|
I got a new CPU+ram+motherboard and it pretty much won't boot at all if I enable XMP or really any memory frequency above 2133. i notice my RAM isn't on the list for my motherboard so maybe I just need to buy different RAM? CPU: 9600k Mob: Gigabyte Aorus Pro Wifi Z390 RAM: Corsair CMW16GX4M2C3200C16 PSU: Corsair TX650M I have tried: XMP profile1 XMP profile1 + CPU ratio to 47 + Vcore to 1.30 No XMP profile, manually set memory freq to 3200 + mem voltage to 1.35, various different CPU ratios up to 50 and Vcore to 1.35 Also tried with and without enhanced multi core performance and the LLC set to Turbo. Doesn't seem to matter what I try, unless it’s default I get boot failure every time. Thinking I'll go to the store and pick up RAM that is actually on the list, such as Patriot PVR416G320C6K, unless you guys have other ideas... Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 21:51 on Mar 23, 2019 |
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 21:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:58 |
|
|
THC posted:I got a new CPU+ram+motherboard and it pretty much won't boot at all if I enable XMP or really any memory frequency above 2133. i notice my RAM isn't on the list for my motherboard so maybe I just need to buy different RAM? Set VCCIO and VCCSA to 1.3 then try XMP.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 22:01
|
|
|
Indiana_Krom posted:Set VCCIO and VCCSA to 1.3 then try XMP. still no dice with that  removing one or the other RAM stick does appear to work though...e: also tried swapping the RAM sticks around and tried them in slots A1+B1 and A2+B2. one stick in A2 alone worked but that sucks obviously Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Mar 23, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:16
|
|
|
Well, you can try 1.35v on those, but that is starting to get up there at least from information I've been able to find online. Also make sure XMP is setting the proper ram voltage, what I tend to do is set things one at a time and reboot, so do VCCSA and VCCIO first then save and restart, then the RAM voltage save and restart, then toggle XMP and try again. Although sometimes it just won't go no matter what you do, in which case try again but 200 MHz slower each time. VCCIO and VCCSA are basically for the whole system agent island on the CPU which includes the memory controller/display controller/and other misc i/o stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2019 23:45
|
|
|
The RAM I have is 3600, but my board only supports it at 3400 (though 3466 works! wow), what I do is set it to XMP, then manually change the clock rate. I suggest setting it to XMP (don't reboot), then manually setting the frequency to 2133. If that works you can then try stepping it up a notch at a time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 00:43
|
|
|
So I am giving up on trying to overclock my piece of poo poo ECS motherboard, and am considering buying another X58 1366 socket motherboard on eBay. Specifically, I am looking to buy the one I use for my MAME cabinet because that thing was so incredibly easy to overclock to 4.0ghz. Anyway, the motherboard in my MAME cabinet is an Asus P6X58D-E. For whatever reason, this motherboard on eBay is like $180 which seems insane to me considering that's more than I paid for it in 2010  Do electronics these days actually go UP in value or something? Anyway a few auctions down I found this: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Asus-P6X58D-E-LGA1366-w-I-O-Plate-16GB-DDR3-RAM-Intel-Xeon-W3550-GeForce-8500GT/223443365334 it comes with that motherboard, as well as 16GB of RAM, and a Xeon W3550 CPU. So I basically have these questions: 1) Is it ridiculous to spend $180 on this instead of buying a newer CPU/motherboard combo? I am only looking to stick with the 1366 socket because I have the watercooler for it, and because I'm a cheapskate. 2) Is the Xeon W3550 overclocked to 4.0 ghz better than the i7 930 overclocked to 4.0 ghz? Some site I am checking out shows them as being identical, which is weird. 3) am I an idiot for even considering spending $180 on this and I should just live with my i7 930 @ 2.6 ghz and 8gb of RAM? I am mostly looking for this computer to be a beefy Plex server (buffering bothers the hell out of me) and to also play some PC games with my NVidia Shield Portable, using the NVidia GTX 1050 I already have. (also as a small side-question, is it still like the old days where if you change the CPU and motherboard you basically have to reinstall Windows 10 fresh because it will be a huge mess if you don't?. If so I'm definitely not changing the motherboard or CPU). Thanks 
Chumbawumba4ever97 fucked around with this message at 02:35 on Mar 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 01:45
|
|
|
THC posted:still no dice with that Set it to 2133, stock volts, run a memory test. Does it pass? GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 02:26 on Mar 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:22
|
|
|
Uncle at Nintendo posted:So I am giving up on trying to overclock my piece of poo poo ECS motherboard, and am considering buying another X58 1366 socket motherboard on eBay. Specifically, I am looking to buy the one I use for my MAME cabinet because that thing was so incredibly easy to overclock to 4.0ghz. Anyway, the motherboard in my MAME cabinet is a Asus P6X58D-E. 1) Yes. 2) It makes perfect sense because they are the exact same Bloomfield CPU. 3) Spending $180 on a 10+ year old architecture where a cheap AMD Ryzen+Board+RAM combo deal for barely more than that will likely run multiple circles around it probably means yes. (Side question, it is still the same, but don't blame it on Windows, all major PC operating systems will suffer a similar mess if you were to attempt it.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:37
|
|
|
I can’t imagine dicking around with LGA1366 and not using a Westmere 6-core Xeon; they’re only like $45 for an X5680(3.3ghz) and overclock pretty well. If you’re not going six-core, use Sandy or Ivy, they’re getting cheap now and overclock even better/easier than Nehalem.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 02:59
|
|
|
Indiana_Krom posted:1) Yes. Yeah I'm gonna have to forget it then. Setting up this Windows setup was such a pain in the rear end that I guess I'll be stuck with this CPU and mobo for a long time. I definitely wasn't blaming Windows 10. I only asked because I remember in the XP and earlier days if you so much as changed a sound card you were advised to flatten and reinstall, but I thought maybe Windows 10 was a lot better with hardware change stuff. Oh well.  JnnyThndrs posted:I can’t imagine dicking around with LGA1366 and not using a Westmere 6-core Xeon; they’re only like $45 for an X5680(3.3ghz) and overclock pretty well. If you’re not going six-core, use Sandy or Ivy, they’re getting cheap now and overclock even better/easier than Nehalem. I'd get a Westmere 6-core Xeon except this poo poo ECS X58 motherboard apparently only supports the i7 920 and the i7 930 and that's it. And if I want to buy a GOOD x58 motherboard I'm looking at ~$150
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 03:42
|
|
|
What's the difficulty with installing?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 03:46
|
|
|
Just the insanely fine tuned way I have sabnzb and a bunch of other stuff installed. It took me like a month the last time I needed to do it
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 03:51
|
|
|
Uncle at Nintendo posted:
Are you positive that Xeons don’t work, or are they just not on the supported list? The compatibility list on my GA-UD3R-X58 doesn’t mention Xeons, but they work just peachy. Then again, this is ECS, so you’re probably right, Westmere is out.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 05:21
|
|
|
JnnyThndrs posted:Are you positive that Xeons don’t work, or are they just not on the supported list? The compatibility list on my GA-UD3R-X58 doesn’t mention Xeons, but they work just peachy. Then again, this is ECS, so you’re probably right, Westmere is out. There was apparently a 1.1 revision of my motherboard, and mine is (of course) 1.0 and they specifically state that the 1.1 revision supports more CPUs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 05:48
|
|
|
LRADIKAL posted:The RAM I have is 3600, but my board only supports it at 3400 (though 3466 works! wow), what I do is set it to XMP, then manually change the clock rate. Juul-Whip fucked around with this message at 20:18 on Mar 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 20:11
|
|
|
I just built a new PC with a Ryzen 7 2700 + ROG X470-F Gaming with a large CPU air cooler + 120mm fan. I've tried running AI Suite 3's auto overclocking, and it claims it could only overclock to 3.7. Tried manually bumping the voltage manually to 1.33 and 4.0 in both the BIOS and AI Suite, but the system instantly locks up or isn't bootable. Am I missing something or does my Ryzen chip just suck? Edit: Reset my BIOS defaults and started over and it seems to be running at 4.0. Corb3t fucked around with this message at 23:02 on Mar 24, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
e: deleted by accident and I forgot what I wrote
Chumbawumba4ever97 fucked around with this message at 13:38 on Mar 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2019 23:59
|
|
|
It’s very possible you just crapped out at the silicon lottery. My Xeon 5670 wont go over 3.5ghz without a ridiculous amount of voltage even though a ‘lot of people’ get 4.0-ish. I’ve always believed that people who get a good chip never STFU about it, while people with crappy overclocks shuffle their feet and state at the floor, so reading forums and overclock guides tend to give you a skewed sense of what’s ‘normal’.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 04:41
|
|
|
I think you can raise the voltage a lot. 1.25 is like what people are giving Coffee Lake. I think 1.38 is the unofficial limit for Bloomfield. I have my Haswell at 1.29 right now. As long as your temperatures stay in check I wouldn't worry about raising the voltage at all. Crashing on startup is just classic stability problems, if it happened after a few hours of Prime it could be temperature, but when it's booting I'd go straight to voltage. Of course it could just be a weak chip and there's nothing you can do about that. It slows down at idle to save power. They've gotten really good at handling the speed changes and there should be virtually no performance or stability impact at normal levels. My install of Windows 10 reports my Haswell as running at both 3.3 GHz and 4.3 GHz depending on what I'm checking. I'm going to guess that Windows has started to read a string in the processor that says what the stock speed is and reports that to avoid reporting problems with people seeing like 800 MHz if they check the field while it's idle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 15:11
|
|
|
craig588 posted:I think 1.38 is the unofficial limit for Bloomfield. I ran 1.39 on Sandy Bridge for years and years without issue, and I'd be comfortable with going a bit past 1.4 on Bloomfield as long as I could keep it cool. My i7-920 was unable to do more than around 3486 (166*21) and stay stable if the notes I kept are anything to go by. In the same EX58-DS4 board, I got an L5640 (six-core, but low-power) up to 3325 (175*19) which confirmed that the board wasn't holding it back from going past 166 BCLK, so I decided to try a bit higher and with an X5660 I got to 4560 (190*24) and 1.375V. I also tried an X5670 I bought for work just to see, but it was a slightly worse overclocker than the X5660 which doubles my suspicion that the X5660 is unusually good. It's pretty normal to see an OC that will superficially boot up but isn't stable and crashes when loading Windows, logging in, trying to run more than a couple programs at once, etc. I thought for a while that I had my X5660 stable at 4.8 without HT (200x24) but it turned out that any time I ran certain programs - I remember Blizzard games doing it - they would just crash to desktop within a few minutes. Went away when I dropped to 4.56. You would think that something like this would also give you bluescreens or other indications of a systemic problem, but sometimes poo poo is just weird. e: The 2.8GHz in the Windows Properties screen is a text string that reflects stock speed and is probably stored in some EEPROM; it has nothing to do with actual live speed that the processor is running at. I'm glad I got it this far, but I would not under any circumstances recommend someone buy an X58 board at current market prices to set up a similar system. If you already have one that can support and overclock Westmere then the price of the chip alone is inconsequential, but if you're paying for the board too then you really should consider the current deals on Ryzen 1700/2700 and X370/470 boards. You'll end up with a faster system that uses substantially less power and has a warranty. I'm planning to upgrade myself once the 3000-series comes out, assuming it's a substantial step up from 2000. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Mar 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 17:41
|
|
|
Thank you all for the replies. I just had the weirdest things happen and I figured I'd share it. I got the overclock to stay rock solid at 165x21 and my temps were insanely low; like 35C while running Prime95. So I figured I would bump up the voltage to 1.4v and change it to 180x21. Windows booted fine, I ran Prime95 fine, no issues at all. Like an hour later I had to reboot and that's when everything got crazy. Windows 10 was checking and fixing errors on every single hard drive attached to the computer. When Windows finally booted, it asked me for a login password even though I have it set up to not require one (it even gave me an error about how it couldn't enable the "don't ask for password" feature). Programs that usually startup with the computer didn't. The loving internet broke on the computer. I literally couldn't connect to the internet. It had the red exclamation mark over the network icon which you'd normally see when your internet is down. Windows showed I only had 2GB of RAM even though CPU-Z showed 8. I rebooted and went back down to 165x21 but holy poo poo, what would cause all that madness? I didn't try to OC it to 9.0ghz. The CPU is extremely cool even under extreme load so I don't know what the hell to think. I'll live with 165x21 but it kind of sucks I spent endless hours for what amounts to a 600mhz increase in speed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
You overclocked the bus and it got fucky? Up the multiplier? E - it should be able to do that. More qpi volts? GRINDCORE MEGGIDO fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Mar 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
Is the memory speed based off the QPI speed? Memory getting unstable used to be what caused weird things to happen, but it has been generally fixed for a while now, but Bloomfield was one of the last processors you could change the FSB on. You could try setting the memory divider one lower so the bios displays that the memory is running slower, but with the overclock it's the same speed. I think with X58, you can't change the multiplier but it's very capable of FSB changes. If I'm remembering wrong, yeah, don't touch the bus and push the multiplier. craig588 fucked around with this message at 23:57 on Mar 25, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2019 23:54
|
|
|
GRINDCORE MEGGIDO posted:You overclocked the bus and it got fucky? I don't know if I overclocked the BUS because I don't see anything in my BIOS about it The only thing I changed was the CPU voltage, the overclock frequency, and the ratio. craig588 posted:Is the memory speed based off the QPI speed? Memory getting unstable used to be what caused weird things to happen, but it has been generally fixed for a while now, but Bloomfield was one of the last processors you could change the FSB on. You could try setting the memory divider one lower so the bios displays that the memory is running slower, but with the overclock it's the same speed. This is where I get completely lost. I'm decent with computers but have absolutely no idea what the things you said are called in my BIOS. I know my RAM is supposed to be 16000 9 9 9 24 2T but I am not sure what to do with that information. For what it's worth, CPU-Z is reporting my RAM as this: 659.9 MHZ FSB:DRAM 2:8 7 7 7 20 86 2T I've tried manually setting the RAM to what the specs say on the sticker on the RAM but my computer refuses to post whenever I do that. I am not sure if that is what you were asking me to do
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:02
|
|
|
Someone else'll have to help on specifically what to change, I've resigned to paying extra for Asus motherboards so I don't need to learn different settings and I can get used to everything being called and sorted generally similarly. You want to set the timings to 9-9-9, generally memory runs best at the timings it was specced for. The performance benefits from tighter timings are generally small and instability happens from small changes. Right now it's running at 1333, but with 7s that could be what causes the problems when the CPU is running fast enough to stress it some more. I think the memory speed is fixed, if it wasn't you'd see a speed something like 830 MHz with the 165x21 overclock.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
Uncle at Nintendo posted:I don't know if I overclocked the BUS because I don't see anything in my BIOS about it I would suggest just doing a more standard overclock and just leaving the bus at 100 Mhz and adjusting the ratio. You can OC with the bus but sometimes that fucks up timing on other stuff. Also stop using CPU-Z it's not great. Install HWInfo64 since its sensors seem to be a little better at showing the right data. CPU-Z is showing your ram as being clocked down to 1333mhz (DDR is double data rate so 700mhz but you get two cycles per clock) but with faster timings set. This may be due to the bus speed being weird but could also just be a misreading of CPU-Z.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 00:39
|
|
|
Think if the bus is too high it reduces the memory speed on a strap? It's been a while since those. Can you up the multiplier or is it locked?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:08
|
|
|
The 930 has a stock FSB of 133 MHz, setting it to 100 MHz will cause problems. I've always found CPU-Z to be extremely reliable for the limited set of things it reports. Clock speeds and timings, VID sort of works, but the CPU voltage can be adjusted by the motherboard so much it doesn't mean much. Normally it grays out the field if it doesn't trust the reading it's getting.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:09
|
|
|
Also wasn't the 930 back in the dark ages when Intel locked the multipliers and there were no "K" unlocked equivalents, so the only way to overclock at the time was by overclocking the FSB?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:17
|
|
|
Indiana_Krom posted:Also wasn't the 930 back in the dark ages when Intel locked the multipliers and there were no "K" unlocked equivalents, so the only way to overclock at the time was by overclocking the FSB? Looks like it. What's the max safe qpi volts?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 01:21
|
|
|
Indiana_Krom posted:Also wasn't the 930 back in the dark ages when Intel locked the multipliers and there were no "K" unlocked equivalents, so the only way to overclock at the time was by overclocking the FSB? Christ I didn't even know about that, I used AMD at the time and got a -K haswell machine. At least my incorrect info is relevant despite the incorrect numbers and that I didn't know it was multiplier locked. So, to the OP, you will have to bump your bus speed up but don't do it too much or everything will get unstable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 02:19
|
|
|
I’ve got a 940 OC’d to about 4 ghz. Not many options were available other than raising the FSB (133->160) and bumping up the voltage a tad. This chip is a loving workhorse and it was very, very easy to do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 02:27
|
|
|
God I feel like a moron for asking this but FSB is the same as "CPU Over-clocking Frequency"? So basically I should leave that as the default of 133 (which is what my BIOS puts it at when I choose to enable overclocking) and just up the "ratio CMOS setting" to something like 30 to get 4ghz as it would not mess with the RAM?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 13:36
|
|
|
For X58, not exactly - adjusting the multiplier is the standard advice on newer generations. The FSB is kind of the central clock that keeps CPU cores and memory controller synchronized, so when you go up with it both the CPU and memory clocks will increase. Fortunately each of CPU and memory has its own multiplier so that you can find a maximum for each independently if you want to. For example, you can probably drop your memory multi to 6x or 8x which would give you a starting point of 800MHz or 1066. Since your memory is probably specced for 1333(10x), 1600(12x), or higher, this allows you to try overclocking the CPU without worrying that any instability you encounter is a result of running the memory too fast. Calling it FSB a bit of a misnomer because Nehalem/Bloomfield/X58 doesn't use a front side bus anymore like Core 2 Duo/Quad did, it uses QPI - but the 'FSB' clock determines QPI speed as well, so whatever. You may also find as you go up that the QPI speed is a limiting factor, especially past 175 FSB. You may be able to adjust the multiplier for QPI a bit if this comes up, but it's mostly just a wall that you hope not to hit. I was lucky to have a system that would boot at 200. In newer generations you have what they call BCLK ('base clock') and it generally starts at 100 and affects more than just CPU/memory so you can't really change it substantially without causing massive issues. Some X58 platforms properly call BCLK what is the 'FSB' speed on your board, since that's really what it is. This is why people who have those generations are recommending you just change the CPU multiplier - it's unlocked on K-model chips, and is the generally the only way to go in generations where it's an option. It's generally not an option to adjust the CPU multiplier upward with X58 though. I remember reading somewhere when the platform was new that all 9xx models had unlocked multipliers, but at least with my board and i7-920 I was only ever able to go down from stock. Any Xeon is definitely not going to have unlocked multipliers, and my experience at least with the X5660 is that even the top stock multipliers are a bit wonky. I can run at 24x but only in two-core turbo, and if I'm not OK with that I have to stick to 22x and not use turbo at all. Since I'm already pushing the limits of QPI, I just can't get the BCLK much higher and it wouldn't be possible to get the cores as high at 22x as at 24x anyway so I just accept that my top speeds are only reachable with a 2-core load. Later generations generally let you lock all cores at whatever multiplier you want, but this is a bit too early for that. Anyway - TL;DR, CPU multiplier overclocking is probably not an option until the generation after yours. Use FSB to overclock and drop memory multiplier as necessary to keep the memory clocks from being your limiting factor. If you want to get deeper in than this with advice about voltages etc., I would recommend digging up an X58 overclocking guide. There were a lot out there back when the platform was more relevant. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Mar 26, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2019 14:41
|
|
|
Eletriarnation posted:For X58, not exactly - adjusting the multiplier is the standard advice on newer generations. Thank you! So basically what you are saying is, for example, if I wanted to get 4.0 ghz, I'd be better off doing 215x19 than 200x20? Did I read your post right? I also think my RAM is bad because Windows is only reporting 8 GB even though I have 12 GB installed. This is with or without overclocking; it doesn't matter. So I just bought 6 of these: https://www.ebay.com/itm/Hynix-4GB-2Rx8-PC3-12800U-HMT351U6CFR8C-PB-DDR3-Desktop-ram/323733846565 Though the latency numbers are higher, (11 11 11 11 instead of 9 9 9 9) I hope this fixes my overclocking issues as well. At the very least it will triple the amount of RAM I currently have, so I see it as a no-brainer for $80 either way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 14:41
|
|
|
Kind of the opposite. Basically, if your X58/i7-930 combo is like my X58/i7-920 combo was, you're going to have a cap on your CPU multiplier. Probably 21x (2.8GHz) or 23x (3.06GHz), depending on whether your board reports the turbo number (for 2 cores) or the max all-core number. Like I mentioned before, my X5660 shows 22x in BIOS because that's the all-core number but it actually goes to 24 in practice and therefore 24 has to be stable - you might be in a similar position, so you'll just have to watch for that. Anyway, going higher on that multiplier would be the easiest way to overclock if you could do it but since you can't FSB/BCLK will be the only way. Increasing FSB from the stock of 133 will, in addition to speeding up your CPU proportionally from its stock speed, also speed up RAM and QPI. So, let's take an easy example - what happens when you go up 25%, from 133 to 166? I'm putting in assumed values for your RAM and QPI here. CPU goes from 23x133 (3066) to 23x166 (3818). RAM goes from 10x133 (1333) to 10x166 (1660). QPI goes from 36x133 (~4.8GHz) to 36x166 (~6.0). Let's assume the CPU can actually run this fast, because if it can't there's no point in trying to eliminate other limiting factors. If the RAM can't, that's fine - drop your multiplier to x8, 8x166 is 1328 so you're basically at stock performance. You can keep going to x6 if you want to go higher, and your new 1600 RAM will help with this too. QPI - well, depending on which model of chip you have the stock multiplier can be a lot higher than 36x, so if you run into instability start out by making sure this is as low as possible. Not "Slow Mode" though if you have it; this is *really* slow, to the point that the system will be unusable. With a 36x multiplier, it shouldn't be an issue at least up to around 165-175. Past that though, the only thing you can do if it's a problem is try tweaking the voltage a bit. Too much voltage and you'll kill the board, so in practice this is the wall you are likely to hit with a really good chip - too high FSB means too high QPI means the system isn't stable. Coming back to my Xeon, if I weren't limited by QPI I could try dropping the turbo and doing 210x22 to see if all-core 4.62 would be stable. 210x36 would put QPI at ~7.5GHz though, and I seem to have a wall where the system won't boot past ~7.2 so I have to be content with using the turbo multiplier to get only two cores as high as possible. Hope that helps - it's definitely kind of a mess, which is why this is the last generation that it worked like this and in 2nd generation onward you just pay Intel a little extra to be able to change the CPU multiplier directly. Eletriarnation fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Mar 27, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 18:53
|
|
|
Thanks so much. I really appreciate it. I'm going to do all of that once the new RAM comes in. No use in me messing with my BIOS now only to have to do it again a week from now 
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2019 20:36
|
|
|
OK so I got my new RAM in the mail. I bought 6 sticks of this: Unfortunately I was only able to use 4 of them, because apparently the middle two DIMM slots on this piece of trash ECS motherboard are dead? I've never heard of dead RAM slots before, nor do I know how the hell a slot could die short of me pouring battery acid in the slot, but ECS found a way somehow. Anyway so I have 4 sticks of this in for a total of 16 GB of RAM now. When I tried to boot the PC, Windows instantly gave me a BSOD, so I cleared the CMOS and it booted fine. I am guessing it is because of the RAM settings in my BIOS, which makes sense because my older RAM had completely different timings. Anyway with the RAM I have now, as you can see the photo above shows 11-11-B1: what should I change these BIOS settings to?  I'm guessing the tCL and tRCD should be changed to 11 and 11, but what about tRP? tRAS? tRFC? DRAM Command Rate does not have an option for B1. Should I up the voltage on this RAM at all? Lower the DRAM frequency for stability or something like that?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 11:36
|
|
|
What board is it?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 12:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 12:58 |
|
|
This doesn't help anything, but I have all of the terms floating around so I might as well get them out. tCL is column address strobe delay, tRCD is row to column delay, tRP is row precharge, tRAS is row address strobe delay. None of the names matter to consumer use of memory, but I wanted to get them out since I knew them. I'd start with setting everything to 11 except the tRFC to like 30. Not a rule, but a good guideline is to start out setting the tRFC to about the first 3 values added together minus 1. 32 will probably work too but is probably higher than it needs to be. Timings matter very little for performance and they more need to match what the memory was designed for. The best timings versus the worst timings at the same clock speed will only be a few percent of performance difference. Command rate is more down to the memory controller, but with 4 sticks you might need 2 there for stability. Usually (But not always!) 1 works for 2 modules and 2 is for when you've fully populated the memory. If the memory has a SPD or XMP profile built in that's already those settings go with that. There are like 20 other timings that also don't really matter for performance that the SPD can probably have that will be better than the motherboard making its best guess at. Google the model number off one of the memory chips and see if anyone else has raised the voltage on them. I'd go to 1.65 volts with no worry, but if other people didn't see gains I wouldn't bother and keep them at 1.5 volts. The brand or rating doesn't matter in this case, whatever some chips were binned to if they respond well to voltage than everything from that line should.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2019 12:21
|
|