# AMD Ryzen 3000 "Zen 2" a Memory OC Beast, DDR4-5000 Possible



## btarunr (May 10, 2019)

AMD's 3rd generation Ryzen (3000-series) processors will overcome a vast number of memory limitations faced by older Ryzen chips. With Zen 2, the company decided to separate the memory controller from the CPU cores into a separate chip, called "IO die". Our resident Ryzen memory guru Yuri "1usmus" Bubliy, author of DRAM Calculator for Ryzen, found technical info that confirms just how much progress AMD has been making.

The third generation Ryzen processors will be able to match their Intel counterparts when it comes to memory overclocking. In the Zen 2 BIOS, the memory frequency options go all the way up to "DDR4-5000", which is a huge increase over the first Ryzens. The DRAM clock is still linked to the Infinity Fabric (IF) clock domain, which means at DDR4-5000, Infinity Fabric would tick at 5000 MHz DDR, too. Since that rate is out of reach for IF, AMD has decided to add a new 1/2 divider mode for their on-chip bus. When enabled, it will run Infinity Fabric at half the DRAM actual clock (eg: 1250 MHz for DDR4-5000). 






This could turn into an additional selling point for AMD X570 chipset motherboards, as they'll have a memory frequency headroom advantage over boards based on older chipsets as their BIOS will include not just the increased memory clock limit, but also the divider mode. Of course this doesn't mean that you can just magically overclock any memory kit to these 5 GHz speeds - it's probable that only the best of the best modules will be able to get close to these speeds. 

1usmus also discovered that the platform adds a SoC OC mode and VDDG voltage control. We've heard from several sources that AMD invested heavily in improving memory compatibility, especially in the wake of Samsung discontinuing its B-die DRAM chips.

*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## bonehead123 (May 10, 2019)

Nice, *IF* it works as expected, and if it does, could we therefore look forward to having DDR-7@10k speeds in a few years for example ???



> The DRAM clock is still linked to Infinity Fabric (IF) clock domain



So if this is the case, why not just replace the IF with optical or another more advanced interlink method ??


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 10, 2019)

Wait and see...


----------



## MikeMurphy (May 10, 2019)

Maybe memory bandwidth is important because they supposedly need to feed 16 cores and 32 threads on a dual 64-bit memory channel architecture.



bonehead123 said:


> Nice, *IF* it works as expected, and if it does, could we therefore look forward to having DDR-7@10k speeds in a few years for example ???
> 
> So if this is the case, why not just replace the IF with optical or another more advanced interlink method ??



Integrated HBM, my dude.


----------



## GoldenX (May 10, 2019)

And I was happy with a 3333MHz overclock on my 2400MHz RAM...


----------



## RH92 (May 10, 2019)

Very nice , honestly  personally im much more hyped about better memory support/OC on Zen 2 than higher core count or/and clocks !  Hopefully the difference between X570 and older chipsets won't be that big otherwise it would ruin the experience .


----------



## londiste (May 10, 2019)

Wouldn't the 1/2 divider pose a small problem with decreasing IF clock when it gets enabled?
Assuming without divider memory goes to 3600 (roughly how it is now), going from 3600 to 4000 and enabling the divider to facilitate these speeds would mean IF clock going from 1800 to 1000, right?

IMC is in the CPU, so divider support in BIOS could theoretically be available for older boards as well.


----------



## Bones (May 10, 2019)

I do know one thing, I'll have a Ryzen 3 on my short list of hardware to buy at that time.


----------



## Manu_PT (May 10, 2019)

Rocking my 4000mhz CL18 on Z390, you will see how good it is when ram is clocked high


----------



## LemmingOverlord (May 10, 2019)

Well, is that *single-channel*?


----------



## danbert2000 (May 10, 2019)

londiste said:


> Wouldn't the 1/2 divider pose a small problem with decreasing IF clock when it gets enabled?
> Assuming without divider memory goes to 3600 (roughly how it is now), going from 3600 to 4000 and enabling the divider to facilitate these speeds would mean IF clock going from 1800 to 1000, right?



That's how I understood it, IF speeds will decrease compared to 3200 MHz DDR4 speeds. Which begs the question, why would you push for higher memory clocks if it's going to wind up slowing your processor down? I think that the better memory compatibility will be the big gain, and only overclockers chasing the highest speeds for fun will actually find this useful.


----------



## Deleted member 172152 (May 10, 2019)

I wouldn't use 1/2 mode as a) I can't be bothered with that kind of ram speed and b) I'll probably get the same performance with full IF and slower RAM, like 3200 or maybe 3600MHz if I upgrade my RAM!


----------



## EntropyZ (May 10, 2019)

Everything I keep reading from the start of the Ryzen 3000 "leaks" just seems to good to be true now, I'm not gonna lie. If it is, well, it probably is. I was already hyped to hear there's a bump in IPC, but this is too much IMO. It just makes me think of the aftermath when the thing actually launches.

Regardless,  they should be a decent upgrade from a 1000 series chip, at least for gaming.

Maybe it is an earnest effort to improve on the uArch. All I can do is wait and watch. (And stay out of any incoming drama)


----------



## NdMk2o1o (May 10, 2019)

So it has support in the bios for DDR4 5000, doesn't mean anything, my Asrock Ab350m has support for DDR4 4000, it still doesn't get anywhere close to that the same as all other current gen and 1st gen Ryzen boards and processors. That said if Ryzen 2 can hit 4000mhz DDR4 with 4.5+Ghz chiplets available then that is more than enough for my and many other peoples needs. The interesting this is the seperate I/O chip that replaces the on die memory controller, maybe they have overcome many of the limitations of Ryzen and Ryzen+ memory issues.


----------



## bug (May 10, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> So it has support in the bios for DDR4 5000, doesn't mean anything, my Asrock Ab350m has support for DDR4 4000, it still doesn't get anywhere close to that the same as all other current gen and 1st gen Ryzen boards and processors. That said if Ryzen 2 can hit 4000mhz DDR4 with 4.5+Ghz chiplets available then that is more than enough for my and many other peoples needs. The interesting this is the seperate I/O chip that replaces the on die memory controller, maybe they have overcome many of the limitations of Ryzen and Ryzen+ memory issues.


Pretty much what I was thinking, but still, wow!

Zen's memory "issues" come down to AMD having to draw the line somewhere and come up with a finished product. When they did that, a lot of tweaking for the memory controller got thrown under the bus (read: postponed to Zen2). The I/O chip has nothing to do with that. That was moved to a separate chip because AMD concluded the memory controller doesn't scale and so it will continue to be built on 14nm.


----------



## 1usmus (May 10, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> So it has support in the bios for DDR4 5000, doesn't mean anything, my Asrock Ab350m has support for DDR4 4000, it still doesn't get anywhere close to that the same as all other current gen and 1st gen Ryzen boards and processors. That said if Ryzen 2 can hit 4000mhz DDR4 with 4.5+Ghz chiplets available then that is more than enough for my and many other peoples needs. The interesting this is the seperate I/O chip that replaces the on die memory controller, maybe they have overcome many of the limitations of Ryzen and Ryzen+ memory issues.



in my case, what is stated is reality (4000 on 2700x)

There are a lot of improvements in X 570,  MSI and ASUS are preparing legendary tops


----------



## NdMk2o1o (May 10, 2019)

bug said:


> Zen's memory "issues" come down to AMD having to draw the line somewhere and come up with a finished product. When they did that, a lot of tweaking for the memory controller got thrown under the bus (read: postponed to Zen2).


Wow, it's great to have some real inside knowledge on building the Zen architecture and that even though Ryzen+ was released a whole 12 months later (probably in development for 3+ years as with the 1st gen which probably would of been more like 5 years) Now I know they just rushed it out the door with that darn memory controller being thrown in at the last minute. Btw how did it feel to be working with Jim Keller on a daily basis? 



1usmus said:


> in my case, what is stated is reality (4000 on 2700x)
> 
> There are a lot of improvements in X 570,  MSI and ASUS are preparing legendary tops
> 
> View attachment 122641


Yes you're the exception to the rule when you consider most people, sure some can/have reached that speed the majority top out at 3400-3600. Even 4000 acheivable on most x570 boards would be acceptable, obviously if higher is more common rather than being an exception to the rule that's just swell, though in all likelyhood it wouldn't bother me anyway as I'd rather spend £150 on decent ram that will hit 4000 than double that for 16GB that in the best of the best boards and circumstances hit 5000

Edit: btw big thanks for all the time you have dedicated to Ryzen RAM calculator, it didn't seem to work out for me the last time I used it though I notice you have since released a newer version and I may download that again now and try and shoot for 3400+ on my RAM which I've not been able to acheive as of now.


----------



## lsevald (May 10, 2019)

So what memory should we get for Ryzen 3000? For budget, mid range and high end? If it's possible to predict this early. Just worried I will regret not buying a samsung B-die based kit now, before they are all gone...


----------



## GoldenX (May 10, 2019)

It's a new MC, wait and see.


----------



## phanbuey (May 10, 2019)

i hope they fix the issue with filling all the ranks...

What point is a 16/32 core proc where you are capped at 16GB dual channel if you want to run high speed dimms.


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 10, 2019)

1usmus said:


> in my case, what is stated is reality (4000 on 2700x)
> 
> There are a lot of improvements in X 570,  MSI and ASUS are preparing legendary tops
> 
> View attachment 122641



So a Crosshair VIII Extreme and Asrock a Taichi X570 Ultimate?


----------



## kastriot (May 10, 2019)

Good job AMD.


----------



## bug (May 10, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Wow, it's great to have some real inside knowledge on building the Zen architecture and that even though Ryzen+ was released a whole 12 months later (probably in development for 3+ years as with the 1st gen which probably would of been more like 5 years) Now I know they just rushed it out the door with that darn memory controller being thrown in at the last minute. Btw how did it feel to be working with Jim Keller on a daily basis?


Well, this isn't inside knowledge, AMD publicly stated it. And the memory controller wasn't rushed, they just didn't have the luxury to tweak it as much as they (knew they) could.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (May 10, 2019)

bug said:


> Well, this isn't inside knowledge, AMD publicly stated it. And the memory controller wasn't rushed, they just didn't have the luxury to tweak it as much as they (knew they) could.


Where's the quote for this?


----------



## Mamya3084 (May 11, 2019)

Hopefully it can achieve at least 3200 with 4 sticks. My 1800x can only achieve 3000mhz with 4x 3466 gskill b-die memory kit.


----------



## JAB Creations (May 11, 2019)

Being able to overclock the RAM with all four dimms is important to me. I doubt I'll have 5GHz RAM though as things improve for me I'd love to benchmark the RAM differences and release the information myself about how much it's worth buying faster clocked RAM plus the difference between two and four dimms. I'm very grateful that they took the time to really iron out the issues that _have_ been mentioned and it's my hope that the 3000 series Ryzen Two generation will be as rock solid as possible.


----------



## mahoney (May 11, 2019)

So you'll need a new mobo for this?


----------



## TheLostSwede (May 11, 2019)

mahoney said:


> So you'll need a new mobo for this?



Maybe. Obviously you'd need a Ryzen 3000, since it contains the memory controller.
Judging by how I at least presume the information was collected, I'm guess it's from a UEFI update for current boards, so it might stil be possible on non X570 boards.


----------



## eidairaman1 (May 11, 2019)

mahoney said:


> So you'll need a new mobo for this?



No


----------



## Kohl Baas (May 11, 2019)

AFAIK the main reason of using high speed memory in Ryzen (gaming) setups is to pump up the speed of the Infinity Fabric, because if it can't hit at least 3-3.2GHz, there is a slight lag every time the scheluder throws a thread from one module to another.

As a Ryzen 1700 user I never had issue using it on stock speed, but since I use it with stock memory speed, there could be a spight jitter on less multythreaded (older) games. For example: MarMax.

Highly multythreaded applications are less affect d, because if it uses all 16 threads, the scheluder can't throw any of it to another.

And honestly I failed to see the advantage of a 5GHz memory in comparison to a 3GHz one under gaming applications.


----------



## Caring1 (May 11, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> Maybe. Obviously you'd need a Ryzen 3000, since it contains the memory controller.
> Judging by how I at least presume the information was collected, I'm guess it's from a UEFI update for current boards, so it might stil be possible on non X570 boards.


I'd assume top tier boards only that have the necessary power delivery.


----------



## dicktracy (May 11, 2019)

Let's get past 4.2 GHz for CPU and 3600Mhz for RAM first before making up fairy tales


----------



## NdMk2o1o (May 11, 2019)

dicktracy said:


> Let's get past 4.2 GHz for CPU and 3600Mhz for RAM first before making up fairy tales


Yes fairy tales cause its unlikely they would improve the ram capability and base clock like they did even with the interim ryzen +


----------



## Midland Dog (May 11, 2019)

londiste said:


> Wouldn't the 1/2 divider pose a small problem with decreasing IF clock when it gets enabled?
> Assuming without divider memory goes to 3600 (roughly how it is now), going from 3600 to 4000 and enabling the divider to facilitate these speeds would mean IF clock going from 1800 to 1000, right?
> 
> IMC is in the CPU, so divider support in BIOS could theoretically be available for older boards as well.


IMC is on the I/O die


----------



## Xuper (May 11, 2019)

But even at DDR4 4000 , Those kits are expensive.


----------



## medi01 (May 11, 2019)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1126734966363025408


----------



## ShurikN (May 11, 2019)

dicktracy said:


> Let's get past 4.2 GHz for CPU and 3600Mhz for RAM first before making up fairy tales


2700X does both.


----------



## olymind1 (May 11, 2019)

Xuper said:


> But even at DDR4 4000 , Those kits are expensive.



I agree.

In my country the ram prices for 2x8 GB DDR4 kits are:
-3000 CL16 kit 80 € - G.Skill Aegis
-3400 CL16 kit 105 € - Patriot Viper 4
-3600 CL17 kit 124 € - Patriot Viper Steel
-3733 CL17 kit 143 € - Patriot Viper 4

Everything else faster is much more expensive, and everything else slower isnt really cheaper than the 3000MHz kit. So I'm wondering what kind of ram will be optimal / acceptable for Ryzen 3 with a reasonable price with reasonable performance for gaming only.

Also from what RAM frequency will we need to enable the 1/2 IF speed multiplier? And how will it affect the CPU's performance..?


----------



## TheLostSwede (May 11, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> I'd assume top tier boards only that have the necessary power delivery.



Depends on which CPU you get, no? Afaik, there's no power increase unless you go over 8 cores.



dicktracy said:


> Let's get past 4.2 GHz for CPU and 3600Mhz for RAM first before making up fairy tales



Done.



olymind1 said:


> So I'm wondering what kind of ram will be optimal / acceptable for Ryzen 3 with a reasonable price with reasonable performance for gaming only.
> 
> Also from what RAM frequency will we need to enable the 1/2 IF speed multiplier? And how will it affect the CPU's performance..?



Unknown at this point. AMD apparently tests with G.Skill, Corsair, Kingston and one or two other brands. This doesn't mean that the board makers will optimise for the same kits. Once boards are available, check the QVL for the board you want and buy accordingly. It's highly recommended to do this to start with, if you want to use fast memory.

Unknown at this point, but I'm sure we'll find out more as soon as hardware is sampled to review sites.


----------



## springs113 (May 11, 2019)

dicktracy said:


> Let's get past 4.2 GHz for CPU and 3600Mhz for RAM first before making up fairy tales


My 2700x has no problem doing that,  in fact I can do 4.3ghz + 3600mhz no problem.   I scaled it back to 4.15 though.   I need them to be able to at least go 4.8 all core + 3600mhz.


----------



## Roddey (May 11, 2019)

Well on this news I went ahead and bought the Viper Steel Series 4000mhz. I dont know if the tariffs, the release of AMD 3000, and the cancellation of b-die will effect the pricing of these but I took a guess they might and bought a little early. There not going to be delivered until the end of May and I will have 30 days(if left unopened)to decide if I keep them or return them for a refund. The price is locked in though for almost 8 weeks.
Time will tell I guess.


----------



## Andrev (May 11, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> So it has support in the bios for DDR4 5000, doesn't mean anything, my Asrock Ab350m has support for DDR4 4000, it still doesn't get anywhere close to that the same as all other current gen and 1st gen Ryzen boards and processors. That said if Ryzen 2 can hit 4000mhz DDR4 with 4.5+Ghz chiplets available then that is more than enough for my and many other peoples needs. The interesting this is the seperate I/O chip that replaces the on die memory controller, maybe they have overcome many of the limitations of Ryzen and Ryzen+ memory issues.


The specs sheet of Asrock B350m shows 3200+(OC) mhz speed. I'm curios where didn you saw that 4000mhz for that board.


----------



## Totally (May 11, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Where's the quote for this?



In the review for the Asrock x370 Taichi. Earthdog went over the details there to highlight why that board and Asrock team was so awesome.


----------



## EarthDog (May 11, 2019)

Totally said:


> In the review for the Asrock x370 Taichi. Earthdog went over the details there to highlight why that board and Asrock team was so awesome.


I dont think that was me.... I've never reviewed anything x370.


----------



## infrared (May 11, 2019)

I can't wait to see how a 3700x behaves in my Crosshair VI, I've have 3600mhz stable this board, and remember @cdawall getting over 3700 so I'll keep my fingers crossed. If I can't reach at least 3800mhz I'll have to get an X570 board as well.


dicktracy said:


> Let's get past 4.2 GHz for CPU and 3600Mhz for RAM first before making up fairy tales


Um?! Even my 1800X is capable of those clocks for benchmarks.. even a sub-par 2700X can exceed those with ease.


----------



## RH92 (May 11, 2019)

1usmus said:


> There are a lot of improvements in X 570,  MSI and ASUS are preparing legendary tops



Is really X570 going to play that much of a role in memory OC ( other than the multiplier you mentioned )  when we know that the MC is on the CPU ? I mean  motherboard manufacturers said the same about X470/B450 compared to X370/B350  but it turned out that there was basicaly no difference between the two  when Zen+ was used   .


----------



## bug (May 11, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Where's the quote for this?


On the internet, from around when Zen launched. I'm not going to spoon feed it to you


----------



## EarthDog (May 11, 2019)

infrared said:


> Um?! Even my 1800X is capable of those clocks for benchmarks.. even a sub-par 2700X can exceed those with ease.


for all intents and purposes, 4.2 ghz and 3200 mhz is about it across the board. Anything past that, especially on core clocks, is gravy for any ryzen. Memory can get up there, but you need the right sticks and proper bios/aegesa.

Benchmark stable, if done right, isnt 24/7 stable.


----------



## bug (May 11, 2019)

EarthDog said:


> for all intents and purposes, 4.2 ghz and 3200 mhz is about it across the board. Anything past that, especially on core clocks, is gravy for any ryzen.


Looking at the price of RAM, you don't really want to go over 3200 anyway. Though you may have the budget if you're buying a 16c/32t CPU.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (May 11, 2019)

bug said:


> On the internet, from around when Zen launched. I'm not going to spoon feed it to you


Don't be ridiculous, you can make anything true on the Internet, I want to know where amd said this, oh you won't spoon feed me because its not true


----------



## cdawall (May 11, 2019)

infrared said:


> I can't wait to see how a 3700x behaves in my Crosshair VI, I've have 3600mhz stable this board, and remember @cdawall getting over 3700 so I'll keep my fingers crossed. If I can't reach at least 3800mhz I'll have to get an X570 board as well.
> 
> Um?! Even my 1800X is capable of those clocks for benchmarks.. even a sub-par 2700X can exceed those with ease.



Yea I pushed 3866 with one of the original bios's, but that was with a very nice amd provided cpu and some of the best bdie ever made lol


----------



## Xuper (May 11, 2019)

for DDR4 4000 or above, you need a Mobo with beefy SoC VRM which almost all of those Tier 2/3 Mobo don't have it.


----------



## bug (May 11, 2019)

NdMk2o1o said:


> Don't be ridiculous, you can make anything true on the Internet, I want to know where amd said this, oh you won't spoon feed me because its not true


No, I won't waste my time digging up statements from two years ago because of your hostile attitude.
Maybe someone else will jump in and lend a hand, but I actually have no time to waste right now.


----------



## Divide Overflow (May 11, 2019)

High speed memory pricing intensifies.


----------



## NdMk2o1o (May 11, 2019)

bug said:


> No, I won't waste my time digging up statements from two years ago because of your hostile attitude.
> Maybe someone else will jump in and lend a hand, but I actually have no time to waste right now.


That old chestnut ie: full of it 



Andrev said:


> The specs sheet of Asrock B350m shows 3200+(OC) mhz speed. I'm curios where didn you saw that 4000mhz for that board.


In the bios and since multiple agesa updates since it was first released there have been more multipliers and speeds gradually added.


----------



## TheLostSwede (May 11, 2019)




----------



## londiste (May 11, 2019)

Midland Dog said:


> IMC is on the I/O die


I/O die is on the CPU package. The context of my comment is that IMC is not on the motherboard which would make it possible for old motherboards to support the divider with BIOS update.


----------



## cucker tarlson (May 11, 2019)

Tired of tech sites and channels doing that.
Can we accept Ryzen 3000 for what it once it launches or do we have to read clickbait "news" like this every day just to see for the 1000th time the real product never meets expecations if they're crazy high.


----------



## TheLostSwede (May 11, 2019)

cucker tarlson said:


> Tired of tech sites and channels doing that.
> Can we accept Ryzen 3000 for what it once it launches or do we have to read clickbait "news" like this every day just to see for the 1000th time the real product never meets expecations if they're crazy high.



Not really click bait, simply information collected from new UEFI files.


----------



## cucker tarlson (May 11, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


> Not really click bait, simply information collected from new UEFI files.


all clickbait









						AMD Ryzen 3000 "Zen 2" a Memory OC Beast, DDR4-5000 Possible
					

AMD's 3rd generation Ryzen (3000-series) processors will overcome a vast number of memory limitations faced by older Ryzen chips. With Zen 2, the company decided to separate the memory controller from the CPU cores into a separate chip, called "IO die". Our resident Ryzen memory guru Yuri...




					www.techpowerup.com
				




memory beast ? come on.
the title doesn't even match the contents  for god's sake as it says in order to reach such speeds you need 1/2 IF divider.


----------



## R0H1T (May 11, 2019)

TheLostSwede said:


>


So zen3 has 4 way SMT & stacked HBM(?) for the new Xbox, might as well make a weekly AMD "all you can throw" rumors thread & I'm not being sarcastic


----------



## InVasMani (May 11, 2019)

I'm curious how BCLK frequency might play into the 1:2 divider. If you can offset it a bit via that and it's not tied to PCIE/SATA then I'm quite alright with that seems like a easy enough remedy potentially in such a case.


----------



## Imsochobo (May 12, 2019)

MikeMurphy said:


> Maybe memory bandwidth is important because they supposedly need to feed 16 cores and 32 threads on a dual 64-bit memory channel architecture.
> 
> 
> 
> Integrated HBM, my dude.



Yes and no, a few times memory bandwidth is important. 
But take a i9 14 core, remove two sticks and do dual channel, surprise! 
Doesn't affect it that much at all! 

Zens major limitation is latency more than bandwidth. 
But surprise! Frequency decreases latency. 

So yeah, to some extent bandwidth but I feel the latency is really what they are after.


----------



## Melvis (May 12, 2019)

Sounds great! but I would be happy if I could just get my 3600MHz Ripjaws to run at there rated speed instead of 3200MHz lol


----------



## Kissamies (May 12, 2019)

And I'm running DDR4-2400 with my 2600


----------



## TheMadDutchDude (May 12, 2019)

Why so low? You must have a terrible motherboard...


----------



## Jism (May 12, 2019)

Even i can do 3600Mhz with a Hynix 2x 16GB kit. Have you guys configured the modules in the right slot(s) for example? This 470-F board only does these speeds when you hit slot 2 and 4 and not 1 and 3, for some weird reason.

Ontopic: I think with a half divider of IF and 2500Mhz memory speeds, you can still pack more bandwidth then ever and still get better scores. I dont think it's a useless feature but one beneficial.


----------



## GoldenX (May 12, 2019)

Jism said:


> Even i can do 3600Mhz with a Hynix 2x 16GB kit. Have you guys configured the modules in the right slot(s) for example? This 470-F board only does these speeds when you hit slot 2 and 4 and not 1 and 3, for some weird reason.
> 
> Ontopic: I think with a half divider of IF and 2500Mhz memory speeds, you can still pack more bandwidth then ever and still get better scores. I dont think it's a useless feature but one beneficial.


Same here, slots 0 and 2 are useless for high frequencies (can't even go higher than 2933), 1 and 3 are the good ones.


----------



## kapqa (May 12, 2019)

I am also running Ryzen 2600 (with Adata 3000 but apparently it is only 2666 Mhz Memory) , and on Passmark the Memory Factor scores quite low (3 and half star out of 5).


----------



## Camm (May 13, 2019)

It should be noted it isn't exactly all roses on the other side of the fence. Since jumping over to a 9900K, my G.Skill DDR4 3866 4x16GB Dual Rank kit I can only hit 3200mhz with. On my AsRock X470 Taichi w/ 2700X, I could hit about 3333mhz.

I know I'm a unique usecase with full DIMM population with dual ranked modules, but I was a little surprised how weak Intel's memory controller is in this situation.


----------



## Eselmio (May 13, 2019)

I actually have my memory at  3400 CL 15-17-17-30 CR1 @ 1.35v it is a Quad Channel kit Trident Z RGB 4x8 GB 3200 Mhz CL16-18-18-38 1.35v , I've tested with memtest86+ for stability (chips are Hynix AFR)

My motherboard is an Extreme Zenith paired with a Threadripper 1950X overclock at 4.0 GHz with 1.37-1.39 using the compensating voltage mode. 

Before I was using 8X4 GB of Corsair Dominator, you can not make them work at their advertised speed, work at the advertising speed of 3000 MHz CL15-17-17-35, could only make then work at 2800 Mhz

4 sticks were Hynix chips and the other Micron.

If this will become true, it will actually be very good.


----------



## GoldenX (May 13, 2019)

Camm said:


> It should be noted it isn't exactly all roses on the other side of the fence. Since jumping over to a 9900K, my G.Skill DDR4 3866 4x16GB Dual Rank kit I can only hit 3200mhz with. On my AsRock X470 Taichi w/ 2700X, I could hit about 3333mhz.
> 
> I know I'm a unique usecase with full DIMM population with dual ranked modules, but I was a little surprised how weak Intel's memory controller is in this situation.


Yeah, there is no processor that likes all 4 dimms full. Weaklings.


----------



## lsevald (May 13, 2019)

How well does 4x8GB single ranked samsung b-die work on current Ryzen 2000/Intel? I got my trigger finger ready on buying 2 kits of 2x8GB G.Skill 3200 Flare X cl14 for a build after Ryzen 3000 is out. I guess I could also end up with an Intel setup in the unlikely event that Ryzen 3000 disappoints (performance or cost wise). Bad idea?


----------



## londiste (May 13, 2019)

lsevald said:


> How well does 4x8GB single ranked samsung b-die work on current Ryzen 2000/Intel? I got my trigger finger ready on buying 2 kits of 2x8GB G.Skill 3200 Flare X cl14 for a build after Ryzen 3000 is out. I guess I could also end up with an Intel setup in the unlikely event that Ryzen 3000 disappoints (performance or cost wise). Bad idea?


Less memory modules is better than more memory modules. Go for 2x16GB instead of 4x8GB (assuming same speeds etc).


----------



## mat9v (May 13, 2019)

1/2 divider is kinda useless?
I mean, you get very fast memory and have to push it through a thin straw of halved IF to CPU cores. Sure if IF at 1250Mhz is significantly faster than memory at 5000 then it is not a big issue but if not - you loose that gained speed from increasing memory frequency. The more important thing when running IF at half speed would be timings. Whatever you gain from better timings in memory modules you loose much more in IF lagging behind - memory chip optimisation would gain us 10-20ns while IF running at half speed would loose us a 50ns easily? Consider that without any optimisations we get over 100ns for 2133 memory and corresponding 1066 IF speed and around 80 for 3200 memory and 1600 IF link - that is 20ns lag for 500Mhz of IF link speed. Sure increasing IF link speed would give us decreasingly smaller gains but still... going from 4000 memory with IF at 2000 to IF at 1000 would "kill the performance dead" 
It's good only for breaking speed records.

Now, if AMD would be to introduce 2x IF multiplier, that would enable use to lower delays introduced by slow IF link...
Consider somewhat slow memory at 3000 that results in IF running at 1500 and apply 2x to that to get IF running at 3000? IF link with delays on the order of 25ns... and even with low quality memory running at 2133 or 2400 we would get IF running at 2133 and 2400. It would eliminate the problem with IF bus concurrency when communicating with memory controller and PCIEx (GPUs) that can happen in current scenarios. All that, if IF would be able to run at that speeds.... but considering that some memory kits are able to run 3733 on ZEN+ and that means 1866 for IF it is not really far from 2133...

One can dream of course.


----------



## londiste (May 13, 2019)

mat9v said:


> I mean, you get very fast memory and have to push it through a thin straw of halved IF to CPU cores. Sure if IF at 1250Mhz is significantly faster than memory at 5000 then it is not a big issue but if not - you loose that gained speed from increasing memory frequency. The more important thing when running IF at half speed would be timings. Whatever you gain from better timings in memory modules you loose much more in IF lagging behind - memory chip optimisation would gain us 10-20ns while IF running at half speed would loose us a 50ns easily?


What Ryzen so far benefits from with fast memory is the increased IF link speed between CCXs which should be slower no matter what memory timings or speed gets to be.
Edit: reading up on IF speeds in current Zen, I assume AMD doubled the width of IF links from CCX to RAM, otherwise the divider would also limit RAM bandwidth.


mat9v said:


> Now, if AMD would be to introduce 2x IF multiplier, that would enable use to lower delays introduced by slow IF link...
> Consider somewhat slow memory at 3000 that results in IF running at 1500 and apply 2x to that to get IF running at 3000?


This is the entire problem and reason for introducing the divider - IF cannot run at that high a clock. There is hope that AMD has improved IF in Zen2 but we will ahve to wait and see what approach they have taken with it.


----------



## Redwoodz (May 13, 2019)

mat9v said:


> 1/2 divider is kinda useless?
> I mean, you get very fast memory and have to push it through a thin straw of halved IF to CPU cores. Sure if IF at 1250Mhz is significantly faster than memory at 5000 then it is not a big issue but if not - you loose that gained speed from increasing memory frequency. The more important thing when running IF at half speed would be timings. Whatever you gain from better timings in memory modules you loose much more in IF lagging behind - memory chip optimisation would gain us 10-20ns while IF running at half speed would loose us a 50ns easily? Consider that without any optimisations we get over 100ns for 2133 memory and corresponding 1066 IF speed and around 80 for 3200 memory and 1600 IF link - that is 20ns lag for 500Mhz of IF link speed. Sure increasing IF link speed would give us decreasingly smaller gains but still... going from 4000 memory with IF at 2000 to IF at 1000 would "kill the performance dead"
> It's good only for breaking speed records.
> 
> ...



 More options are always better. Besides, if they can get BLK adjustments working as well it takes the limitations off because then you can run whatever IF speed you want.


----------



## mat9v (May 13, 2019)

londiste said:


> RAM speed through IF should not be a problem. What Ryzen so far benefits from with fast memory is the increased IF link speed between CCXs which should be slower no matter what memory timings or speed gets to be. Faster memory does provide its own benefits but this is separate and even comparatively slow IF link should be enough for RAM's purposes.


IF speed impacts all reads from and to memory just because it is between cores and memory. Games running on two CCXs only compound the problem but forcing them to run on only 4 cores from single CCX does not fix much if anything. It is those delayed reads and writes from/to memory that are the problem, not the link speed but delays introduced by IF link.
It is not like IF is so fast anyway, according to AMD it runs at 42GB/s at 1333Mhz (or 2666 memory clock) according to 








						ISSCC 2018: AMD's Zeppelin; Multi-chip routing and packaging
					

A look at AMD's Zeppelin SoC and the Infinity Fabric, a multi-chip architecture used by AMD to scale their SoC design from the mainstream PC market all the way to the server market.




					fuse.wikichip.org
				



and that is very close to what memory benchmarks show for memory alone clocked at 3000Mhz. And yet, IF must also handle inter-CCX communication and PCIEx access - all that is overloading it's capacity.
Running it at twice the speed would be very good for performance if not power budget and yes I suppose AMD was not able to do so with ZEN/ZEN+, but I had hoped for ZEN2 to make it so.


----------



## Super XP (May 13, 2019)

I read somewhere that Infinity Fabric will no longer be tied to the IMC. Because in order for the fabric to achieve a set bandwidth, it cannot be tied to the IMC. It's because of how ZEN2 is designed. By having a 14nm and 7nm chiplets. I'll see if I can find that preview then post it.


----------



## The Stilt (May 13, 2019)

This has to be the new low from TPU, or frankly one of the many in recent times.

Stating that "DDR-5000MHz is possible" simply based on the available bios options is silly and makes no favors to anyone, the least to AMD. The same way you could state that with the current generation Ryzen CPUs DDR-4133MHz is possible, or that on Intel Coffee Lake Refresh parts DDR-5500MHz is possible. In reality of course, most current generation Ryzen users still struggle reaching higher than 3466MHz and the same way the typical best case scenario for daily use on Intel platforms is roughly 4133MHz or less (mostly due to the DRAM PCB or MB PCB signaling limits).

Actually both current  gen. Ryzens already support up to DDR-8466MHz by their Phy design, but lets no let the facts to get in the way of fabricating the "news".

As I said, reporting BS like this (and the majority of other Zen 2 related rumors) is not in anyones interests.

Matisse will no doubt bring good improvements in most areas (incl. memory speeds), but everyone should keep their expectations at sane levels regardless.

If w1zzard was dead, he'd be spinning in his grave...


----------



## Super XP (May 13, 2019)

The Stilt said:


> This has to be the new low from TPU, or frankly one of the many in recent times.
> 
> Stating that "DDR-5000MHz is possible" simply based on the available bios options is silly and makes no favors to anyone, the least to AMD. The same way you could state that with the current generation Ryzen CPUs DDR-4133MHz is possible, or that on Intel Coffee Lake Refresh parts DDR-5500MHz is possible. In reality of course, most current generation Ryzen users still struggle reaching higher than 3466MHz and the same way the typical best case scenario for daily use on Intel platforms is roughly 4133MHz or less (mostly due to the DRAM PCB or MB PCB signaling limits).
> 
> ...


Well I agree to a certain extent. Seems TPU isn't the only site reporting on this particular news.

As I said before, in my previous post. It seems Infinity Fabric will require at least 100 GB/s Bandwidth bidirectional in order to have enough to feed the 7nm Chiplets and the larger 14nm IO die.

I was under the impression the limiting factor for Infinity Fabric was the fact it was tied to the IMC. I still believe that's the case and the issue overall.


----------



## bug (May 13, 2019)

Super XP said:


> Well I agree to a certain extent. Seems TPU isn't the only site reporting on this particular news.



Well, the news is DDR4-5000 was found somewhere in Zen2's UEFI. TPU ups the ante and reports DDR4-5000 is possible with Zen2. There's a "slight" disconnect there. I don't have much of an issue with that, because I can understand what's being said, but you know many people don't read past the headlines.


----------



## The Stilt (May 13, 2019)

Super XP said:


> Well I agree to a certain extent. Seems TPU isn't the only site reporting on this particular news.
> 
> As I said before, in my previous post. It seems Infinity Fabric will require at least 100 GB/s Bandwidth bidirectional in order to have enough to feed the 7nm Chiplets and the larger 14nm IO die.
> 
> I was under the impression the limiting factor for Infinity Fabric was the fact it was tied to the IMC. I still believe that's the case and the issue overall.



SDF ("IF") is still tied to the MEMCLK, but this time around there is a Pll in between, which allows other than 1:1 frequency relation.

The intention is not to provide higher SDF bandwidth through higher frequency, but to allow higher MEMCLK frequencies (at a cost) to provide sufficient memory bandwidth.
Zen 2 is a wide core, and even Intel Xeons with 256-bit memory interface (QCH) become bandwidth starved in certain 256-bit workloads (not to mention 512-bit ones, hence SKL-SP uses 384-bit HCH memory config).


----------



## R0H1T (May 13, 2019)

mat9v said:


> And yet, IF must also handle inter-CCX communication and PCIEx access - all that is overloading it's capacity.


We don't know the layout of zen2 die, it could well be 8 cores per CCX or they might have changed the entire layout radically.


----------



## Redwoodz (May 13, 2019)

The Stilt said:


> This has to be the new low from TPU, or frankly one of the many in recent times.
> 
> Stating that "DDR-5000MHz is possible" simply based on the available bios options is silly and makes no favors to anyone, the least to AMD. The same way you could state that with the current generation Ryzen CPUs DDR-4133MHz is possible, or that on Intel Coffee Lake Refresh parts DDR-5500MHz is possible. In reality of course, most current generation Ryzen users still struggle reaching higher than 3466MHz and the same way the typical best case scenario for daily use on Intel platforms is roughly 4133MHz or less (mostly due to the DRAM PCB or MB PCB signaling limits).
> 
> ...





bug said:


> Well, the news is DDR4-5000 was found somewhere in Zen2's UEFI. TPU ups the ante and reports DDR4-5000 is possible with Zen2. There's a "slight" disconnect there. I don't have much of an issue with that, because I can understand what's being said, but you know many people don't read past the headlines.




Yes it is an overstatement, thread author would have been better off showing that the new Biostar X570 has supports DDR4 4000+OC  right on it's box.......meaning it HAS to be able to reach those speeds in at least some cases or they will be sued.


----------



## Super XP (May 13, 2019)

Well one goal for AMD should be to rectify the Infinity Fabric Latency hit. Hopefully they fixed this with the upcoming ZEN2 design.


----------



## MikeMurphy (May 13, 2019)

Imsochobo said:


> Yes and no, a few times memory bandwidth is important.
> But take a i9 14 core, remove two sticks and do dual channel, surprise!
> Doesn't affect it that much at all!
> 
> ...



Low latency memory doesn't solve the problem of 32 threads competing for access to that memory.  Bandwidth does.


----------



## bug (May 14, 2019)

Super XP said:


> Well one goal for AMD should be to rectify the Infinity Fabric Latency hit. Hopefully they fixed this with the upcoming ZEN2 design.


We'll know soon enough.


MikeMurphy said:


> Low latency memory doesn't solve the problem of 32 threads competing for access to that memory.  Bandwidth does.


In theory, low-latency is better when you need to access bits of memory frequently. But we already have 3 layers of cache take care of that. So yeah, bandwidth with be #1 on my watchlist too.


----------



## londiste (May 14, 2019)

R0H1T said:


> We don't know the layout of zen2 die, it could well be 8 cores per CCX or they might have changed the entire layout radically.


Didn't @1usmus dig out the confirmation of 4-core CCX from BIOS images?


----------



## bug (May 14, 2019)

londiste said:


> Didn't @1usmus dig out the confirmation of 4-core CCX from BIOS images?











						AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen 'Matisse' Coming Mid 2019: Eight Core Zen 2 with PCIe 4.0 on Desktop
					






					www.anandtech.com
				



That's all I know about Zen2. No idea if there's one or two CCXes on that die.


----------



## Super XP (May 14, 2019)

bug said:


> AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen 'Matisse' Coming Mid 2019: Eight Core Zen 2 with PCIe 4.0 on Desktop
> 
> 
> 
> ...


By utilizing 7nm Chiplets AMD can custom build CCXs with potentially 2 or 3 or 4 or 6 or 8 cores etc. 
Well that is what I read once that's it's possible all by moving everything on that 14nm I/O and keeping the CPU chipsets separate. Who knows really.


----------



## londiste (May 14, 2019)

Super XP said:


> By utilizing 7nm Chiplets AMD can custom build CCXs with potentially 2 or 3 or 4 or 6 or 8 cores etc.
> Well that is what I read once that's it's possible all by moving everything on that 14nm I/O and keeping the CPU chipsets separate. Who knows really.


CPU Complex (CCX) is the primary arhitectural multicore building block of Zen architectures. CCX size has nothing to do with I/O core, chiplets or 7nm.


----------



## Super XP (May 14, 2019)

londiste said:


> CPU Complex (CCX) is the primary arhitectural multicore building block of Zen architectures. CCX size has nothing to do with I/O core, chiplets or 7nm.


Perhaps I didn't make my comment clear enough. That 14nm IO can remain the same, keeping costs down all while allowing more customization with the 7nm chiplets.



> Quote:
> Of particular note, the chip incorporates a new-to-AMD chiplet based design approach, using separate I/O and CPU dies to simplify manufacturing and allow for easier chip customization.


https://www.anandtech.com/show/14286/amd-7nm-navi-gpu-and-rome-cpu-to-launch-in-q3


----------



## londiste (May 14, 2019)

Super XP said:


> Perhaps I didn't make my comment clear enough. That 14nm IO can remain the same, keeping costs down all while allowing more customization with the 7nm chiplets.


You are not using correct terminology then.

CCX is - as its name says - a core complex. In Zen it contains 4 cores and L3 cache (when looking at it on a high level). In a Zen/Zen+ chip die there are two such CCXs connected to Scalable Data Fabric (SDF) that we can characterize as IF hub where everything in the CPU connects to - CCXs, memory controllers, IO Hub. There is only one CCX configuration, while individual cores can be disabled in it there will not be multiple CCX configurations in the same generation. There are good reasons for expecting CCXs to remain at 4 cores in Zen 2.

Cores per die and cores per package are decidedly different from architectural features.

Amount of cores in Zen 2 CCX that we do not know is important because cores inside CCX can very quickly communicate with each other but communication with cores in a different CCX (even when it is on the same die) takes longer as it goes through IF connections.


----------



## Super XP (May 14, 2019)

Thanks for the explanation,  I'm already aware of the inner workings of the CCX. 

It's just that I read somewhere in a previous article (Pre ZEN+ release), where the author speculated that one possible reason for utilizing this ZEN2 design approach was to potentially benefit from customizable 7nm Chiplets. 

Anyhow, your explanation is clarity enough. Thank You,


----------



## londiste (May 14, 2019)

Super XP said:


> It's just that I read somewhere in a previous article (Pre ZEN+ release), where the author speculated that one possible reason for utilizing this ZEN2 design approach was to potentially benefit from customizable 7nm Chiplets.


Chiplet design benefits from higher yields due to smaller individual dies. This makes the design much cheaper than monolithic die with the same core count. This is practically the only benefit but it is a big one.

There are some negatives as well. IF links between dies is slightly slower in its current form and does use more power. Whether chiplet design adds complexity to the package is not sure yet but it is likely. With memory controller in the I/O die, memory is inevitably further away from the CPU cores, increasing latency. How much and how AMD has mitigated that - we will see soon.

Customizable chiplets can be a huge boon for custom market - consoles primarily. Maybe (a big maybe) for laptops. On desktop as we know it, customizable chiplets in terms of adding a GPU for an APU does not look like too good of a solution. With I/O Die, memory is far away and GPU is very dependent on memory (usually more bandwidth than latency but still). AM4 does not have enough space or pins to add HBM or some direct connected RAM. TR4/SM3 are unlikely candidates for integrated GPU.

There are a lot of thoughts being shared about stacked dies but with current CPU parts (including 7nm), power density will be a huge problem.


----------



## Redwoodz (May 15, 2019)

londiste said:


> Chiplet design benefits from higher yields due to smaller individual dies. This makes the design much cheaper than monolithic die with the same core count. This is practically the only benefit but it is a big one.
> 
> There are some negatives as well. IF links between dies is slightly slower in its current form and does use more power. Whether chiplet design adds complexity to the package is not sure yet but it is likely. With memory controller in the I/O die, memory is inevitably further away from the CPU cores, increasing latency. How much and how AMD has mitigated that - we will see soon.
> 
> ...




 Yes but I/O die on a cool, mature 14nm could be clocked high enough to mitigate that latency.


----------



## londiste (May 15, 2019)

Redwoodz said:


> Yes but I/O die on a cool, mature 14nm could be clocked high enough to mitigate that latency.


What would be clocked high enough? Memory controller is tied to memory speed but the resulting bandwidth needs to fit through IF.  IF has two endpoints, the other one is in the CPU cores' chiplet. Their best bet is probably making IF wider.


----------



## Midland Dog (May 15, 2019)

londiste said:


> Less memory modules is better than more memory modules. Go for 2x16GB instead of 4x8GB (assuming same speeds etc).


asssuming your cpu has a 128bit imc yeah, anything more than bandwidth goes up exponentially by using all channels


----------



## Gasaraki (May 15, 2019)

Motherboard BIOS options doesn't mean it's work at that speed.


----------



## Redwoodz (May 16, 2019)

londiste said:


> What would be clocked high enough? Memory controller is tied to memory speed but the resulting bandwidth needs to fit through IF.  IF has two endpoints, the other one is in the CPU cores' chiplet. Their best bet is probably making IF wider.


 Supposedly not tied strictly 1:1 now. What I meant is everything on Zen+ is 12nm. With I/O die on package @ 14nm they do not have to be tied @ 1:1 ratio.



londiste said:


> What would be clocked high enough? Memory controller is tied to memory speed but the resulting bandwidth needs to fit through IF.  IF has two endpoints, the other one is in the CPU cores' chiplet. Their best bet is probably making IF wider.


  What I mean is Zen+ is all 12nm.... 14nm I/O die on package is not tied @ 1:1 ratio.


----------



## londiste (May 16, 2019)

Redwoodz said:


> Supposedly not tied strictly 1:1 now. What I meant is everything on Zen+ is 12nm. With I/O die on package @ 14nm they do not have to be tied @ 1:1 ratio.


Whether chips are made on 7nm, 12nm or 14nm process has absolutely nothing to do with this. This is an architectural or configuration decision.


----------



## Super XP (May 20, 2019)

bonehead123 said:


> Nice, *IF* it works as expected, and if it does, could we therefore look forward to having DDR-7@10k speeds in a few years for example ???
> 
> 
> 
> So if this is the case, why not just replace the IF with optical or another more advanced interlink method ??


IF is already well advanced, and most likely better than most interlink methods. IF can Handle any speed you throw at it, but it seems the actual ZEN design can't at the moment.
I am sure AMD is working out a way to allow ZEN to accept faster IF speeds, and hopefully we will see much faster IF interconnect speeds with ZEN3+



londiste said:


> What Ryzen so far benefits from with fast memory is the increased IF link speed between CCXs which should be slower no matter what memory timings or speed gets to be.
> Edit: reading up on IF speeds in current Zen, I assume AMD doubled the width of IF links from CCX to RAM, otherwise the divider would also limit RAM bandwidth.
> This is the entire problem and reason for introducing the divider - IF cannot run at that high a clock. There is hope that AMD has improved IF in Zen2 but we will ahve to wait and see what approach they have taken with it.


Once again, IF is not the issue here from how I read into it, the issue is that the Current ZEN CCXs cannot handle faster IF speeds, if it would, AMD would have added a multiplier where it would run IF at 2x or 3x the IMC. IF isn't the problem here people, but again ZEN is a new design, and I am sure AMD is working it out so it can accept faster IF speeds,
Nevertheless, even with the latency hit due to CCX to CCX communication, ZEN runs amazing and is king of Multi-threading. Newer ZEN designs will only add to this achievement.



> AMD has decided to add a new 1/2 divider mode for their on-chip bus. When enabled, it will run Infinity Fabric at half the DRAM actual clock (eg: 1250 MHz for DDR4-5000).


I am curious to see Benchmarks & Stability Tests done on manipulating this "New 1/2 Divider Mode" if possible to pump up the IF speed and see what happens.


----------



## dumo (Aug 12, 2019)

DDR4 5000 with Samsung B-die is possible


----------



## GoldenX (Aug 12, 2019)

And here I am happy with this.


----------



## TheMadDutchDude (Aug 12, 2019)

Still stuck at 4333 on my setup. I guess this will have to wait a little while longer.


----------



## dumo (Aug 13, 2019)

DDR4 5K with Samsung B-die


----------



## cucker tarlson (Aug 13, 2019)

can FCLK be overclocked ?
I mean can you push 1:1:1 ratio higher than 3733mhz ?


----------



## EarthDog (Aug 13, 2019)

cucker tarlson said:


> can FCLK be overclocked ?
> I mean can you push 1:1:1 ratio higher than 3733mhz ?


Yes. But not much past it AFAIK.


----------



## TheMadDutchDude (Aug 14, 2019)

On what board did they hit 5k? I’m still very curious as to why mine hard walls at 4333.


----------



## dumo (Aug 14, 2019)

TheMadDutchDude said:


> On what board did they hit 5k? I’m still very curious as to why mine hard walls at 4333.


Impact/formula for Asus, Godlike for MSI and Aqua for Asrock

With B-die @ 4800C14 and fclk 1900, almost match 9900K with identical memory settings


----------



## dumo (Aug 26, 2019)

Asus ROG Crosshair VIII Impact

B-die 5K DOCP with 4800C18 @ XMP


----------



## johnny-r (Aug 26, 2019)

I played around with DRAM Calculator over the weekend, wow ! I can really set my ram to its limits, way to go AMD ! I knew it is gonna be sweet but did not realize the potential with RAM is so huge !

last week Msi released some new bios updates and I grabbed the latest release for my B450m gaming plus, the latest release addressed memory compatibility issues, I've also noticed my post is much faster than before especially when I reboot, it was not just zen 2 compatibility issues on the older chipset but memory too, all sorted now, way to go Msi !


----------

