickly


----------



## Kei (Feb 13, 2009)

This thread makes me sad...all of these posts and a whole 2 of us (that I've counted) actually read the information before the cpu's were for sale stating what others are now calling a horrible unbelievable insane failtacular surprise.

Really if more than 2 people read the reviews you would have seen very clearly in the stats and mentioned by the reviewer that the motherboards in their current state will only officially support one dimm per channel at 1333Mhz. Anything other than that would be downclocked to 1066Mhz.

I'm ashamed that after all that talk of how great AMD was doing you "all" appear to have lost faith because they told you beforehand that something was not officially supported in the first place. 

Again I say, yes it sucks for a select few that you MAY have problems running 4 dimms at 1333Mhz or higher.....but if you could read something other than "bad" news you would've known beforehand.

Kei <--- f*ck the flame jacket


----------



## swaaye (Feb 13, 2009)

breakfromyou said:


> this isn't that big of a deal. remember how s939 A64's responded to 4 memory modules? They would usually get clocked down, or would run a 2T command rate...kind of the same thing.



Or not work at all. See DFI nF4 Ultra-D. It would see only one pair no matter what I did with it.

Running 4 DIMMs is always a bitch. My Gigabyte P35-DS3R mobo automatically cranks the latency behind the scenes and needs more MCH volts. This isn't some modern revelation either. You can wander back in time to the days of Pentium and K6s and see that loading up all banks on the mobo will result in the need to turn down the latencies. More DIMMs/SIMMs = more difficulties in signal integrity.


----------



## swaaye (Feb 13, 2009)

Kei said:


> Really if more than 2 people read the reviews you would have seen very clearly in the stats and mentioned by the reviewer that the motherboards in their current state will only officially support one dimm per channel at 1333Mhz. Anything other than that would be downclocked to 1066Mhz.



Check out some of the responses. I'm not sure everyone here is literate to begin with.


----------



## Kei (Feb 13, 2009)

Haha, that was pretty good swaaye. 

So far in my experience I haven't had too much trouble running with 4 dimms with my PII 920 AM2+ setup. The only 'problem' I have is that I can't get 1066Mhz stable using all four dimms using the 2.66 divider. I'm running two different types of ram right now which of course has something to do with it.

However both sets (4Gb total) run in excess of 1066Mhz by themselves. One set runs up to 1150Mhz and the other runs to 1120Mhz. No problems with them seperately, but if I use all four dimms then I can't get them stable using the 1066 (2.66) divider so I just use the HT Bus to clock them up using the 800 (2.0) divider instead to whatever speed I need. I usually just leave it at 1000Mhz which is close enough and I like whole numbers. 

The 4 dimm thing isn't really new at all, and goes back a very long time. Heck, I'd be just fine with 8Gb 1066Mhz DDR3 haha. Once the new AM3 boards are a bit more available I"ll very likely give it a go. It'll probably be with 4Gb though in the beginning anyway....I think. 

Kei

(btw, I'm wondering when any other site is going to cover this "issue")


----------



## btarunr (Feb 13, 2009)

Kei said:


> Really if more than 2 people read the reviews you would have seen very clearly in the stats and mentioned by the reviewer that the motherboards in their current state will only officially support one dimm per channel at 1333Mhz. Anything other than that would be downclocked to 1066Mhz.



The processors were intended to run memory at 1333 MHz speeds, irrespective of how many modules populate a channel. It was never part of the AM3's original specs., that it should be able to run only a single 1333 MHz module per channel. This is a design flaw, out of the ordinary (hence listed under _errata_ and not _specifications_) AMD is working on it. 

And oh, AMD responded to our email, we're expecting another short reply, after which I will update the news.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 13, 2009)

swaaye said:


> Or not work at all. See DFI nF4 Ultra-D. It would see only one pair no matter what I did with it.
> 
> *Running 4 DIMMs is always a bitch. My Gigabyte P35-DS3R mobo automatically cranks the latency behind the scenes and needs more MCH volts.* This isn't some modern revelation either. You can wander back in time to the days of Pentium and K6s and see that loading up all banks on the mobo will result in the need to turn down the latencies. More DIMMs/SIMMs = more difficulties in signal integrity.



I have had many Gigabyte boards based on the P35-DS3R:

EP35C-DS3R  x2
P35C-DS3R    x2
P35-DS3R
EP35-DS3R

None of those needed any extra volts at MCH and they have mild OC's. I still have two in my house. Thats the most of the same series I have ever had. Funny thing you use that as an example being one of the best OC'ers of their time for the money. A few of those had 64bit Vista and 8GB of RAM like the one I gave to my GF. It had no issues that I have seen. 

I think your issue is the RAM you used. Its probably not on the Supported memory list. Common mistake really.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 13, 2009)

sno.lcn said:


> Hopefully I don't encounter problems in a few days when my boards and CPUs arrive.  I'm not running my 2000mhz DDR3 sticks at half their rated speed just because AMD can't get their act together and plan ahead.  I'll finish my reviews and immediately drop all this AMD stuff faster than you can say pineapple.
> 
> But whenever a solution pops up I'll play again, I've been having fun with the 'new AMD' so far



if you are so dead set on doing it, just get it over with, stop wasting our time and put the stuff up for sale.


----------



## DOM (Feb 13, 2009)

i think this thread needs to be closed already ppl getting mad for no reason


----------



## btarunr (Feb 13, 2009)

eidairaman1 said:


> if you are so dead set on doing it, just get it over with, stop wasting our time and put the stuff up for sale.



L2r, he said after he's done his reviews. Do not post when you have nothing to add to the topic.


----------



## H82LUZ73 (Feb 13, 2009)

Any of bother to think MAYBE JUST MAYBE the memory controllers they have suck ass? Why do I say this,Think they have DDR2 and DDR3 ......maybe drop DDR2 and add the DDR3 as one maybe get full 4 dual channels ......And why blame AMD maybe the memory controller that was supplied was lower end but sold to them as high end ....


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 13, 2009)

H82LUZ73 said:


> Any of bother to think MAYBE JUST MAYBE the memory controllers they have suck ass? Why do I say this,Think they have DDR2 and DDR3 ......maybe drop DDR2 and add the DDR3 as one maybe get full 4 dual channels ......And why blame AMD maybe the memory controller that was supplied was lower end but sold to them as high end ....



If something doesn't work to spec, it just doesn't work. No need to try to make excuses for them. They are a big company, and they can be held responsible for their mistakes.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 13, 2009)

thus why i believe their first batch will be sold to OEMs (Stock DDR2 and DDR3 at less than 1333MHz) and then a New Stepping appears which has the problem corrected.


----------



## DaedalusHelios (Feb 13, 2009)

eidairaman1 said:


> thus why i believe their first batch will be sold to OEMs (Stock DDR2 and DDR3 at less than 1333MHz) and then a New Stepping appears which has the problem corrected.



People have been buying these processors for a while now... what are you saying?


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 13, 2009)

DDR3 model?


----------



## TheMailMan78 (Feb 13, 2009)

DOM said:


> i think this thread needs to be closed already ppl getting mad for no reason



Come on DOM! Binge and I are already starting a riot! We got bagels!

I don't know why people are so up in arms about this. Its a first revision people! GET OVER IT!


----------



## btarunr (Feb 13, 2009)

Updated.


----------



## cdawall (Feb 13, 2009)

swaaye said:


> Or not work at all. See DFI nF4 Ultra-D. It would see only one pair no matter what I did with it.
> 
> Running 4 DIMMs is always a bitch. My Gigabyte P35-DS3R mobo automatically cranks the latency behind the scenes and needs more MCH volts. This isn't some modern revelation either. You can wander back in time to the days of Pentium and K6s and see that loading up all banks on the mobo will result in the need to turn down the latencies. More DIMMs/SIMMs = more difficulties in signal integrity.



i have noticed the same on my ECS P45BE, p5q-pro, K9A2 platinum, K9A platinum and crosshair II formula



DaedalusHelios said:


> I have had many Gigabyte boards based on the P35-DS3R:
> 
> EP35C-DS3R  x2
> P35C-DS3R    x2
> ...



no using ram not on there stupid supported list makes no difference. 4 dimms stresses every mem controller drop max FSB clock alot. look on XS and find me a 600+ FSB clock with 4 dimms populated. there wont be one because its stresses the controller.



DaedalusHelios said:


> People have been buying these processors for a while now... what are you saying?



which ones the only DDR3 models out are the X3 710/720 and X4 810


----------



## swaaye (Feb 13, 2009)

DaedalusHelios said:


> I have had many Gigabyte boards based on the P35-DS3R:
> 
> EP35C-DS3R  x2
> P35C-DS3R    x2
> ...



Just do some searches for P35 and 8GB. See what you find. 

It definitely comes down to a combination of board and RAM quality. I have 4 sets of 2x2GB. Some of them will work in my P35 at 8GB just fine. It dramatically affects overclockability however. A friend of mine with an Abit IP35 couldn't get 8GB going no matter what with expensive OCZ Reaper 2x2 800 kits. I do believe that it's very important to get 1.8v RAM instead of stuff that has had its capabilities stretched with more voltage.

As for my DFI nF4 Ultra-D problem, well that was more of a board problem I think. The old DFI street forums were quick to tell you that running 4 DIMMs was a feat. Although I don't really have a feeling for how problematic S939 was in general for this.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Feb 14, 2009)

refer to this link for update on situation.

http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=85093


----------

