• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Ryzen "2" ?

So, my rig has now crashed out twice at 3000MHz ram speed. No other overclock, everything on auto while I try to get the ram stable.
Latest was full lockup on the Windows lock-screen, had to long-hold the power button- even reset button wouldn't work.

Lost a good couple of hours' work on Skylines last night after a hard crash, as I foolishly forgot to enable autosave...

So far I've enjoyed tinkering with this setup, but the failure to get it running stable at anything over 2133MHz ram speed is becoming very frustrating. Just when I think I've cracked it, bang, crash, blue screen.

Grr.
 
Drollic said:
Has a 2800x actually been confirmed yet?
Click to expand...
All AMD have said is that they're keeping it as an option to combat whatever Intel might release.
"We felt like, with the 2700X and 2700 at the performance and price points, we had that space covered," explains Anderson. "We just felt that with those two SKUs we had it sufficiently covered where we wanted to position the product."

"That doesn’t preclude a 2800X someday, right, maybe," Anderson continues cryptically. "But for now we believe those two SKUs cover the space well.”
Click to expand...
https://www.pcgamesn.com/amd-ryzen-7-2800X-release-date

I reckon it'll happen at some point though. Otherwise why not just call the chip they released the 2800X? Clearly they have a little more wiggle room for clocks to create another SKU if they need it, as has been seen via fiddling with the base clock on the 2700X to get more out of SenseMI.
 
Contemplating a move away from my 2500k (it's still going, but the mobo has developed a fault; Asus budget mobos really are trash).

I notice the R5 2600 is about the same price as the i5 8400, with the 8400 being slightly better single thread perf and gaming benchmarks.

And the R5 2600X about the same price as the i5 8600X, with the Intel having considerably better single thread perf and gaming benchmarks.

But that's come from a very quick skim of the interwebs, and tbh it gets much more confusing when you start trying to figure out which will boost to what, the clock-speeds the things will actually run at under load, etc.

I'll need a new mobo and mem, and cost of those is a factor.

Sole use will be 1080p gaming (1440p/100Hz down the road some time in a future upgrade). As such, multi-thread compile/encode performance (etc) is not a factor :p

Is there a compelling reason for a 100% gaming usage user to get anything other than the Intel 8400/8600K? Apart from Spectre, et al, and Intel being a horrible anti-competitive company. I'm inclined just to focus on the products tho ;)
 
FoxEye said:
Contemplating a move away from my 2500k (it's still going, but the mobo has developed a fault; Asus budget mobos really are trash).

I notice the R5 2600 is about the same price as the i5 8400, with the 8400 being slightly better single thread perf and gaming benchmarks.

And the R5 2600X about the same price as the i5 8600X, with the Intel having considerably better single thread perf and gaming benchmarks.

But that's come from a very quick skim of the interwebs, and tbh it gets much more confusing when you start trying to figure out which will boost to what, the clock-speeds the things will actually run at under load, etc.

I'll need a new mobo and mem, and cost of those is a factor.

Sole use will be 1080p gaming (1440p/100Hz down the road some time in a future upgrade). As such, multi-thread compile/encode performance (etc) is not a factor :p

Is there a compelling reason for a 100% gaming usage user to get anything other than the Intel 8400/8600K? Apart from Spectre, et al, and Intel being a horrible anti-competitive company. I'm inclined just to focus on the products tho ;)
Click to expand...

I think you have answered your own question there. If your 1080p gaming, then Intel is the best route. You said you don't use multi-threaded apps or compile and render, no point in paying for something you will never likely use.
 
kitfit1 said:
I think you have answered your own question there. If your 1080p gaming, then Intel is the best route. You said you don't use multi-threaded apps or compile and render, no point in paying for something you will never likely use.
Click to expand...
I just wondered if there was something I'd missed that would swing it for AMD. Frankly I have a soft spot for them, and a similar level of disgust for Intel :p

But if the Intel is the better product for gaming, with no real advantage for the AMD, then I'll get the Intel. At the end of the day the product in my hand is what matters most.

Although I do hope Zen2 trounces the Intel stuff.
 
FoxEye said:
I just wondered if there was something I'd missed that would swing it for AMD. Frankly I have a soft spot for them, and a similar level of disgust for Intel :p

But if the Intel is the better product for gaming, with no real advantage for the AMD, then I'll get the Intel. At the end of the day the product in my hand is what matters most.

Although I do hope Zen2 trounces the Intel stuff.
Click to expand...

As it stands at the moment, if i was looking to change my rig, i wouldn't touch Intel with a barge pole. AM4 is a much longer term better bet, certainly up to and maybe even past Zen3. If you add in the security issues with Intel, which are still ongoing, they wouldn't be my choice.
Peeps are constantly telling us that Intel's IPC and single core performance beats AM4 hands down. Well, it did, but certainly not by much now and even that would have to be an 8700k.
 
kitfit1 said:
As it stands at the moment, if i was looking to change my rig, i wouldn't touch Intel with a barge pole. AM4 is a much longer term better bet, certainly up to and maybe even past Zen3. If you add in the security issues with Intel, which are still ongoing, they wouldn't be my choice.
Peeps are constantly telling us that Intel's IPC and single core performance beats AM4 hands down. Well, it did, but certainly not by much now and even that would have to be an 8700k.
Click to expand...
Funnily enough I'm leaning towards the 2600 atm :p Just feel too dirty buying another Intel :p

In the £200, 2600X vs 8600K price bracket there's more of an Intel advantage.

In the £160, 2600 vs 8400 price bracket there's not all that much in it, even single thread perf seems pretty similar.

I think I might go with the 2600 and put the saved dosh towards an 1170 GPU.

Complete PC make-over this year.

P.S. Is the 2600 (non-X) stock cooler any good?
 
According to the QVL for my board there are only 4 ram types that can run 3200MHz with a Ryzen 2.

Seems a lot more ram types can run 3200MHz if they are Vega APU's tho. (If I'm reading that right and they don't mean Vega GPU)

Time to look at the QVL for the X470 board.

15 ram type that can run 3200MHz or higher for x470.
 
FoxEye said:
P.S. Is the 2600 (non-X) stock cooler any good?
Click to expand...
It's more than good enough for stock and can handle some moderate overclocking. If you really want to push things you'll need something better though.

Incidentally, you'll certainly be better off tilting your budget towards a better graphics card. I'm "only" running a "mere" 1600 paired with my 1080 Ti, but I'm yet to find a realistic situation where it's holding the card back at 1440p. I mean, of course I'm CPU bottlenecked in World of Warcraft for example, but I would be with an Intel CPU too. In games where the 1080 Ti can actually stretch its legs, it always runs out of grunt long before the CPU does. Maybe if you're planning on running a 1080 Ti at 1080p or have two in SLI or something then you're going to see a benefit from having an 8700K at 5GHz, but otherwise I struggle to see the point.

opethdisciple said:
According to the QVL for my board there are only 4 ram types that can run 3200MHz with a Ryzen 2.

Seems a lot more ram types can run 3200MHz if they are Vega APU's tho. (If I'm reading that right and they don't mean Vega GPU)

Time to look at the QVL for the X470 board.

15 ram type that can run 3200MHz or higher for x470.
Click to expand...
QVLs are rarely comprehensive. The RAM I'm using at 3200MHz with a 1600 isn't on my board's QVL for example. You can generally extrapolate from it to other kits based on timings and ICs. If you get a kit that's Samsung B-die, you should be pretty much guaranteed to get at least 3200MHz with a second-gen Ryzen chip. I had no issues getting that with a first-gen chip and seriously tightened some timings on top of that. And that's on MSI's second-lowest-end X370 board.

A QVL obviously doesn't account for manual tweaking either. It's designed for letting you plug and play, whereas a little voltage bump can potentially get you further. From what I've read elsewhere, 3466MHz seems to be the new 3200MHz when it comes to second-gen Ryzen and the same RAM. Though I don't know how much the X370 vs X470 situation matters in that respect.
 
opethdisciple said:
According to the QVL for my board there are only 4 ram types that can run 3200MHz with a Ryzen 2.

Seems a lot more ram types can run 3200MHz if they are Vega APU's tho. (If I'm reading that right and they don't mean Vega GPU)

Time to look at the QVL for the X470 board.

15 ram type that can run 3200MHz or higher for x470.
Click to expand...

My Ram isn't on ASRock's QVL at all, yet it runs perfectly, even when clocked beyond its ratings.

QVL lists are pretty meaningless. :)
 
Aretak said:
It's more than good enough for stock and can handle some moderate overclocking. If you really want to push things you'll need something better though.

Incidentally, you'll certainly be better off tilting your budget towards a better graphics card. I'm "only" running a "mere" 1600 paired with my 1080 Ti, but I'm yet to find a realistic situation where it's holding the card back at 1440p. I mean, of course I'm CPU bottlenecked in World of Warcraft for example, but I would be with an Intel CPU too. In games where the 1080 Ti can actually stretch its legs, it always runs out of grunt long before the CPU does. Maybe if you're planning on running a 1080 Ti at 1080p or have two in SLI or something then you're going to see a benefit from having an 8700K at 5GHz, but otherwise I struggle to see the point.


QVLs are rarely comprehensive. The RAM I'm using at 3200MHz with a 1600 isn't on my board's QVL for example. You can generally extrapolate from it to other kits based on timings and ICs. If you get a kit that's Samsung B-die, you should be pretty much guaranteed to get at least 3200MHz with a second-gen Ryzen chip. I had no issues getting that with a first-gen chip and seriously tightened some timings on top of that. And that's on MSI's second-lowest-end X370 board.

A QVL obviously doesn't account for manual tweaking either. It's designed for letting you plug and play, whereas a little voltage bump can potentially get you further. From what I've read elsewhere, 3466MHz seems to be the new 3200MHz when it comes to second-gen Ryzen and the same RAM. Though I don't know how much the X370 vs X470 situation matters in that respect.
Click to expand...

My 8 pack ram will not run higher than 3133Mhz with a 2700x on my x370 mobo.
 
opethdisciple said:
Nope. B-Die.

It might not even be stable at that. I've played 3 games thus far. 2/3 it's fine. BF1 it can crash.

Hard to know for sure tho as sometimes it's fine and it could just be flaky servers.

BF1 has been flaky since launcher me.
Click to expand...
Weird. Either Asus have dropped the ball or you got really unlucky with your IMC. Most seem to be reporting an easy 3466MHz with B-die and Zen+ chips. Hell, I can almost-but-not-quite manage that (at least at voltages I'm comfortable with), which is why I dropped back to 3200MHz with tightened timings.
 
Aretak said:
Weird. Either Asus have dropped the ball or you got really unlucky with your IMC. Most seem to be reporting an easy 3466MHz with B-die and Zen+ chips. Hell, I can almost-but-not-quite manage that (at least at voltages I'm comfortable with), which is why I dropped back to 3200MHz with tightened timings.
Click to expand...

Yea I spent about 5 weeks messing around with it on both a 1700 and a 2700x. I even sent the ram back under RMA as it would not do 3200MHz DOCP. But then the ram that returned to me was the same.

So I'm guessing it's my motherboard that's the issue.

But then others with my mobo can also run the ram above 3200MHz no issues.
 
Using Ryzen memory calculator. Struggling to get my Corsair 3600, Samsung b die error free at 3400, with safe settings.

Noticed that when I disable gear down or set command rate to 2 my computer won't boot and I have to reset the cmos.

Playing around with trfc alt settings at the moment as that seems to be helping but still not error free in hci memtest.

Using a MSI 350b motherboard with a 2700x, the mb doesn't have all the command rate settings and combines soc and NB voltage.
 
Deaths_Calling said:
Using Ryzen memory calculator. Struggling to get my Corsair 3600, Samsung b die error free at 3400, with safe settings.

Noticed that when I disable gear down or set command rate to 2 my computer won't boot and I have to reset the cmos.

Playing around with trfc alt settings at the moment as that seems to be helping but still not error free in hci memtest.

Using a MSI 350b motherboard with a 2700x, the mb doesn't have all the command rate settings and combines soc and NB voltage.
Click to expand...

worked out the failing to boot is because tcl was on 17 when I tried to set command line to 2. Turns out it needs to be an even number... the calculator suggested disabling geardownmode which sets it to cmd2t by default, I didn't notice it also suggested manually setting it to 1t.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom