ArchStanton

Mannix-Ita dropped some kind of new tool he has created into several of the major AMD-centric threads I follow over at OCN. I haven't checked it out at all myself, but he seems both knowledgeable and respected. I thought you might have an interest in it if it works well. https://www.overclock.net/threads/benchmaestro-cpu-gpu-benchmarking-and-tools-utility.1797775/

OCCT checks good, but I think I will throw everything and the kitchen sink at this tune before trying to lower the voltages or up the fclk (I'm undecided on what direction I will turn next). Maybe Membench inside Dram Calc for our next validation tool.

Damn, I'm too slow to compete with Google. I had screenshots prepped and everything.

Had a chance to read a handful more posts today. After examining some CBR23 scores that were posted in conjunction with impressive L3 numbers, I have the impression that those "shiny" L3 read/latency values were obtained with rather aggressive static OC's. I do now recall that I read somewhere that L3 speed is tied to Core clock in some fashion, but it had not occurred to me that AIDA64 Cache and Memory bench might utilize enough threads to benefit from a high static OC as opposed to the generally better performance offered by PBO with single/low thread count loads. I will test this when time permits. Edit: Would anyone have a recommendation regarding DDR4 heatsinks? My specific kit is F4-3600C14Q-64GVKA, though I currently only have 2 sticks in use.

I think he said he uses the "EDC bug". I am very far from 100%, but I think they may do something very similar to one another and/or possibly conflict?

It passed TM5_1usmusx25. Temps were fine. I left it running OCCT this morning. I'll check it when I get home. However, none of the handful of synthetics I through at it this morning showed a nickel's worth of change in performance . Some of the enthusiasts at OCN seem obcessed with GDM off, which this "tune" has. I haven't thoroughly tested it yet, but scratching the surface, I see no benefit. I may investigate trying to push fclk above 1900 in a "daily drivable" way, but based on what I've read so far, that seems largely luck of the draw and unlikely.

In my continued RAM OC research, I came across some interesting settings posted by domdtxdissar in [Official] AMD Ryzen DDR4 24/7 Memory Stability Thread | Page 404 | Overclock.net (page 404, post 8075). They looked like an improved version of what I had previously been using. Of course, I still don't know WHY they work. Hopefully, as I continue to study, things will clarify, and I can graduate from copy/paste to test/refine with some idea of what I'm doing. L3 read/latency is still not quite what I was hoping for, but its better. I'm unsure if the reason my L3 values tend to lag those of the "prosumers" that post the settings is related to the fact that they tend to run 4x8GB while I am running 2x16GB . Perhaps I will read further and learn the answer. Time to fire up HWiNFO64 and TestMem5 (x25 cycles 1usmus) and begin to confirm stability. Hopefully HWiNFO64 doesn't bug out and I get accurate peak temperature readings. I guess I should turn the logging function on so I can check and see if any high-ish values are momentary blips or true temperatures. DRAM voltage is set to 1.560... Edit: If the DIMMS go over 45⁰C, I'm pretty sure I'll get errors, and I'll be hunting for improved RAM heatsinks. If they approach 40⁰C, I'll probably still be looking for better heatsinks. F@k it, I'll be getting better heatsinks. Edit 2:. I need to revisit J7's comments here in my own build log regarding single rank/dual rank/quad rank. Maybe some of that pertains to L3 read/latency speeds... Edit 3: No, putting my brain in gear, L3 shouldn't be tied to much in the way of DRAM other than fclk I guess...hmm. So much to learn .

Well s#!t. Maybe its not such a bad thing that I don't own any Wix stock. Regardless, the store where you purchased should allow you to exchange it once it dries out (it should fail an air leak test for them).

I won't likely be inclined to take advantage of your offer in the near future, but I would like to express my gratitude to you none the less. It is very generous of you.

Sometimes I have had success by opening the file in the lowly MS Paint and then resaving it with a different file name .

I've convinced myself that I do need to revisit my RAM and actually tune it to my system, rather than rely on the settings I plagiarized from J7. In addition, I've got some QD's coming from Koolance itself. I did some digging and found these: But pricing and availability didn't seem better than what's available in the DIY PC enthusiast market currently, so I didn't bother researching whether chrome plated brass would function for our purposes or not (I'm guessing yes, but it would be prudent to be 100% sure). Here are links to a brochure and the main website if anyone wishes to dig deeper: Liquid Cooling Connectors for Thermal Management : CPC (cpcworldwide.com) Non-Spill Liquid Cooling Connectors | CPC (cpcworldwide.com) I think I will likely make more changes to my loop in the future. Probably going LM on both GPU die and CPU IHS. More robust cooling on GPU backplate (I do not anticipate active, just "more"). Planning to use QD's to make maintenance far easier and facilitate connection to a "chiller" (maybe on the "redneck" side of the spectrum of possibilities). I know the gains might be minimal, but for squeezing out every possible drop of cooling performance, I think I will have one of my larger radiators between the CPU and GPU blocks (primarily for the small benefit it might provide when not using a "chiller" of any sort). Aesthetics are going down the toilet, but I am okay with that now as the "benching bug" has bitten me and I am infected.

"Won't see 'em again till the 4th of July..." Oh man, how easy it is for some songs to make me think I'm still that goofy kid instead of a goofy adult.

Winner winner chicken dinner! Also, if you still have the opportunity and haven't already done so, get yourself a reference picture of the processor itself. (That was my original dud, not the almost dud I have now )

Appropriately sized syringe is supposed to be the ideal tool for straightening them, sorry for the troubles .

Hmm, I guess to be on the safe side we better confirm the stepping of your CPU. If it's a B0, then I think J7 and I would both agree on either 3501 or 3801. For B2 there have been scattered reports of issues if the BIOS isn't 3904 or newer.

As a card-carrying member of "team red" (for the time being), I would like to add that the TechN and Heatkiller IV AM4 blocks are also worthy of consideration and likely easier to obtain.

An excerpt from Aris's review: "Thanks to digital control, innovative features like the totem-pole PFC converter can be used to offer efficiency levels that simply aren't possible from older analog designs (at least until an analog controller for this type of PFC converter becomes available)." The full article, as it's a lot to take in: Corsair AX1600i Review - Tom's Hardware | Tom's Hardware WWW.TOMSHARDWARE.COM It is tough to improve something that it is already excellent, so Corsair's desire to build an even better PSU than its current flagship, the AX1500i, is noteworthy. More impressive, the AX1600i succeeds in... I believe the "community" still trusts Aris to be impartial despite his reviews being published on TH, but if this is no longer the case, then somebody please slap this newb and set me straight .

I believe I am correct that the Corsair 1600axi is still the only digital control "big boy" on the market? When Seasonic/EVGA/Super Flower manage to bring something of equal performance to market, I will be very tempted to get one.

That appears to be a substantially more "populated" PCB for sure.

Picture stolen from: [Official] Heatkiller Club | Page 295 | Overclock.net (post 5,894) I presume that is where the additional connector gets soldered onto Ada.

@The Pookfor work or for "shenanigans"?

53.4TB...

Aye, I ran off to look it up. Unless ASUS has really done something squirrely the 4 pin shouldn't be an issue.