• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Ryzen: Strictly technical

Page 80 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

IRobot23

Senior member
Jul 3, 2017
601
183
76
  • Like
Reactions: Schmide

naukkis

Senior member
Jun 5, 2002
365
208
116
They are, 4 2-core complexes (grouped by 2) all connected by L2 cache - long comparison to CCX connected by Infinity Fabric even if "communication between them is not ideal".
But ok, you have a point there that it resembles CCX in Ryzen :)
Where you get that info? As I know Jaquar has L2 shared between 4 cores and 8-core version has two groups of four cores connected to each other with fabric - pretty much as Zen but with L2 as last level cache.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NTMBK

Thunder 57

Golden Member
Aug 19, 2007
1,546
1,457
136
Where you get that info? As I know Jaquar has L2 shared between 4 cores and 8-core version has two groups of four cores connected to each other with fabric - pretty much as Zen but with L2 as last level cache.
That's how I remember it. I will add that i think one of the newer Playstation variants has a true 8 core version, but I hardly keep up with consoles. I can say with certainty though that there was no 4 x dual core version.
 

Tuna-Fish

Golden Member
Mar 4, 2011
1,038
592
136
They are, 4 2-core complexes (grouped by 2) all connected by L2 cache - long comparison to CCX connected by Infinity Fabric even if "communication between them is not ideal".
But ok, you have a point there that it resembles CCX in Ryzen :)
No, you are wrong. The jaguar cores are in two groups of 4, with great latency inside the CCX terrible latency between the two CCX. Source: I have written non-trivial amounts of code for them.
 

CatMerc

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2016
1,114
1,146
136
@The Stilt Do you know how the memory controller handles having mixed dual and single ranked memory?

Let's say I put a single rank kit on Channel A, and a dual rank kit on Channel B, will channel B have rank interleaving working?
 

The Stilt

Golden Member
Dec 5, 2015
1,709
3,057
106
@The Stilt Do you know how the memory controller handles having mixed dual and single ranked memory?

Let's say I put a single rank kit on Channel A, and a dual rank kit on Channel B, will channel B have rank interleaving working?
Never tried such configuration, and frankly I have no idea.

Dual rank modules in general seem to work worse on Raven / Pinnacle, than they did on Summit Ridge.
3200MHz is a struggle, which is unfortunate.
 

CatMerc

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2016
1,114
1,146
136
Never tried such configuration, and frankly I have no idea.

Dual rank modules in general seem to work worse on Raven / Pinnacle, than they did on Summit Ridge.
3200MHz is a struggle, which is unfortunate.
I got a 2x8 2400 CL15 dual ranked kit to 2933 CL14 on 2700X, while the other channel has a pair of single ranked 2x8 3200 CL14.
 

CatMerc

Golden Member
Jul 16, 2016
1,114
1,146
136
So this is bizzare. My SoC voltage stopped responding to what I set in BIOS. Either that or the readout is completely messed up.

I am locked at 0.869V all the time, no matter what. Cleared CMOS multiple times and it's still there.

Edit: Discovered that the only way to change it is with Ryzen master o_O
 
Last edited:

snstr

Member
Aug 16, 2017
29
7
36
Would a "heatpipe direct touch" cooling solution pose any problems in conjunction with the Zen+ boost (XFR2, PBO, ...)? E.g. having hotspots exactly in the gaps of the direct touch area and therefore maybe having the CPU clocking lower than necessary? Or would the heatspreader of the Ryzen CPU disperse the heat sufficiently?

The specific case I am thinking of is pariring a 2700X with an Alpenföhn Brocken 3 (220W TDP, but direct touch, as seen here: https://www.alpenfoehn.de/images/Produkte/Bilder/Brocken3/Brocken3_8.jpg ):

 

Wall Street

Senior member
Mar 28, 2012
691
44
91
Would a "heatpipe direct touch" cooling solution pose any problems in conjunction with the Zen+ boost (XFR2, PBO, ...)? E.g. having hotspots exactly in the gaps of the direct touch area and therefore maybe having the CPU clocking lower than necessary? Or would the heatspreader of the Ryzen CPU disperse the heat sufficiently?
Direct touch heat pipes work fine with Ryzen and all associated features.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snstr

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
Would a "heatpipe direct touch" cooling solution pose any problems in conjunction with the Zen+ boost (XFR2, PBO, ...)? E.g. having hotspots exactly in the gaps of the direct touch area and therefore maybe having the CPU clocking lower than necessary? Or would the heatspreader of the Ryzen CPU disperse the heat sufficiently?

The specific case I am thinking of is pariring a 2700X with an Alpenföhn Brocken 3 (220W TDP, but direct touch, as seen here: https://www.alpenfoehn.de/images/Produkte/Bilder/Brocken3/Brocken3_8.jpg ):

So long as you use thermal compound you should be fine. The point of thermal compound is to fill in gaps to allow for more efficient heat transfer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snstr

snstr

Member
Aug 16, 2017
29
7
36
Thanks :)

LOL - I always use thermal paste, so it is so natural to me, that I did not even think of it, when posting the question above... :D


(So for some extra laughs, even if it is off topic: Last time I changed a CPU cooler I used pear brandy for cleaning the old thermal paste. The PC smelled for weeks like pears. But it worked :p)
 

stAbb

Member
Apr 12, 2018
31
24
41
The good news, you don't have to worry about hot spots as the heat spreader on your CPU spreads the heat between the direct touching heat pipes.
Just remember to add a bit more thermal paste.

Normally I would recommend a blob about as big as is shown in these pictures:
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/thermal-compound-roundup-october-2011/4/

You want to have a slightly bigger blob of thermal paste then is shown in the picture with direct touching heat pipes to get an even spread between your cooler and the heat spreader on your CPU.
Some of the thermal paste will get into the crannies between the pipes.

With kind regards,
stAbb
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
20,812
9,008
136
@The Stilt
Sorry, I can't find the program to display all the ram timings, and for DDR 3466 CL14 what the ideal settings would be. Could you please tell me (again) both of these ? I donwloaded Aida64, but I can't find it. I do have this:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

formulav8

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2000
6,998
521
126
Perfect ! Now what do I need to tweak ?
I'm lot 100% sure on all of your sub-timings because I just don't tweak like I did back in the day. But I would disable GearDownMode. IIRC, it makes commandRate equivalent to something like 1.5t even if cmd2t shows 1T.

Also try lowering Trdrdscl and Twrwrscl to 2 (IIRC). That should help a bit with latency. I believe the bottom left 2 settings in your screen shot. You can try setting Trrdl and Trrds to 6 or less like 4 or 5. Trfc to 300 or less.

But there are multiple others to help quite a bit. Do a check with Aida before and after, at least for the ones I mentioned and see how it goes. You may be surprised how the less common tweaked timings can do for performance/lower latency.
 

formulav8

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2000
6,998
521
126
Also that Ryzen Ram calculator I linked can help quite a bit with getting nice timings/sub-timings for lower latency/higher bandwidth.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
20,812
9,008
136
Well I am running over80c @1.36 vcore or more. I think its time for manual settings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick

stAbb

Member
Apr 12, 2018
31
24
41
Blockheads, your settings look alright, having tRDRD and tWRWR under the jedec for 2133 seems a bit tight tho (3, if I remember correctly). But, if it works, it works.

I would try 42 for the tRC, test that, then try 32 for tFAW.
If that isn't stable, set tRRDL to 9 and tFAW to 36.

It should be safe to set tWTRS to 4 and tWTRL to 12.
If these don't work, try setting the tRDRD and tWRWR to 3 and see what gives you the best stability and performance.

Your tRFC is a bit low, do more refreshes on your memory really still improve performance without corruption of data? I've seen it as low as 160 ns on Samsung B die before but it is a tricky setting, as you can loose stability elsewhere on your timings. I would change this one last when overclocking.

Markfw, I would try these timings.

Tcl 14
Trcdrd 14
Trcdwr 14
Trp 14
Tras 28
Trc 42 (44)
Trrds 6
TrrdL 8 (9)
Tfaw 32 (36)
Tfawdlr 0 (Most likely can't be set manually in your bios.)
Tfawslr 0 (Most likely can't be set manually in your bios.)
TwtrS 4
TwtrL 12
Twr 12
Trcpage 0
TrdrScl 2 (3 or 4)
TwrwrScl 2 (3 or 4)

If the ones to the left aren't stable try some or all of the alternative timings.

If these timings work, it's time to look at your tRFC.
You could go straight for Blockheads tRFC of 280 (which translates to around160ns at 3466Mhz) and see if that adds some more performance.

Let me know what works for you! There is always more to learn.

With kind regards,
stAbb

PS: After that you could even try the additional sub timings. It doesn't look like your board messed up badly there though, so I wouldn't worry too much about those.

Edit: took out part of the tRFC explanation to keep the post readable. If you come across any issues with the tRFC, let me know. Added the names of the values.
 
Last edited:

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
20,812
9,008
136
I'm lot 100% sure on all of your sub-timings because I just don't tweak like I did back in the day. But I would disable GearDownMode. IIRC, it makes commandRate equivalent to something like 1.5t even if cmd2t shows 1T.

Also try lowering Trdrdscl and Twrwrscl to 2 (IIRC). That should help a bit with latency. I believe the bottom left 2 settings in your screen shot. You can try setting Trrdl and Trrds to 6 or less like 4 or 5. Trfc to 300 or less.

But there are multiple others to help quite a bit. Do a check with Aida before and after, at least for the ones I mentioned and see how it goes. You may be surprised how the less common tweaked timings can do for performance/lower latency.
OK, I ram the dram calculator. Using the fast and extremem settings it would not boot. I am using the safe, and here is the result. What do you think ?


AIDA64 used to work, but with these timings it no longer will.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Drazick
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS