Increase my RAM speed??

[underdog1799]

Hello,
I am a noob when it comes to overclocking and i have been experimenting a bit, but i noticed just recently that my RAM score on passmark's benchamrk software sucks. I don't understand why because it is fast RAM. Here are my system specs:
Mobo: Asus M5A97
CPU: AMD FX-8150 (OC to 4.0Ghz)
RAM: 2x 4GB GSkill Sniper Series DDR3 1866 (PC3 14900) Dimms
GPU: Asus GTX 560
SSD: OCZ Vertex 3 120GB

I noticed that my RAM score was something like 1246 and a friend of mine with RAM running at 1600Mhz got a score of something like 3000. What gives? I don't understand why mine can be so low compared to his. Any help here either with how to change settings or overclock my RAM would be welcomed!

[Tradesman]

What's your DRAM running at, can pull down CPU-Z to find out, it's a free utility program, will want to run it and look at the Memory tab, you'll have a list of numbers to the right, at the top is the freq - if your at 1866 it will show around 933 (since it's DDR DOUBLE Data Rate - so 933 times 2 = 1866). It may well be at the mobo default of 1333 or maybe 1600. If it's not at 1866 look in the BIOS for DOCP or XMP and enable it and set to 1866, then check CPU-Z again.

If no XMP or DOCP can set them up manually - check the info thread here for help:

http://www.gskill.us/forum/showthread.php?t=11742

Also, one reason they may differ a lot would be if your friend is running an Intel CPU, they will generally always score much better than AMD CPUs because the INtel CPUs have a much stronger MC (Memory Controller) and utilize resources much better than AMD systems.

CHeck these and let us know what you find

[underdog1799]

My friend's computer is Intel, but seriously AMD runs half the speed of intel? That sucks! My DRAM timings are 9-10-9-28 running at 1866 MHz because CPU-z reports 933 mhz. Is there any way i can speed this up at all? Its killing me and making me want to sell my system to get intel

[Tradesman]

You might be lucky enough to have a strong 8150 (normally about 1866 is the max) but could try 2133 at 10-11-10-28 will prob want to add about + 0.05 to the DRAM voltage.

Could also leave at 1866 and try adding the same to the DRAM voltage and about + 0.06 to the CPU/NB voltage, which will help the DRAM a bit.

Raising the OC will also help.

Sorry but AMD just has weak MC's (memory controllers) and you really have to work to get them and the DRAM to perform near Intel levels.

[Techmeister]

SOme useful information on Zambezi and Vishera CPUs

My friend's computer is Intel, but seriously AMD runs half the speed of intel? That sucks! My DRAM timings are 9-10-9-28 running at 1866 MHz because CPU-z reports 933 mhz. Is there any way i can speed this up at all? Its killing me and making me want to sell my system to get intel

Just an FYI that AMD IMCs are NOT weak and they perform as advertised IME and that of many other folks. The Zambezi and Vishera model CPUs are rated for 1866 MHz. RAM frequency and with the proper RAM and settings they will all run (2) DIMMs perfectly fine @ 1866 MHz. which is what AMD states in their Tech Documents. As noted some BIOS will automatically set the RAM frequency to 1866 MHz. but many will just boot at the default frequency set in the SPD by the RAM maker, which is typically 1066/1333 MHz. with current DDR3 RAM. Booting at the lower frequency than the CPU can run is not a fault with the RAM nor CPU. The lower default 1066/1333 MHz. set by the RAM maker in the SPD is intended to make sure that all PCs will properly boot with the RAM, which fits many different applications and CPU default frequencies.

Many folks have been able to run (2) DIMMs rated @ 2000 MHz. or higher on the Zambezi CPUs without issue. Not every CPU nor DIMM will run @ 2000 MHz. on Zambezi however. Some Zambezi CPUs and DIMMs will run as high as 2400 MHz. but that is the exception, not the rule. The Vishera CPUs will run a little higher RAM frequency than the Zambezi CPUs, typically ~200 MHz. higher. Thus it's common with the properly rated (1) or (2) DIMMs to hit 2200 MHz. or higher on the Vishera CPUs, but you must have all settings correct to reach 2200+ MHz. Some folks have made it to 2600 MHz. with (1) or (2) DIMMs but this is very rare. The settings required may be considerably different than the default voltage/latencies to run at the higher frequencies.

When you start running (4) DIMMs many mobo BIOS automatically set the DIMM frequency to 1333 MHz. and some will not allow the setting to be increased when using (4) DIMMs. For those mobos that do allow higher RAM frequency with (4) DIMMs which is a lot of load on the IMC, you might be able to run 1600 MHz. stable under P95 with good RAM on Zambezi or Vishera based CPUs. Anything higher is just luck of the draw with these CPUs and RAM as these CPUs are NOT rated to run (4) DIMMs above 1333 MHz. It's worth noting that 16GB.-32GB. places a very heavy strain on the IMC. Asking the IMC to run the RAM beyond it's rated 1333 MHz. frequency is asking a lot and may not happen. While Intel CPUs *may* or *may not* run the RAM at a higher frequency, they aren't running (8) core CPUs like the Zambezi and Vishera CPUs and the CPU architecture is much different, which is why the FX processors are far superior in multi-threaded applications.

Most PC enthusiasts do not realize that RAM running at 1333 MHz. on a typical Intel or AMD desktop PC is not a system bottleneck. That is why running faster RAM provides almost no system performance gains. Running faster RAM for fun is great, but understand that you won't see much system performance change at all even when going from 1333 MHz. to 2000 MHz. unless you are using an APU where the GPU can use the increased bandwidth/frequency.

[Tradesman]

Yes they do as currently advertised, when the BullDozers were first released though they advertised that the CPUs were native to 1866 (trying to one up Intel) when in fact they are native 1333 CPUs and are 'rated' UP TO 1866 at 1 DIMM PER CHANNEL - (I still have the email from them when, after much back and forth they changed their advertising to more honestly reflect the capabilities)...They still don't show any indication however that the testing and basis for the 1DIMM PER CHANNEL is also based on 4GB sticks (they hadn't even begun testing 8GB when the Dozers were released or even when they changed the advertising).

I refer to them as weak in comparison to Intel CPU/MCs, where as a 2 year old 2500K can/could run 32GB of 2133/2200 and the 3570K (also older than the 8350) can run 32GB of 2400+, the 8350s I've seen are doing well to run 32GB of 1600, where as it's a norm for the Intel CPUs.

In part it's a basic difference in the approach and the business plan - Intel looks into the MC with more R&D as well as the integration with the appropriate chipsets and IMO AMD looks more to trying to get the bang from 1 stick per channel (basically this comes from their BIOS and Kernel Guides for the different lines of CPUs) to keep prices down so they can compete with Intel for sales volume.

[Techmeister]

I don't think it's appropriate to mislead people by stating that AMD IMCs "are weak" when they perform exactly as stated in AMDs technical documents. In addition IMC's are not "native any frequency". There are engineered to do a job and how high a frequency they will run is based primarily on the design needs of the CPU. In AMD's case they use a higher OE IMC frequency than Intel uses for their CPUs, i.e. 1866 MHz. for AMD and 1366 MHz. for Intel. Intel didn't design their IMC to run at speeds above 2000 MHz., it just turned out that way more by accident than design.

The fact that Intel IMCs may overclock higher than AMD's IMC, does not in any way make AMD's IMC "weak", especially when AMD IMCs will routinely run several hundred MHz. above their stated OE frequency. When it comes to overclocking you get what you get. AMD doesn't claim their IMC will run RAM beyond 1866 MHz. but the Zambezi and Vishera CPUs often will run @ 2000+ MHz. with (1) or (2) DIMMs which is actually quite good.

The fact that Intel's IMC will run RAM at a higher frequency than AMD's has nothing to do with Intel investing more R&D in their IMC. The difference comes from AMD designing their IMC to do the job required, which is the way most products are engineered. If AMD was interested in making their IMC run at a higher frequency such as 2133 MHz. in the upcoming APUs/APUs, then they will do so.

The design of the IMC has absolutely nothing to do with "the business plan" so I'd suggest that you stop with the misguided comments because they sound very disingenuous. Your "theories" on why AMD or Intel does what they do or don't do are pure speculation, meritless, misleading and totally inappropriate for you to be disseminating in a public forum.

FYI- 8GB. DDR3 DIMMs were not even readily available at affordable prices until just recently. Why would AMD or Intel design for a product that didn't exist when they designed their respective CPUs? Until RAM prices dropped like a rock, few people would have ever considered more than 4 GB. of RAM for a typical desktop, because the price vs. return is totally unjustified. For most people 8GB. is more than they would ever use with plenty to spare. Published test's by Corsair show only marginal gains in going from 4 GB. to 8GB. and other independent testing confirms this to be true.

IMO it's up to the CPU, mobo and RAM suppliers to work together to sort out minute electrical issues that can develop with the many different ICs and DDR3 DIMMs in the marketplace. Making baseless IMC statement is an unwise thing to do because it always comes back to bite you.

[Tradesman]

This is what I was told by AMD after my back and forth with them late 2011/early 2012 after they had changed their 'advertising

". The original change was to replace ‘native 1866 support’ with ‘up to 1866’ with a side note at the bottom of the page...‘1866 supported with 1 DPC (DIMM per Channel) in single memory slot motherboard designs’ The third web page that featured a competitive comparison between processors has now been integrated into the AMD model number comparison web page.

This statement is consistent with the AMD BIOS and Kernel Developers Guide which specifies that DDR3 memory at 1866 speed is only supported on AM3r2 motherboards with 1 DIMM per channel in a 1 DIMM per slot channel set-up. This is just the bare minimum needed to achieve 1866 memory speed on a motherboard design. Please see the attached table 33 from BIOS and Kernel Developers Guide 42301 rev 3.07 for reference"

they also said

"Your interpretation of the document you had been referred to is correct and you can only run a 1 DPC (DIMM per Channel) configuration at that speed and therefore the maximum you can currently achieve is 8GB of memory at 1866MHz until larger DIMM modules become available."

This response came in Jan of 2012, when 8GB sticks had already been readily available to the public for a few months or more and were affordable, a tad expensive yes (as was the 8150 at the time, they dropped the price about the same time).... One also has to keep in mind new designs are generally made available to the CPU manufacturers for testing purposes long before they are available to the public.

As far as recently, you lay no time frame but I've been building 8/16GB systems going back to 2008 or so, and the normal starting point for my clients has been a minimum of 8GB going back to early 2011. Most of my clients are businesses, gamers and individuals that want/require higher end systems, but even then, most of the gaming systems I build have at least 8GB. 16GB is rapidly challenging for the starting point, not to mention 32GB systems are being called for more and more as people use VMs and RAM Drives for a multitude of purposes.

As far as going from 4-8GB (or more) running benchmarks (to me anyway) is all fine and dandy, but in the real world when you are running multiple apps, running VMs, etc is where having more DRAM really shines, the DRAM can hold all that data and temp files, etc that otherwise would be shuttled off to a page file on a mechanical drive, which slows response time and therefore slows the system.

Everyone has their own opinion on things, most of mine are based on being in systems since 1980 (yes I'm a dinosaur ), but over all these years both as an individual and as a Fed Government employee for the USAF and the US Park Service, I've had the privileged to work closely with Intel, AMD, nVidia, Asus, GB and other companies in the systems world, as well as networking with other consultants/builder, IT folks, etc and while I currently don't build on the AMD platform, I have seen a lot of promise in the A10 line of APUs (am thinking of building one here shortly, when I get some free time).

[damric]

AMD has second best IMC.



















Unfortuneately it is quite a few laps behind first place.