Dram Calculator Fr-xmp Isnt Reading Correct Values

Page 2 of 3

That's rather weird, I got the same kit as you a calendar month agone and mine is totally stable with the "fast" setting and with 3733Mhz instead of 3600Mhz and 1,35v (XMP standard voltage), my board is the Aorus Master though. What are your RAM temps?
https://imgur.com/a/SjKfGaU
cubus New Member

Messages:

6

Likes Received:

2

GPU:

to the guys request what would be the purpose of this tools, outside of overclocking.
Gigabyte x570 gaming 10 (f11))+ viper steel 3600 cl17 XMP = bluecreen symphony.
Used the calculator, created a fast profile + inverse IF speed + changed voltage = no more than bluescreens - and the timings are better that the xmp ones (i am not good at ram oc, i but followed the labels for ram timings and then entered amd overclocking screen to alter IF speed).
Tested the new release, minor improvements to the fast settings + at present i tin keep Geardown mode on > applied new timings = works like a charm
Kool64 Maha Guru

Messages:

1,193

Likes Received:

481

GPU:

It still doesn't support my dual rank 3600 Hynix MFR :/
IchimA Maha Guru

Messages:

1,266

Likes Received:

218

GPU:

@JonasBeckman then , for the price differecence from 3600 to 4200 I gain 20 fps ! deal ... p.due south. that was just a test yous showed me ! until ALL examination ( gamnig or not gaming ) have that increase ... I still stand my indicate .
Pictus Member Guru

Letters:

184

Likes Received:

62

GPU:
DDR4 prices going downwards to more reasonable levels wouldn't be a bad thing, there's a good number of titles that exercise do good but of course from a price / performance perspective there's some very diminishing returns when each stick potentially costs a few hundred dollars or comparable each.
Looking forwards to what the DDR5 kits tin can do and the latest improvements to the CPU and motherboard architecture both from AMD and Intel, maybe with some tweaking the upcoming 4000 series won't be equally dependent although it is also possible it volition show even bigger benefits by removing some of the current limits and bottlenecks and improvements to cache and such.

Fallout 4 even with DDR3 was what really showed me how some games and I assume also other software including the Os itself could scale actually nicely with higher speed kits and since then just most any retention intensive game especially open earth or those relying extensively on information streaming benefits but one time you pass around the 3200 range for DDR4 kits the prices really ramp up too and then these high-end modules become incredibly costly for a smaller benefit from that point.
(Information technology's nice to accept but inside a reasonable pricing range and compared to the rest of the cost of the hardware for the organization.)
IchimA Maha Guru

Letters:

ane,266

Likes Received:

218

GPU:

Exactly , non to mention that all I could find in my country stores when I built this PC was 3600 CL18, and to buy a adept 3600Mhz CL16 information technology was to expansive with an estimation engagement of inflow of three - four weeks . ... After yous pass 3600 Mhz ... RAM prices just skyrockets
HARDRESET Master Guru

Messages:

817

Likes Received:

363

GPU:

All-In-One liquid cooler, lose air flow,heat soak, that is why i take a Ram cooler.
Do the default MEMbench run please.

Attached Files:

Last edited: May eleven, 2020
I just dear this tool. Such a time saver. I take my Ryzen 1800x running with 3200Mghz cas 14 with some pretty tight sub timings due to this tool. My CPU just can't handle any higher frequency.
386SX Maha Guru

Messages:

one,354

Likes Received:

1,523

GPU:

... and since forever those values are not what is written in BIOS from the upside downwardly, simply all other values seem "in the right place" so you tin read / set up them by going from the upside downward.
And then his first "consequence" applies to me, too.
@mgilbert :
The event with your tRFC is the calculator uses what "every chip may be capable of", for example 160ns for Samsung b-die. This equals to tRFC 256 at 3200MHz (my own "rubber" profile).
Y'all summate the specs written in your RAM by a given formula, starting from 350ns instead of 160 (and different speed).
So both are correct, but the formula is unlike.
Rule of pollex = higher values are bad for performance just skilful for stability.
It used to recommend a max of one.48V, and I'm pretty sure with the current settings my RAM needs ane.47V to be 100% stable, but now its max recommended says 1.40V which is a large LOL... and for tWRRD it used to recommend 3, now it's 1. Pretty certain my PC will implode into bluish screen oblivion if I try 1 on that timing just I'll give it a shot subsequently.
You would be surprised that some of the settings need a lot more voltage than others.
The trick is finding out which one.
For case, I am now at 1.385, downwards from i.43 !!! Just by but calculation 1 to rRDWR ( 9 instead of recommended: 8 ), keeping every other setting the same.

Already thirty hours of using the computer, no issues, no crashes, no errors, nothing, works perfectly at this new lower voltage.

---
This programme's recommendations are simply that, non accented values.
Some testing and experimentation on your side is needed also.

Who knows, with merely tiny changes y'all might drop from your 1.48 to merely 1.4 and remain stable with no loss in operation.
Thank you for the proposition. But I'thou not afraid of high voltage on RAM, there is a reason why RAM has lifetime warranty. Information technology'southward pretty hard to kill, and one.47V or even college isn't dangerous for DDR4 based on everything I've read. Also I'm pushing pretty much all the timings to extremes on this RAM, information technology would accept an insane amount of testing for me to get to that lower voltage. Not to mention many nights of Memtest 86+ running to confirm stability. So spiral it, I'll take that extra drop of performance with brutal voltage. Brutal voltage for brutal timings.
I didn't even know precisely what this RAM was when I bought it, there was squat for info online (notwithstanding squat), but I was definitely going to buy it considering information technology was hands down the all-time I could get for annihilation in the same price galaxy (was given a special discount past ye olde Amazon). I only relatively recently found out they're A2 Samsung B-dies, but considering the MSRP on these things was enough to make Vegeta break his scouter, I'm not too surprised.
Early DDR3 used pretty hefty values and some of the higher clocked kits even upwardly to 2.0v or higher whereas I believe information technology's now 1.25v stock on DDR4 and ane.35v on most XMP profiles only up of 1.45v or fifty-fifty ane.5v is usable though I'd imagine the higher voltages need some more testing and checking temps and all that plus the different retentivity modules and what type it is could need some adjusting for.
OCZ 1800 (eight-eight-viii-24 I think.) at ii.0v upwardly to 2.1v maximum and even 7 years later it worked just fine though that too is going to be pretty variable.

EDIT: Well not like I'thou an proficient, early on I simply considered the increased power consumption and estrus buildup not what additional voltage could practice to the circuitry over time and faster deposition.
Smaller nodes and all that too which are more sensitive compared to the big chunky things of the 1990's when I got started with this ha ha.

EDIT: Suppose that as well means contempo DDR4 modules might differ from the initial batches whatever steps memory take gone down through over the years. Should accept done some reading upwards on that come to think of it.
Tests existence done on 5nm and fifty-fifty lower at present although that might non be on the market for some fourth dimension yet, will be interesting to hear what DDR5 will be using and I suppose higher speeds up to perhaps 8000 just even laxer timing values.

Last edited: May 12, 2020
I appreciate this program but, this is super annoying, how am I supposed to know what my ram is, beyond the actual manufacturer and model proper name?
mgilbert Member

Letters:

37

Likes Received:

6

GPU:

Be conscientious with DRAM Calculator for Ryzen. I've had the settings it recommends piece of work, only I've also had those settings corrupt a Windows installation beyond all recovery, requiring a make clean reinstallation. Set a restore point earlier yous change anything - but yet exist prepared to practise a make clean install if things become really wrong. And no, I'm not a noob. I've got over twoscore years' experience with computers, having in one case owned my ain figurer business organization in which I built and repaired hundreds of computers over the course of a decade.
After seeing Tech Jesus'southward video on RAM speed affecting real world game functioning on Ryzen I tried to push button my RAM clocks, simply alas, the tight timings Ryzen DRAM estimator lists cannot be pulled off at 3800MHz on a kit that was rated 3600MHz. I did the tight timings for sub timings and the safe timings for near the primary timings. Raising the RAM/controller/fabric all from 1800 to 1900MHz even with the far worse timings gave me a minimum of 5% performance improvement in Nier Automata, a game that is programmed similar donkey when information technology comes to CPU usage (DX xi and Japanese) so I await a larger than 5% improvement in properly coded DX 12 games that use more cores.
My current settings with RAM at 1.45V showed every bit stable after much Mem 86+ testing, but so my PC failed to Post after I rebooted. Not certain if that was a strange fluke but I merely didn't accept the patience and cranked information technology back to 1.47V and left it in that location for now. I had to learn well-nigh VDDG CCD/IOD and CLDO VDDP and all that because my Asus TUF X570-Plus Wi-Fi is absolutely retarded with stock settings.

It isn't just an Asus matter either I think, MSI was besides nuts with stock voltages, and the CPU voltage at "car" is also insanity.

As before long equally the Textile clock was touched the lath was pumping like 1.15V for the VDDGs which is apparently death, and the VDDP voltage also went high (I forgot what). Meanwhile the SoC voltage was 1.107V in reality because I had that manually set. Apparently the SoC voltage should ever be 50mV to a higher place the VDDG otherwise ???

Anyhow my preliminary manual voltage settings, all of which tin hopefully go lower:
- RAM one.47V BIOS doesn't show in Windows what it really is.
- CCD & IOD VDDG i.02V BIOS, 1.0182V Windows.
- VDDP 0.91V, 0.9091V Windows.
- SoC 1.13V, 1.107V Windows (auto LLC, I don't want to screw with it, since this seems safe).

Screenshot:

I didn't even know when gear-downward manner is on only fifty-fifty CL is possible. I learned quite a chip having to looked upwardly individual settings then Asus automobile settings don't murder my system. This is the first time where extremely fine tuning RAM was worthwhile. I do non like how convoluted this all is.
I suspect in a few years a lot of users who just used stock/automobile are going to have degraded systems, particularly retentiveness controllers.

Last edited: May 19, 2020
HARDRESET Master Guru

Messages:

817

Likes Received:

363

GPU:

Can yous run the MEMbench test at
default, Cheers.