Intel Core i9 9900K processor review
Intel Core i7 9700K processor review
Intel Core i5 9600K processor review
MSI MEG Z390 ACE review
ASUS ROG Maximus XI Hero review
Crucial P1 M.2 1000GB SSD Review
Corsair Force Series MP510 M.2 SSD Review
MSI GeForce RTX 2070 Armor 8G review
ASUS Turbo GeForce RTX 2070 8GB review
Guru3D PC Buyers Guide Autumn 2018
AMD Ryzen 7 Memory And Tweaking Analysis review
Posted by: on: 04/04/2017 08:44 AM [
50 comment(s) ]
In this article we'll take the new G.Skill Flare X 3200 MHz memory kit and have a closer look at the effect of memory frequencies on applications and games. Next to that we'll also address tweaking a bit so you can peek what effect faster memory and a CPU tweak has as an overall impact on Ryzen 7 performance.
Read article
Advertisement
pages 1 2
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33506
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33506
Posted on: 04/04/2017 09:14 AM
First !!
Well joke aside.
Got the same ram for my msi xpower setup with bios 1.3
The ram are stuck at 2400 mhz.. if i go 3200 mhz windows will blue screen me with memory error. So hope this soon is relevant for me.
Yeah I am releasing the XPower review tomorrow and am also complaining about memory compatibility in that review as well. MSI will release new BIOSes by next week that hopefully addresses this.
First !!
Well joke aside.
Got the same ram for my msi xpower setup with bios 1.3
The ram are stuck at 2400 mhz.. if i go 3200 mhz windows will blue screen me with memory error. So hope this soon is relevant for me.
Yeah I am releasing the XPower review tomorrow and am also complaining about memory compatibility in that review as well. MSI will release new BIOSes by next week that hopefully addresses this.
Cryio
Senior Member
Posts: 102
Senior Member
Posts: 102
Posted on: 04/04/2017 10:27 AM
On page 4: "When Microsoft launched Windows Vista 1 GB was just be bare minimum recommended specification. They actually recommend 2 GB with Windows 7 at minimum."
Actually Vista's minimum was 512 MB and W7's was 1 GB.
On page 4: "When Microsoft launched Windows Vista 1 GB was just be bare minimum recommended specification. They actually recommend 2 GB with Windows 7 at minimum."
Actually Vista's minimum was 512 MB and W7's was 1 GB.
Sunesha
Member
Posts: 26
Member
Posts: 26
Posted on: 04/04/2017 11:17 AM
Thanks for the testing. This was definitely a helpful insight which memory to buy.
Thanks for the testing. This was definitely a helpful insight which memory to buy.
Evildead666
Senior Member
Posts: 859
Senior Member
Posts: 859
Posted on: 04/04/2017 12:37 PM
Great test hilbert.
Good to see some results at above 1080p also
Great test hilbert.
Good to see some results at above 1080p also
Dygaza
Senior Member
Posts: 535
Senior Member
Posts: 535
Posted on: 04/04/2017 12:57 PM
Very good article. There are very often very impressive gains with faster memories. Now we just need those bios updates to come so we get access to even faster memories.
Very good article. There are very often very impressive gains with faster memories. Now we just need those bios updates to come so we get access to even faster memories.
HittriX
Senior Member
Posts: 152
Senior Member
Posts: 152
Posted on: 04/04/2017 01:18 PM
I'm here with the same memory kit you got with your r7 1800x unboxing kit,
Corsair CMK16GX4M2B3000C15, and i am also stuck at 2400mhz with my MSI B350 Tomahawk at bios 1.2 for now.
I'm here with the same memory kit you got with your r7 1800x unboxing kit,
Corsair CMK16GX4M2B3000C15, and i am also stuck at 2400mhz with my MSI B350 Tomahawk at bios 1.2 for now.
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9017
Senior Member
Posts: 9017
Posted on: 04/04/2017 01:19 PM
Great review/test. So an overclock shows more improvement than memory bandwidth increases, but memory does make a difference. Would love to see 3600MHz memory working with Ryzen.
Hilbert, do you think you will have time to test the R7 with a Fury X or 480, and compare it to Intel so we can put this new theory that Nvidia is gimping AMD to bed or shine light on it with reputable data.
Great review/test. So an overclock shows more improvement than memory bandwidth increases, but memory does make a difference. Would love to see 3600MHz memory working with Ryzen.
Hilbert, do you think you will have time to test the R7 with a Fury X or 480, and compare it to Intel so we can put this new theory that Nvidia is gimping AMD to bed or shine light on it with reputable data.
Embra
Senior Member
Posts: 674
Senior Member
Posts: 674
Posted on: 04/04/2017 01:19 PM
Awesome review HH. I appreciate the detailed through reviews you do. Main reason I love this site. Thank you!
Awesome review HH. I appreciate the detailed through reviews you do. Main reason I love this site. Thank you!
Embra
Senior Member
Posts: 674
Senior Member
Posts: 674
Posted on: 04/04/2017 01:22 PM
Similar issue for me. I had better success with the cpu at base clock first, then OCing oddly.
Yeah I am releasing the XPower review tomorrow and am also complaining about memory compatibility in that review as well. MSI will release new BIOSes by next week that hopefully addresses this.
Similar issue for me. I had better success with the cpu at base clock first, then OCing oddly.
Denial
Senior Member
Posts: 11568
Senior Member
Posts: 11568
Posted on: 04/04/2017 01:39 PM
On page 4: "When Microsoft launched Windows Vista 1 GB was just be bare minimum recommended specification. They actually recommend 2 GB with Windows 7 at minimum."
Actually Vista's minimum was 512 MB and W7's was 1 GB.
512 was for Vista home basic.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/919183/system-requirements-for-windows-vista
The other editions were more. I only remember because I tried to install it on an older system with 512mb of ram when it came out and it wouldn't let me, ended up using XP.
I don't know about Win 7.
On page 4: "When Microsoft launched Windows Vista 1 GB was just be bare minimum recommended specification. They actually recommend 2 GB with Windows 7 at minimum."
Actually Vista's minimum was 512 MB and W7's was 1 GB.
512 was for Vista home basic.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/919183/system-requirements-for-windows-vista
The other editions were more. I only remember because I tried to install it on an older system with 512mb of ram when it came out and it wouldn't let me, ended up using XP.
I don't know about Win 7.
Loophole35
Senior Member
Posts: 9017
Senior Member
Posts: 9017
Posted on: 04/04/2017 01:53 PM
512 was for Vista home basic.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/919183/system-requirements-for-windows-vista
The other editions were more. I only remember because I tried to install it on an older system with 512mb of ram when it came out and it wouldn't let me, ended up using XP.
I don't know about Win 7.
IIRC 32bit would let you install home on 1GB but 64bit had 2GB minimum.
512 was for Vista home basic.
https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/919183/system-requirements-for-windows-vista
The other editions were more. I only remember because I tried to install it on an older system with 512mb of ram when it came out and it wouldn't let me, ended up using XP.
I don't know about Win 7.
IIRC 32bit would let you install home on 1GB but 64bit had 2GB minimum.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33506
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33506
Posted on: 04/04/2017 01:55 PM
Hilbert, do you think you will have time to test the R7 with a Fury X or 480, and compare it to Intel so we can put this new theory that Nvidia is gimping AMD to bed or shine light on it with reputable data.
Honestly I'd rather wait until VEGA arrives as we'd need a really fast rendering card here to be able to show a proportional enough difference. GPUs like 480 and even Fury X are much more GPU bound in 1080p. Anyway I do not want to rip open this discussion again in a thread with a different topic. I'll think about it, but right now I am drowning in time with too many reviews in the queue to be able to that.
Hilbert, do you think you will have time to test the R7 with a Fury X or 480, and compare it to Intel so we can put this new theory that Nvidia is gimping AMD to bed or shine light on it with reputable data.
Honestly I'd rather wait until VEGA arrives as we'd need a really fast rendering card here to be able to show a proportional enough difference. GPUs like 480 and even Fury X are much more GPU bound in 1080p. Anyway I do not want to rip open this discussion again in a thread with a different topic. I'll think about it, but right now I am drowning in time with too many reviews in the queue to be able to that.
malitze
Member
Posts: 88
Member
Posts: 88
Posted on: 04/04/2017 02:01 PM
Great article as usual. I'd be interested in your take on what kind of voltage you'd use on a daily basis.
Great article as usual. I'd be interested in your take on what kind of voltage you'd use on a daily basis.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33506
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33506
Posted on: 04/04/2017 02:08 PM
Overclocked CPU? Depends on your setting and preference.
Ryzen needs roughly 1.45 Volts at stress on all cores in the 4.0~4.1 Ghz domain. Now you can fix that voltage at 1.45 which adds roughly 50 Watts under stress on all cores or ~ +15 Watts in idle.
If you go a little deeper into fine-tuning you could OC based on offset. Say for each automated clock step upwards an offset of +100mv would do the trick. At that stage your overall power consumption would go down.
Great article as usual. I'd be interested in your take on what kind of voltage you'd use on a daily basis.
Overclocked CPU? Depends on your setting and preference.
Ryzen needs roughly 1.45 Volts at stress on all cores in the 4.0~4.1 Ghz domain. Now you can fix that voltage at 1.45 which adds roughly 50 Watts under stress on all cores or ~ +15 Watts in idle.
If you go a little deeper into fine-tuning you could OC based on offset. Say for each automated clock step upwards an offset of +100mv would do the trick. At that stage your overall power consumption would go down.
malitze
Member
Posts: 88
Member
Posts: 88
Posted on: 04/04/2017 02:31 PM
Overclocked CPU? Depends on your setting and preference.
Ryzen needs roughly 1.45 Volts at stress on all cores in the 4.0~4.1 Ghz domain. Now you can fix that voltage at 1.45 which adds roughly 50 Watts under stress on all cores or ~ +15 Watts in idle.
If you go a little deeper into fine-tuning you could OC based on offset. Say for each automated clock step upwards an offset of +100mv would do the trick. At that stage your overall power consumption would go down.
I see, I'm kinda hesitant to go that high 24/7. I'm at 3.925 GHz with a mild +43,75mV offset, I'll just stick with that for now. Thanks
Overclocked CPU? Depends on your setting and preference.
Ryzen needs roughly 1.45 Volts at stress on all cores in the 4.0~4.1 Ghz domain. Now you can fix that voltage at 1.45 which adds roughly 50 Watts under stress on all cores or ~ +15 Watts in idle.
If you go a little deeper into fine-tuning you could OC based on offset. Say for each automated clock step upwards an offset of +100mv would do the trick. At that stage your overall power consumption would go down.
I see, I'm kinda hesitant to go that high 24/7. I'm at 3.925 GHz with a mild +43,75mV offset, I'll just stick with that for now. Thanks
Dygaza
Senior Member
Posts: 535
Senior Member
Posts: 535
Posted on: 04/04/2017 02:52 PM
One possiblity ofc is always downclock cpu's. Get Ryzen And I7-6900K to run at 2GHz each and see how nvidia / AMD behaves on that comparision. Should make AMD cards cpu bound at 1080 a lot more that way aswell.
In all honesty, people have been too eager to blame nvidia for gimping that it almost sound like they would do it on purpose. New arch need time to get working optimally. I would only worry if this claimed performance gap would exists after few months, but it's still way too early.
Honestly I'd rather wait until VEGA arrives as we'd need a really fast rendering card here to be able to show a proportional enough difference. GPUs like 480 and even Fury X are much more GPU bound in 1080p. Anyway I do not want to rip open this discussion again in a thread with a different topic. I'll think about it, but right now I am drowning in time with too many reviews in the queue to be able to that.
One possiblity ofc is always downclock cpu's. Get Ryzen And I7-6900K to run at 2GHz each and see how nvidia / AMD behaves on that comparision. Should make AMD cards cpu bound at 1080 a lot more that way aswell.
In all honesty, people have been too eager to blame nvidia for gimping that it almost sound like they would do it on purpose. New arch need time to get working optimally. I would only worry if this claimed performance gap would exists after few months, but it's still way too early.
JamesSneed
Senior Member
Posts: 354
Senior Member
Posts: 354
Posted on: 04/04/2017 03:04 PM
Thanks
Thanks for this review. Personally the cost is a non issue. If the memory is fast and stable so what is an extra 50-70 bucks on a new build. Its on par with needing 4 sticks of RAM for the x99 just in this case you need two sticks of high bandwidth memory to get the most out of Ryzen.
btw minor typo on page 8:
"bandwidth numbers will chance bigtime:"
Thanks
Thanks for this review. Personally the cost is a non issue. If the memory is fast and stable so what is an extra 50-70 bucks on a new build. Its on par with needing 4 sticks of RAM for the x99 just in this case you need two sticks of high bandwidth memory to get the most out of Ryzen.
btw minor typo on page 8:
"bandwidth numbers will chance bigtime:"
Amx85
Senior Member
Posts: 311
Senior Member
Posts: 311
Posted on: 04/04/2017 03:07 PM
Thanks, nice review but you forget to use the lastest BIOS
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty%20X370%20Professional%20Gaming/#BIOS
Last Stable is 1.60
--changes:
1.Improve XMP DRAM compatibility.
2.Add Simultaneous Multi-Threading(SMT) item in BIOS setup.
And Lastest Beta 1.93D
--changes:
Improve XMP DRAM compatibility.
Good day for all
Thanks, nice review but you forget to use the lastest BIOS
http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/Fatal1ty%20X370%20Professional%20Gaming/#BIOS
Last Stable is 1.60
--changes:
1.Improve XMP DRAM compatibility.
2.Add Simultaneous Multi-Threading(SMT) item in BIOS setup.
And Lastest Beta 1.93D
--changes:
Improve XMP DRAM compatibility.
Good day for all
chispy
Senior Member
Posts: 8374
Senior Member
Posts: 8374
Posted on: 04/04/2017 03:15 PM
Thank you Hilbert for this great guide/review of the memory scaling/ cpu overclocking on Ryzen cpus. That should put to rest all those comments that Ryzen 7 it's not a well suited 1080p gaming cpu. Performance will keep up Ryzen with more mature Bios as well. That's only the tip of the iceberg
, also we have to look forward for a lot more software optimizations side of things that should bring out even much more performance out of it. All in all Ryzen it's bringing what most of us were waiting for , an affordable 16 threaded cpu for future proofness. 8 core 16 threads it's the new 4 core year 2017 and going forward into the future.
Thank you Hilbert for this great guide/review of the memory scaling/ cpu overclocking on Ryzen cpus. That should put to rest all those comments that Ryzen 7 it's not a well suited 1080p gaming cpu. Performance will keep up Ryzen with more mature Bios as well. That's only the tip of the iceberg
, also we have to look forward for a lot more software optimizations side of things that should bring out even much more performance out of it. All in all Ryzen it's bringing what most of us were waiting for , an affordable 16 threaded cpu for future proofness. 8 core 16 threads it's the new 4 core year 2017 and going forward into the future.
H83
Senior Member
Posts: 2391
Senior Member
Posts: 2391
Posted on: 04/04/2017 03:26 PM
Very nice article! It´s crazy the performance Ryzen gains by using faster memory. But paying more than 200€ for 16Gb of RAM seems too steep, at least for me.
Hilbert, rergarding Vega, do you any info about a possible release date?
Very nice article! It´s crazy the performance Ryzen gains by using faster memory. But paying more than 200€ for 16Gb of RAM seems too steep, at least for me.
Hilbert, rergarding Vega, do you any info about a possible release date?
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 3235
Senior Member
Posts: 3235
Posted on: 04/04/2017 03:41 PM
So it seems for 1080p games, you get roughly 1FPS for every 100-200Mhz you go up. Not bad.
I wonder if the performance impact is greater on the lower-core systems, since they'll be less starved for bandwidth.
So it seems for 1080p games, you get roughly 1FPS for every 100-200Mhz you go up. Not bad.
I wonder if the performance impact is greater on the lower-core systems, since they'll be less starved for bandwidth.
Arbie
Member
Posts: 95
Member
Posts: 95
Posted on: 04/04/2017 04:08 PM
Thanks for this unique piece of work... haven't seen any such analysis elsewhere and the results were surprising. I didn't expect memory bandwidth to have nearly such a large effect on apps and especially on games. Very good to know when thinking where to allocate the cash.
Thanks for this unique piece of work... haven't seen any such analysis elsewhere and the results were surprising. I didn't expect memory bandwidth to have nearly such a large effect on apps and especially on games. Very good to know when thinking where to allocate the cash.
Hilbert Hagedoorn
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33506
Don Vito Corleone
Posts: 33506
Posted on: 04/04/2017 04:16 PM
Nothing official no, but logic dictates May/June, in that Computex timeframe.
Hilbert, rergarding Vega, do you any info about a possible release date?
Nothing official no, but logic dictates May/June, in that Computex timeframe.
PrMinisterGR
Senior Member
Posts: 6967
Senior Member
Posts: 6967
Posted on: 04/04/2017 05:13 PM
The Linux driver has been submitted, so it shouldn't be very long now.
The Linux driver has been submitted, so it shouldn't be very long now.
pages 1 2
Click here to post a comment for this article on the message forum.
Junior Member
Posts: 11
First !!
Well joke aside.
Got the same ram for my msi xpower setup with bios 1.3
The ram are stuck at 2400 mhz.. if i go 3200 mhz windows will blue screen me with memory error. So hope this soon is relevant for me.