• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Can I squeeze more out of 2x F4-3600C14D-16GVKA kits?

SkyStreaker said:
GOOD ONE, I'm going to do that...

@tabascosauz -
3800CL15 seems a good start with 1.45v, but what timings are advised? 15-14-14-??? Unclear on that one.
Click to expand...

Here's mine @ 1.42v, but the VDIMM you need will be different. Completely stable through 20 runs TM5 Extreme1, but don't copy my procODT obviously (thinking of changing that even though nothing wrong). VSOC/VDDP/VDDGs also should be tailored to your CPU's needs.

The point of CL15 is to cut down on the VDIMM so that you may be able to get away with passive airflow only. If you're going to drop tRCD and tRP in the pursuit of performance further you may as well just run 14-14-14 @ 1.5v+.........mine does 3800 14-14-14 @ 1.51V completely stable but it's kinda complicated and I don't see any real performance benefit

3800cl15 timings.png
 
AlwaysHope said:
That's the whole point of MT86.
Click to expand...
Ehh.. I don't know.. It was good back in the day when you had less than half a gig of ram, but now a days.. I'm not really sold. Windows isn't the house of cards it used to be, it can take a beating. I check in windows and I don't have any issues..
 
freeagent said:
Ehh.. I don't know.. It was good back in the day when you had less than half a gig of ram, but now a days.. I'm not really sold. Windows isn't the house of cards it used to be, it can take a beating. I check in windows and I don't have any issues..
Click to expand...
Sure windows these days can take a beating IF you like repairing your OS when loading errors occur. I for one don't like wasting time with that, in the end, the ram can pass all the tests or it doesn't .
Take a look around on the web, plenty of advice sites for memory testing in windows nearly always recommend MT86 as an option.
 
AlwaysHope said:
Sure windows these days can take a beating IF you like repairing your OS when loading errors occur. I for one don't like wasting time with that, in the end, the ram can pass all the tests or it doesn't .
Take a look around on the web, plenty of advice sites for memory testing in windows nearly always recommend MT86 as an option.
Click to expand...

I like to give Windows 10 a lot of shit but tbh it's fairly resilient. Hasn't really completely crapped the bed since my early days of running blatantly unstable CJR on my 3700X because I didn't know what HCI Memtest was. And MT86 never even found that, what I was running would have thrown errors barely into the double digits in HCI......so I strictly relegate MT86 to a quick hardware check and nothing more

I was referring more to the minor corruption that sfc /scannow and DISM checkHealth finds, they'll pop up relatively quickly if you daily an unstable setup. Can result in some odd behaviour but doesn't exactly break the OS.

Lord knows I've run dozens of very sketchy profiles on my 4650G and 5700G that were lucky to POST, still held up fine.

What is much more likely to fail ime is the BIOS, I think I've had at least one instance from every AM4 board I've owned save for the ASRocks (only bc I didn't really use them) where unstable mem randomly nukes the BIOS so badly that it needs to be reflashed. My B550I Aorus AX has had it about a dozen times in the past year.

Since that's on POST or before, it's not something MT86 can prevent either. Best to just know the limits of the hardware and respect them.
 
AlwaysHope said:
Sure windows these days can take a beating IF you like repairing your OS when loading errors occur
Click to expand...
Yeah that doesn't happen to me, not sure if I should feel good or bad about that. If it works for you brother, run it! I have my ways of getting to the bottom of stability, I haven't used MT86 in t least a decade, but probably more..

And I agree, the bios is usually the weak spot, but I have had good luck with this board, and most if not all of my Asus boards. P8Z77-V is shit though. I don't think I like Asus midrange stuff after using that board. I watched it die slowly. It was a sad death. It works fine but it cannot see anything from the southbridge.
 
ZenTimings_Screenshot_27298857,9723824.png


Reflashed the BIOS this morning, reseated the CPU/GPU/RAM and rewired everything. Ran this with TM5 with the Extreme1 config for my entire morning. It seems stable thusfar. What would be my next steps?
 
1900 1:1 is what I would try next. If it can’t do it then back off, but you want 1:1.
 
phanbuey said:
have you OC'd the tertiary timings? -- those get a ton of performance above and beyond what a frequency bump will do -- especially with 4 dimms.

primarily trrd_s / trrd_l /tfaw to [4 / 6 / 24] (loose) then [4 / 5 / 20] then [4 / 4 / 16] (super tight ) or 4 / 5 / 16

Try something like

trrd_s / trrd_l /tfaw - [4 / 6 / 24] (to start)

and:

tRDRD_sg = 7
tRDRD_dg = 4
tRDRD_dr = 7
tRDRD_dd = 7

tWRWR_sg = 7
tWRWR_dg = 4
tWRWR_dr = 7
tWRWR_dd = 7

And then run a test -- i think you will be surprised at the performance increase.
Click to expand...
I tried this on my F4-3600C16D-16GTZKW @ 3960 cl16 and I didnt really see any diff in aida64





I tweaked trfc once, but it failed in gaming, had some freezes, i used max 1.40v, now im at 1.44v, what would be the safe trfc? Atm its stock again 694, I used it as low as 450. But not at higher voltages.
 

Attachments

  • 20211126_161213.jpg
    20211126_161213.jpg
    2.2 MB · Views: 121
Last edited:
SkyStreaker said:
View attachment 226666

Reflashed the BIOS this morning, reseated the CPU/GPU/RAM and rewired everything. Ran this with TM5 with the Extreme1 config for my entire morning. It seems stable thusfar. What would be my next steps?
Click to expand...
Next step is CL14 with 1.5V+. You need to lower the tRFC waaay down to under 300 and your tFAW to 16/20. tRRDL to 4 or 6. tRAS 24 will not be stable without at least 1.6V but you can probably do 28 with 42 tRC. tRDWR can probably go down to 8 with 3 tWRRD or 9 with 1 tWRRD.

TheHunter said:
I tried this on my F4-3600C16D-16GTZKW @ 3960 cl16 and I didnt really see any diff in aida64





I tweaked trfc once, but it failed in gaming, had some freezes, i used max 1.40v, now im at 1.44v, what would be the safe trfc? Atm its stock again 694, I used it as low as 450. But not at higher voltages.
Click to expand...
Your timings are all over the place, my dude. Could you post a screenshot of ZenTimings so we can figure out what's going on?

zentimings.protonrom.com

ZenTimings

ZenTimings is a simple and lightweight app for monitoring memory timings on Ryzen platform.
zentimings.protonrom.com zentimings.protonrom.com
 
rares495 said:
Next step is CL14 with 1.5V+. You need to lower the tRFC waaay down to under 300 and your tFAW to 16/20. tRRDL to 4 or 6. tRAS 24 will not be stable without at least 1.6V but you can probably do 28 with 42 tRC. tRDWR can probably go down to 8 with 3 tWRRD or 9 with 1 tWRRD.


Your timings are all over the place, my dude. Could you post a screenshot of ZenTimings so we can figure out what's going on?

zentimings.protonrom.com

ZenTimings

ZenTimings is a simple and lightweight app for monitoring memory timings on Ryzen platform.
zentimings.protonrom.com zentimings.protonrom.com
Click to expand...
Im on intel z490 is there a alternative to this?


Ok I found this and so far I tweaked

trfc to 450 and the timings
trrd_s / trrd_l /tfaw - [4 / 5 / 20]

and:

tRDRD_sg = 7
tRDRD_dg = 4
tRDRD_dr = 7
tRDRD_dd = 7

tWRWR_sg = 7
tWRWR_dg = 4
tWRWR_dr = 7
tWRWR_dd = 7

1637942102319.png



and get this now atm, usually im at around these speeds.. Even with default timings, ok latency is ~ 43-44ns or so.
cachemem trfc450.png



best was one time wjhen I tested 4233 CL16 & trfc 450 @ 1.45v, but I think it wasnt completely stable

cachemembest lat.pngcachemem 4237 trfc 450.png
 
Last edited:
I edited my post and added all the info

1637944008448.png


Comparing to this, i seem to be around his values, ok except trfc and 3-4 deep timings, should I try his extra different timings? Also why is his trefi so high and mine so low by default?

original pic, he has 4400MHZ CL16
 
Last edited:
1900/1900 1866/1866 1:1.

1900/1800 still “ok” but not ideal.
 
Infinity Fabric/memory.

It's not that hard.
 
TheHunter said:
Im on intel z490 is there a alternative to this?


Ok I found this and so far I tweaked

trfc to 450 and the timings
trrd_s / trrd_l /tfaw - [4 / 5 / 20]

and:

tRDRD_sg = 7
tRDRD_dg = 4
tRDRD_dr = 7
tRDRD_dd = 7

tWRWR_sg = 7
tWRWR_dg = 4
tWRWR_dr = 7
tWRWR_dd = 7

View attachment 226686


and get this now atm, usually im at around these speeds.. Even with default timings, ok latency is ~ 43-44ns or so.
View attachment 226687


best was one time wjhen I tested 4233 CL16 & trfc 450 @ 1.45v, but I think it wasnt completely stable

View attachment 226688View attachment 226689
Click to expand...

I would look at these two parameters: tRFC and tREFI.

What you want to do here is increase tREFI (refresh interval) and decrease tRFC (time to recharge/refresh). What this is saying is that every 14,055 clock cycles your RAM will stop for 450 clocks to refresh the memory locations. This basically means you spend 3.2% of the time doing this. If you can, for example, double tREFI to 30,000, you'll gain back half that or 1.6% of the time your memory is currently sitting idle while doing a refresh.

I've found tREFI to be the one that can be changed quite a bit, while tRFC can't.


1637948243205.png
 
RandallFlagg said:
I would look at these two parameters: tRFC and tREFI.

What you want to do here is increase tREFI (refresh interval) and decrease tRFC (time to recharge/refresh). What this is saying is that every 14,055 clock cycles your RAM will stop for 450 clocks to refresh the memory locations. This basically means you spend 3.2% of the time doing this. If you can, for example, double tREFI to 30,000, you'll gain back half that or 1.6% of the time your memory is currently sitting idle while doing a refresh.

I've found tREFI to be the one that can be changed quite a bit, while tRFC can't.


View attachment 226695
Click to expand...
Thanks,

I've set trefi 30000 and trfc to 400 and so far so good. My no1 game atm Destiny2 works ok too for now.

Btw what would be the safe lowest voltage for ~ 4Ghz (3960MHz) CL16, 1.40v or I need more by default? atm testing 1.44v, I had at 1.40v but wasnt sure was it voltage or some timing. Guess this trefi too tight?

4237MHZ CL16 made the best results, but mobo auto set SA and IO a lot,.. Guess this 4233MHZ CL16 definitely needs 1.45v by default?
 
freeagent said:
And I agree, the bios is usually the weak spot, but I have had good luck with this board, and most if not all of my Asus boards. P8Z77-V is shit though. I don't think I like Asus midrange stuff after using that board. I watched it die slowly. It was a sad death. It works fine but it cannot see anything from the southbridge.
Click to expand...


The latest bios on this Gigabyte Z590 Aorus Ultra certainly lets you know pretty quickly if it will accept custom RAM speed & timings. It's pretty forgiving so far, with daily testing over the last few weeks I've never had to reset the cmos once! unlike my previous B450 & X570 rigs. 1st time I owned a Gigabyte board since Lynnfield days.
 
AlwaysHope said:
The latest bios on this Gigabyte Z590 Aorus Ultra certainly lets you know pretty quickly if it will accept custom RAM speed & timings. It's pretty forgiving so far, with daily testing over the last few weeks I've never had to reset the cmos once! unlike my previous B450 & X570 rigs. 1st time I owned a Gigabyte board since Lynnfield days.
Click to expand...

Gigabyte was pretty bad ~10 years ago in the FX days. Seems like they went much more upscale with the Aorus line. That is one beefy power setup on the Ultra with 16 phases and 90A caps.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top