Overclock.net banner

X399 Threadripper 1950X performs poorly when in dual channel? Someone confirm?

5K views 10 replies 8 participants last post by  pietro sk 
#1 ·
Anybody who have the 1950X with 4 dimm slots filled can replicate this? Try running your rig with dual vs quad channel.

The blue results are mine, red ones are from someone else with almost exactly the same specs as me. The only difference is the video card and memory, he's got quad I got dual channel. If you look at the results, Prime Number and Physics test are way below (memory bandwidth?). My CPU score ends up close to half of what his is.

I'm buying an extra 2 chips of the exact ones I have and I'll update this thread with the results (hopefully I get it on Monday). Also it does not seem to be a BIOS version issue (I tried both BIOS versions available on the MSI support page.) On the pictures below he has BIOS 1.2 and I upgraded to 1.3. So I thought it might be the BIOS, I downgraded to 1.1 (since there's no 1.2 on the website). And it's still the same results.

CPU


MEMORY: My Threaded Memory is very low compared to his.


OVERALL RESULTS


 
See less See more
4
#2 ·
Why are you surprised though?

We know any cross-CCX communication occurs via Infinity Fabric linked to memory.
 
#5 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouddha77 View Post

Hello,

Was you problem solved by adding RAM and be in quad channel?

rgds
Following up on this post, have you had a chance to test yet? I just finished my build with a 1920X and using 32GB RAM in dual channel I pulled from another build. Not seeing the results I'd hoped for in benchmarks. Debating either 2 more 16Gb sticks or moving to 4x8GB. (Side note, RAM prices have gone way up! Same RAM I bought 14 months ago is now double the price. Craziness)
 
#7 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouddha77 View Post

Well, I had exactly the same pattern and moving from dual to quad channel changed it all!

There is visibly a need for AMD Threadripper to be in Quad channel.

rgds
Anyone know or able to test what the impact is of quad channel vs dual quad channel?

I'm holding out for the new Gskill memory, they're coming within the next couple of weeks with 4 and 8 dimm sets optimised for TR so higher memclocks should be easier to reach than it is now.
Still wondering if it's the better option to go for a 4-dimm setup rather than the 8-dimm setup.

I really like the look of 8-dimm and I see no reason not to use dual quad channel but I know performance is very mem sensitive with threadripper.

Would be cool to see a round-up with the exact mem dimms of dual vs quad vs dual quad.
 
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouddha77 View Post

Well, I had exactly the same pattern and moving from dual to quad channel changed it all!

There is visibly a need for AMD Threadripper to be in Quad channel.

rgds
What speed RAM are you running? I'm currently running 16GBx2 DDR4-2400. Adding 2 more of the same sticks is cheaper than replacing it with 8GBx4 of faster RAM (and I end up with 64GB instead of 32). Leaning towards just adding the 2 more sticks but not sure how much of a performance impact the lower speed will have.
 
#10 ·
I am using 3200.... I am not an expert and mostly use my computer for chess.... Looking at the performance difference when closking to 2400 or 3200, 3200 doesn't makes a real difference.
Most important is to be in Quad Channel. So if I was in your shoes, I would just add another 2 sticks of 2400.

rgds
 
#11 ·
Jesus Facepalm.

TR= 2socket platform, put into 1 socket.

What do you think will happen, if one cpu has no dimms inserted ??
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top