mickulty

you should still be able to edit the submission to use a different screenshot

What's wrong with the memory, isn't it just DDR2? /s

That would be correct, they have a ridiculously fast serial bus to the AMB chip that's something like 12x the ('true') memory clock. This isn't shared, rather each DIMM passes on commands to the next.

I was gonna hold off on posting this to give him chance to delete the thread but since people have seen it now; FFS, just because you want to sub 6-core socket 604 Xeons in team cup. "for a more cohesive DB" my arse. You've never even OC'd an FB-DIMM and you're saying they're the same? Did you just get sick of trying to find hardware loopholes, so now you want to mess with the DB to make your own, while accusing others of "wanting to feel special"? You know HWBOT staff are volunteers, right? Don't waste their time with stupid crap like this. BTW as far as the underlying logic, if anything it's weirder that DDR3 and DDR4 RDIMMs aren't listed separately since the CAD bus is done totally differently on them.

The HWBOT submission search function is really useful when researching hardware, or when talking to people who aren't on hwbot yet but are interested what kind of scores people get with certain platforms, GPU families etc. Unfortunately the permalinks to search results are colossal - far too big to just post in a chat, and unweildy even for a forum/reddit post. For example, I was asked if I could try and come up with a list of the best PCI GPUs. I want to respond with the search results for 3DMark2001SE on PCI GPUs, but this is the permalink: https://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?applicationId=1&scoreOperator=more_or_equal&score=&username=&regionCode=&countryId=&teamId=&glPointsOperator=more_or_equal&glPoints=&hwPointsOperator=more_or_equal&hwPoints=&compPointsOperator=more_or_equal&compPoints=&globalTeamPowerPointsOperator=more_or_equal&globalTeamPowerPoints=&hardwareTeamPowerPointsOperator=more_or_equal&hardwareTeamPowerPoints=&totalPointsOperator=more_or_equal&totalPoints=&league=&globalRankOperator=less_or_equal&globalRank=&hardwareRankOperator=less_or_equal&hardwareRank=&cpu=&cpuId=&cpuSubFamily=&cpuSubFamilyId=&cpuFamily=&cpuFamilyId=&cpuBatch=&cpuBatchId=&cpuFreqOperator=less_or_equal&cpuFreq=&numberOfProcessors=&cpuSocketId=&cpuCoolingId=&gpu=&gpuId=&gpuFamily=&gpuFamilyId=&gpuBatch=&gpuBatchId=&gpuCoreFreqOperator=more_or_equal&gpuCoreFreq=&gpuShaderFreqOperator=more_or_equal&gpuShaderFreq=&gpuMemFreqOperator=more_or_equal&gpuMemFreq=&numberOfVideocards=&gpuSocketId=104&gpuCoolingId=&mbModel=&mbModelId=&mbChipset=&mbChipsetId=&mbManufacturer=&mbManufacturerId=&mbChipsetBatch=&mbChipsetBatchId=&mbCoolingId=&memType=&memTypeId=&memProduct=&memProductId=&memManufacturer=&memManufacturerId=&memBatch=&memBatchId=&memFreqOperator=more_or_equal&memFreq=&memTCasOperator=more_or_equal&memTCas=&memCoolingId=&psuWattOperator=more_or_equal&psuWatt=&psuProduct=&psuProductId=&psuManufacturer=&psuManufacturerId=&diskCapacityOperator=more_or_equal&diskCapacity=&diskProduct=&diskProductId=&diskManufacturer=&diskManufacturerId=&dateAfter=&dateBefore=&_bestHardware=on&orderBy=score&limit=20&_imageAttached=on&_videoAttached=on&offset=0 It seems to me that most of these are either specifying something that's just the default, or not specifying anything at all. If we were to cut it down to just the search terms we would get: https://hwbot.org/search/submissions/permalink?applicationId=1&gpuSocketId=104 This "de-crapified" link already seems to work, but manually cutting everything irrelevant out is a total pain. Could it not be generated like that in the first place, with empty or default fields (eg "&cpuFreq=") simply not being appended?

Just pre-emptively make it websmile's simpsons mob from country cup.

Radeon VII hasn't been pushed but should be close enough to the Titan X Pascal even based on the results that are up. The good Radeon VII scores even beat bad Titan Xp scores. Stage is fine IMO, I actually like how it's been set up because we could see different sets of hardware competing very closely with one another. Could certainly ban more hardware to knock the cost down but that's what all the DDR1, 2 and 3 stages are for.

The superposition stage isn't Nvidia only, is it?

I'm pretty sure it's only Haswell-EX Xeons that have DDR3 on LGA2011-3, the DDR3 boards don't list support for i7s. Anyway, competition looks good. I like how open many of the stages are.

This is more a database side thing but will the 12nm Picasso (raven 'shrink') iGPUs be separated from their 14nm Raven Ridge equivalents? Annoyingly they're all still called "Vega 8", "Vega 11" etc. This would affect the DDR4 Radeon iGPU stage.

Speaking of loophole hardware, is it intended that "3dmark Firestrike integrated Radeon graphics (2 scores) -> max 25 points" would include (or could be interpreted as including) Vega M?

b-but bloodrage? ?

I for one would love that actually

Z170 was DDR3+DDR4 but almost no-one bothered with the DDR3 option because Intel said you have to use 1.35V DIMMs, so everyone decided if they had to buy new ram to just buy DDR4. I'm pretty sure it's possible for DDR3 boards with the coffee lake mod to work as well (not 100% sure about 8-core chips). But yeah someone trying hard enough could get an 8086K to run with DDR3. AFAIK no-one made Z270 DDR3 boards but Kaby does still have the DDR3 controller.

So... we need a 1366 stage? I do have one question/comment, anyone know if Black Hole is competition ready? I've had trouble getting consistent/competitive results but maybe I just suck, I'm happy to accept that (-:

I started out doing mhz testing with 4 DIMMs with a Ryzen 1700+AB350-Gaming. This was supposed to be a joke, troll some of the r/oc discord guys like "yeah I'm testing that IC, but in a crappy configuration lol". I was expecting maybe 3200 since it's a T-topology board. Anyway they do DDR4-3600 daily stable. Which for 4 DIMMs on first-gen Ryzen is just insane. So this is actually really interesting data, makes me think these sticks might be super easy to run somehow. Screenshot attached, timings are very much quick and dirty and not tuned at all, I just set primaries and mhz. EDIT: Interestingly, the same settings were pretty unstable in 2-dimm - T-topology in action, but interesting that it's a factor at these lower speeds.

Those are 512Mx16 layout (4 chips per rank), AFAIK they're not used in high-performance modules because of less bank groups hurting performance or something. I've made a thread in memory heaven as I think there's a lot of information to go through.

Thought it was time to start collecting information in one place about this new miracle IC that the OGS guys used to smash the memory frequency WR. There are a bunch of different IC codes for "8Gbit Revision E" and while the characteristics should be broadly similar there's definitely some variance - not sure how much of that is down to binning for kits and how much is down to differences between different Micron models (JEDEC bin, temperature bin, maybe package?). These are found from micron's ic code lookup tool, and model numbers are interpreted with the help of micron's 8Gbit DDR4 datasheet. The known standard (1Gx8 layout) Rev.E IC codes, excluding Z9 series ES chips, are: D9VPP - '075' JEDEC bin code, no extended temperature code D9WFL - 062E' JEDEC bin code, no extended temperature code D9WFP - '062E' JEDEC bin code, 'IT' extended temperature code D9XSP - '062E' JEDEC bin code, 'AAT' extended temperature code D9XSJ - '062E' JEDEC bin code, 'AIT' extended temperature code D9XSK - '062E' JEDEC bin code, 'AUT' extended temperature code C9BHS - '075E' JEDEC bin code, no extended temperature code (=D9VPP?) C9BJC - '062E' JEDEC bin code, no extended temperature code (=D9WFL?) C9BJZ - '62M' JEDEC bin code, no extended temperature code (these ones are on the WR sticks) It should be stressed that these aren't all necessarily available, they just show up searching for part numbers. There's also C9BHR - '083E' JEDEC bin code, no extended temperature code. Micron's site lists these as Rev.H, but it's possible this is an error - usually IC codes with the first 4 characters the same would be variations of the same IC (eg D9GTS/D9GTR/D9GTN). 062E is 3200C22 jedec bin, 075E is 2666C18 jedec bin, 075 is 2666C19, and 083E is 2400C16. The 62M jedec bin code doesn't seem to be documented. Temperature wise IT/AIT, AAT, and AUT are rated from -40C to 95C, 105C and 125C respectively. ICs without temperature codes are rated for 0C-95C, this doesn't necessarily really mean anything though. Micron 8Gbit Rev.E has been reported, to my knowledge, in: 8GB Ballistix Sport LT 3000 15-16-16 (multiple users in the r/overclocking community have these) 16GB Ballistix Sport AT 3200 16-18-18 dual rank (recently reviewed by techpowerup) 8GB Ballistix Elite 3600 16-18-18 (WR sticks) Overclocking characteristics are: Apparently no CB/CBB Scales with voltage Very temperature sensitive At least the low bins seem to need high tRCD A couple of different r/overclocking users have reported 3600 14-20-16 1.45V on AMD using the 3000 15-16-16 sticks. This is really interesting because it suggests a reasonable amount of variation if the lower-end sticks need tRCD 20 for 3600 whereas higher-end sticks can do 3600+ at tRCD 18. My personal theory (and I realise it's a bold one): the 62M JEDEC bin code on C9BJZ might be like elpida's MNH and MGH codes seen on 1Gbit Rev.A DDR3 indicating the unofficial 'HYPER' bin - that is, the result of some kind of sorting done at Micron/Crucial for OC above and beyond any official JEDEC bin, separating ICs of the same design that exhibit similar characteristics but with a big difference in the typical numbers. I'm currently busy testing some 3000C15 Sport sticks that I picked up today, but I'll try and keep this post up to date as more information comes to light ?

Thanks, I'd forgotten that there are special bins and part #s for crucial. Not sure those even have a direct equivalent in the D9xxx series, D9WFL's equivalent is C9BJC.

Do you know which specific IC code is on these chips? Looks from the micron FBGA and Component Marking Decoder like 8Gbit Micron Revision E DDR4 has a couple of different ones, not counting other widths than x8; D9VPP, a 2666c19 JEDEC bin D9WFL, a 3200C22 JEDEC bin D9WFP, a 3200C22 JEDEC bin also certified for 'industrial' use down to -40C D9XS*, a 3200C22 JEDEC bin with various automotive temperature bins (-40C to 105C) I'm guessing D9WFL? It'd be good to have something to call them other than "E-die", I've already seen some folks get confused and think it's the return of 4Gbit Samsung.

Yeah I was pretty annoyed a while back when I wanted to try out whatever micron's best 4Gbit IC was in a 2x4 kit and ended up with samsung e-die, lol. There are other examples but I fear we'd stray from the topic ?

Ballistix Elite use - or rather used to use, it seems - samsung b-die at least for high bins.

Wow, good spot - the spd tab reports it as micron! EDIT: As does the comment on the score, I'm blind lol

Awesome score! This from the bench session with TAGG?

Hang on... is it true this was on HY510???