[kairi_zeroblade]

I suggest never volunteer as a beta tester.

And to think that everyone expects doing those speeds easy peasy..even with the guidance above, I'd still say its still silicon lottery..and after all that work on getting there is the performance satisfactory? I have an 8600G doing 8k+ on memory but the performance is crap (personally)..

 

[kairi_zeroblade]

It is certainly true that the performance gains from 1:2 are often marginal, but a dual CCX Raphael or Granite Ridge part can often meaningfully benefit as the FCLK bottleneck is less of an issue. With my single CCX parts I'm on the fence between super tight 6200-6400 1:1 settings or 8100 1:2, but I'd probably choose the latter on a 9950X.

I am still yet to get a 9700x sample to try out but based on what I am reading everywhere the single CCD chips highly benefits 1:1 sync ratio, not entirely sure about the dual CCD chips, if you have tried one and was able to get 8200 stable at what fabric clock was this? 2200? I do rarely see chips doing 2200 on Fabric, yours might be binned or you simply won lottery.

 

[kairi_zeroblade]

Granite Ridge CCDs seem to tolerate higher FCLKs in general and they likely have IODs binned to match. Many Granite Ridge setups will default to 2100 FCLK when using EXPO and most Granite Ridge samples can do 2200 FCLK.

I tried four 9700Xes (three could do 2200, one topped out at 2167) before being given a 2233 capable retail sample (that is still only unconditionally stable at 2233 when capped to ~130W...so I run 2200 because after I delidded it I found I could cool ~180W on air before hitting temperature limits).

Out of these five, four of them could do 8200 in an ASRock B650M-HDV/M.2, three at 2200 FCLK. One sample had a dud IMC and the other was not stable at 2200 FCLK at all.

Prior to AGESA 1.2.0.2 I was running 6200MT/s with tight timings (and Nitro 1-2-0) as that is what was performing best. However, whatever they did with AGESA 1.2.0.2 has changed that (latency improved slightly all-round, but I lost a fair bit of bandwidth in the 1:1 ratios), so I'm finding that 8100 now performs best (8200 needs to be so much looser on this board that the performance is worse than 8000, let alone 8100).

8000+ has generally had a small edge with dual-CCX parts, at least where both CCXes were heavily utilized, because two Fabric links can fully saturate 6400MT/s memory.

will see when I get my "not so good silicon" sample, for all I know, from my region all bins has been trash, only the APU's had success on those speeds.

 

[kairi_zeroblade]

Was finally able to get it to pass most of a memtest run (i ended it at ~87%) using the default gSkill ddr5-8000 settings a guy posted on youtube. Only one I couldn't find in my Asus BIOS (he was using an Asrock board) was "Processor ODT Impedance" setting. Gonna try and do some stress tests now.

View attachment 2676551 View attachment 2676552 View attachment 2676564 View attachment 2676566

running the benchmark for what? 12 seconds does not definitively indicate stability, you either run the stress test on y-cruncher or other apps for a few hours.