Ryzen 5000 Memory Performance Guide: 2 vs. 4 RAM Sticks

Endymio

Posts: 989   +831
This can give the four DIMM module configuration an advantage as it allows several open DRAM pages in each rank
It's not stated in the first two graphs, but based on the following ones, it appears your 4-DIMM configuration also has twice the ram as the 2-DIMM configuration (32GB vs. 16). Wouldn't that give a potential performance boost that distorts the results? Also, as far as I know, you can also get a four-rank/dual channel configuration simply by using two sticks of dual-rank ram, no?

(edited: removed duplicate 'rank')
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Reehahs

Uncle Al

Posts: 7,581   +6,089
I like the performance boost but I'm not likely to replace my RAM for this slight upgrade in performance ... at 32MB that would be a bit more than I'm willing to pay ... at least not until we see a 50-75% increase.
 

Shoam

Posts: 18   +17
So, 4 ranks are faster than 2 WHEN they run at the same speed, but that's not an answer to the question that most of your readers want an answer for: If the RAM isn't able to run at the same speed after adding 2 more ranks, will the system still be faster?
 

godrilla

Posts: 169   +99
So, 4 ranks are faster than 2 WHEN they run at the same speed, but that's not an answer to the question that most of your readers want an answer for: If the RAM isn't able to run at the same speed after adding 2 more ranks, will the system still be faster?
you mean 4 dims/dual ranks ?


Also is 2 dims /dual ranks possible?

Can you please make an article about the new Nvidia System access memory update that is being promised to come in future updates.
 
Last edited:

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,046   +1,413
This article was excellent.

Only thing missing was DDR4 3200 CL14 Dual Ranked Tuned numbers.

And DDR4 3600 CL16 Dual Ranked Tuned numbers.

But more so for my setup cause I'm using 2x8 single ranked 3200 CL14 with a Ryzen dram fast profile. And was planning to add another set to go 4x8. These are samsung B die so I can run 3600 CL14 on them aswell.



 
  • Like
Reactions: Reehahs
Why would you lower CL14 to 16? Maybe an idea to make an article keeping the primary and secondary timings in line. I would love to see some screenshots what secondary and primary timings Techspot tweaked for the tuning part.
I'm currently running 4 sticks of G.Skill Neo 3600C16-16-16-32 with FClock 1800, which is a sweetspot according my humble testing. 3800MHz/1900Fclock didn't jield much more here (did not test on Zen 3 though) in games nor productivity...

Keep up the great work guys!!!
 
Interesting, but honestly with the changes coming to fclk in the next agesa core, it is premature to make any recommendations on memory. 3600 is very slow by modern standards when more CPU's hit 2000mhz, or even 2100mhz fclk, 3600C16 is leaving a lot of performance on the table.

Also, could you post a "Zentimings" screenshot of your tuned memory profile and tell us at what voltage you are running? That would be very helpful in determining how "tuned" the sub-timings are.

For example, Is this a mildly tuned profile like you find in the Ryzen dram calc running moderate voltages (1.45ish), or is this a really tight tune running 1.7v?

Without that context of what you consider to be very tight sub timings it is hard to judge how insightful this article really is.

 

Oshyan

Posts: 26   +37
Second godrilla's question: is 2 dims /dual ranks possible? For example I just purchased 2x32GB = 64GB because I need large amounts of memory for 3D and video editing work. Had I read this article prior to purchasing I might have bought 4x16GB instead, but I wanted the possibility of upgrading to 128GB later. You mention early in the article that dual rank individual modules are possible with higher capacities, so this would be good to understand better.

Also would be *really* nice to see your usual set of application benchmarks (I.e. mostly rendering benches) on this article. While the effects may be most notable or of most interest to your audience with games, those of us doing work with our machines would really benefit from your in-depth testing with the inclusion of those tests.

Thanks!
 

Endymio

Posts: 989   +831
Had I read this article prior to purchasing I might have bought 4x16GB instead
32GB modules very well may be dual-rank anyway. So unless you're using this on an (Intel) quad-channel mobo, you're may already be getting the benefits.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Oshyan

TheBigT42

Posts: 474   +374
All I saw was a bunch of Apples VS Oranges VS Bananas

The title was "Ryzen 5000 Memory Performance Guide"
Why muddy the waters with Ryzen 3000 and Intel Chips? I came to read about Ryzen 5000
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bmadd105

HugsNotDrugs

Posts: 31   +16
I was hoping to see the memory scaling performance all the way down to 2133mhz, for science.

My 5900x is going to be paired with my existing 64GB of 2400mhz RAM, hopefully without too much of a performance hit.
 

Oshyan

Posts: 26   +37
32GB modules very well may be dual-rank anyway. So unless you're using this on an (Intel) quad-channel mobo, you're may already be getting the benefits.
Right, exactly. But the article indicates it's hard to determine if they're dual rank, and anyway would be useful to see confirmation testing of 2 DIMM dual rank vs. 4 DIMM dual rank at same capacities...
 

robb213

Posts: 349   +114
I would suggest adding a blip about motherboard memory topologies, I.e. T and daisy chain configurations. Trying to use 4 sticks on a daisy chain board will more than likely result in lower performance than sticking to 1-2 sticks, like with my Asrock X570 Taichi.
 

veLa

Posts: 1,024   +566
I was hoping to see the memory scaling performance all the way down to 2133mhz, for science.

My 5900x is going to be paired with my existing 64GB of 2400mhz RAM, hopefully without too much of a performance hit.
The previous generations of Ryzen have been very sensitive to RAM speed. I can't say the same yet for Ryzen 5000, but I imagine you'll see a performance hit.
 

Lionvibez

Posts: 2,046   +1,413
Interesting, but honestly with the changes coming to fclk in the next agesa core, it is premature to make any recommendations on memory. 3600 is very slow by modern standards when more CPU's hit 2000mhz, or even 2100mhz fclk, 3600C16 is leaving a lot of performance on the table.

Also, could you post a "Zentimings" screenshot of your tuned memory profile and tell us at what voltage you are running? That would be very helpful in determining how "tuned" the sub-timings are.

For example, Is this a mildly tuned profile like you find in the Ryzen dram calc running moderate voltages (1.45ish), or is this a really tight tune running 1.7v?

Without that context of what you consider to be very tight sub timings it is hard to judge how insightful this article really is.
I think that is a fantastic idea to add Zen timing + voltage for the tuned setups if there is a future update on this article.

This is what I'm running for 3200CL14 + Dram Fast Profile.



 
Great article but I'm a little confused...

So dual rank setups provide better results for CPU and memory intensive scenarios. Which would suggest that 4x8GB single rank memory sticks is the way to go, since it would operate as dual rank, but at the end Steve recommends 2x8Gb (which are single rank sticks from what I found online). In the beginning of the article he states that two single rank sticks will always operate as single rank.

I get it that 16GB in total should suffice but that is beyond the scope. I also understand that at higher resolutions (1440p) which is what I'll be doing see a smaller difference. Is that why the 2 single rank 8GB sticks are being recommended?

I'm undecided if 2x16Gb (dual rank sticks) or 4x8Gb (single rank sticks) are the way to go. 2x16 would be nice as I could expand in the future but would adding an extra 2x16 to that 64 running as dual rank or quad rank?

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks a million.

---------------------------------------------

My current planned setup is:

MSI Tomahawk x570
AMD Ryzen 5600x
Kraken X63
M.2 Samsung 970 Evo 1tb
RAM is a big ?????
 

fps4ever

Posts: 554   +635
Great article but I'm a little confused...

So dual rank setups provide better results for CPU and memory intensive scenarios. Which would suggest that 4x8GB single rank memory sticks is the way to go, since it would operate as dual rank, but at the end Steve recommends 2x8Gb (which are single rank sticks from what I found online). In the beginning of the article he states that two single rank sticks will always operate as single rank.

I get it that 16GB in total should suffice but that is beyond the scope. I also understand that at higher resolutions (1440p) which is what I'll be doing see a smaller difference. Is that why the 2 single rank 8GB sticks are being recommended?

I'm undecided if 2x16Gb (dual rank sticks) or 4x8Gb (single rank sticks) are the way to go. 2x16 would be nice as I could expand in the future but would adding an extra 2x16 to that 64 running as dual rank or quad rank?

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks a million.

---------------------------------------------

My current planned setup is:

MSI Tomahawk x570
AMD Ryzen 5600x
Kraken X63
M.2 Samsung 970 Evo 1tb
RAM is a big ?????
They do not support Quad channel. Go for 2x16GB to get dual rank memory as most are.
 
I have a asrock b450m/ac motherboard that maxes out at 32gbs of ram. So I bought 2 sticks of 2x16 of ram.It sounds like I should have bought 4 sticks of 2x8. One more thing to add to my long list of buyers remorse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lukaspechar
They do not support Quad channel. Go for 2x16GB to get dual rank memory as most are.
Thanks for your answer, however am I understanding this correctly?
  • 2 single rank sticks = single rank
  • 4 single rank sticks = dual rank
  • 2 dual rank sticks = dual rank
  • 4 dual rank sticks = dual rank (or is this quad rank??)

I know The MSI Tomahawk x570 doesn't support quad channel so I would gain no benefit if it is quad rank but is it quad rank if I use 4 dual rank sticks or does it remain dual rank?

Given your suggestion to go with 2x16GB I would imagine you are allowing future expansion with an extra 2x16 GB sticks? Is that the thinking behind your answer?
Many thanks
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reehahs

fps4ever

Posts: 554   +635
Thanks for your answer, however am I understanding this correctly?
  • 2 single rank sticks = single rank
  • 4 single rank sticks = dual rank
  • 2 dual rank sticks = dual rank
  • 4 dual rank sticks = dual rank (or is this quad rank??)

I know The MSI Tomahawk x570 doesn't support quad channel so I would gain no benefit if it is quad rank but is it quad rank if I use 4 dual rank sticks or does it remain dual rank?

Given your suggestion to go with 2x16GB I would imagine you are allowing future expansion with an extra 2x16 GB sticks? Is that the thinking behind your answer?
Many thanks
Don't over think it. Today's 16GB sticks are mostly dual rank so stick with 2 of those to be safe. A lot depends on individual motherboards and other factors like the article says...then yes you can upgrade later if desired and you will get either dual rank or quad rank but it still won't be quad channel.
 

urbanman2004

Posts: 156   +53
I've been running dual 16GB 3200MHz modules on my X570 build (3700X/1080Ti) for almost the past year after upgrading from my dual 8GB 2400MHz RAM configured Z97 build (4770K/1070). Any RAM combo above that would be considered overkill for gaming.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lukaspechar

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 2,046   +2,576
So what about quad rank E.G. having 2 dual ran DIMMs per channel. This would occur in, say, a 64GB build with 4 16GB dual rank sticks. How does performance with this compare to single dual rank and dual stick single rank?