Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community - Reply to Topic
Thread: Memory controller sucks on new i9 9900K! Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
03-19-2019 10:30 PM
Samsarulz Which BIOS are you using? lastest is the better for RAM OC. From 1704 compatibility ans stability are improved. With 1801 things are better. Im using an 9900K with the Maximus IX Apex (modded) + the 1704 Apex X BIOS as source.

Running some BDie kits at 4266 18-19-19-39 with XMP settings and nothing else is stable. Check your BIOS version. If you are up to date then you will need to add some more VCCSA volts or memory volts.

Regards
03-19-2019 07:17 PM
TahoeDust
Quote: Originally Posted by cerealkeller View Post
I'm running 32 GB 2x16 3900 MHz 16-16-16-32 1.4v on my z390 Dark. VCCIO and VSA at 1.25v, I put a ton of time into tuning the timings at 3900 so I probably will leave it alone. I'll attach an AIDA64 benchmark.
I have no complaints. If memory speed is important, you need to buy a board with really good memory support. My 7700K ran at 3466, I had it at 3566 at one point on my z270 Gaming 9, but the memory support sucked ass on that board compared to the z390 Dark.
If you want to run 4 sticks at high clock speeds you'll have to choose a board with T Topology memory layout.
What kit are you using? They are running great. I have my 2x8 kit running 4200 17-17-17-37 @1.45v. I went with the 8gb dimms because I was not sure how fast of ram I could get stable w/ 2x16.
03-19-2019 06:58 PM
mouacyk
Quote: Originally Posted by cerealkeller View Post
I'm running 32 GB 2x16 3900 MHz 16-16-16-32 1.4v on my z390 Dark. VCCIO and VSA at 1.25v, I put a ton of time into tuning the timings at 3900 so I probably will leave it alone. I'll attach an AIDA64 benchmark.
I have no complaints. If memory speed is important, you need to buy a board with really good memory support. My 7700K ran at 3466, I had it at 3566 at one point on my z270 Gaming 9, but the memory support sucked ass on that board compared to the z390 Dark.
If you want to run 4 sticks at high clock speeds you'll have to choose a board with T Topology memory layout.
nice work on that efficiency. that's insane that you're at 98.6% efficiency of 60.94GB/s.
03-19-2019 06:32 PM
white owl That's almost 2x faster than my 2400 Mhz DDR3. I should really work on the timings but I really don't have the free time to do it.
03-19-2019 06:21 PM
cerealkeller I'm running 32 GB 2x16 3900 MHz 16-16-16-32 1.4v on my z390 Dark. VCCIO and VSA at 1.25v, I put a ton of time into tuning the timings at 3900 so I probably will leave it alone. I'll attach an AIDA64 benchmark.
I have no complaints. If memory speed is important, you need to buy a board with really good memory support. My 7700K ran at 3466, I had it at 3566 at one point on my z270 Gaming 9, but the memory support sucked ass on that board compared to the z390 Dark.
If you want to run 4 sticks at high clock speeds you'll have to choose a board with T Topology memory layout.
03-15-2019 08:23 PM
NBrock Just read all 9 pages... worth it.

Hopping over to the official-intel-ddr4-24-7-memory-stability-thread will yield some good information. I was easily able to get my GSkill 4x8GB 3600 kit running 4133 using some of the timings I saw another user post. Reading through all the stuff over there is def worth the time.
03-15-2019 07:17 PM
Jidonsu
Quote: Originally Posted by lumbeechief View Post
~Facepalm!~ Looks too me like you linked to a dead reddit post.
It’s only dead because you deleted it. It's ok though, we're all here just laughing at you at this point. Thank you for the entertainment, Mr. Associates Degree.
03-15-2019 02:55 PM
lumbeechief
Quote: Originally Posted by Jidonsu View Post
What's even funnier is this.

The OP posted a thread over on reddit about the same thing. https://www.reddit.com/r/overclockin..._new_i9_9900k/

If you search his comment history though, you'll see that he has a "Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science." Dude can't even keep his lies straight. https://www.reddit.com/r/crtgaming/c..._930sb/efazxs3
~Facepalm!~ Looks too me like you linked to a dead reddit post.
03-15-2019 07:45 AM
Silent Scone
Quote: Originally Posted by acquacow View Post
What command-line app is that you are using for testing memory/file integrity? I feel like I need to run something like that to verify my setup is stable with my higher clockings...

Thanks!
It's Google Stress App Test ran through BASH terminal. See here: https://www.overclock.net/forum/5-in...ty-thread.html
03-15-2019 07:43 AM
acquacow
Quote: Originally Posted by Silent Scone View Post
I think you should probably stop spreading misinformation.

4x8GB @ 4266 on the Formula XI.

Anything over 4000MHz requires both a reasonable IMC and a methodical approach to memory tuning. VCCSA and VCCIO can often need to be tuned incrementally, I had this discussion recently with another user who was proclaiming that more is always better on these rails. Signal rails come down to an alignment issue, so this is often not the case at all. Some CPU will not like more than 1.35v, either.
What command-line app is that you are using for testing memory/file integrity? I feel like I need to run something like that to verify my setup is stable with my higher clockings...

Thanks!
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off