DDR4 DIMM Lies

[mrflibble]

So it's an Intel conspiracy?

Never suspect malice when incompetence will suffice.
Never suspect malice when incompetence or marketing bullshit will suffice.

You have a brand new board, with a brand new CPU, and barely-tested-in-the-wild firmware. Problems are not unexpected.

Pretty much this...

Don't get me wrong, when the jedec profiles are lacking, having an XMP profile is convenient. You can consider it a handy lookup table and you don't have to enter all them numbers into the bios settings like you had to in the dark ages. But ... if you have to use an XMP profile because the jedec profiles are not there yet, that's usually a hint that you are running those memory chippies on settings the fab would probably frown upon.

You had a similar situation years ago with DDR3. You couldn't get nicely priced fast modules that not only were fast & cheap, but also ran on 1.50 V as intended. You could however get fast & cheap if you accepted that the memory stick vendor already did the overvolting to 1.65 V for you. A couple of years later 1.50 V modules were plentiful. And ditto for timing profiles vs price+availability.

So looks like we're currently still in the era where it makes sense to bin + tweak those ddr4 chippies, slap on a pretty heatsink + obligatory leds, and make some more money. When DDR4 joins the ranks of tech where those doing the production run ask "Why are we still doing this? It's almost too easy.", well then you can get those DDR4@2400 modules given away for free with a packet of Wheaty Flakes. But not today.... Today you still have to deal with marketing bullshit and accept the fact that a given XMP profile may or may not work on that shiny new motherboard.

PS: Link to that similar ddr3 situation years ago: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/291857-30-tomshardware

[TiN]

. Non-JEDEC DDR4 speed rated sticks are usually just prebinned, preselected modules, which tested to run at higher speeds in specific boards. XMP is one of the ways how to tell specific motherboard about capabilities of specific module, so BIOS can set timings, voltages and other related MC settings accordingly to make the module work. There can be a lot of things happening under the hood, outside of typical RAS-CAS-CMD timings by application of XMP profile.

That's why vendors of both memory sticks and mainboards publish so called AVL's, which tell you how well can DIMM A work in MB B, and what CPU was used, etc. This usually works quite well with Intel platforms. With Ryzen....well, you into some fun, I've heard. Personally I didn't try or touch anything AMD since very long time, but info above is based on many generations of Intel designs I was working on. 

[mrflibble]

I don't know if ASrock has become better the last few years, but they've built cheap mainboards, cheap in all regards.

From what I hear they've kept up the fine tradition of "Cheap in all regards!".

But then, every manufacturer produces a "suboptimal" product every now and then. So it's usually worth it to do your homework and go over the reviews.

[Mr. Scram]

Well of course they bin them - the point is that they're upselling a product they don't even manufacture. And they regularly do it by cranking the voltage past normal levels.

What's so bad about that? They test the modules, rate them according to their own findings and take responsibility for the consequences. That is not much different from the manufacturer doing the same thing. They put in effort and take a risk, which is what they charge you for. Video card manufacturers do the same thing with factory overclocked GPUs.

One might argue that they might have been clearer on this, but we have to realise that Ryzen was only released a week or so ago. The chips were apparently fully compatible with DDR4 systems on the market at that time, but Ryzen requires different qualities and therefore the testing process needs to be adjusted.

It is good to note that QVLs (Qualified Vendor List) are still a thing. Even if you have memory that complies to every standard right from the factory and use it in a random motherboard that does the same, operation is not guaranteed. It typically tend to work just fine, but some combinations throw a fit, even though the individual parts are adhering to standards and work fine in every other combination. The immense complexity of the hardware ecosystem has many benefits, but the one downside is that unexpected behaviour is an option.

I don't know if ASrock has become better the last few years, but they've built cheap mainboards, cheap in all regards.

I have seen a lot of systems being built with Asrock motherboards and there do not appear to be much problems. Performance seems to be decent to fairly good too.

The last few big motherboard issues came from Asus (finicky memory and heating issues), Gigabyte (cold boot issues) and, a while back, Intel itself (SATA chipset issues). Oh, and I guess we can count the Atom issues too, since those chips are soldered to the motherboard, but that might admittedly be a stretch.

[gnif]

In the past I have gone with ASUS boards, but I have found that their support over time is terrible, getting BIOS updates with later microcode is a nightmare, it had left many of us to hack/patch our own BIOS images with updated microcode. So far ASRock I have noted have been releasing not just updated microcode, but new features, settings, etc... even for the older boards. They were one of the few that actually bothered to add the Phenom AM2+ support to their older boards.

As for the build quality of this board, it is pretty decent, I wouldn't say its awesome though, the heat sinks on the mosfets are pretty cheap and nasty, fixed with just those plastic spring things.

The issue here isn't that RAM is binned, etc... the issue is that they do not market the RAM at it's real clock, in many cases they don't even specify its 'default stable clock', ie, the real factory clock. So when you are shopping for RAM, unless you do what I was unaware of prior (buy from Crucial), you will be gambling on what you get.

One other thing to note, Micron do sell RAM rated at 1600MHz (DDR4-3200), according to digikey the ICs are around $13.70 USD each. 16 would be needed to make a 8GB DIMM, which would cost $219.20 just for the modules, making a 16GB pack cost $438.4. So unless you are paying that kind of cash for a DDR4-3200 set, you're likely getting overclocked junk.

[wraper]

Easiest way to get RAM with true JEDEC speed, which don't need overclock/overvolt to work at advertised speed, is buying cheap ram without heatsinks  , like Kingston value RAM. The fun part is that cheap ram often have higher JEDEC speed than those more expensive "faster" types with fancy heatsinks.

[gnif]

Easiest way to get RAM with true JEDEC speed, which don't need overclock/overvolt to work at advertised speed, is buying cheap ram without heatsinks  , like Kingston value RAM. The fun part is that cheap ram often have higher JEDEC speed than those more expensive "faster" types with fancy heatsinks.

This is what I did initially, I bought ram without any heatsinks, value/cheap ram, but it was programmed with overclocked SPD timings, no XMP timings of any sort.

[wraper]

Easiest way to get RAM with true JEDEC speed, which don't need overclock/overvolt to work at advertised speed, is buying cheap ram without heatsinks  , like Kingston value RAM. The fun part is that cheap ram often have higher JEDEC speed than those more expensive "faster" types with fancy heatsinks.

This is what I did initially, I bought ram without any heatsinks, value/cheap ram, but it was programmed with overclocked SPD timings, no XMP timings of any sort.

Well, you wrote XMP  :

Later I found out that these modules are JEDEC-2133 but XMP-2400 (Intel's Extreme Memory Profile), which is why they are selling them as DDR4-2400

Never heard about Avexir, also they are black an called platinum, so not really non fancy "value" stuff where buyer don't care how they look.

[Mr. Scram]

The issue here isn't that RAM is binned, etc... the issue is that they do not market the RAM at it's real clock, in many cases they don't even specify its 'default stable clock', ie, the real factory clock. So when you are shopping for RAM, unless you do what I was unaware of prior (buy from Crucial), you will be gambling on what you get.

That is the point: there is no such thing as a real clock. The chips get binned by their manufacturer, and then get binned again. Binning is just testing a chip against a certain speed and rating. There is no reason the second bin is less valid than the first. The first manufacturer does not guarantee anything beyond the lower memory clocks. The second manufacturer takes a longer look at the chips and guarantees a higher clock.

Let's put it this way: I sell you a hundred oranges that weigh at least 150 grams each. I put a sticker on them: at least 150 grams. You take these oranges and sort them according to weight, and put the 35 oranges that turn out to weigh more than 200 grams in some nice paper. You sell these fifth kilo oranges to people for a bit more money than the other oranges. What would you say to someone coming back with an orange, pointing at the sticker that these are actually 150 gram oranges?

Of course, due to compatibility issues, the situation with memory is a bit more complex than it is with oranges. That would amount to something like conventional scales that weigh the oranges just fine and a totally new model of scale that does not know how to deal with the oranges, but I digress. The binning part is pretty much the same. Adding Ryzen to the mix just means the binning requirements need to be a bit tighter than it was before.

[Monkeh]

The issue here isn't that RAM is binned, etc... the issue is that they do not market the RAM at it's real clock, in many cases they don't even specify its 'default stable clock', ie, the real factory clock. So when you are shopping for RAM, unless you do what I was unaware of prior (buy from Crucial), you will be gambling on what you get.

That is the point: there is no such thing as a real clock. The chips get binned by their manufacturer, and then get binned again. Binning is just testing a chip against a certain speed and rating. There is no reason the second bin is less valid than the first. The first manufacturer does not guarantee anything beyond the lower memory clocks. The second manufacturer takes a longer look at the chips and guarantees a higher clock.

Guarantees a higher clock - so long as your board manages to hit weird timing specs, and cranks the voltage up outside of normal specs.

Use of XMP should be very, very clearly noted along with the actual, standard profile the RAM will operate at. Anything outside JEDEC profiles is 'best of luck to you'.

[Mr. Scram]

Guarantees a higher clock - so long as your board manages to hit weird timing specs, and cranks the voltage up outside of normal specs.

Use of XMP should be very, very clearly noted along with the actual, standard profile the RAM will operate at. Anything outside JEDEC profiles is 'best of luck to you'.

That is what the aforementioned QVL is for. Even memory that has been binned from the factory for a certain speed is not guaranteed to work at that speed with all motherboards. Only the memory on the QVL carries that guarantee of compatibility

[Monkeh]

Guarantees a higher clock - so long as your board manages to hit weird timing specs, and cranks the voltage up outside of normal specs.

Use of XMP should be very, very clearly noted along with the actual, standard profile the RAM will operate at. Anything outside JEDEC profiles is 'best of luck to you'.

That is what the aforementioned QVL is for. Even memory that has been binned from the factory for a certain speed is not guaranteed to work at that speed with all motherboards. Only the memory on the QVL carries that guarantee of compatibility

The QVL is a crutch for poorly designed systems.

If you get a properly built module specified to and supplying JEDEC standard timings, it should function with any system which supports those speeds. If you do not support those speeds, then do not try and run them - pick the lower profile. If you 'support' those speeds and it doesn't work with a standard module: Your board or firmware is broken. Fix it.

There is no point in these standards if they're treated as optional.

Now, if there is some freak aberration which causes one or two very specific modules not to work - then you can write a 'sorry, this doesn't work' list, and I'll only think slightly less of you.

[Mr. Scram]

There is no point in these standards if they're treated as optional.

Now, if there is some freak aberration which causes one or two very specific modules not to work - then you can write a 'sorry, this doesn't work' list, and I'll only think slightly less of you.

I don't think they are treated as optional. It is a market with very complex products, technological capabilities that change every day and a nauseatingly fast development cycle. There are bound to be a number of hiccups. Just look at the errata of singular products that are much simpler and have a much slower development cycle. You quickly realise that it is a miracle that so many of these components just happen to be compatible at all.

The few issues that arise really do not warrant slowing the cycle way down and taking many years for what currently takes one.

[Someone]

There is no point in these standards if they're treated as optional.

Now, if there is some freak aberration which causes one or two very specific modules not to work - then you can write a 'sorry, this doesn't work' list, and I'll only think slightly less of you.

I don't think they are treated as optional. It is a market with very complex products, technological capabilities that change every day and a nauseatingly fast development cycle. There are bound to be a number of hiccups. Just look at the errata of singular products that are much simpler and have a much slower development cycle. You quickly realise that it is a miracle that so many of these components just happen to be compatible at all.

The few issues that arise really do not warrant slowing the cycle way down and taking many years for what currently takes one.

Its also a very competitive market where any small advantage can get huge profits, so there is a business case to squeeze out every last bit of timing. It falls down when that timing is against the dominant platform rather than the "guaranteed" jedec timings against all possible memory controllers. Just a bit of crappy marketing which seems to have been blown out of proportion rather than discussing the electronics side of it with timing/noise margins and the obvious differences between intel and AMD parts.

[Yansi]

Easiest way to get RAM with true JEDEC speed, which don't need overclock/overvolt to work at advertised speed, is buying cheap ram without heatsinks  , like Kingston value RAM. The fun part is that cheap ram often have higher JEDEC speed than those more expensive "faster" types with fancy heatsinks.

I usually not poke my fingers inside PCs, as i really hate that PC stuff...  Anyway, what you said is interesting. As it was exactly what I have seen few months ago, when I wanted to upgrade RAM in my notebook. Just browsed local retailers eshops and quickly found out the cheapest RAMs did indeed had if not the best performace, regarding timing and such. I couldn't believe that too