• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Ryzen: Strictly technical

Page 63 - 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.
Is there any way to make a custom voltage curve and bind it to multiplier? So I can have 1.15V for 3Ghz and 1.35V for 4Ghz?
 
Ozzyrulez said:
To top it off their last BIOS update seriously broke memory compatibility. I went from being able to run 2933 to now not being able to post above 2133. I'm seriously considering buying a new motherboard that has better RAM support.
Click to expand...

I would hold out for a few more weeks. There's another AGESA update coming out in May. If that doesn't improve the situation with your memory, then maybe switch to a different board (the way RAM prices have kept increasing, that's probably cheaper than getting different RAM).

I think Asus went a bit too far with the cutting of features compared to the C6H. They're mostly software-based UEFI features that they could have kept on the Prime if they wanted. I get it that they'd rather you pay more for the C6H, but it doesn't exist in a vacuum. There are plenty of other X370 boards from other vendors, with more options at lower prices.
 
looncraz said:
The Prime X370 is the first X370 or B350 motherboard I've seen without them.
Click to expand...

And while I'm not ready to give it back to Amazon and get an ASRock instead (that was my top choice, but I couldn't find any K4 or Taichi here in Italy), I'm actually considering it, just to punish ASUS as they really underdelivered badly this time. I still have time, but Amz IT still as no choice of ASRock x370 MBs at correct prices :/
 
Swapped the Prime X370 Pro with an ASRock Fatalwhatever Gaming K4. Generally better options, though not all fan headers can run in DC mode... only real downside I could find.

Did not resolve virtualization issue, so I will assume that we will just have to wait for the software ecosystem to catch up. Boot times, interestingly, decreased by about 5 seconds when using RAID (fast boot vs fast boot - most of the benefit occurring during Win 10 boot, so that could simply be a matter of Windows reorganizing its boot-time drivers).

Having full AMD extended options available, VRM temperature monitoring, and an extra M.2 slot makes it a pretty easy choice, IMHO... two of those things aren't even advertised, so you'd never know.
 
Veradun said:
And while I'm not ready to give it back to Amazon and get an ASRock instead (that was my top choice, but I couldn't find any K4 or Taichi here in Italy), I'm actually considering it, just to punish ASUS as they really underdelivered badly this time. I still have time, but Amz IT still as no choice of ASRock x370 MBs at correct prices :/
Click to expand...
I assume prices are the main concern. I got a Taichi via Amazon.de for € 266 (directly from ASRock) as they had it in stock. I think you should be able to get it EU wide, just not at US prices ($200+VAT).
 
The Asus Prime X370-Pro seems to be the red headed step-child of their AM4 boards. They focus almost everything on their CH6 and even their B350 gets more attention and updates, but more specially, their other boards didn't completely break memory speeds on the latest BIOS.
 
Buildzoid (Actually Hardcore Overclocking) reviews the VRM on the MSI B350M Gaming Pro (cheapest B350 motherboard):
https://youtu.be/3BYAdyO9nZo

TLDW: The board is 3+2 and at realistic maximum ratings (125C, 100A, 1.42V vcore) the board will be dissipating 22W of heat through the vcore VRMs. He is pretty critical of the FETs used by MSI (which are the same PK616BA and PK632BA FETs on all their AM4 boards) because they are 1) cheap and 2) inefficient. Which is actually okay IMO on a $69.99 motherboard (price has dropped since I purchased).

BTW I wasn't able to set vcore voltage higher than 1.40V on any EFI for this board, so MSI clearly knows the board's limits and added an extra margin for safety.
 
IEC said:
Buildzoid (Actually Hardcore Overclocking) reviews the VRM on the MSI B350M Gaming Pro (cheapest B350 motherboard):
https://youtu.be/3BYAdyO9nZo

TLDW: The board is 3+2 and at realistic maximum ratings (125C, 100A, 1.42V vcore) the board will be dissipating 22W of heat through the vcore VRMs. He is pretty critical of the FETs used by MSI (which are the same PK616BA and PK632BA FETs on all their AM4 boards) because they are 1) cheap and 2) inefficient. Which is actually okay IMO on a $69.99 motherboard (price has dropped since I purchased).

BTW I wasn't able to set vcore voltage higher than 1.40V on any EFI for this board, so MSI clearly knows the board's limits and added an extra margin for safety.
Click to expand...

It's not great but for $70 that's still a great buy for a R5 1600 or less to pair with for overclocking moderately.
 
Does someone have an explanation why 50% core-parking (aka CCX1 fully parked) nets slightly worse benchmark results for 7-Zip and WinRar single-thread benchmarking? Shouldn't it be the other way around with the level 3 cache being utilized on a single CCX?
 
IEC said:
Robert Hallock explains the various settings related to high speed memory overclocking and what they do. From the press event with MSI in Austin, TX:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZgpHTaQ10k
Click to expand...
Ok good vid.
Takeaway from ram is soc voltage at 1.1v ram voltage at eg 1.4 to 1.5 no probs. But keep soc high.
For cpu never go higher than 1.45 to remain longterm life.
That pretty high btw. So people shouldnt be scared of eg 1.42v considering lifespan.
 
Malogeek said:
The Asus Prime X370-Pro seems to be the red headed step-child of their AM4 boards. They focus almost everything on their CH6 and even their B350 gets more attention and updates, but more specially, their other boards didn't completely break memory speeds on the latest BIOS.
Click to expand...

Yeah if they dont get there shit together with the next bios update or two im selling it off and buying a ASrock.
 
Rifter said:
Yeah if they dont get there shit together with the next bios update or two im selling it off and buying a ASrock.
Click to expand...

It's ridiculous that Asus have reps answering questions and giving support for the C6H in forums threads, but they don't give a crap about the Prime. Sure the C6H is $100 more, but I thought that was only supposed to buy you more hardware features, not a private tech support team from Asus.
 
Timur Born said:
Does someone have an explanation why 50% core-parking (aka CCX1 fully parked) nets slightly worse benchmark results for 7-Zip and WinRar single-thread benchmarking? Shouldn't it be the other way around with the level 3 cache being utilized on a single CCX?
Click to expand...

Cache aware algorithms expecting access to 16MB of L3 cache and allocating pools that are larger than 8MB.
 
Wouldn't that be a problem for both cases, 50% parked and everything unparked? It's still 2x 8 mb cache instead of 1x 16 mb regardless of whether both CCX are active or only one, isn't it?
 
looncraz said:
Cache aware algorithms expecting access to 16MB of L3 cache and allocating pools that are larger than 8MB.
Click to expand...
The interesting part is that these are single threaded tests. so that one thread could never fill and then use the 8 MB L3 of the second CCX, regardless if it's active or not.

Timur Born said:
Wouldn't that be a problem for both cases, 50% parked and everything unparked? It's still 2x 8 mb cache instead of 1x 16 mb regardless of whether both CCX are active or only one, isn't it?
Click to expand...
It's a victim cache. So if one CCX is completely parked, no core would fill the associated 8MB of L3 by throwing out L2 cache lines.
 
Timur Born said:
Wouldn't that be a problem for both cases, 50% parked and everything unparked? It's still 2x 8 mb cache instead of 1x 16 mb regardless of whether both CCX are active or only one, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Dresdenboy said:
The interesting part is that these are single threaded tests. so that one thread could never fill and then use the 8 MB L3 of the second CCX, regardless if it's active or not.
.
Click to expand...

This is when kernel thread leveling acts to improve performance by forcing both L3s to have the data. If a CCX is parked, it will never have the data.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top