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

AMD Ryzen Infinity Fabric Ticks at Memory Speed

Joined
Nov 30, 2015
Messages
705 (0.48/day)
Location
Croatia
Processor Core i5-2400 @3,1 GHz
Motherboard Gigabyte GA-B75M-D3H
Cooling LC Power LC-CC-95
Memory HyperX Genesis 2x4GB @1333 MHz
Video Card(s) Palit GTX 750 Ti StormX OC 2GB
Storage WD Blue 1TB/ Crucial BX500 120GB/ Seagate 500GB
Display(s) ASUS VW190DE
Case Deepcool Smarter /w 2x Zalman 1000RPM
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply FSP Hexa+ 400W
Mouse Microsoft WMO 1.1A
Keyboard IBM KB-8926
Software W7 Pro 64-bit
Benchmark Scores Turns on on the first try! Usually.
Dual Channel seems to be one of the problems, if they brought it out with Triple / Quad, these would have performed way better.
Yea, never thought about that actually, makes sense now that you mention it.

Also a question, could this Infinity Fabric in theory enable on-die Crossfire/SLI connection between two GPUs, removing (or reducing) the need for software?
 
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
1,017 (0.34/day)
Location
Porto
System Name No name / Purple Haze
Processor Phenom II 1100T @ 3.8Ghz / Pentium 4 3.4 EE Gallatin @ 3.825Ghz
Motherboard MSI 970 Gaming/ Abit IC7-MAX3
Cooling CM Hyper 212X / Scythe Andy Samurai Master (CPU) - Modded Ati Silencer 5 rev. 2 (GPU)
Memory 8GB GEIL GB38GB2133C10ADC + 8GB G.Skill F3-14900CL9-4GBXL / 2x1GB Crucial Ballistix Tracer PC4000
Video Card(s) Asus R9 Fury X Strix (4096 SP's/1050 Mhz)/ PowerColor X850XT PE @ (600/1230) AGP + (HD3850 AGP)
Storage Samsung 250 GB / WD Caviar 160GB
Display(s) Benq XL2411T
Audio Device(s) motherboard / Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty Pro + Front panel
Power Supply Tagan BZ 900W / Corsair HX620w
Mouse Zowie AM
Keyboard Qpad MK-50
Software Windows 7 Pro 64Bit / Windows XP
Benchmark Scores 64CU Fury: http://www.3dmark.com/fs/11269229 / X850XT PE http://www.3dmark.com/3dm05/5532432
Yea, never thought about that actually, makes sense now that you mention it.

Also a question, could this Infinity Fabric in theory enable on-die Crossfire/SLI connection between two GPUs, removing (or reducing) the need for software?
I think that is exactly what they want to do, since Vega also supports connection to this infinite fabric thing. It also applies to inter cpu connection on their Naples server platform which sports an healthy 8 channel memory configuration.
 
Joined
Mar 13, 2012
Messages
149 (0.05/day)
So if you building Ryzen gaming rig on a budget

less is more

better to use like 8 GB of expensive super fast memory to get more performance then.

What AMD should do is to revive their Radeon memory brand and sell super fast DDR4 memory with only Ryzen profiles at very low cost to push their Ryzen cpu business.

This way gamers are more inclined to upgrade to Ryzen if the can get maximum performance at a reasonable price. What they don't make in the memory business they will gain 10 fold in the cpu business.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
6,806 (4.08/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Dual Channel seems to be one of the problems, if they brought it out with Triple / Quad, these would have performed way better.
The number of channels (or bandwidth) is not the issue here. The issue is the crossbar switch operates at the same frequency as the RAM. With slower RAM, the crossbars switch has higher latency -> interconnect is slower.

Not a big issue per se, but it depends whether memory speeds can be fixed with a simple BIOS update or they require hardware changes.
 
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
2,075 (0.79/day)
Location
Jacksonhole Florida
System Name DEVIL'S ABYSS
Processor i7-4790K@4.6 GHz
Motherboard Asus Z97-Deluxe
Cooling Corsair H110 (2 x 140mm)(3 x 140mm case fans)
Memory 16GB Adata XPG V2 2400MHz
Video Card(s) EVGA 780 Ti Classified
Storage Intel 750 Series 400GB (AIC), Plextor M6e 256GB (M.2), 13 TB storage
Display(s) Crossover 27QW (27"@ 2560x1440)
Case Corsair Obsidian 750D Airflow
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC1150
Power Supply Cooler Master V1000
Mouse Ttsports Talon Blu
Keyboard Logitech G510
Software Windows 10 Pro x64 version 1803
Benchmark Scores Passmark CPU score = 13080
So, the gist of this thread is, Ryzen should have been designed like an Intel CPU, with more memory channels, a monolithic core design, and a more capable IMC. Of course, it would cost more to make (just like Intel). So let's just make Ryzen into a clone of Intel's HEDT chips, and at the same price level. But hey, at least we can put on an AMD case badge, to let everyone know how much we hate Intel...
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
17 (0.01/day)
The majority of game developers think all the cores of a processor are linked through the L3 cache because Intel's processors are so. They might carelessly share critical data and pay enormous cost in Ryzen.

Programmers must know about cache mechanisms. They can calculate concurrently but must update in one thread. If data are shared by many cores and they update it, there will be total mess, especially in Ryzen.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
6,806 (4.08/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Programmers must know about cache mechanisms.
No, not really. Cache is there to assist while the programmers do their thing. In a world of virtualization, the software rarely knows what it's running on anyway.
Optimizing data chunks wrt cache size is required in some instances, but knowing the intricacies of cache's implementation is certainly not a requirement for a programmer.
 

deu

Joined
Apr 24, 2016
Messages
341 (0.26/day)
System Name Bo-minator (my name is bo)
Processor Intel i7 4770K
Motherboard ASUS MAXIMUS VI HERO Z87
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory G-SkiLL 4x4GB RAM 2133 Mhz (CL 9)
Video Card(s) ASUS STRIX 1080Ti OC
Storage Samsung EVO 850 1TB
Display(s) ACER XB271HU + DELL 2717D
Case Fractal Design Define R4
Audio Device(s) ASUS Xonar Essence STX
Power Supply Antec HCP 1000W
Mouse G403
Keyboard CM STORM Quick Fire Rapid
Software Windows 10 64-bit Pro
Benchmark Scores XX
Good video showing how talking across the CCXs through the fabric hurts performance. This also shows that MS Windows 10 scheduler need some tweaking.

Good video to illustrate the issue! :) Now we just need people to understand that this is something that is fixable :) (like really fixable.)
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
17 (0.01/day)
Optimizing data chunks wrt cache size is required in some instances, but knowing the intricacies of cache's implementation is certainly not a requirement for a programmer.
This is a principle, not a technical detail. And this principle is obvious for anyone who have studied any kind of cache mechanism before.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
6,806 (4.08/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
This is a principle, not a technical detail. And this principle is obvious for anyone who have studied any kind of cache mechanism before.
You lost me.
 

cdawall

where the hell are my stars
Joined
Jul 23, 2006
Messages
27,650 (5.65/day)
Location
Houston
System Name All the cores || Into the Blue
Processor 2990WX || 5960X
Motherboard Asrock X399M || Asus X99M WS
Cooling CPU-XSPC RayStorm Neo, 2x240mm+360mm, D5PWM+140mL, GPU-2x360mm, 2xbyski, D4+D5+100mL || TBD
Memory 4x8GB G.Skill Trident Z 3200 CL16 || EVGA 3200 2x8GB
Video Card(s) (2) EVGA SC BLACK 1080Ti's || EVGA 1080Ti FE
Storage 2x Samsung SM951 512GB, Samsung PM961 512GB || OCZ Vector 180 480GB
Display(s) Dell UP2414Q 3840X2160@60hz || TBD
Case Caselabs Mercury S5+pedestal || Supermicro S5 (GS5A-753K)
Audio Device(s) Fischer HA-02->Fischer FA-002W High edition/FA-003/Jubilate/FA-011 depending on my mood
Power Supply Seasonic Prime 1200w || Seasonic Snow Silent 750w
Mouse Thermaltake Theron, Steam controller || TBD
Keyboard Thermaltake Poseidon ZX, Steam controller || Corsair K70
Software W10P || W10P
AMD need to drop this "CPU block style", interface between between 'group' of CPUs tend to be bottlenecked by bandwidth
look at back, Intel C2Q, Pentium D linked via FSB speed, but ultimately dropped it
AMD need to make real 'individual' cores, with shared L3 cache across 8 cores like Intel do

I dont know, maybe AMD try to save R&D cost by making 'blue print' of 4 cores configuration and simply 'copy-paste' cores to silicon
You mean like the athlon x2, phenom and phenom II...
 

r9

Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
2,619 (0.63/day)
System Name Desktop | Poweredge r410
Processor i5 6500 4.5GHz@1.275V | 2 x E5620 @2.4GHz
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty Gaming | Intel 5500
Memory 16GB DDR4 2400MHz | 32GB ECC DDR3
Video Card(s) RX480 8GB |On-Board
Storage 250GB SSD + 512GB SSD|4x320GB
Display(s) 27" Dell + 2 x 24" LCD Setup
Case Fractal Design Define Nano S
Software Windows 10 | Server 2012 r2
So again the bottleneck is the connection between the two CCX and L3.
So if the Windows scheduler handles the threads and L3 cache properly, not moving threads between the two CCX this Infinity Fabric should not be an issue, and AMD said that Windows Scheduler is aware of the Ryzen Architecture.
I'm confused.
And wishful thinking but maybe in the next BIOS updates we could unlink the bus from the memory and overclock it.
 
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
17 (0.01/day)
You lost me.
Did I? Parallel programming is extremely difficult. You must know many principles for it. You can't benefit by multicore processors if you write a program freely.

If you are not skilled programmer and don't know much about parallel programming, you should write single-threaded programs. Caches always helps you in there.

And you should know the details of hardware if you write performance-critical software, like a game.
 
Joined
Jul 29, 2014
Messages
476 (0.24/day)
Location
Fort Sill, OK
Processor Intel 7700K 5.1Ghz (Intel advised me not to OC this CPU)
Motherboard Asus Maximus IX Code
Cooling Corsair Hydro H115i Platinum
Memory 48GB G.Skill TridentZ DDR4 3200 Dual Channel (2x16 & 2x8)
Video Card(s) nVIDIA Titan XP (Overclocks like a champ but stock performance is enough)
Storage Intel 760p 2280 2TB
Display(s) MSI Optix MPG27CQ Black 27" 1ms 144hz
Case Thermaltake View 71
Power Supply EVGA SuperNova 1000 Platinum2
Mouse Corsair M65 Pro (not recommded, I am on my second mouse with same defect)
Software Windows 10 Enterprise 1803
Benchmark Scores Yes I am Intel fanboy that is my benchmark score.
Good video to illustrate the issue! :) Now we just need people to understand that this is something that is fixable :) (like really fixable.)

That was fantastic Video. This also means each time benchmarking results can/will vary depending on how Windows is scheduling threads between two CCX.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
6,806 (4.08/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
So again the bottleneck is the connection between the two CCX and L3.
So if the Windows scheduler handles the threads and L3 cache properly, not moving threads between the two CCX this Infinity Fabric should not be an issue, and AMD said that Windows Scheduler is aware of the Ryzen Architecture.
I'm confused.
And wishful thinking but maybe in the next BIOS updates we could unlink the bus from the memory and overclock it.
AMD themselves said Win scheduler is not the issue, but what do they know? http://www.windowscentral.com/amd-says-windows-scheduler-isnt-blame-ryzen-performance

Did I? Parallel programming is extremely difficult. You must know many principles for it. You can't benefit by multicore processors if you write a program freely.

If you are not skilled programmer and don't know much about parallel programming, you should write single-threaded programs. Caches always helps you in there.

And you should know the details of hardware if you write performance-critical software, like a game.
Parallel programming is not extremely difficult. In fact, it can be fairly easy to do (look at Erlang or Go's goroutines). But most of the time it is more tedious to write and harder to test/maintain.
Caching has nothing to do with multi-threading. Caching is there to avoid memory read/writes, it doesn't actually care whether the CPU is running 1 or 1,000 threads.
L1 and L2 caches are always split and I know of no one trying to write multithreaded code in order not to upset L1 and L2 caches. If anything, that's a compiler's or a scheduler's job. I don't see why things would be any different when we're talking about L3 cache.
 

r9

Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
2,619 (0.63/day)
System Name Desktop | Poweredge r410
Processor i5 6500 4.5GHz@1.275V | 2 x E5620 @2.4GHz
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty Gaming | Intel 5500
Memory 16GB DDR4 2400MHz | 32GB ECC DDR3
Video Card(s) RX480 8GB |On-Board
Storage 250GB SSD + 512GB SSD|4x320GB
Display(s) 27" Dell + 2 x 24" LCD Setup
Case Fractal Design Define Nano S
Software Windows 10 | Server 2012 r2
AMD themselves said Win scheduler is not the issue, but what do they know? http://www.windowscentral.com/amd-says-windows-scheduler-isnt-blame-ryzen-performance



Parallel programming is not extremely difficult. In fact, it can be fairly easy to do (look at Erlang or Go's goroutines). But most of the time it is more tedious to write and harder to test/maintain.
Caching has nothing to do with multi-threading. Caching is there to avoid memory read/writes, it doesn't actually care whether the CPU is running 1 or 1,000 threads.
L1 and L2 caches are always split and I know of no one trying to write multithreaded code in order not to upset L1 and L2 caches. If anything, that's a compiler's or a scheduler's job. I don't see why things would be any different when we're talking about L3 cache.
Ryzen L3 cache is split between the two CCX. So it has 2x8MB instead of 1x16MB. Which means when if thread is moved from one CCX to the other the cached information needs to be moved to the appropriate L3.
That's where the Infinity Fabric bottleneck takes place and heavily affects performance.
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
6,806 (4.08/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Ryzen L3 cache is split between the two CCX. So it has 2x8MB instead of 1x16MB. Which means when if thread is moved from one CCX to the other the cached information needs to be moved to the appropriate L3.
That's where the Infinity Fabric bottleneck takes place and heavily affects performance.
I know that. But that's AMD's design decision. And when going for max performance, programmers will need to account for that. But I don't think it's fair to say programmers should (much less must) take into account cache implementation details when writing a game.
And even so, thread core affinity is typically the responsibility of the OS.
 
  • Like
Reactions: r9

r9

Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
2,619 (0.63/day)
System Name Desktop | Poweredge r410
Processor i5 6500 4.5GHz@1.275V | 2 x E5620 @2.4GHz
Motherboard ASRock Fatal1ty Gaming | Intel 5500
Memory 16GB DDR4 2400MHz | 32GB ECC DDR3
Video Card(s) RX480 8GB |On-Board
Storage 250GB SSD + 512GB SSD|4x320GB
Display(s) 27" Dell + 2 x 24" LCD Setup
Case Fractal Design Define Nano S
Software Windows 10 | Server 2012 r2
I know that. But that's AMD's design decision. And when going for max performance, programmers will need to account for that. But I don't think it's fair to say programmers should (much less must) take into account cache implementation details when writing a game.
And even so, thread core affinity is typically the responsibility of the OS.
And calling the interconnect Infinite Fabric is like putting race stripe on a car and expecting it to go faster.
Something is not adding up here. From the information that was floating around it sounded like the Infinite Fabric is the bottleneck due to threads moving between CCX.
But with AMD releasing that statement that nothing wrong with the Windows scheduler it looks like that bus is the bottleneck in all scenarios.
And its sounds like all the memory issues are related to the bus being in sync with the memory.
Looks like a huge overlook on AMD side.
But I'm willing to bet they will offer significant IPC improvement on Zen 2.0 and it will be largely due to addressing the bus speed.
 
Joined
Feb 12, 2015
Messages
1,101 (0.62/day)
AMD need to drop this "CPU block style", interface between between 'group' of CPUs tend to be bottlenecked by bandwidth
look at back, Intel C2Q, Pentium D linked via FSB speed, but ultimately dropped it
AMD need to make real 'individual' cores, with shared L3 cache across 8 cores like Intel do

I dont know, maybe AMD try to save R&D cost by making 'blue print' of 4 cores configuration and simply 'copy-paste' cores to silicon
It is incredibly cheaper, and nearly infinitely scalable for AMD to do it this way.


You can thank this new Tech for Ryzen's low cost and massive 32-core brethren. In fact I hope (And expect) AMD to apply this to their GPU archs within a year. Imagine a 1200mm^2 10,000-SP monster gaming card.
 
Joined
Mar 16, 2017
Messages
194 (0.19/day)
Location
behind you
Processor Threadripper 1950X (4.0 GHz OC)
Motherboard ASRock X399 Professional Gaming
Cooling Enermax Liqtech TR4
Memory 48GB DDR4 2934MHz
Video Card(s) Nvidia GTX 1080, GTX 660TI
Storage 2TB Western Digital HDD, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO SSD, 280GB Intel Optane 900P
Display(s) 2x 1920x1200
Power Supply Cooler Master Silent Pro M (1000W)
Mouse Microsoft wireless 3500
Keyboard Corsair K70 MK.2
Software Windows 10
Different CPUs have different cache designs, and they have become quite complicated. A game developer may be able to slightly improve performance using good programming habits, but they could just as easily hinder it. Caches are designed to improve performance for the average program. Also memory allocation isn't the program's job. It's done by the OS and the OS indeed plays tricks with caches (page coloring for example).

It is possible to play the caches like a fiddle (Memtest86+ doesn't disable them), but it's quite difficult and not something that can be done under an OS.

BTW hasn't AMD done something like this before? I think they once had a FSB that was synced with main memory, or had to be for good performance.
 
Joined
Feb 25, 2016
Messages
124 (0.09/day)
Why did they even decide against a Monolithic design? Can't believe we're talking about two separate modules called CCXs (CPU Complex)... just seems like an obsolete design back to the first dual cores that had to reach out to the FSB to communicate between each other. This is unbelievable to me, I know it's better than going out to the FSB, but it imagine how crazy Ryzen could of been with a Monolithic design... it'd be crazy fast I imagine...

Tired of anything related to modules with slow interconnects.
I thought the reason was obvious. They don't have enough money and human resource for monolithic design to make cpus from 2 to 8 cores, apus from 2 to 4 cores, gpus from small to big size, custom chips for consoles, other embedded designs, etc. They also needed some interconnect for server as well as hpc apu. So they chose the best compromise for AMD, decided to choose the design that will help them with computational tasks aka server cpus and apus over gaming. And I think they did well. I never expected them to come so close to Intel. Zen cpus should serve them well in servers and this will give them enough money for better products down the line. I'm now happy enough with their product to assemble some am4 systems down the line, something I didn't do with their BD products.
 

AcesNDueces

New Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2017
Messages
18 (0.02/day)
The Improvements seen have very little to do w actual memory bandwidth and more to with the side benefit of the higher memory speed increasing the speed of the infinity fabric clock. Essentially faster ram overclocks the Uncore/SouthBridge/cache speeds. Thats where the jump is coming from.
 
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
224 (0.08/day)
Location
South-Africa
Processor i5 4670k @ 4.2 Ghz
Motherboard MSi Z87 GD65 Gaming Motherboard
Cooling Zalman CNPS11 Extreme
Memory 16GB DDR3 Corsair Vengeance @ 2400Mhz
Video Card(s) Gigabyte RTX 2060 OC Pro 6GB
Storage 250GB Samsung 850 EVO SSD
Display(s) Samsung Syncmaster SA950D
Case Corsair 750D Airflow Edition
Audio Device(s) ASUS Xonar D2X
Power Supply Corsair AX760 Platinum
Mouse Razer Mamba Chroma (2015)
Keyboard Corsair K70 MK.2 Low-Profile Rapidfire
Software Microsoft Windows 10 Enterprise 64-bit
The number of channels (or bandwidth) is not the issue here. The issue is the crossbar switch operates at the same frequency as the RAM. With slower RAM, the crossbars switch has higher latency -> interconnect is slower.

Not a big issue per se, but it depends whether memory speeds can be fixed with a simple BIOS update or they require hardware changes.
I did say "one" of the issues. *sigh*
 

bug

Joined
May 22, 2015
Messages
6,806 (4.08/day)
Processor Intel i5-6600k (AMD Ryzen5 3600 in a box, waiting for a mobo)
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Extreme7+
Cooling Arctic Cooling Freezer i11
Memory 2x16GB DDR4 3600 G.Skill Ripjaws V (@3200)
Video Card(s) EVGA GTX 1060 SC
Storage 500GB Samsung 970 EVO, 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX300 and 3TB Seagate
Display(s) HP ZR24w
Case Raijintek Thetis
Audio Device(s) Audioquest Dragonfly Red :D
Power Supply Seasonic 620W M12
Mouse Logitech G502 Proteus Core
Keyboard G.Skill KM780R
Software Arch Linux + Win10
Top