Overclock.net banner
3,941 - 3,960 of 7,835 Posts
I think there fairly accurate as far as software voltage reporting, I have the same MB too.

Just because you can pass a memory test doesn't mean the system is stable in other heavy usage programs. What I would do is not try and pass real high memory test times, but once you see it is fair stable for a time, try other BM tests.
I find Y-cruncher and lin pack extreme real good to see if the overall system is stable at those settings. you can also retest when you think you have good settings for a longer time.
Y-cruncher doesn't need to run hrs on hrs, it generally bugs out fairly quickly if issues arise
Thanks for this ... at the end of the day, I need a fast and stable system but the cost of running 24 hours per test is a pain. I'm at 6500% now (past 15 hours), zero errors and I'll let it run its course to 10,000% hopefully (just so that I may say that I run to 10,000 :)). I earlier downloaded tm5. Is that also a program able to quickly sus out instabilities in the system, if any?
 
Thanks for this ... at the end of the day, I need a fast and stable system but the cost of running 24 hours per test is a pain. I'm at 6500% now (past 15 hours), zero errors and I'll let it run its course to 10,000% hopefully (just so that I may say that I run to 10,000 :)). I earlier downloaded tm5. Is that also a program able to quickly sus out instabilities in the system, if any?
TM5 with the anta777 ABSOLUT config set to run overnight is typically enough for RAM stability.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: RighteousOne
TM5 with the anta777 ABSOLUT config set to run overnight is typically enough for RAM stability.
Oh wow, thanks... but you've written a bunch of stuff way over my head. What is an "anta777 ABSOLUT" configuration? Sorry for the newbie question...

Also, are there programs able to flesh out immediate instabilities within an hour, for example, or less. Longer term hard to detect instabilities would be the domain of Korhu or TM5.
 
Testing with Karhu at 5000% so far after 10 hours. No errors at 3733MHz so far (3600MHz XMP). Only changed ram voltage from 1.35v to 1.4v. All others are at their default (auto) values, i.e Vddq TX = 1.2v and SA VID (SA voltage?) = 1.1v. DRAM temperatures are 50C-54C, with inner two modules being the warmest at 53C-54C and the outer two the coolest at about 50C. Also, timings are at their default 18-22-22-42 values. I have about 6GB of ram free as Karhu uses up the rest (122GB). All 24 threads are used (Karhu default).

1. Is Karhu at 10,000% with no errors the ultimate goal?
2. Can I use the computer while Karhu is running without messing up the test? Obviously its sluggish as all CPUs are at 1000% usage.
3. Is the probability of hitting 10,000% with zero errors good, i.e 100%?
Are you sure it is still in gear 1. You dont manually set it bios ususally defaults to gear 2 after 3600 on z690. So check that and Karhu 10,000 is usually what I aim for. Some do more and some less so up to you.

I have used my PC while running Karhu but it is best to not use it.
 
@RighteousOne I also like to use benchmate y cruncher to also test ram/imc/cpu. You could use the 10b for your system. BenchMate

This test doesnt take as long but will require good cooling on the cpu and also lets you see if changes you make help or hurt as it times it. Hit F6 are end of run for more info. Will look like this but my run is 2.5b
 

Attachments

Are you sure it is still in gear 1. You dont manually set it bios ususally defaults to gear 2 after 3600 on z690. So check that and Karhu 10,000 is usually what I aim for. Some do more and some less so up to you.

I have used my PC while running Karhu but it is best to not use it.
@RighteousOne I also like to use benchmate y cruncher to also test ram/imc/cpu. You could use the 10b for your system. BenchMate

This test doesnt take as long but will require good cooling on the cpu and also lets you see if changes you make help or hurt as it times it. Hit F6 are end of run for more info. Will look like this but my run is 2.5b
Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?
 
Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?
Gear1 is not same as CR 1T, command rate 1T is a timing value in the memory timing section.
Gear1 means 1 to 1 ratio of memory controller to memory freq. In bios look around the frequency speed setting for something like this
"Memory Controller : DRAM Frequency Ratio [1:1]" , you want 1 to 1 ratio.

PS, I would run CR 2T, Gear 1 mode and on voltages, I think a good start would be VDIMM= 1.4v, VCCSA = 1.25v and VDDQ TX = 1.3v and see if Y crucnher passes if your ram tests were good.
 
Do you have round trip latency enabled or "dynamic" set under the rtls section?

If you do and it is still not training correctly them then I would try another bios. Or just run it like you have it. Doesnt matter unless you are running benchmarks and comparing yours to others.

Edit added pic where you can find settings. I dont have MSI this gen so used z490 which should be similar. They are markey with red check where they should be.
I have everything set to auto or default from the stock BIOS. You'd think the stock BIOS would obviously train RAM properly regardless whether it's running JDEC standards, XMP, custom timings, etc... I did some more searching - this MSI board has a ton of RAM options. There's a sub-menu for RAM training. In just the RAM training menu alone there's probably 20 or 30 settings. They're all set to auto (default). One said Round Trip Latency. I changed it from auto to enabled and, what do you know, the RTLs went from 83/83 & 75/75 to 75/75 & 73/73.

So unless you manually go into some obscure Training sub-menu in the BIOS and change 1 specific setting (out of like 30), the motherboard won't train RAM? Seems like a bug to me but that seems to have done the trick. That now leaves me to think, what other of these 30 RAM training settings do I need to change from auto to enabled? There's all sorts of things regardling RTL, IOL, termination, etc. etc. It's all way over my head.
 
Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?
The following is not in any particular order and is based on a mix of my opinion and opinions of others that I often see floating around PC sites.

-- "short" = quick, fast test, usually 1- 5 mins
-- "medium" = minimum test, I'd be fairly comfortable if the RAM passes medium without error
-- "long" = when you really want to be extra certain of no RAM errors. Lots of people only use the medium tests (with a few different programs though) and have success that way. Some people even say the long tests are overkill. If you really want to be extra certain, and don't mind the extra time (do it while you sleep, are busy with other things, are out for the day/night, etc.), then do the long tests. Most errors should be picked up with the "medium" tests though. Also, errors not picked up in medium but picked up in "long" can be purely related to heat and nothing else, which can then deceive you into thinking your RAM OC settings are bad, so monitor your RAM temps!

Karhu RAM Test
  • medium: 6400% (Karhu says 6400% has 99.41% error detection rate)
  • long: 10,000% - 20,000%
HCI Memtest / Memtest Pro
  • medium: 400% - 600%
  • long: 1000 - 2000%
TM5 Anta777 Absolut
  • medium: 6 cycles
  • long: 18 - 24 cycles
TM5 Anta777 Extreme
  • medium: 6 cycles
  • long: 18 - 24 cycles
TM5 Usmus v3
  • medium: 6 cycles
  • long: 12 - 18 cycles
Linpack Xtreme
  • medium: 10 - 15 runs of each stress test
  • long: 25 - 50 runs of each stress test
  • Note: because I have no idea which test to do (I think the #s are 2 GB, 4, 6, 8, 10, 14, 30), I just do every one. Eg. 10 runs of 2 GB, 10 runs 4 GB, and so on. The 2 GB tests last like 5 seconds each, the 4 GB like 15 seconds, etc. so they're not too time-consuming. The most time-consuming test (30 GB) is around 5-ish mins each
Y-Cruncher
  • not sure which medium or long stress tests to run, ask around because this is another great program. See below for using Y-Cruncher for a great short test
OCCT
  • 30 min w/ AVX
  • 30 mins w/ out AVX
Notes
  • apparently TM5 Usmus v3 and Karhu hit the IMC harder so can potentially detect IMC-related errors quicker
  • apparently Y-Cruncher can potentially detect VCCSA voltage-related errors quicker
  • I have seen instances where, during a 6 cycle test, TM5 Extreme would show at least 1 error while both TM5 Absolute and TM5 Usmus v3 didn't show errors therefore I use Extreme alongside other tests rather than replacing Extreme with Absolut.
  • for a short test to check VCCSA, run Y-Cruncher with the following settings 0 [hit enter], 1 [hit enter], 8 [hit enter]. This test should last around 3-ish mins. If you error/fail this test, consider adjusting VCCSA (up or down) before adjusting any other settings (other voltages, RAM frequency, RAM timings, CPU core, CPU cache, etc.)
  • me, personally, when I try new RAM settings before I go into the medium or long stress tests, I do some short tests, those being: 1 or 2 of the Y-Cruncher VCCSA tests I explained in my previous point, then 3-5 Linpack Xtreme runs using stress test and the second or third lowest GB option. If I pass both short tests, I then use a few programs to benchmark the new RAM settings to see the speeds, scores, latency, etc.: Programs I use for this are as follows (in no particular order):
    • Passmark Performance Test (set to 2 tests, short, keep best result, all Memory Tests)
    • Aida64, the 4 memory tests (I do the latency test 3-5 times and use the best result since it can be really inconsistent)
    • Intel MLC GUI - just the first screen's bandwidth & latency test, I do it 2 times as the latency test is more consistent than Aida64
    • Linpack Xtreme: Stress Test, 3 tests of your desire (I choose 3 GB option)
    • Y-Cruncher: upon starting, hit 0, enter, 1, enter, 8, enter, use the two times as test score
    • OCCT Memory Benchmark
    • PyPrime: a nice quick test but good because scales well with everything (like Linpack Xtreme)
    • Geekbench 3: faster than GB4, use the memory (single- and multi-threaded) scores
  • I not only do this out of curiosity and excitement to see possible gains in performance but to also see if there are any weird scores. If you have weird test results like lower scores, lower bandwidth, higher latency, compared to your previous, slower RAM settings, then that can indicate an issue (ie. instability). I then go on to the medium stress tests. I personally start with the following 3 in no particular order: TM5 Usmus v3, TM5 Anta777 Absolut, Karhu Ram Test. If all 3 of those give me no errors, then I move on to a medium run of HCI Memtest and medium Linpack Xtreme. If all those pass, I then either move on to the long tests or use my PC as normal and do the long tests when I feel like it (when I'm sleeping, not home, don't need the PC, etc.)
  • I always have HWInfo open during medium and long stress tests to monitor temps
  • I always have my case side fans on max, my door open, and WIndow open (if I'm home) to keep the RAM as cool as possible in order to get heat out of the equation as much as possible
  • If you pass all the medium and long test yet start having instability in games, day-to-day stuff, etc. and you notice that the RAM temps are way higher than during the tests, then you can be 99.9% sure the instability is purely heat related.
  • I usually have a conservative clock on my CPU and CPU cache (AKA ring, uncore). For eg, if I know I'm stable at 1.300v 5.2 GHz core, 4.9 GHz cache, I'll keep the same VCore but drop cpu clock down 100 MHz and cache down 100-200 MHz in order to get those out of the RAM & IMC equation. If I pass the Y-Cruncher and Linpack Xtreme short along with the medium tests, I then put my CPU and CPU cache back to my normal clocks and then start with the long tests. Some people say to not do this but instead to just always test the RAM with your max/normal CPU clocks from the beginning. They may be right. If you're 100% sure that your CPU and CPU cache clocks are 100% stable then that may indeed be a better strategy. Sometimes a normally stable core or cache clock may need more voltage once you push your RAM harder due to the IMC being under more stress so you could indeed get instability which you may think is from the RAM (since you think you know your CPU core & cache are 100% stable) when it could, in fact, actually be your CPU cache being too high (and possibly just needing a bump in voltage) due to your RAM OC putting more stress on the IMC. That's why I like to back off the CPU & CPU cache clocks 100-200 MHz at first.
P.S. If anything is incorrect, let me know and I'll correct it ASAP
 
Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?
No idea what you will need for sa and dq. I would try up to 1.35 to 1.4 range if you need to.

Gear 1 is not the same as 1t/cr1. Gear and command rate are 2 different things.
 
I have everything set to auto or default from the stock BIOS. You'd think the stock BIOS would obviously train RAM properly regardless whether it's running JDEC standards, XMP, custom timings, etc... I did some more searching - this MSI board has a ton of RAM options. There's a sub-menu for RAM training. In just the RAM training menu alone there's probably 20 or 30 settings. They're all set to auto (default). One said Round Trip Latency. I changed it from auto to enabled and, what do you know, the RTLs went from 83/83 & 75/75 to 75/75 & 73/73.

So unless you manually go into some obscure Training sub-menu in the BIOS and change 1 specific setting (out of like 30), the motherboard won't train RAM? Seems like a bug to me but that seems to have done the trick. That now leaves me to think, what other of these 30 RAM training settings do I need to change from auto to enabled? There's all sorts of things regardling RTL, IOL, termination, etc. etc. It's all way over my head.
Yeah that is why ram tuning takes weeks to months to set everything. It is pretty involved especially when starting out and learning all of the timings and voltages.
 
Yeah that is why ram tuning takes weeks to months to set everything. It is pretty involved especially when starting out and learning all of the timings and voltages.
Yup, and you need to keep CPU OC separate before running memory OC cause if you do both without enough time in between if you get some random error you won't know if it's CPU OC or your memory OC.
Then your going to be back to doing a lot of testing again.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: bscool
Oh wow, thanks... but you've written a bunch of stuff way over my head. What is an "anta777 ABSOLUT" configuration? Sorry for the newbie question...

Also, are there programs able to flesh out immediate instabilities within an hour, for example, or less. Longer term hard to detect instabilities would be the domain of Korhu or TM5.
TM5 with the 1usmus config set to 6 cycles is generally enough for a quick but accurate RAM test. 90% of issues get weeded out within the first cycle.
Bummer my test errored out at 7500% in gear 1 (same as command rate 1T, right?)...I'll increase Vccsa from 1.1v to 1.2v and Vddqtx from 1.2v to 1.3v in bios and run further and hopefully quicker tests. Are these fair values?
On DDR4, VCCSA is safe up to 1.35V, and VDDQ can go as high as you need it to go, as the FIVR rail will trip long before any damage can be done.
I have everything set to auto or default from the stock BIOS. You'd think the stock BIOS would obviously train RAM properly regardless whether it's running JDEC standards, XMP, custom timings, etc... I did some more searching - this MSI board has a ton of RAM options. There's a sub-menu for RAM training. In just the RAM training menu alone there's probably 20 or 30 settings. They're all set to auto (default). One said Round Trip Latency. I changed it from auto to enabled and, what do you know, the RTLs went from 83/83 & 75/75 to 75/75 & 73/73.

So unless you manually go into some obscure Training sub-menu in the BIOS and change 1 specific setting (out of like 30), the motherboard won't train RAM? Seems like a bug to me but that seems to have done the trick. That now leaves me to think, what other of these 30 RAM training settings do I need to change from auto to enabled? There's all sorts of things regardling RTL, IOL, termination, etc. etc. It's all way over my head.
RTL, just set the mode to Dynamic (or enable RTL Training).
RTT, 80 for Park, and Wr and Nom tend to be somewhere near 40, plus-minus one or two values. For most strong overclocking dies, anyway.

The following is not in any particular order and is based on a mix of my opinion and opinions of others that I often see floating around PC sites.

-- "short" = quick, fast test, usually 1- 5 mins
-- "medium" = minimum test, I'd be fairly comfortable if the RAM passes medium without error
-- "long" = when you really want to be extra certain of no RAM errors. Lots of people only use the medium tests (with a few different programs though) and have success that way. Some people even say the long tests are overkill. If you really want to be extra certain, and don't mind the extra time (do it while you sleep, are busy with other things, are out for the day/night, etc.), then do the long tests. Most errors should be picked up with the "medium" tests though. Also, errors not picked up in medium but picked up in "long" can be purely related to heat and nothing else, which can then deceive you into thinking your RAM OC settings are bad, so monitor your RAM temps!

Karhu RAM Test
  • medium: 6400% (Karhu says 6400% has 99.41% error detection rate)
  • long: 10,000% - 20,000%
HCI Memtest / Memtest Pro
  • medium: 400% - 600%
  • long: 1000 - 2000%
- TM5 Anta777 Absolut (replaced Anta777 Extreme)
  • medium: 6 cycles
  • long: 18-24 cycles
- TM5 Usmus v3
  • medium: 6 cycles
  • long: 12-18 cycles
Linpack Xtreme
  • medium: 10-15 runs of each stress test
  • long: 25 - 50 runs of each stress test
  • Note: because I have no idea which test to do (I think the #s are 2 GB, 3, 4, 6, 10, 30 or something), I just do every one. Eg. 10 runs of 2 GB, 10 runs 3 GB, and so on. The 2 GB tests last like 5 seconds each, the 3 GB like 15 seconds, etc. so they're not too time-consuming. The most time-consuming test (30 GB) is around 5-ish mins each
Y-Cruncher
  • not sure which medium or long stress tests to run, ask around because this is another great program. See below for using Y-Cruncher for a great short test
OCCT
  • 30 min w/ AVX
  • 30 mins w/ out AVX
Notes
  • apparently TM5 Usmus v3 and Karhu hit the IMC harder so can potentially detect IMC-related errors quicker
  • apparently Y-Cruncher can potentially detect VCCSA voltage-related errors quicker
  • for a short test to check VCCSA, run Y-Cruncher with the following settings 0 [hit enter], 1 [hit enter], 8 [hit enter]. This test should last around 3-ish mins. If you error/fail this test, consider adjusting VCCSA (up or down) before adjusting any other settings (other voltages, RAM frequency, RAM timings, CPU core, CPU cache, etc.)
  • me, personally, when I try new RAM settings before I go into the medium or long stress tests, I do some short tests, those being: 1 or 2 of the Y-Cruncher VCCSA tests I explained in my previous point, then 3-5 Linpack Xtreme runs using stress test and the second or third lowest GB option. If I pass both short tests, I then use a few programs to benchmark the new RAM settings to see the speeds, scores, latency, etc.: Programs I use for this are as follows (in no particular order):
    • Passmark Performance Test (set to 2 tests, short, keep best result, all Memory Tests)
    • Aida64, the 4 memory tests (I do the latency test 3-5 times and use the best result since it can be really inconsistent)
    • Intel MLC GUI - just the first screen's bandwidth & latency test, I do it 2 times as the latency test is more consistent than Aida64
    • Linpack Xtreme: Stress Test, 3 tests of your desire (I choose 3 GB option)
    • Y-Cruncher: upon starting, hit 0, enter, 1, enter, 8, enter, use the two times as test score
    • OCCT Memory Benchmark
    • PyPrime: a nice quick test but good because scales well with everything (like Linpack Xtreme)
    • Geekbench 3: faster than GB4, use the memory (single- and multi-threaded) scores
  • I not only do this out of curiosity and excitement to see possible gains in performance but to also see if there are any weird scores. If you have weird test results like lower scores, lower bandwidth, higher latency, compared to your previous, slower RAM settings, then that can indicate an issue (ie. instability). I then go on to the medium stress tests. I personally start with the following 3 in no particular order: TM5 Usmus v3, TM5 Anta777 Absolut, Karhu Ram Test. If all 3 of those give me no errors, then I move on to a medium run of HCI Memtest and medium Linpack Xtreme. If all those pass, I then either move on to the long tests or use my PC as normal and do the long tests when I feel like it (when I'm sleeping, not home, don't need the PC, etc.)
  • I always have HWInfo open during medium and long stress tests to monitor temps
  • I always have my case side fans on max, my door open, and WIndow open (if I'm home) to keep the RAM as cool as possible in order to get heat out of the equation as much as possible
  • If you pass all the medium and long test yet start having instability in games, day-to-day stuff, etc. and you notice that the RAM temps are way higher than during the tests, then you can be 99.9% sure the instability is purely heat related.
  • I usually have a conservative clock on my CPU and CPU cache (AKA ring, uncore). For eg, if I know I'm stable at 1.300v 5.2 GHz core, 4.9 GHz cache, I'll keep the same VCore but drop cpu clock down 100 MHz and cache down 100-200 MHz in order to get those out of the RAM & IMC equation. If I pass the Y-Cruncher and Linpack Xtreme short along with the medium tests, I then put my CPU and CPU cache back to my normal clocks and then start with the long tests. Some people say to not do this but instead to just always test the RAM with your max/normal CPU clocks from the beginning. They may be right. If you're 100% sure that your CPU and CPU cache clocks are 100% stable then that may indeed be a better strategy. Sometimes a normally stable core or cache clock may need more voltage once you push your RAM harder due to the IMC being under more stress so you could indeed get instability which you may think is from the RAM (since you think you know your CPU core & cache are 100% stable) when it could, in fact, actually be your CPU cache being too high (and possibly just needing a bump in voltage) due to your RAM OC putting more stress on the IMC. That's why I like to back off the CPU & CPU cache clocks 100-200 MHz at first.
P.S. If anything is incorrect, let me know and I'll correct it ASAP
Just run y-cruncher's component stress test with all options enabled, and you pretty much have a rock stable PC if it can even pass one loop.
And the test takes only like 20 minutes. No other stress test even comes close for the CPU (and cache, IMC).

For RAM, TM5 anta777 ABSOLUT overnight is enough to be 99% stable. Though Karhu 10K is a good plus if you're willing to pay for it. But generally not necessary.
If you only want to be game stable, 1sumus set to six cycles is enough for the RAM. But do have some sort of GPU stress test running as well, in that case.
 
I lowered my VDIMM from it's 100% stable 1.6v to 1.55v and used different tests for a max of 3 mins to see if any would catch instability extremely quickly, the following are my results:
  • TM5 Usmus v3: error found @ 1:00 min
  • TM5 Anta777 Superlight: error found @ 1:40min
  • TM5 Anta777 Extreme: error found @ 1:18 min
  • TM5 Anta777 Absolute: 0 errors
  • Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: different result numbers indicating potential instability (even though LX says 0 errors). I consider this a success because @ 1.6v, I get all identical result #s
  • Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): error found (test failed)
  • Karhu Ram Test: 0 errors
  • OCCT w/ out AVX: 0 errors
  • OCCT w/ AVX: 0 errors
  • HCI Memtest: 0 errors

I then increased voltage to 1.58v and did longer tests with the following results:
  • TM5 Usmus v3, 6 cycles: 0 errors
  • TM5 Anta777 Absolut, 6 cycles: 0 errors
  • TM5 Anta777 Extreme, 6 cycles: 2 errors found
  • Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: see previous test, exact same result
  • Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): 0 errors (test completed)

At VDIMM 1.58v, only TM5 Anta777 Extreme and arguably Linpack Xtreme found errors. I'm definitely going to keep using TM5 Extreme alongside Absolut rather than replace Extreme with Absolut like most people seem to have done. Maybe in long tests (10-20 runs) or tests where it's not just a simple matter of not having enough VDIMM, TM5 Absolut is superior to TM5 Extreme, however, there are still situations where TM5 Extreme exposes errors where TM5 Absolut doesn't. So it's not like Absolut has made Extreme obsolete; Extreme definitely still has a part to play based on my tests.
 
I lowered my VDIMM from it's 100% stable 1.6v to 1.55v and used different tests for a max of 3 mins to see if any would catch instability extremely quickly, the following are my results:
  • TM5 Usmus v3: error found @ 1:00 min
  • TM5 Anta777 Superlight: error found @ 2:13 min
  • TM5 Anta777 Extreme: error found @ 1:40 min
  • TM5 Anta777 Absolute: 0 errors
  • Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: different result numbers indicating potential instability (even though LX says 0 errors). I consider this a success because @ 1.6v, I get all identical result #s
  • Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): error found (test failed)
  • Karhu Ram Test: 0 errors
  • OCCT w/ out AVX: 0 errors
  • OCCT w/ AVX: 0 errors

I then increased voltage to 1.58v and did longer tests with the following results:
  • TM5 Usmus v3, 6 cycles: 0 errors
  • TM5 Anta777 Absolut, 6 cycles: 0 errors
  • TM5 Anta777 Extreme, 6 cycles: 2 errors found
  • Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: see previous test, exact same result
  • Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): 0 errors (test completed)

At VDIMM 1.58v, only TM5 Anta777 Extreme and arguably Linpack Xtreme found errors. I'm definitely going to keep using TM5 Extreme alongside Absolut rather than replace Extreme with Absolut like most people seem to have done. Maybe in long tests (10-20 runs) or tests where it's not just a simple matter of not having enough VDIMM, TM5 Absolut is superior to TM5 Extreme, however, there are still situations where TM5 Extreme exposes errors where TM5 Absolut doesn't. So it's not like Absolut has made Extreme redundant; Extreme definitely still has a part to play based on my tests.
Well thanks for this! Will run the gamut. I had replaced extreme with Absolut myself.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: spin5000
I lowered my VDIMM from it's 100% stable 1.6v to 1.55v and used different tests for a max of 3 mins to see if any would catch instability extremely quickly, the following are my results:
  • TM5 Usmus v3: error found @ 1:00 min
  • TM5 Anta777 Superlight: error found @ 2:13 min
  • TM5 Anta777 Extreme: error found @ 1:40 min
  • TM5 Anta777 Absolute: 0 errors
  • Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: different result numbers indicating potential instability (even though LX says 0 errors). I consider this a success because @ 1.6v, I get all identical result #s
  • Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): error found (test failed)
  • Karhu Ram Test: 0 errors
  • OCCT w/ out AVX: 0 errors
  • OCCT w/ AVX: 0 errors
  • HCI Memtest: 0 errors

I then increased voltage to 1.58v and did longer tests with the following results:
  • TM5 Usmus v3, 6 cycles: 0 errors
  • TM5 Anta777 Absolut, 6 cycles: 0 errors
  • TM5 Anta777 Extreme, 6 cycles: 2 errors found
  • Linpack Xtreme 4 GB, 6 runs: see previous test, exact same result
  • Y-Cruncher (option 0, 1, 8): 0 errors (test completed)

At VDIMM 1.58v, only TM5 Anta777 Extreme and arguably Linpack Xtreme found errors. I'm definitely going to keep using TM5 Extreme alongside Absolut rather than replace Extreme with Absolut like most people seem to have done. Maybe in long tests (10-20 runs) or tests where it's not just a simple matter of not having enough VDIMM, TM5 Absolut is superior to TM5 Extreme, however, there are still situations where TM5 Extreme exposes errors where TM5 Absolut doesn't. So it's not like Absolut has made Extreme obsolete; Extreme definitely still has a part to play based on my tests.
Where does one find these TM5 configuration files, namely Anta777 Superlight/Extreme/Absolut and usmus? I try running TM5 and it blocks me saying something like "Can't run AWE module without Admin privileges". I made TM5.exe to run as admin but still the stubborn dialogue box persists.
 
Where does one find these TM5 configuration files, namely Anta777 Superlight/Extreme/Absolut and usmus? I try running TM5 and it blocks me saying something like "Can't run AWE module without Admin privileges". I made TM5.exe to run as admin but still the stubborn dialogue box persists.
 
  • Rep+
Reactions: RighteousOne
Where does one find these TM5 configuration files, namely Anta777 Superlight/Extreme/Absolut and usmus? I try running TM5 and it blocks me saying something like "Can't run AWE module without Admin privileges". I made TM5.exe to run as admin but still the stubborn dialogue box persists.
The links are in there.

As for that error, restart your PC.
 
What's better for RTLs? 75/75 and 73/73 or 75/75 and 75/75? I have to turn training on for my MSI Edge DDR4 or else it barely trains RTLs which is weird so now every time I make a change in the BIOS, even if it's just CPU vCore, the RTLs may change. It's always between the 2 sets of #s listed above.
 
What's better for RTLs? 75/75 and 73/73 or 75/75 and 75/75? I have to turn training on for my MSI Edge DDR4 or else it barely trains RTLs which is weird so now every time I make a change in the BIOS, even if it's just CPU vCore, the RTLs may change. It's always between the 2 sets of #s listed above.
Lower RTLs "should" be better for performance. But you need to check all of them which only show in bios or using memtweak it because they could train somethjing like 75/73/75 and 75/75/75.

But more important is make sure both are stable as I have seen where chaning rtls even 1 tick will cause instability in memory tests. Screenshot of memtweak it so you can see there are 3 rtls per channel when using DR.

Once you have found the rlts that are stable/perform best and you dont want them to drift/train turn off/disble memory training(memory fast boot) in the bios or it will continue to happen.

Link to pic from z490 but should be same/similar on z690 Z490 Tomahawk "Manually" setting RTL/IO-L help...
 

Attachments

3,941 - 3,960 of 7,835 Posts