Radeon RX 6700, 6700 XT & 6750 XT users club

[Chrispy_]

Undervolt you will be happier. Adrenaline software will tell you the lowest safe point for your card. And it will check the safe overclock of both the gpu and vram. Make sure you also tune your fan and power settings.

Adrenaline's auto-undervolt is VERY conservative. I run 1090mv on the slider and Adrenaline suggested 1175mv. Potentially 1090 might not be 100% stable as I had my first driver crash and reset to default Wattman running Disco Elysium, of all things - but at the very least, it's stable enough for me with just one crash in several weeks at 1090mv.

The voltage suggested on the slider doesn't take offset into account though, so my 1090mv setting results in GPU-Z measuring 975mv at game clocks.

 

[Macro Device]

Not sure if Gigabyte is similar

It's literally the same.

your cpu is fine

May be untrue. It suffered two shortcuts and now it can't run 8c16t without getting absurdly watt-hungry so I stay 8c8t. But regardless of CPU settings I get instant death if above 4G is on and fast timings are on.

something in the bios or something is set wrong

Any other setting than above 4G changes nothing. Already checked if my RAM settings are to blame. Even replaced mem sticks with 100% working. It's either CPU or GPU.

 

[amd64skater]

Adrenaline's auto-undervolt is VERY conservative. I run 1090mv on the slider and Adrenaline suggested 1175mv. Potentially 1090 might not be 100% stable as I had my first driver crash and reset to default Wattman running Disco Elysium, of all things - but at the very least, it's stable enough for me with just one crash in several weeks at 1090mv.

The voltage suggested on the slider doesn't take offset into account though, so my 1090mv setting results in GPU-Z measuring 975mv at game clocks.

Well yeah it's conservative. But it gives a starting point for newbies. I also found that if I max overclock gpu and vram the voltage settings need to be raised.

It's literally the same.

May be untrue. It suffered two shortcuts and now it can't run 8c16t without getting absurdly watt-hungry so I stay 8c8t. But regardless of CPU settings I get instant death if above 4G is on and fast timings are on.

Any other setting than above 4G changes nothing. Already checked if my RAM settings are to blame. Even replaced mem sticks with 100% working. It's either CPU or GPU.

It might be the board.

 

[Ruru]

Bumped to 1125mV and set the clocks to 2600-2700MHz, seems fine so far after few Superposition runs, hotspot at 95C.

 

[amd64skater]

Bumped to 1125mV and set the clocks to 2600-2700MHz, seems fine so far after few Superposition runs, hotspot at 95C.

Hotspot temp is about normal for benchmarking.

 

[siluro818]

It's 3.0 de jure but with the 11th gen CPU, I run PCI-E 4.0.

You don't say.

Well, then I'll snag a different CPU and see if it makes any difference.

You're going to switch to AMD CPU just for fast timings on your GPU?

 

[Macro Device]

You're going to switch to AMD CPU just for fast timings on your GPU?

I'm going to buy a new CPU (11700K or 11900K, not decided yet) so I could have two computers. Main will feature the new CPU and the supporting one will contain this engineering sample I already almost bricked.

And fast timings will be tested once again so I'll be sure if the CPU is the culprit.

Buying an AMD CPU ain't planned. Not yet at least.

 

[siluro818]

I'm going to buy a new CPU (11700K or 11900K, not decided yet) so I could have two computers. Main will feature the new CPU and the supporting one will contain this engineering sample I already almost bricked.

And fast timings will be tested once again so I'll be sure if the CPU is the culprit.

Buying an AMD CPU ain't planned. Not yet at least.

Right, but everyone else that replied to this thread is on Zen. Pretty sure that's why their ReBAR implementation doesn't cause trouble with the VRAM timings of the Radeon - it's the AMD chipsets.

 

[amd64skater]

Right, but everyone else that replied to this thread is on Zen. Pretty sure that's why their ReBAR implementation doesn't cause trouble with the VRAM timings of the Radeon - it's the AMD chipsets.

You know I didn't think of that. But AMD does make it easier when you pair an AMD CPU and GPU. Also I did notice that the 5000 series CPU's matched with a RX 6000 GPU's or higher on pcie 4.0 chipsets perform pretty good.

@Beginner Micro Device ok it might be your cpu. I didn't realize it has integrated graphics built in. So yeah get a cpu that's strictly a CPU. Not sure what to get because they change all the time I can't keep up. AMD is simpler with it's lineup but I know Intel is faster in the sense.

 

[Kodehawa]

Got yet another question I didn't find no clear answer over the Internet.

The card is a 6700 XT.
The issue is the complete loss of stability with fast memory timings (dead hangs, green screen included sometimes). This happens even with everything else @ stock.

Default timings cause no such bollocks regardless of the clock. Even 2150 MHz is fine with timings @ default.

What I tried:

• Lowering clocks to absurdly low values (500 MHz GPU & 500 MHz VRAM)
• Reinstalling Windows 10
• Installing a different version of Windows 10
• Installing Windows 11
• Drivers 22.5.1, 22.11.2, 23.2.1, 23.2.2
• Flashing another BIOS
• Underclocking the rest of my PC
• Installing the card in other PCI-E slots
• Installing the card in a different PC
• Tweaking other Adrenaling settings
• Summoning the Lucifer.

Does it 100% mean I got bad not good enough VRAM modules? Or is it some kinda bug and these fast timings are somehow too demanding even for the best VRAM chips ever and I can reconfigure that?

Fast timings are demanding yeah.
One tid-bit: the timings get adjusted the more frequency you give it. By that I mean, at 2150MHz the timings tend to be looser than at 2000MHz. Usually games don't care about this, but productivity stuff (like raw memory copy) will.

I found that when overclocking for gaming, fast timing didn't make a difference (I can run 2150MHz FT, but it runs like at 1fps more than 2150, same goes even for 2000MHz FT). It makes a difference on benchmarking like Time Spy and Superposition if the memory can handle it, but that's about it.

Also on RDNA2 you don't get memory artifacts usually, but performance will lower if your memory OC isn't stable. Check with benchmarks like Superposition.

 

[Macro Device]

it has integrated graphics built in

Irrelevant. My iGPU is buggy and is only enabled when it's a life and death matter. Disabled 99.99% of the time. This is the reason number 0 I want a new CPU. Intel's iGPU is a must.

performance will lower if your memory OC isn't stable

Already known. My sweet spot is setting 2120 in Wattman. Lower values are slower and highers are slower as well.

 

[amd64skater]

Fast timings are demanding yeah.
One tid-bit: the timings get adjusted the more frequency you give it. By that I mean, at 2150MHz the timings tend to be looser than at 2000MHz. Usually games don't care about this, but productivity stuff (like raw memory copy) will.

I found that when overclocking for gaming, fast timing didn't make a difference (I can run 2150MHz FT, but it runs like at 1fps more than 2150, same goes even for 2000MHz FT). It makes a difference on benchmarking like Time Spy and Superposition if the memory can handle it, but that's about it.

Also on RDNA2 you don't get memory artifacts usually, but performance will lower if your memory OC isn't stable. Check with benchmarks like Superposition.

Yeah what @Kodehawa said. I have noticed the same thing on my card.

Irrelevant. My iGPU is buggy and is only enabled when it's a life and death matter. Disabled 99.99% of the time. This is the reason number 0 I want a new CPU. Intel's iGPU is a must.


Already known. My sweet spot is setting 2120 in Wattman. Lower values are slower and highers are slower as well.

What I was meaning about integrated cpu is that performance wise they don't perform as well as their non integrated counterpart.

 

[Kodehawa]

Already known. My sweet spot is setting 2120 in Wattman. Lower values are slower and highers are slower as well.

I doubt you need to worry about Fast Timings then. Gaming performance improvement is minimal (I've noticed in HW Legacy I can get like one fps or two by enabling FT, but that's it, in most other games its zero)

 

[AusWolf]

Right, but everyone else that replied to this thread is on Zen. Pretty sure that's why their ReBAR implementation doesn't cause trouble with the VRAM timings of the Radeon - it's the AMD chipsets.

The CPU does nothing with VRAM fast timings. I have an 11700 (non-K) in my HTPC and a 6500 XT, and turning fast timings on is not an issue.

 

[GreiverBlade]

mine also work with AMD SAM (Smart Access Memory, which is the actuall acronym for ReBAR for AMD ) and fast timing ... just tested today

if i have to choose between the two .... i disable fast timing over ReBAR/AMD SAM anyday!

Dude your cpu is fine. I just think something in the bios or something is set wrong.

more than fine indeed

 

[RJARRRPCGP]

fast memory timings (goes bananas as in it takes less than 3 minutes to bug out).

Does Windows crash and reboot with a fatal WHEA error for "Cache Hierarchy Error"?

 

[Macro Device]

integrated cpu is that performance wise they don't perform as well as their non integrated counterpart.

Where did you read this nonsense? CPU-wise they are identical and F-CPUs are weaker in general due to their AV1 lack. Say, watching videos on YT loads CPU cores in F-CPUs whilst iGPU-fueled ones use iGPUs for that leaving more room for more important tasks. Be my iGPU fine, I'd no doubt enabled it.

more than fine

This needs tests.

Does Windows crash and reboot with a fatal WHEA error for "Cache Hierarchy Error"?

It doesn't. I can't learn what error it crashes with, these crashes are too dead to be useful. Nothing I can gather from Event Viewer. "The system has been shut down unexpectedly," and that's it.

 

[Kodehawa]

Where did you read this nonsense? CPU-wise they are identical and F-CPUs are weaker in general due to their AV1 lack. Say, watching videos on YT loads CPU cores in F-CPUs whilst iGPU-fueled ones use iGPUs for that leaving more room for more important tasks. Be my iGPU fine, I'd no doubt enabled it.

YouTube uses VP9 mostly, but does indeed use AV1. The 6700XT supports up to 8K 60 AV1 decode (tho its mostly 4k60 and 8k30, anything higher drops frames) so the iGPU isn't doing work, the decode block on your dGPU is.

 

[Macro Device]

uses VP9 mostly

Oh, I always mix them up. The point is iGPU is a very good thing to have so I don't see any reason to use Intel's F processors. They ask for their iGPUs so little it doesn't mean a thing but this iGPU is a good helper. QSV, VP9, AV1, extra video card in case dGPU goes kaput, you name it. And it takes no space inside the PC case. $10–30 difference isn't worth it at all.

 

[Kyan]

Yeah, the 6700XT I used was a reference card - It looks like it should be a good cooler - it has the weight and build quality with plenty of fins and ventilation but when you actually use it it's a bit underwhelming on both noise and temperatures :\

The 6750XT have a bigger cooler than the 6700XT and are not that much power hungry, so it's a much quieter card if you don't push it to 100% all the time. I actually take it for the design and the performance review wasn't that bad (and the price of other manufacturer was a lot higher)

 

[AusWolf]

Oh, I always mix them up. The point is iGPU is a very good thing to have so I don't see any reason to use Intel's F processors. They ask for their iGPUs so little it doesn't mean a thing but this iGPU is a good helper. QSV, VP9, AV1, extra video card in case dGPU goes kaput, you name it. And it takes no space inside the PC case. $10–30 difference isn't worth it at all.

The iGPU doesn't do decode when you have a dGPU installed.

With that said, I always go for the iGPU option when choosing a CPU, mainly for debugging purposes and the extra monitor outputs I can use. Modern GPUs tend to have only one HDMI output these days, and I need two.

 

[Ruru]

The iGPU doesn't do decode when you have a dGPU installed.

With that said, I always go for the iGPU option when choosing a CPU, mainly for debugging purposes and the extra monitor outputs I can use. Modern GPUs tend to have only one HDMI output these days, and I need two.

Valid points there if you don't have a box full of graphics cards like I do

Agree on the HDMI part, my only HDMI goes to VR headset. And I have to use a DP-DVI cable for connecting my secondary monitor (ViewSonic 24" 1080p VA from 2015) as it has only VGA & DVI.

 

[AusWolf]

Valid points there if you don't have a box full of graphics cards like I do

I do too, but my largest build is m-ATX, so space for expansion cards is severely limited.

 

[Ruru]

I do too, but my largest build is m-ATX, so space for expansion cards is severely limited.

Ah, I'm on the same boat, my only accessable PCIe slot goes to an USB3.0 card as this B550 mATX board just doesn't have enough ports.

 

[AusWolf]

Ah, I'm on the same boat, my only accessable PCIe slot goes to an USB3.0 card as this B550 mATX board just doesn't have enough ports.

Mine used to go to an m.2 adapter when I was on Intel, but my current B650 board has two sockets coming from the CPU, so I'm fine with using only those... luckily, because the main x16 slot is shifted down by one slot, so the bottom one is the only breathing room for the graphics card.