Print

Register Now!

To Get More Info and Daily Reward.

• Login
• Register

Please login or register.

[isi--81]

Go for Dual Rank RAM, it is faster @ same clocks vs Single Rank 
https://www.golem.de/news/ram-overclocking-getestet-ryzen-profitiert-von-ddr4-3200-und-dual-rank-1704-127262.html
http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Ryzen-5-1600X-CPU-265842/Tests/R5-1500X-Review-Mainstream-1225280/3/
I bought this one https://geizhals.de/crucial-ballistix-sport-lt-weiss-dimm-kit-32gb-bls2k16g4d26bfsc-bls2c16g4d26bfsc-a1572708.html
It is running @ 2933 CL18 with 1.25V (keep in mind that 2666MHz DR RAM ~delivers same FPS in Games like 3200 SR)
2666MHz can run with 16-15-15-15-33 @ 1.2V. Works great with manually set in the Bios (no XMP).
What i also saw is, that you can see thos differences @ low resolutions, but 1080P max Settings-4K etc, there are very rare scenarios, whew you will see a difference in FPS.
Mostly you are GPU limited. So get yourself DR RAM, it is cheaper and 2666MHz are enough.

[xfxp1384]

No, it clearly states 1600.2Mhz, you are reading the native supported speed. Please see below for more proof:

I have the exact same memory 
 

(CORSAIR Vengeance LPX 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200 (PC4 25600) Desktop Memory Model CMK16GX4M2B3200C16)

but I haven't been able to get 3200Mhz.

I've been using 2933Mhz (A-XMP Profile 1) since the beta v1.21 Ish, currently using 1.3 [B350 Tomahawk], though my R7 1700 works flawlessly at 3.9Ghz..

I wonder when we would get the official support for our ram with its stock clock.

Here's some picture proofs






Although, a lot of softwares displays my mem clock as 2133 Mhz like yours and others.

[isi--81]

BTW you can check your RAM with Thaiphoon Burner. It is free and there you can check if your RAM is single Rank or Dual Rank.

[RemusM]

Go for Dual Rank RAM, it is faster @ same clocks vs Single Rank

That's a false statement.
Read again (carefully) the first message of this topic.
Single rank is always faster than Dual rank.
And here is the reason:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_rank
 Increasing the number of ranks per DIMM is mainly intended to increase the memory density per channel.
Too many ranks in the channel can cause excessive loading and decrease the speed of the channel.

[isi--81]

I should have add in games it is faster, go check the tests.
I posted 2 of them.

[RemusM]

I should have add in games it is faster, go check the tests.
I posted 2 of them.

You don't understand the difference between RANK and SIDE.

[isi--81]

Then go check out that 2 Links which i posted. PCGH / Golem are quiet big here in germany.
So you say they dont know what they are talking about?
I think you dont understand the difference, here for you (Look 2.42min)

[RemusM]

So you say they dont know what they are talking about?
I think you dont understand the difference,

The internet is full of "gurus" and all kind of crappy/fake/paid benchmarks and tests.
I am talking about tests and recommendations made by AMD.

[isi--81]

Do you say that AMDs claim that  2666 MHz for 2 DIMMs in dual channel and single rank" ...
or i say it otherwise, do you think it is not possible to use Dual Rank RAM @ 2666MHz or above, because AMD says what you posted in your startpost?

[Nichrome]

http://www.legitreviews.com/ddr4-memory-scaling-amd-am4-platform-best-memory-kit-amd-ryzen-cpus_192259

We cool now? Maybe in games dual rank performs better, but as far as speeds of RAM, single rank goes higher.

[isi--81]

Yeah thats true what you wrote and everything is cool.
My Dual Rank 2 Dimm RAM runs @ 2993MHz with a B350 arctic.
Those guaranteed speeds which AMD declared doenst mean, that you cant overclock even higher.

[isi--81]

Sry couldn t edit my post, but i found another interesting link https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/28741978/SERVER-memory-rank-single-dual-quad.html
So interleaving is the key here.

[darkhawk]

Sry couldn t edit my post, but i found another interesting link https://www.experts-exchange.com/questions/28741978/SERVER-memory-rank-single-dual-quad.html
So interleaving is the key here.

Unfortunately, that link is wrong and most of what was 'discussed' is also incorrect, since dual sided RDIMM's are in fact slower and have lower performance than the single sided RDIMM's, and the same is true with LRDIMM's as well.... See : https://www.microway.com/hpc-tech-tips/ddr4-rdimm-lrdimm-performance-comparison/

Look, plain and simple, everyone is tired of you trying to prove a point that just isn't....right.
Either accept what others have shown here (and what knowledgeable people in the industry agree on), or believe what you want.
Fact remains, we don't need a constant argument with no factual basis here, not when common knowledge says different, benchmarks say different. 

Yes, we understand that there might be very specific circumstances where the dual rank does perform better, but those are not the norm, and in many cases, doesn't really translate into real world usage.

[anotherkhoi]

May i ask if the Corsair Vengeance LPX 8GB 2400 cas 14 (CMK8GX4M1A2400C14) could cause the crashing/freezing issue (Windows 10) with the B350 Tomahawk?
Just upgraded my PC with B350 Tomahawk, R5 1600 and the Corsair Vengeance LPX 8GB 2400 cas 14, tried to re-install Windows 10 a lot of times but its just keep crashing/freezing even when i just browsing web. Ran memtest86 more than 2 hours with pass 4/4 without any problem.

[jacki-baldes]

I´m sorry for my english but i got following problem:

I got a MSI B350 Tomahawk arctic with Ryzen 1600 and GTX 1070.
Because i got small performance issues i want to disable SMT, but i can´t find this option in bios (its not under OC settings at the bottom).
I saw in this forum, that this option was enabled in Bios version 1.31, so i tried to figure out which version i got.
MSI Live update tells me, that there is no Bios update available and that i got Bios Version H.10. 

What can i do?

Thanks!

[darkhawk]

See : https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=283344.0 for the latest version.

[rindman]

With the latest bios 1.4 the xmp mode works  properly now ( Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200 mhz black, Sk Hynix SR ). No Freezes, everything at auto settings ( vcore 1.2, offset in auto goes up to 1.39v with XFR, quite normal since my vid is 1.5v )

I will try some overclocking with adjusting at the lowest vcore possible. Would be nice to have offset setting for tweaking and allowing 0.8v on idle.

[rindman]

And my board is the gaming pro.

[jacki-baldes]

See : https://forum-en.msi.com/index.php?topic=283344.0 for the latest version.

Ty, but i got another question. The official MSI B350 tomahawk site give me Version 1.34 as latest "official" version.
Why doesn´t Live Update 6 proposes it to me as new Bios Version altough it got H.1?

[darkhawk]

Ty, but i got another question. The official MSI B350 tomahawk site give me Version 1.34 as latest "official" version.
Why doesn´t Live Update 6 proposes it to me as new Bios Version altough it got H.1?

B350 Tomahawk =/= B350 Tomahawk Arctic

They are different boards and require different BIOS's. You cannot use the Tomahawk BIOS on a Tomahawk Arctic board.
If you look at the Tomahawk Arctic site ( https://www.msi.com/Motherboard/support/B350-TOMAHAWK-ARCTIC.html#down-bios ) you'll see the latest is actually H.3

[rindman]

Can we use the Gaming Pro AC's bios on the Gaming Pro ? :D The board doesn't have the additionnal wifi card :P

Success was short lived, on cold boot, it DOES NOT work. It burns the 5 memory try and boot back to default settings ...

I wonder why it only work when the machine started already ... Stupid uefi post memory test

[darkhawk]

Can we use the Gaming Pro AC's bios on the Gaming Pro ? :D The board doesn't have the additionnal wifi card :P

Success was short lived, on cold boot, it DOES NOT work. It burns the 5 memory try and boot back to default settings ...

I wonder why it only work when the machine started already ... Stupid uefi post memory test

No. There's a reason the BIOS's are different.

[jurigag]

Had some adata ax4u300038g16-drz 3000 mhz and i had many blue screens on 2677 and 2933 mhz profiles

Bought other ram, corsar cmk16gx4m2b3200c16r and on 3200 mhz it doesn't even run, on 2933 with many tries it run but BSOD on 2677 BSOD too, now i check 2400 mhz.

2400 mhz BSOD too, right now checking 2133 mhz, it's even less stable than this adata was.

I even have blue screen on 2133 mhz and 16-18-18-36 corsair.

Is there any ram which is actually stable on ryzen platform?

Or maybe my MB or CPU is broken? It's MSI B350 Tomahawk and Ryzen 5 1600.

[nikozbk]

Had some adata ax4u300038g16-drz 3000 mhz and i had many blue screens on 2677 and 2933 mhz profiles

Bought other ram, corsar cmk16gx4m2b3200c16r and on 3200 mhz it doesn't even run, on 2933 with many tries it run but BSOD on 2677 BSOD too, now i check 2400 mhz.

2400 mhz BSOD too, right now checking 2133 mhz, it's even less stable than this adata was.

I even have blue screen on 2133 mhz and 16-18-18-36 corsair.

Is there any ram which is actually stable on ryzen platform?

Or maybe my MB or CPU is broken? It's MSI B350 Tomahawk and Ryzen 5 1600.

Are you overclocking your CPU at all? What's your CPU voltage set to?

[jurigag]

No, no overclocking, just stock voltage and stock frequency on cpu.

[99games]

Had some adata ax4u300038g16-drz 3000 mhz and i had many blue screens on 2677 and 2933 mhz profiles

Bought other ram, corsar cmk16gx4m2b3200c16r and on 3200 mhz it doesn't even run, on 2933 with many tries it run but BSOD on 2677 BSOD too, now i check 2400 mhz.

2400 mhz BSOD too, right now checking 2133 mhz, it's even less stable than this adata was.

I even have blue screen on 2133 mhz and 16-18-18-36 corsair.

Is there any ram which is actually stable on ryzen platform?

Or maybe my MB or CPU is broken? It's MSI B350 Tomahawk and Ryzen 5 1600.

Stable as in runs at advertised speeds? Only one or two that people claim may do that. Gskill trident z CL14 and their flare version. Steer far clear of the trident z's that are not CL14 bc I.M.E they are a ram horror show with this setup.

I'm using the same ram as you corsair lpx 3200 with a 1700x and x370gpc. I built mine few weeks ago. I know bios v1.3 and v1.4 did nothing to improve ram stability for me like they were said to. 
I'm stuck but fairly stable at 2667. Have heard that a few people can run this ram at 2933 or 3200. From what I've gathered my 1700x chip is fairly sub par. Clock speeds and Ipc. Most 1700's I've read about perform better that my 1700x.  As we start going through one bios after another I'm thinking its the Cpu's that are the problem. I'm already in the process of returning my 1700x for a 1700. Saving 103 dollars and having a good chance to have similar or better performance and compatibility anyways.

You shouldnt be BSOD all the time like that though. Something isn't right

[jurigag]

Right now im back at adata and no blue screen for around 7 hours at 2933 mhz.

[bobah083]

About memory support, why 1T/2T Command rate setting is not in the bios?

My Tomahawk once had started my memory at 2933. And CpuZ was showing 2T. 
But then, next time i booted, it failed to boot, rolled back to 2133. And could not start higher than 2666 ever since. 
[font="Segoe UI", "Helvetica Neue", "Liberation Sans", "Nimbus Sans L", Arial, sans-serif]At 2633 it starts with 1T. [/font]
Memory is dual rank (2x16gb) corsair lpx


I think that i will be able to up my memory frequency once MSI adds that setting.
It looked like "auto" setting once luckily guessed 2T, but does not do that anymore

[darkhawk]

About memory support, why 1T/2T Command rate setting is not in the bios?

My Tomahawk once had started my memory at 2933. And CpuZ was showing 2T.
But then, next time i booted, it failed to boot, rolled back to 2133. And could not start higher than 2666 ever since.
At 2633 it starts with 1T.
Memory is dual rank (2x16gb) corsair lpx


I think that i will be able to up my memory frequency once MSI adds that setting.
It looked like "auto" setting once luckily guessed 2T, but does not do that anymore

Has nothing to do with MSI, or any other OEM's.

AMD has limited usage to 1T. At this time, that is why there is no 1T/2T selection.

[99games]

Ok was gonna post earlier but waited until I did one last test. A cpu swap.
I know this has been said by others but one more couldn't hurt.

I really believe memory speed/ support..etc is mostly dependent on the ryzen cpu, as many here have said as well.

I have been running Ryzen 7 1700x for about 2 weeks now.
X370GPC mobo
Corsair LPX CL16 3200mhz DRAM
Windows 10
Corsair h110i heatsink

Started off on bios v1.2. Did minimal testing but  2400mhz  16-18-18-18-38 was what I got to run
Bios v1.3 - best I ever tested was 2600mhz CL12 it would run but ran much better with CL14
Bios v1.4- exact same as v1.3

I, like many others , believe that AMD made good chips. BUT their product line is nothing more than quality control separations. 7 series has 3 categories of the exact same cpu's with a good amount of variation in each category. my 1700x appeared to run at the lower end and even seemed inferior to majority of the 1700's. So clearly there seems to be overlap across product groups. All I know is they binned off voltage. What frequencies idk

I now have a 1700 running with all the exact same hardware and software. Just popped out 1700x and dropped in 1700.

After a few minutes of testing it out to make sure it wasn't a dud. I started on ram speeds
I have tried exactly 3 restarts testing for what ram speeds will boot.
Again 1700x never would boot higher than 2667, no matter what.

1700

1st try- 2667 16-18-18-18-38 1.35v  Auto everything else (success)
2nd try- 2933 18-20-20-20-40 1.36v  NB .925 auto everything else (success)
3rd try- 3200 18-20-20-20-40 1.36v NB .9375 auto everything else (success) *after power cut off exiting bios.  But I am typing this running 3200
*edit" test 4- A-XMP works 3200mhz 16-18-18-36 with 1700. 
I'm not even using B-die ram
 
So even a 1700 can out performs a 1700x in DRAM support.

AMD did a great job. It isn't perfect though.  Silicon lottery has now extended across binned versions.
Many more aspects to this but got stuff to do

MSI seems to be doing ok by me, clearly in my situation it was the cpu doing the most to hold back top dram speeds

[darkhawk]

So even a 1700 can out performs a 1700x in DRAM support.

AMD did a great job. It isn't perfect though.  Silicon lottery has now extended across binned versions.
Many more aspects to this but got stuff to do

MSI seems to be doing ok by me, clearly in my situation it was the cpu doing the most to hold back top dram speeds

Thank you!

I've been saying it. And there's evidence out there from other users on other forums. 
And, in all honesty, it makes sense that AMD didn't guarantee more than 2667 MHz in very particular situations (from an engineering perspective....).

With all that being said, I'm glad your board is doing better and more like what you desired. That's really what matters. And I'm glad you now have a much better understanding regarding it.

[jurigag]

Yesterday it worked on adata whole day with 2933 mhz, today after 15 minutes blue screen, annoying.

[londonsmee]

Code: [Select]

Asus GTX 1080Ti ROG Strix OC 11GB GDDR5X Graphics Card
MSI AMD X370 XPOWER GAMING TITANIUM AM4 Socket ATX Motherboard
AMD Ryzen 7 1800X 8 Core AM4 CPU/Processor (4ghz)
Corsair Vengeance Blue LED 32GB Kit DDR4 3200MHz Memory
2 x Samsung 500GB 960 Evo PCIe SSD m.2
Samsung 850 EVO 500GB 2.5inch SSD
Corsair Hydro Series H110i 280mm Extreme Performance Liquid CPU Cooler
Crystal Series 460X RGB Compact ATX Mid-Tower Case

Well have new system up and running. Can't get it past the ram past 2400 at the present, which see by the posts and the image of ram a lot of others having the same issue. Only really posting for its. a 1800x so not just 1700x Hoping for more news soon.

[charles.earl]

MSI Gaming Pro Carbon X370 user here. Running the 1600X (And previously a 1600 non-X), Paired with 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200 RAM kit. Last two BIOS's I've been able to use XMP Profile 1 (2933) no problem at all first try. It will not do Profile 2 yet (3200). Although I won't see much of a performance bump anyway. Just would sound cool. 

C.

[99games]

Thank you!

I've been saying it. And there's evidence out there from other users on other forums.
And, in all honesty, it makes sense that AMD didn't guarantee more than 2667 MHz in very particular situations (from an engineering perspective....).

With all that being said, I'm glad your board is doing better and more like what you desired. That's really what matters. And I'm glad you now have a much better understanding regarding it.

Thanks man
Np, I've seen you and others here (me included) banging our heads against a wall, and spending loads of time trying to figure it out or explaining it to others. 

I'm am pretty new to most of it but yeah, I was gonna say that the 2667 sounds like they know exactly what's up, that some chips wont be able to process at the higher speeds, at least not yet and don't want the "it wont run 3200mhz ram" as a qualifying reason to RMA the chip. Also they're just being honest which is great. Basically they know about the quality variances within the sub groups.
I haven't done much reading into it, but am curious how AMD binned these processors. Curious if they solely binned based on voltage needed at OEM frequencies. Or did say 1800x chips need to pass other tests to make it on to the 1800x bin list. If they binned solely on voltage needed for X frequency , that would explain how some people even with an 1800x, are having more issues than 1700 owners with things like ram compatibility. As the bios versions mature further, I think these cpu inconsistencies are going to come to light more. Where the only people left not getting high ram speeds are the ones with the subpar chips. Subpar for ryzen. (not just the people who didn't buy 200 dollar ram) Eventually bios and chipset drivers, etc will facilitate the entire lot, but not before people see that AMD made a great cutting edge, value/budget processor that is like every other man made technology, not perfect and could use some improvement. Think most including myself for a time, just heard about the bios issues and assumed it was the sole problem with the ram speeds

[darkhawk]

I haven't done much reading into it, but am curious how AMD binned these processors. Curious if they solely binned based on voltage needed at OEM frequencies. 

I'm going to guess it's a voltage vs frequency binning. If the chips can do x.xx frequency without going over x.xx voltage, it's an 1800X. And same with the other chips.
If it doesn't make the 1800X, maybe it'll be an 1700X. And if it can't make a 1700X, maybe it becomes a 1700. 
I would also guess that if they had core-fallout, that it might get moved down to a Ryzen 5 as well with cores disabled. That certainly would make some sense to be honest, from a manufacturing standpoint.

But again, I'm just guessing here given the data I've seen. I generally compare frequency vs voltage, while also considering the cooling situation. Obviously LN2 is going to allow a much higher voltage and get a higher frequency.....and that can really skew the comparison. But air coolers and even water coolers have pretty close limits overall when it comes to overclocking.

[mmkgraphx]

Just a few things discovered while trying to work the memory OC
Someone mentioned using Aida64 to view the SPD XMP memory timings - great tip - didn'y help much
Corsair list the OC timing settings to achieve 3000 (2933) but they didn't work for me.
Corsair Vengeance LED DDR4 3000 (CMU16GX4M2C3000C15) recommended XMP 15-17-17-17-35 @ 1.35 volt.
best I can achieve (stable) with that setup is 2400 . wonky at 2666 . boot fail at 2933
boosted the voltage as high as 1.37 still a no go
BIOS 1.3  MSI B350M Mortar.  XMP Timings suggested by Aida64 via SPD  were 16/20 17 17 17 35 1.35 v
I started the OC stepping with the memory. SO everything else is at auto or default.
waiting for the next BIOS update now.

[darkhawk]

Just a few things discovered while trying to work the memory OC
Someone mentioned using Aida64 to view the SPD XMP memory timings - great tip - didn'y help much
Corsair list the OC timing settings to achieve 3000 (2933) but they didn't work for me.
Corsair Vengeance LED DDR4 3000 (CMU16GX4M2C3000C15) recommended XMP 15-17-17-17-35 @ 1.35 volt.
best I can achieve (stable) with that setup is 2400 . wonky at 2666 . boot fail at 2933
boosted the voltage as high as 1.37 still a no go
BIOS 1.3  MSI B350M Mortar.  XMP Timings suggested by Aida64 via SPD  were 16/20 17 17 17 35 1.35 v
I started the OC stepping with the memory. SO everything else is at auto or default.
waiting for the next BIOS update now.

Did you try taking the NorthBridge voltage up to 1.0V or 1.1V when overclocking the memory?

[marian8gb]

MSI PRO CARBON
Corsair Dominator Platinum cmd16GX4M2B3000C15  cant take more than 2133 MHz
manualy i can take 2400 or 2667 , but its unstable.....

Bios 1.4

P.S this memory in QVL by Arock(x370) and Corsair sad that its memory work fine with ryzen.

Who know what is it?

[nikozbk]

Just wanted to post my personal experience:

I couldn't go past 2666 consistently with the 16GB LPX Vengeance 3000MHz Corsair memory (CMK16GX4M2B3000C15), but after switching to the 3200MHz model (CMK16GX4M2B3200C16W) I can now use XMP profile 2, 3200MHz no problem. Same CPU, same BIOS. Needless to say I will be returning the 3000MHz kit.

MSI B350 Tomahawk, 1.43 beta BIOS (which is apparently the same as 1.40)

[mickilbunz]

I need a little help I'm running x370 carbon Trident z RGB F4-3200c16D-16GTZR kit and a 1600x I have 7.95 of 16gb I've cleared the cmos I've done msconfig settings, I've messed with Run Msc.services and still it says 8gbs the system sees two dims at 16gb but won't use it

[doom2pro]

I need a little help I'm running x370 carbon Trident z RGB F4-3200c16D-16GTZR kit and a 1600x I have 7.95 of 16gb I've cleared the cmos I've done msconfig settings, I've messed with Run Msc.services and still it says 8gbs the system sees two dims at 16gb but won't use it

Let me guess you used the G.Skill Beta RGB software? The older versions (maybe even the latest no idea) have a known flaw that corrupt the SPD chips on the modules themselves. The software controls RGB by writing to a special area of the SPD chips, but the Beta software corrupts the other data by accident, and G.Skill has informed users to uninstall it and no longer use it.

You are going to have to RMA your ram.

[doom2pro]

I'm going to guess it's a voltage vs frequency binning. If the chips can do x.xx frequency without going over x.xx voltage, it's an 1800X. And same with the other chips.
If it doesn't make the 1800X, maybe it'll be an 1700X. And if it can't make a 1700X, maybe it becomes a 1700.
I would also guess that if they had core-fallout, that it might get moved down to a Ryzen 5 as well with cores disabled. That certainly would make some sense to be honest, from a manufacturing standpoint.

But again, I'm just guessing here given the data I've seen. I generally compare frequency vs voltage, while also considering the cooling situation. Obviously LN2 is going to allow a much higher voltage and get a higher frequency.....and that can really skew the comparison. But air coolers and even water coolers have pretty close limits overall when it comes to overclocking.

I wouldn't be surprised if some cut down SKUs with disabled cores are still functional but won't clock as high as the SKU requires, without stability issues or going over TDP.

Even the Memory Controllers have variability, the real question is, are those all binned to run at at least 2400, meaning even an 1800X could have a mediocre memory controller or did they bin the Memory Controller for higher priced SKUs also?

[imwechs]

Thanks man
Np, I've seen you and others here (me included) banging our heads against a wall, and spending loads of time trying to figure it out or explaining it to others.

I'm am pretty new to most of it but yeah, I was gonna say that the 2667 sounds like they know exactly what's up, that some chips wont be able to process at the higher speeds, at least not yet and don't want the "it wont run 3200mhz ram" as a qualifying reason to RMA the chip. Also they're just being honest which is great. Basically they know about the quality variances within the sub groups.
I haven't done much reading into it, but am curious how AMD binned these processors. Curious if they solely binned based on voltage needed at OEM frequencies. Or did say 1800x chips need to pass other tests to make it on to the 1800x bin list. If they binned solely on voltage needed for X frequency , that would explain how some people even with an 1800x, are having more issues than 1700 owners with things like ram compatibility. As the bios versions mature further, I think these cpu inconsistencies are going to come to light more. Where the only people left not getting high ram speeds are the ones with the subpar chips. Subpar for ryzen. (not just the people who didn't buy 200 dollar ram) Eventually bios and chipset drivers, etc will facilitate the entire lot, but not before people see that AMD made a great cutting edge, value/budget processor that is like every other man made technology, not perfect and could use some improvement. Think most including myself for a time, just heard about the bios issues and assumed it was the sole problem with the ram speeds

   Perhaps to some extent there may be small differences in quality of the Integrated Memory Controller in Ryzen. that may account for  some discrepancies.but that is NOT the primary issue with memory not running at full rated speed.the primary reason is that bu design the IMC works much better  with dimms that are single rank ( not double sided memory) and memory chips with low cas latency like Samsung B die. Most chips on dimms are cheap chips with higher cas latencies. There area couple of lesser factors like cas latencies that are odd numbers like 15 or 17 or 19 for example do not work well with Ryzen. The reason , I have know idea, but it has been established to be true. The bios has a lot to due how memory interacts with Ryzen and there fore is important though not the only factor.  this is a complex issue,but if you are buying or bought memory for a Ryzen build without some investigation of these issues you have to take some responsibility for it. It is a brand new platform and it is never wise to jump in without some fact checking. Planning a new build on a brand new design always encompasses  study of compatibility issues.

[darkhawk]

I wouldn't be surprised if some cut down SKUs with disabled cores are still functional but won't clock as high as the SKU requires, without stability issues or going over TDP.

Even the Memory Controllers have variability, the real question is, are those all binned to run at at least 2400, meaning even an 1800X could have a mediocre memory controller or did they bin the Memory Controller for higher priced SKUs also?

I would imagine that all the Ryzen 7 series chips are checked to verify and work at the rated speeds they advertise (2667 single rank, etc....), but that's probably it. Any more than that and it's just wasted time testing.

[jarl_petersen]

If my g.skill rgb 3600 dont work on my Titan MSI board.... Them nevet amd agein

[reni.kiev]

Это ложное утверждение.
Читать еще раз (осторожно) первое сообщение этой темы.
Одноместный ранг всегда быстрее , чем Dual ранга.
И вот почему:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_rank
 Увеличение количества рядов на модуль DIMM в основном предназначен для увеличения плотности памяти для каждого канала.
Слишком много рангов в канале могут привести к чрезмерной нагрузке и уменьшить скорость канала.

I'll correct you, for AMD the dual rank is faster.
But raizen capricious. There are tests, reviews confirming this.
The AMD controller depends on the memory speed, very much.
And the dual rank plays a role in contrast to the Intel.

Now about memory and BIOS motherboards.
Why can not we adjust the voltage of SOC?
Why do not we give the adjustment on the bus.
We were limited in overclocking, on chipsets b350.
Bios is not full. What prevents the MSI from including the Command Rate adjustment (CR) 1T 2T ???
Why can not we use all the settings ???
We bought these things right.
And we are limited. Just do not say That it's all AMD.

[darkhawk]

I'll correct you, for AMD the dual rank is faster.
But raizen capricious. There are tests, reviews confirming this.
The AMD controller depends on the memory speed, very much.
And the dual rank plays a role in contrast to the Intel.

Now about memory and BIOS motherboards.
Why can not we adjust the voltage of SOC?
Why do not we give the adjustment on the bus.
We were limited in overclocking, on chipsets b350.
Bios is not full. What prevents the MSI from including the Command Rate adjustment (CR) 1T 2T ???
Why can not we use all the settings ???
We bought these things right.
And we are limited. Just do not say That it's all AMD.

First off, read the first post. It's not true. So please stop propagating something that is well known to be false.
Single Rank will provide higher speeds for the memory (ie frequency) due to the lower load on the IMC.
Dual Rank will provide higher bandwidth in specific situations, and higher density per module. 
No matter how you want to cut it, those are FACTS. You might get higher bandwidth with Dual Rank in specific situations compared to single rank at the same frequency, but nothing guarantees that you'll be able to attain the same frequency either, and given that it's very well known that dual rank stresses the IMC more, it only makes sense for AMD to have dual rank guaranteed at a lower frequency compared to single rank.

SOC? It's NorthBridge voltage within most MSI BIOS's for AM4 systems.
What 'bus'? There's plenty of different 'bus' adjustments that could be made, but using a generic term like that really doesn't point to any specific issue.....
1T and 2T has been discussed at length across many forums. Essentially, bother AMD to fix it. At this time, they have limited it to 1T. Across all OEM's (although some have gone against this and enabled special BIOS's that contain the ability to use 2T, but only for 1 specific version, and a rather old version of the BIOS at that, from what I've seen).

It's not all AMD, but to deny that AMD has limits (look at the memory timings, for any OEM....you'd be a complete fool to think that all the OEM's are only providing 6 to 8 different settings to adjust for memory because thats all they felt like supporting.....) on the OEM's is foolish and not willing to critically evaluate what is going on within the industry. And that's just 1 specific example of it....there's plenty more if you start examining it.

[unt0xic]

Hello there!

Got as many of here CMK16GX4M2B3000C15 and got the same problems 2400 stable \ 2667 unstable \ 2999 didnt start.

While I trying to findout whats it wrong with this memory or motherbord, I cant avoid DRAM voltage, may be its only for me but i cant really see 1.35 V on my memory.

If I set DRAM voltage at 1.35 i've 1.344. Same situation with 1.36 -> 1.344. And only 1.37 gives 1.36, but not help.

And now here is the question: Is it like should to be? Iam alone have such problem?

[jurigag]

Looks like the only stable ram for me is adata 2133 mhz. Any other or other frequency is just not stable and blue screen. Hope some bios will fix this.