Getting up to 2933MHz on an AMD-2200G - Does dual-channel matter?

[whm1974]

We have been trying to help you, but you need to chill down and understand what the situation entails.
All AM4 boards have that sheet showing the "memory speeds", but that sheet was created over a year ago, BEFORE the launch of Ryzen. The sheet was intended to show what was guaranteed as far a memory speed, and that anything else beyond that, you were lucky.

At Ryzen launch, one year ago, clocking memory higher than 2133 had varied degrees of success. The sheet was intended to protect the board makers as far as guaranteed ram speed. It served its purpose, but what it meant was minimum speed, not maximum. Keep that in mind.

Finally, as others have said, 2 dimms will always be better than 4.
In any modern CPU, 4 dimms drive higher load and strain on the CPU IMC. For the same ram capacity, 2 dimms win.

I wonder how many people, even folks like us, actually have all four slots filled anyway? 16GB is plenty of memory for most use cases for most users. I have two 8GB DDR3 DIMMs in my system. I figured that when I will actually need 32GB of memory, then it will also be time to build a new rig anyway. This one one of reasons I'm been saying that the OP is making a very large mountain out of a little tiny molehole. This is simply not an issue for most users.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

@whm1974, that's an opinion, which is fine. I didn't feel like paying $69 more for extra performance. The AMD 2200G is the best bang for the buck in my opinion. And you have to realize where I'm coming from. My graphics are going from iGPU HD 530 Graphics up to the Vega 8. So, I'm going to be good for awhile. I don't know whether I'll fill up 4 slots or not, so I'm not sure how you could know what I'll do. According to you and alexruiz, the load is higher with 4 slots filled but according to your words it would be a "tiny loss in performance".

@alexruiz So, if I understand correctly, the paper insert I got with my motherboard is outdated and overly conservative in giving me an idea of the fastest speeds I can achieve with 4 slots filled is that right? I hope that's what you are saying, that would be music to my ears. As soon as I get these new AMD All-In-One drivers downloaded and installed I'm going to shut down my machine and boot up into dual-channel mode and see what's what.

The things is, so far I'm only getting a max speed of 2800MHz with a single memory module in slot A2. So, I'm not real hopeful that adding more will get me any faster speeds. I think I'm gonna have to spend another week figuring out and understanding memory timings and all that jazz. I got a long road ahead of me if I want to get my moneys worth.

Now, I do understand why people buy consoles and discrete GPUs. It's a whole lot easier.

 

[IntelUser2000]

You have the very real "potential" to go from running memory @2666MHz using 1 stick of memory down to a low 1866MHz running 4 sticks of memory.

You are still way better off running dual channel @ 1866MHz than single channel @ 2666MHz.

1866 x 2 is 40% more bandwidth than 2666 x1. And your picture even says 2133 is capable which would make the total 60% better.

According to this review, using single channel can bring down the graphics performance so much that in certain games, it can be below UHD 630.

https://www.techspot.com/review/1574-amd-ryzen-5-2400g-and-ryzen-3-2200g/page8.html

And, you need to calm down rather than calling out posters.

 

[whm1974]

@whm1974, that's an opinion, which is fine. I didn't feel like paying $69 more for extra performance. The AMD 2200G is the best bang for the buck in my opinion. And you have to realize where I'm coming from. My graphics are going from iGPU HD 530 Graphics up to the Vega 8. So, I'm going to be good for awhile. I don't know whether I'll fill up 4 slots or not, so I'm not sure how you could know what I'll do. According to you and alexruiz, the load is higher with 4 slots filled but according to your words it would be a "tiny loss in performance".

You need to ask yourself, are you likely to need or will even be able to make use of more then 16GB(2x8GB) of memory? If so, then chances are you will need or want more then 4 cores/4 threads anyway.

 

[Topweasel]

obviously I'm talking about games here. Not sending out an email. I just assumed we all knew that but I apologize. So, there is no depending on the application in this thread. It's all about the games. A little math for you here: 1866/2666 = ~.70. So were talking about a 30% drop in performance if you aren't aware of the "subtleties" involved in these scenarios, i.e., "Did you know if you use a single slot it has to go into A2?" "Did you know if you use up all 4 slots on your motherboard, there is a potential 30% drop in performance?", "Did you know that single-rank versus dual-rank matters?" I just learned all these small but important distinctions most recently. Yes, I'm sorry, it matters and it's noticeable.

You are missing the crux of what I was saying. 30% memory performance doesn't mean anything until you have a frame of reference. That frame of reference needs to be, what does a 30% loss in memory performance mean for the application you are running. Games are an application. But they are all unique (well some less than others, but that is another topic for another forum). It's up to you to figure out what you are running, and find out what how the different memory speeds affect that. An APU though is generally the chip you want to skimp on memory the least. As for the alignment on memory that goes back farther than I can realistically remember. I am sure many of the users here remember Rambus. The chipset that launched with it from Intel couldn't deal with the pathways to the third stick of memory (when SDR and DDR boards generally worked with 4 regularly) but they figured it out so late in the Launch that early motherboards still had three slots but one had a carboard card in the slot saying to never use it. Most boards out there can't run fully populated channels at the same speed as when they only have one stick. I had one board with one set of crappy memory where all the chips worked and worked great. But if I had 4 sticks in my machine randomly rebooted. Didn't matter which one I took out 4 sticks of this substandard memory put to much pressure on the IMC.

But all of this is pointless. Don't look at 300 series motherboards and their launch specs to tell you how populating your board will limit speeds. Read reviews, ask around. Specially when using a an APU those are closer to using a Ryzen 2k that is launching next week than they are the original Ryzen's. Which is where most of this mountain from a mole hill aspect is coming from. You aren't looking at a legitimate issue. You are reading a cover your butt based on old information Disclaimer rather than current day experience. You'd read the same thing for board for an Intel CPU, it's just not backed up by the early troubles AMD had with AM4 at launch. But those again were early launch troubles with a completely different CPU.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

@IntelUser2000 No, I fully intend to run my system in dual-channel mode. But you seem to be missing the crux of my complaint. Is 1866x2 better than 2666x1? Of course it is. But if I paid for 3000x2 I should be getting 3000x2. No? I already read that review, days ago. It was the reason I bought this setup to begin with. The funny thing is, the review doesn't mention anything about single rank versus dual-rank, or b-dies versus d/e dies. There's so much deception in the world of hardware it's incredible. From what I read in the comments on this review:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-ryzen-3-2200g-raven-ridge-cpu,5472.html#2
it's apparently legal to sell kits marked 3200MHz without guaranteeing that you can actually use it at it's rated potential. Can anyone say the word 'lottery'?

It's funny how everybody keeps repeating that I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill. I'm not saying I know it all. You guys seem not to understand what I'm getting at.
@Topweasel you want me to look at individual games, on a 1 by 1 basis. How is that going to tell me anything about whether the memory kits I bought will reach maximum rated speed. The rated speeds I paid good money for? "Did I get a kit with single-rank over dual-rank?" OOPS! Nope, not marked on the kit. So, it's like playing the lottery again I guess. "Does the memory kit use b-die? d-die? e-die?" OOPs, who knows. Not marked on the kits at time of sale.

This is not a consumer friendly activity I'm engaging in right now. I want my memory to run at the speeds I paid for regardless of what game I'm playing. I understand the part about having more load across more modules but let's not get stupid about what is an acceptable loss.

EDIT: Oh, and by the way. Everybody keeps saying that paper insert is old? It is, because it says "Summit Ridge" on it and not "Raven Ridge". But from my small research (look at the Tom's Hardware review) it pretty much represents the state of things today still.

 

[Markfw]

it's apparently legal to sell kits marked 3200MHz without guaranteeing that you can actually use it at it's rated potential. Can anyone say the word 'lottery'?

There are different motherboards where some are better than other, There is different memory, where some run OK on an Intel@ that speed, but not AMD. There are CAS timings, different BIOS. And last but not least, the QVL for your motherboard. Its NOT a lottery, you READ the motherboard manual, you buy memory on that motherboard's QVL, and then you will get what you pay for MOST OF THE TIME, but its surely NOT a lottery, saying so borders on trolling.

 

[TheDarkKnight]

@Markfw Did you read the entire thread? No one who has read this entire thread could possibly jump to the conclusion that I'm trolling. Your a moderator calling me a troll? Oh wow. I'm just stating my opinions as I see them. I already owned the DDR4 memory kit for which I'm using in this system. I bought the kit 3 years ago at a reasonable price. Please read the entire thread before you start accusing people of trolling.

EDIT: And for the record my memory kit is on the QVL on ASRocks website. It's the 16GB (2x8GB) PV416G300C6K (11BF2).

 

[whm1974]

@Markfw Did you read the entire thread? No one who has read this entire thread could possibly jump to the conclusion that I'm trolling. Your a moderator calling me a troll? Oh wow. I'm just stating my opinions as I see them. I already owned the DDR4 memory kit for which I'm using in this system. I bought the kit 3 years ago at a reasonable price. Please read the entire thread before you start accusing people of trolling.

Dude, did you check for the latest BIOS updates and applied them? Besides the memory kit you brought three years ago was tested for use by Intel CPUs. Ryzen wasn't even out yet, and there was no way the manufacturer could guarantee that your memory would work on a future platform.

 

[dlerious]

@Markfw Did you read the entire thread? No one who has read this entire thread could possibly jump to the conclusion that I'm trolling. Your a moderator calling me a troll? Oh wow. I'm just stating my opinions as I see them. I already owned the DDR4 memory kit for which I'm using in this system. I bought the kit 3 years ago at a reasonable price. Please read the entire thread before you start accusing people of trolling.

EDIT: And for the record my memory kit is on the QVL on ASRocks website. It's the 16GB (2x8GB) PV416G300C6K (11BF2).

You might want to check that QVL list again. The only DDR4-3000 listed is a 2x4GB kit of PV48G300C6K (14M1) on the Asrock AB350M Pro4.

Edit to add link:http://www.asrock.com/mb/AMD/AB350M Pro4/index.us.asp#Memory

 

[Markfw]

@Markfw Did you read the entire thread? No one who has read this entire thread could possibly jump to the conclusion that I'm trolling. Your a moderator calling me a troll? Oh wow. I'm just stating my opinions as I see them. I already owned the DDR4 memory kit for which I'm using in this system. I bought the kit 3 years ago at a reasonable price. Please read the entire thread before you start accusing people of trolling.

EDIT: And for the record my memory kit is on the QVL on ASRocks website. It's the 16GB (2x8GB) PV416G300C6K (11BF2).

I don't need to. I was commenting on the one comment I quoted. The proper memory on the proper bios will almost always work as advertised. I only say almost, since there are always exceptions, but a lottery ? That is so far off the truth, its almost trolling. And you already got corrected on your memory being on the QVL. Give it up before you embarrass yourself anymore.

 

[whm1974]

I don't need to. I was commenting on the one comment I quoted. The proper memory on the proper bios will almost always work as advertised. I only say almost, since there are always exceptions, but a lottery ? That is so far off the truth, its almost trolling. And you already got corrected on your memory being on the QVL. Give it up before you embarrass yourself anymore.

Isn't highest speed of DDR4 officially supported is only 2666 speeds, and any memory rated higher is basically overclocked? Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[scannall]

Did you miss seeing the image of the paper insert I posted above? You have the very real "potential" to go from running memory @2666MHz using 1 stick of memory down to a low 1866MHz running 4 sticks of memory. Benchmarks on gaming website prove there is a very real difference, all the more relevant, on AMDs latest Ryzen CPUs with integrated Vega graphics. Maybe you need to read some reviews on these new CPUs and the real impact the memory speeds can have on performance. It's not negligible at all. I can post links if you like but that might invalidate your point. Id be happy to though.

@Topweasel, obviously I'm talking about games here. Not sending out an email. I just assumed we all knew that but I apologize. So, there is no depending on the application in this thread. It's all about the games. A little math for you here: 1866/2666 = ~.70. So were talking about a 30% drop in performance if you aren't aware of the "subtleties" involved in these scenarios, i.e., "Did you know if you use a single slot it has to go into A2?" "Did you know if you use up all 4 slots on your motherboard, there is a potential 30% drop in performance?", "Did you know that single-rank versus dual-rank matters?" I just learned all these small but important distinctions most recently. Yes, I'm sorry, it matters and it's noticeable.

If you hop over into the Ryzen builders thread you will find people using quality motherboards, with quality ram hitting 3200MHz with 4 sticks installed. Using old charts, on pre-release bios is causing confusion for you. Please do a little updated research.

 

[dlerious]

Isn't highest speed of DDR4 officially supported is only 2666 speeds, and any memory rated higher is basically overclocked? Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

That's because 2666 is the highest speed supported by the current JEDEC standard.

 

[whm1974]

That's because 2666 is the highest speed supported by the current JEDEC standard.

So I was right. Thank you for verifying this for me.

 

[Markfw]

Isn't highest speed of DDR4 officially supported is only 2666 speeds, and any memory rated higher is basically overclocked? Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong.

You are correct. But if you check the specs for many motherboards, they say its "unofficially supported" up to 3200 and sometimes even 3600. And if you check the forum build threads, MOST threadrippers using good memory get 3466 at least (for 3600) and 3200 almost always works. So saying "Lottery" implies a 1 in 10 chance or less, where in fact, reality and FACTS say something like 9 of 10 chance. Thats not a lottery. Gee, and I have 4 threadrippers, 3 with 3600 memory, running at 3466 and one with 3200 memory running at 3200, and that is matched by almost everyone in the TR builders thread.

From the X399 Taichi specifications: "DDR4 3600+(OC)/ 3200(OC)/ 2933(OC)/ 2667/ 2400/ 2133"

Edit: not to mention my 1800x and 1700x both running 3200 memory at 3200.

 

[whm1974]

You are correct. But if you check the specs for many motherboards, they say its "unofficially supported" up to 3200 and sometimes even 3600. And if you check the forum build threads, MOST threadrippers using good memory get 3466 at least (for 3600) and 3200 almost always works. So saying "Lottery" implies a 1 in 10 chance or less, where in fact, reality and FACTS say something like 9 of 10 chance. Thats not a lottery. Gee, and I have 4 threadrippers, 3 with 3600 memory, running at 3466 and one with 3200 memory running at 3200, and that is matched by almost everyone in the TR builders thread.

From the X399 Taichi specifications: "DDR4 3600+(OC)/ 3200(OC)/ 2933(OC)/ 2667/ 2400/ 2133"

Edit: not to mention my 1800x and 1700x both running 3200 memory at 3200.

So if I had a decent brand motherboard and memory sticks and use the right BIOS, I should have very few problems reaching 3200 or at least close to it?

 

[Markfw]

So if I had a decent brand motherboard and memory sticks and use the right BIOS, I should have very few problems reaching 3200 or at least close to it?

Yes, Any samsung b-die 3200 memory with any QUALITY motherboard and the latest bios. and you have a good chance of of hitting 3200.

Now, thats with Ryzen 1700/1700x/1800x. With the 2200G, it may be different, ask @VirtualLarry. Due to the integrated video, it may be lower.

From Larrys post on his 2400G: "Edit: Ok, with 2x8GB DDR4-3000 RAM, which the mobo claimed was actually running at 3000, and not at 2933".

Close enough ?

 

[whm1974]

Yes, Any samsung b-die 3200 memory with any QUALITY motherboard and the latest bios. and you have a good chance of of hitting 3200.

Now, thats with Ryzen 1700/1700x/1800x. With the 2200G, it may be different, ask @VirtualLarry. Due to the integrated video, it may be lower.

From Larrys post on his 2400G: "Edit: Ok, with 2x8GB DDR4-3000 RAM, which the mobo claimed was actually running at 3000, and not at 2933".

Close enough ?

Yes. thanks for explaining on how to use high speed DDR4.

 

[Markfw]

BTW, one comment. If you are buying a $105 CPU with a $60-$100 motherboard, why would you spend $228 on 2x8 gig memory ? Answer, it does not make sense. I have a feeling this may be the root of this now that I think of it. If you buy inexpensive memory, it will never perform like expensive memory, and if you have an inexpensive motherboard/CPU you would never buy expensive memory.

Oh, and I do have a 1700 running $99 2 x 8 gig 3000 that I got from microcenter (from their website) , but before DDR4 got ridiculous in price. It does run at 2933 on a $89 motherboard. Thats about as far as I would ever go on a $105 CPU

 

[whm1974]

BTW, one comment. If you are buying a $105 CPU with a $60-$100 motherboard, why would you spend $228 on 2x8 gig memory ? Answer, it does not make sense. I have a feeling this may be the root of this now that I think of it. If you buy inexpensive memory, it will never perform like expensive memory, and if you have an inexpensive motherboard/CPU you would never buy expensive memory.

I'm sure you are right, as to reach the lower points they will have to cut corners somewhere. Myself, I'll spend around ~$100ish to get a decent board. And yes I agree that the OP should have at least gotten the 2400G instead of the 2200G.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I just went into UEFI, and cranked up my Corsair DDR4-2667 RAM on my AB350M Pro4.
It was running at 2133. I enabled XMP. which defaulted to 2667 @ 1.20V. I changed it to 2933 @ 1.350V.

So far, so good. It booted Windows 10.

Edit: This is with a 2200G. Which was in fact, problematic on this same board, but I did a "clean all" and and a fresh re-install. We'll see if it holds up.

Edit: Won't wake from monitor sleep after a day. Is that because of Vega APU driver bugs, and the infamous "HDMI wake from sleep black-screen bug" rearing its ugly head again, or is it because the CPU + mobo + RAM went into bye-bye land after a while, because the RAM was OCed from 2667 @ 1.20V to 2933 @ 1.350V? (Good Corsair LPX Vengeance RAM though.)

 

[whm1974]

I just went into UEFI, and cranked up my Corsair DDR4-2667 RAM on my AB350M Pro4.
It was running at 2133. I enabled XMP. which defaulted to 2667 @ 1.20V. I changed it to 2933 @ 1.350V.

So far, so good. It booted Windows 10.

Edit: This is with a 2200G. Which was in fact, problematic on this same board, but I did a "clean all" and and a fresh re-install. We'll see if it holds up.

So how much increase in performance have you noticed?

 

[Topweasel]

It's funny how everybody keeps repeating that I'm making a mountain out of a mole hill. I'm not saying I know it all. You guys seem not to understand what I'm getting at.
@Topweasel you want me to look at individual games, on a 1 by 1 basis. How is that going to tell me anything about whether the memory kits I bought will reach maximum rated speed. The rated speeds I paid good money for? "Did I get a kit with single-rank over dual-rank?" OOPS! Nope, not marked on the kit. So, it's like playing the lottery again I guess. "Does the memory kit use b-die? d-die? e-die?" OOPs, who knows. Not marked on the kits at time of sale.

You are the one not understanding what you are getting at. First you have no idea if you are going to lose any performance. You don't know what it is. To top it off you are relying on the theory of maybe later upgrading the memory later. Hell even the idea of Single sided Samsung B-Die is outdated based on Mobo manufacturers hurrying out unfinished BIOS's before launch. It's recommended to this day, because we now know what the platform likes the most, so why take a chance with Hynix ram, if you know the platform like B-Die's the best? But again check the QVL list.

This is not a consumer friendly activity I'm engaging in right now. I want my memory to run at the speeds I paid for regardless of what game I'm playing. I understand the part about having more load across more modules but let's not get stupid about what is an acceptable loss.

You aren't a consumer. You are an Enthusiast. There are 100000 combinations of clock speeds, CPU choices, chipsets, and motherboards. If you are a system builder making systems for the general consumer you stick to Jedec from a company like Crucial that specializes in spec perfect OEM system memory. These sticks including the one you are running are targeted at enthusiasts, they are running seriously out of spec, but are tested for that, but only really on one platform. They are then sent to enthusiast board manufacturers to run tests with their boards, if it works it goes on their QVL list. Your sticks were tested against an old platform, on an old chipset, for a completely different CPU architecture. There was no way for the Manufacturer to find any way to take it into account when they made it. It's why a lot came up with a specific "AMD" lineup for Ryzen.

EDIT: Oh, and by the way. Everybody keeps saying that paper insert is old? It is, because it says "Summit Ridge" on it and not "Raven Ridge". But from my small research (look at the Tom's Hardware review) it pretty much represents the state of things today still.

It isn't. For starters again the insert is fricken Jedec spec not anything actually tested for. That is the general requirement that 1-2 Dimms single side run at at least 2666, and then lower for double sided, nearly the same for 4x Single sided, then slower for 4x double sided. It's all about noise levels, power draws, trace lengths and stuff like that. Which when applied to an over engineered board means little. It does still generally mean dropping a tier or two, but going with 4x double sided doesn't mean you will only ever get 1866. Secondly that Toms review was still on X370, which means that its going to be extra cautious because they were limited in memory speeds for the first 2-3 months of release. Lastly the only other reference to memory clocks was a poster talking about memory prices and not the actual running memory speeds.

The mole hill is there is a chance that your 3200 may not run at 3200. But if it runs at 2933/3000, the difference in performance even in games that cause the iGPU to need as much bandwidth as possible still won't be great. Because a 10-20% loss in memory bandwidth doesn't equal doesn't equal a 10-20% loss in GPU performance.

 

[alexruiz]

....
Now, thats with Ryzen 1700/1700x/1800x. With the 2200G, it may be different, ask @VirtualLarry. Due to the integrated video, it may be lower.
....

Deleted the rest of the post for emphasis.
On gigabyte boards with F22b BIOS, a 2200G can drive SK Hynix RAM 3200 16-18-18-38 runs at the full speed without even a flinch.
I have 3 machines at home running that way