Monday, July 1st 2024

DDR5-6400 Confirmed as Sweetspot Speed of Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" Desktop Processors

by
btarunr
 Discuss (75 Comments)
AMD's upcoming Ryzen 9000 series "Granite Ridge" desktop processors based on the "Zen 5" microarchitecture will see a slight improvement in memory overclocking capabilities. A chiplet-based processor, just like the Ryzen 7000 "Raphael," "Granite Ridge" combines one or two "Zen 5" CCDs, each built on the TSMC 4 nm process, with a client I/O die (cIOD) built on the 6 nm node. The cIOD of "Granite Ridge" appears to be almost identical to that of "Raphael." This is the chiplet that contains the processor's DDR5 memory controllers.

As part of the update, Ryzen 9000 "Granite Ridge" should be able to run DDR5-6400 with a 1:1 ratio between the MCLK and FCLK domains. This is a slight increase from the DDR5-6000 sweetspot speed of Ryzen 7000 "Raphael" processors. AMD is reportedly making it possible for motherboard manufacturers and prebuilt OEMs to enable a 1:2 ratio, making it possible to run high memory speeds such as DDR5-8000, although performance returns with memory speeds would begin to diminish beyond the DDR5-6400 @ 1:1 setting. Memory manufacturers should launch a new wave of DDR5 memory kits with AMD EXPO profiles for DDR5-6400.
Source: Wccftech

Related News

Add your own comment

75 Comments on DDR5-6400 Confirmed as Sweetspot Speed of Ryzen 9000 "Zen 5" Desktop Processors

#51
bug
fevgatosI don't agree with the 3d cache point. It's the 3d cache that allows them to be competitive in games, without it things are rough. Not only intel cpus are faster in games, they are also faster while consuming less powers.

Or do you mean amd should completely stop releasing non x3d chips? That would have a huge impact on their margins I think. Ain't happening.
I think what he meant is 3D cache is more like a crutch and he'd like a proper architecture update instead. Technically speaking, he's right. But on the other hand, if it works, it works.
Posted on Reply
#52
Haile Selassie
tabascosauzAre you only using AIDA as a reference, or Intel? Or is that just XMP against XMP. That's not what I was talking about with 8000-8400. I have not seen anybody running sub-8000 show that actual memory performance can come close to a decent manual 6000 config, at those speeds.
Manually tuned to what IC can do. I will post ZenTimings later.
Posted on Reply
#53
R0H1T
bugTechnically speaking, he's right. But on the other hand, if it works, it works.
So you think the bright minds at AWS, Azure, Google, Meta, Baba, Tencent wasted probably billions on Mlian-X, Genoa-X needlessly? There's no alternative to (big) caches on chips, that's why they're a variant just like zen4c or zen5c now!
Posted on Reply
#55
R0H1T
You'll probably need to wait for AM6 or even later?
Posted on Reply
#56
bug
R0H1TSo you think the bright minds at AWS, Azure, Google, Meta, Baba, Tencent wasted probably billions on Mlian-X, Genoa-X needlessly? There's no alternative to (big) caches on chips, that's why they're a variant just like zen4c or zen5c now!
Cache is here to stay, no one was arguing that. I was just talking of the particular implementation where only one CCD gets the cache, overclocking suffers as a result...
Server parts are not what's was being discussed.
Posted on Reply
#57
evernessince
LauncestonianI should have emphasized perceptible difference in fps, I mean sure one may get extra 1 -2 fps, but at what cost with extra volts & thermals?
Thermals and Voltage are not remotely a concern at 6400. This is not anywhere near an extreme frequency to be pushing.

1-2 FPS at best I'd say. Memory in general just does not provide huge performance unlifts outside of edge cases or unless you were on DDR4.
Posted on Reply
#58
rv8000
DynoDo i need to worry about loose timings even with any of the new X3D chips? I'm most likely going to buy a X650E board.
Worry, probably not. They’ll more than likely work if you’ve already purchased/own the sticks, just may require manual adjustment to primaries.

You’ll definitely be missing out on some free performance with respect to gaming (3-4% at worst). On the positive side it gives you an opportunity to learn about ram tuning if you haven’t already dabbled.
Posted on Reply
#59
Steevo
fevgatos1) High idle -low load power draw. Like really high.

2) If - as you said - the am4 support is anything to go by, oh boy. An AM5 owner will need to pray that Intel releases some great products like alderlake, cause if they don't, you kiss your upgradability goodbye. Need I remind you older mobos didn't get support for zen 3 until 2 years after zen 3 was released, and that was because of how competitive alderlake was. By the time I actually got support for zen 3 on my b350 for zen 3 (may of 2022, lol) I had already moved to a new platform. If we get the same crap with AM5, no thanks. Like really, no, thanks.
My 7800X3D idles at 1W.
Gaming it uses 19ishW

Intel uses way more power than AMD for every function.

I run 64GB at 6000MT with tight timings and have no issues. AM5 had some issues when new, the boot times a still longer than I like, but it's a stable platform that works well and is more than competitive on all fronts.
Posted on Reply
#60
JustBenching
SteevoMy 7800X3D idles at 1W.
Gaming it uses 19ishW

Intel uses way more power than AMD for every function.

I run 64GB at 6000MT with tight timings and have no issues. AM5 had some issues when new, the boot times a still longer than I like, but it's a stable platform that works well and is more than competitive on all fronts.
No, it doesn't. You may think it does, but it doesn't.
Posted on Reply
#61
Makaveli
SteevoMy 7800X3D idles at 1W.
Gaming it uses 19ishW

Intel uses way more power than AMD for every function.
You say that so confidently and wrong.

Intel cpu's idle lower due to being Monolithic

With AMD chiplet arch they have to power the IOD while keeping the links active.

Intel uses more power when medium to high usage however at idle they can shut most things down while AMD cannot and this is why intel Idle's lower.

Some good reading for you below.

Ryzen vs Intel's idle power consumption (whole system) : r/Amd (reddit.com)
Posted on Reply
#63
JustBenching
MakaveliYou say that so confidently and wrong.

Intel cpu's idle lower due to being Monolithic

With AMD chiplet arch they have to power the IOD while keeping the links active.

Intel uses more power when medium to high usage however at idle they can shut most things down while AMD cannot and this is why intel Idle's lower.

Some good reading for you below.

Ryzen vs Intel's idle power consumption (whole system) : r/Amd (reddit.com)
Even in that thread those numbers are wonky. They are testing system which is kinda meh, depends a lot on the motherboard.

Measuring directly from the 12v cables a 5800x draw 26 watts at idle with XMP 3200ram on. Drops to around 20-21w with out of the box memory, and goes above 26 with higher speed memory. Intel configured at balanced power plan is showing low single digits under the same scenario. We are talking 3 to 5 watts.

That's not a big difference to be fair, but problem is the more you are running on the background the bigger becomes the difference. Running steam + Syncthing + fancontrol + hwinfo on a 7950x shows it drawing up to 70w. Same stuff on my 12900k is at 15-20. Most notable cause as far as I've understood is that the ryzen part, besides the IOD etc. is constantly trying to hit max single core clockspeeds for relatively very low loads. It keeps on pushing for no reason, and it's one major complain my brother has with his 7950x. It just doesn't want to chill out and relax :D
Posted on Reply
#64
R0H1T
Why testing from the cables then, why not directly the CPU socket you know where the actual consumption should be measured?
Posted on Reply
#65
JustBenching
R0H1TWhy testing from the cables then, why not directly the CPU socket you know where the actual consumption should be measured?
Cause it's a bit more complicated, and my friend that was doing this crap didn't have the time for it. Does it really make a difference? I get the vrm argument, but the difference should remain relatively large
Posted on Reply
#66
Makaveli
fevgatosEven in that thread those numbers are wonky. They are testing system which is kinda meh, depends a lot on the motherboard.

Measuring directly from the 12v cables a 5800x draw 26 watts at idle with XMP 3200ram on. Drops to around 20-21w with out of the box memory, and goes above 26 with higher speed memory. Intel configured at balanced power plan is showing low single digits under the same scenario. We are talking 3 to 5 watts.

That's not a big difference to be fair, but problem is the more you are running on the background the bigger becomes the difference. Running steam + Syncthing + fancontrol + hwinfo on a 7950x shows it drawing up to 70w. Same stuff on my 12900k is at 15-20. Most notable cause as far as I've understood is that the ryzen part, besides the IOD etc. is constantly trying to hit max single core clockspeeds for relatively very low loads. It keeps on pushing for no reason, and it's one major complain my brother has with his 7950x. It just doesn't want to chill out and relax :D
We won't see comparable idle numbers I think until AMD has to chance to redo the IOD for Zen 6.

And yes it varies per motherboard.
Posted on Reply
#67
ratirt
MakaveliWe won't see comparable idle numbers I think until AMD has to chance to redo the IOD for Zen 6.

And yes it varies per motherboard.
Why would you want to see comparable Idle powers on 2 totally different CPUs architectures? you can still compare these for sure but dont expect to have the same results with totally different CPUs. Honestly, you guys are arguing about idle power if it's 10 or 15 watts when the CPU usage at load is 400wats and nobody seem to talk about that. I think it is fair to say that the 7800x3d is the best choice for gaming and nobody disputes that. Not saying best platform but gaming solely and solely processor.
HWUB did a video recently about the best gaming CPU. Like these guys or not but they share some thoughts and the conclusion is obvious.
Posted on Reply
#68
Makaveli
ratirtWhy would you want to see comparable Idle powers on 2 totally different CPUs architectures? you can still compare these for sure but dont expect to have the same results with totally different CPUs. Honestly, you guys are arguing about idle power if it's 10 or 15 watts when the CPU usage at load is 400wats and nobody seem to talk about that. I think it is fair to say that the 7800x3d is the best choice for gaming and nobody disputes that. Not saying best platform but gaming solely and solely processor.
HWUB did a video recently about the best gaming CPU. Like these guys or not but they share some thoughts and the conclusion is obvious.
Idle power consumption is relevant.

And for the love of god people do more than play games on their PC.
Posted on Reply
#69
R0H1T
It's not relevant if you don't turn off your monitor idling at 5mins or so. That consumes more power than any modern day processor at idle! Generally speaking idle power is pretty good across the board on sub 10nm nodes, excellent for Apple of course.
Posted on Reply
#70
JustBenching
R0H1TIt's not relevant if you don't turn off your monitor idling at 5mins or so. That consumes more power than any modern day processor at idle! Generally speaking idle power is pretty good across the board on sub 10nm nodes, excellent for Apple of course.
True, especially oled (although with black background I doubt that's the case). But for example, Im using my PC to stream with moonlight to a couple of devices (my switch, my rg405m, nvidia shield etc.) so the PC basically stays on 16 hours at least - and some times just the whole day cause I forget to turn it off. The only suitable upgrade for me would the 7950x 3d, but the thing is if that thing - and im pretty certain - consumes 50w on average vs 10w on my current CPU for the things im doing, then it kinda adds up.
Posted on Reply
#71
Slizzo
Guess I'm lucky running my memory at 6400C32 1:1 on my board then...
Posted on Reply
#72
ratirt
MakaveliIdle power consumption is relevant.

And for the love of god people do more than play games on their PC.
I know it is important but the importance is, in my opinion, lower than full load power or consumption under load or any other task this processor is created for. It's not build for idle but to do work.
Obviously, the CPUs can do more than gaming but x3d is mainly for that purpose . It is the fastest for gaming there so a simple clarification. You can do all other stuff with it though but that is an obvious thing so I didn't mention it and gaming was the topic at hand that is why i brought it up.
Posted on Reply
#73
Kaleid
ratirtOr you can just OC the kit. :)
I reduced latencies, main one from 36 to 30. Not that I notice anything at all but..
Posted on Reply
#74
salty
SkylinestarI'm praying for 24GBx2 kit with good timing. It doesn't exist today yet.
I have a 24GBx2 kit with CL 32-39-39-102 EXPO timings. It's not bad out of the box.
SlizzoGuess I'm lucky running my memory at 6400C32 1:1 on my board then...
Same with a 7800x3d. Currently testing for stability. Board and kit say it's capable of 6400, so holding true thus far.
Posted on Reply
#75
RootinTootinPootin
Me: with 8400 CL36 DDR5

I will never go back to that speed again, that is kinda slow now for my personal taste, my gut feel tells me to be comfortable with at least 7200-7400mhz CL32 just to cure the itch, its 2024 now and midway approaching 2025, DDR5 has already matured and pretty much evident reaching new heights with the speed it can now attain.

(I did not say zen 5 is bad in any way)
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 21st, 2024 06:51 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts