8 PACK MEMORY RANGE GROWING: SAY HELLO TO 8 PACK RIPPED EDITION & 32GB KITS!!!

Testing these out at the moment (3600Mhz kit, 2 x 32GB kit)

I wonder if it would be best to continue testing these timings or try CAS 16 defaults with fclk 1900, ddr3800
They booted fine at ddr3800 as i tried soon after i bought them but didnt set IF to 1900

005esmc.png
 
Last edited:
@MrPils

Does CPU clock speed really make such a difference in synthetic benchmarks like Aida? In this example this is the Dark Pro 32GB kit running just primary 3600 14-14-14-28

GyAcjp1.png

This is Buildzoid's XMP table at the bottom row for 3600 with just primary configured 14-15-15-35.

qYYbHA0.png

Only the write is faster on the Dark Pro. I understand that motherboards will spit out different auto timings based on what board you use and stuff but 4,000 MB/s less on copy seems pretty extreme for just motherboard auto timing differences.
 
@MrPils

Does CPU clock speed really make such a difference in synthetic benchmarks like Aida? In this example this is the Dark Pro 32GB kit running just primary 3600 14-14-14-28

GyAcjp1.png

This is Buildzoid's XMP table at the bottom row for 3600 with just primary configured 14-15-15-35.

qYYbHA0.png

Only the write is faster on the Dark Pro. I understand that motherboards will spit out different auto timings based on what board you use and stuff but 4,000 MB/s less on copy seems pretty extreme for just motherboard auto timing differences.
47.1ns is very low latency for cas14 ddr3600 memory. Mine is about 54ns on a 5800X cpu
 
@MrPils

Does CPU clock speed really make such a difference in synthetic benchmarks like Aida? In this example this is the Dark Pro 32GB kit running just primary 3600 14-14-14-28

This is Buildzoid's XMP table at the bottom row for 3600 with just primary configured 14-15-15-35.

Only the write is faster on the Dark Pro. I understand that motherboards will spit out different auto timings based on what board you use and stuff but 4,000 MB/s less on copy seems pretty extreme for just motherboard auto timing differences.

Probably more down to cache speed than cpu speed if its copy that's low. Not something we have to deal with on ryzen, but you get the same effect with a low infinity fabric. Raw cpu speed seems to mostly affect the latency but does have a small effect on all bandwidth tests too.

Has anyone removed the heat spreaders from these? Want to use it with a NH-D15 and wondering how easy it is?

I think I remember reading that the top section of the spreader comes off the ripped kits and they then fit under the noctua. Don't quote me, check for yourself but if I did read that its in this thread somewhere...

Edit: Its actually all the darkpro heatspreaders. From the product page:
"Furthermore the PCB cover of the heatspreader can be removed, which reduces the total height to just 37 mm and markedly increases compatibility with larger CPU coolers."
 
@Guest2 That's just because Intel in general has lower latency than AMD due to the nature of the designs. What's your XMP timing Aida scores for the 32GB kit?

As for the Noctua thing, yeah it's 37mm. Will require the second fan to go up higher by a tad.

jNunhTZ.png

If you don't have the NH-D15 yet I'd just get the NH-D15S.
 
Just received two sets of the 3600 cl14 stuff.

I've been playing around this morning and had no problems with the xmp settings when running just 16gb after adjusting a few voltages but I'm yet to get 32gb dialed in.

The best I can get booted and in to Windows to do some benching so far is 15-15-15 but this still blows the 3000 16-18-18 stuff I'm coming from out of the water.

z390 aurous ultra, i9 9900k 4.7 cache, 4.8 all core oc (daily runner oc as my chip isn't the best of the bunch).

Some quick and dirty numbers so far from aida64 benchmarks.

gb - freq - timings - latency (avg) - read - write - copy
32g - 3000 - 14-15-15-35-630-2t - 49.8 - 42218 - 45578 - 42319
16g - 3466 - 14-15-15-35-630-2t - 43.25 - 49988 - 50533 - 45163
16g - 3600 - 14-15-15-35-630-2t - 41.775 - 52644 - 52565 - 48052
32g - 3600 - 15-16-16-35-630-2t - 45.15 - 38600 - 37399 - 41476
32g - 3600 - 15-15-15-32-630-2t - 44.65 - 51719 - 54825 - 51130

Been having quite a bit of progress with these sticks since my earlier post. My first experience of b-die and they really are pretty amazing.

Was struggling to even get them stable at 3600 at first, mainly due to my own errors but as of last night I was up to 4133 17-17-17 benchmark stable.

Plenty more tuning to be done but hitting lots of personal benchmark records.

MQm14kB

https://imgur.com/MQm14kB
 
Been having quite a bit of progress with these sticks since my earlier post. My first experience of b-die and they really are pretty amazing.

Was struggling to even get them stable at 3600 at first, mainly due to my own errors but as of last night I was up to 4133 17-17-17 benchmark stable.

Plenty more tuning to be done but hitting lots of personal benchmark records.

MQm14kB

https://imgur.com/MQm14kB

Nice, but why always 2T?
I thought there was ~5% performance increase using 1T over 2T... or is that outweighed by higher frequency / tighter timings that can be achieved with 2T?
 
Hey cheers, mainly because 1t is impossible with 4 sticks at this kind of timing as far as I can see.

I certainly can't get 1t to post.

Once I've found a frequency I want to stick to I'll start trying to tighten up the timings and see what I can do.
 
Now at CAS 14, 3800Mhz / 1900 IF (PBO still on auto)

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/posts/34316688/

Great testing and timings there. What was your 3600C14 voltage for comparison?

I do wonder if it would be better to run 3800C16 over 3600C14 if temps are an issue for low airflow cases. You should be able to get away with like 1.42v then. My brain logically thinks that pumping 1.5v into dual rank sticks with chips on either side must be creating more heat compared to single rank so the voltage becomes more of a concern.

I'm not saying not to run that setup btw it's just a theory I had. Might need to take into account the ambient temperature being much lower than say summer.
 
Back
Top Bottom