GtiJason Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Wow. I've run upwards of 2.0V so far lol. Any scaling with more than 1.92V? Wow, I've never been higher than 1.88v and never benched higher than 1.85v. I'm either lucky or my kits are ones that hate high volts, Im gonna stick with lucky Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speed.fastest Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 Wow, nice combination G.SKILL and Corsair DC Kit Yep you should be locking the rtl. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabishiihito Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Fixed RTLs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtsurfer Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Should be 49/50 6/6 or 49/50 4/4 if going via offsets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxbassplayerxx Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Aren't symmetrical RTL's optimal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtsurfer Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Aren't symmetrical RTL's optimal? Not as far as I know. If he can get 49/50 working, it will be faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speed.fastest Posted April 18, 2016 Share Posted April 18, 2016 32m i3 6100 4g/4g with E-Die @ 3750 11-18-18-28 300 1T 7m 25s 500ms Anyone have a i3 or Pentium G 32m 4ghz reference? Cause i still dont know my efficiency is good or not. Still comparing with 6700K. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabishiihito Posted April 20, 2016 Share Posted April 20, 2016 M8E seems pretty useless for RAM OC especially compared to the Gene. I can boot and bench B-Die 4000C12 2T and AFR 3866C13 1T on Gene but Extreme always gives Code 41. Same timings set manually on both. Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speed.fastest Posted April 20, 2016 Share Posted April 20, 2016 Larger motherboard size had longer circuit trace from cpu to memory, thats why Impact is one of the best memory tweaking performance, because it's 2 DIMMS and shorter circuit trace from CPU to Memory than Gene or Extreme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sabishiihito Posted April 20, 2016 Share Posted April 20, 2016 I know Impact is the best, but what I don't get is why the Gene is so much better than the Extreme, given they're both 4-DIMM boards with the same BIOS options. Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speed.fastest Posted April 20, 2016 Share Posted April 20, 2016 As far as i know, the bigger and many feature to motherboard, will have more bad pcb circuit trace, maybe thats why gene is better on memory tweaking (because have better pcb circuit trace). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speed.fastest Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 Anyone experience the same with Gene? I need 2T and loose RTL for such memory frequency? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxbassplayerxx Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 I don't think there are very many people pushing E-Die right now but with B-Die, 4-Dimm boards wall around 1900 12-12-12 1T. Above that they require 2T. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speed.fastest Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 So 2 dimm board is a must, my wall at 1T is at about 1980 12-19-19 1T. Thanks for the information. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxbassplayerxx Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 :celebration: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex@ro Posted April 26, 2016 Author Share Posted April 26, 2016 So 2 dimm board is a must, my wall at 1T is at about 1980 12-19-19 1T. Thanks for the information. I think your wall is caused by the mems or IMC,4133 is doable on Gene and Extreme 1T,did it myself and also Websmile did that on Hero... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtsurfer Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 Yeah, E-die doesnt need 2T. Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxbassplayerxx Posted April 26, 2016 Share Posted April 26, 2016 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest invasmani Posted April 28, 2016 Share Posted April 28, 2016 Larger motherboard size had longer circuit trace from cpu to memory, thats why Impact is one of the best memory tweaking performance, because it's 2 DIMMS and shorter circuit trace from CPU to Memory than Gene or Extreme. Sounds great in theory, but considering I managed to get rank #2 in MaxxMem global/WR with "air" cooling mind you with a ASrock Z170 Pro4S which is full ATX motherboard and am running quad channel DIMM's. So with that said I can't say that statement completely holds true. I think your right in that longer circuit traces from CPU to memory makes a difference longer wires tend to mean more jitter and latency with less bandwidth. I think the biggest issue is the layout of the DIMM's themselves the closer they are located to the CPU the better and in the case of quad channel it's better to wire them side by side as opposed to using more wiring to run dual channels on each side of the CPU. As far why one motherboard is better despite a identical appearing bios that's likely just due to better quality components on one versus the other it's pretty easy for the bios software to be identical otherwise. It's quite natural that better components can impact performance and stability I mean that's why liquid nitrogen tends to allow for better benchmarks results than air cooling with the same hardware less heat more stability. On a side note I really want to beat l0ud_sil3nc3`s liquid nitrogen i7-6700K 6,159.6MHz MaxxMem score with my meager air cooled i3-6100 4,625.89MHz it would just be great on multiple levels quite frankly between the CPU the OC and the cooling itself. The fact that I got within 24 marks itself is remarkable to me actually plus it benched and display more quickly which is odd and makes me somewhat question how the results are measured in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeropluszero Posted April 28, 2016 Share Posted April 28, 2016 Lol. maxxmem might be the worlds worst benchmark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtiJason Posted April 28, 2016 Share Posted April 28, 2016 Sounds great in theory, but considering I managed to get rank #2 in MaxxMem global/WR with "air" cooling mind you with a ASrock Z170 Pro4S which is full ATX motherboard and am running quad channel DIMM's. So with that said I can't say that statement completely holds true. I think your right in that longer circuit traces from CPU to memory makes a difference longer wires tend to mean more jitter and latency with less bandwidth. I think the biggest issue is the layout of the DIMM's themselves the closer they are located to the CPU the better and in the case of quad channel it's better to wire them side by side as opposed to using more wiring to run dual channels on each side of the CPU. As far why one motherboard is better despite a identical appearing bios that's likely just due to better quality components on one versus the other it's pretty easy for the bios software to be identical otherwise. It's quite natural that better components can impact performance and stability I mean that's why liquid nitrogen tends to allow for better benchmarks results than air cooling with the same hardware less heat more stability. On a side note I really want to beat l0ud_sil3nc3`s liquid nitrogen i7-6700K 6,159.6MHz MaxxMem score with my meager air cooled i3-6100 4,625.89MHz it would just be great on multiple levels quite frankly between the CPU the OC and the cooling itself. The fact that I got within 24 marks itself is remarkable to me actually plus it benched and display more quickly which is odd and makes me somewhat question how the results are measured in the first place. This is not really even a benchmark, there is a reason you didn't receive any global points for it, and it's not because you didn't include a single cpu-z tab on your screenshot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest invasmani Posted April 28, 2016 Share Posted April 28, 2016 Only because there isn't a lulcatz benchmark that fills your screens with animated cat meme gifs til your PC reaches 100% CPU usage and records how long it takes...yeah some developer is going to copy that idea just you wait! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zeropluszero Posted April 28, 2016 Share Posted April 28, 2016 That sounds like a good benchmark, can't wait! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xxbassplayerxx Posted April 29, 2016 Share Posted April 29, 2016 Only because there isn't a lulcatz benchmark that fills your screens with animated cat meme gifs til your PC reaches 100% CPU usage and records how long it takes...yeah some developer is going to copy that idea just you wait! It's a bad benchmark because it's basically broken. It scales massively with CPU speed, it performs better when you run with less cores and HT turned off, etc. People don't really run it anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest invasmani Posted May 1, 2016 Share Posted May 1, 2016 It's a bad benchmark because it's basically broken. It scales massively with CPU speed, it performs better when you run with less cores and HT turned off, etc. People don't really run it anymore. I just beat a 6700K with HT disabled running 2 cores 2 threads overclocked on liquid nitrogen to 6159.6MHz with a i3-6100 with HT enabled 2 cores 4 threads overclocked to 4,801.16MHz on air by 31.4 Marks. It certainly seems like that invalidates a bit of your blanket statements. I don't know as if it runs better with cores turned off versus on it's plausible though. You'll have less throttling to worry about that could skew results up to a point though that's true with any benchmark that's not overly multi-threaded as well. http://hwbot.org/submission/3202227_invasmani_maxxmem_ddr4_sdram_3925.9_marks/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.