Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Apr 4, 2017.
ahaha lol, sorry, was talking of memories in the sense that i dont remember such problems in the past.
Forgive my bad english anyway.
The Ryzen R5 1600 is a very capable CPU which is what I'm aiming for. I do not want to buy yet another 4 core once again.
The only issue I see with Ryzen is the buggy BIOS and the lack of motherboard choices and availability.
The EFI situations will be sorted in the next weeks. They already confirmed RAM patches are on the way soon.
I agree that Ryzen memory compatibility is all over the place, but with a bit of research you are golden .. TridentZ 3000C14 2x8GB kit running at 3200C14 on my CH6 Hero without any issues :cheers:
My RAM running at 2933 CL14 (rated for 3200 CL14) is quite abit faster than the first RAM I got that could only do 2133. Ryzen looks much better (for gamers) if you can get faster memory running. To anyone wishing to build a Ryzen system, spend a day or three getting confirmation that the memory and motherboard you buy are capable of reaching it's rated speed, and buy the fastest compatible RAM you can afford.
*Also update your bios to the latest available as soon as you get it.
most likely because ther is only one board that officially supports that speed (board/bios; asus hero).
maybe look into stuff the military/nasa contractors produce. billions are spend on those things, and they dont even work right most of the time, but you expect this from consumer products. right.
and last time i checked, n o one gets forced to buy newly design tech right away.
you can wait for the obvious upcoming "fixes", or buy zen +/2.0 when it gets released...
or lets say it different: if a product costs 300$ and is "pretty good" (but might need some updates later), would you be willing to spend 500$ for it to be "perfect"?
I think it´s normal to expect that products made and developed by multi million companies, that pay thousands even millions to their top employees, to work properly once they are released but apparently that´s too much to ask... And it seems i´m the only one that thinks this way...
And like i´ve said before, this remark isn´t directed to Ryzen only but to all products that seem released on a beta stage. From what i´ve read, Intel did the same some times including with their most expensive CPUs!...
As for the paying question, i´de rather pay more for a more mature/stable product than pay less for a product that still needs patches and whatever to finally work at 100%. For example, i´ve been using my current system since yesterday and so far everything is working like it should with the exception of the sound card, that´s starting to really annoy me...
But this is my opinion of course.
Na you're not the only one that thinks that way; I'm sure there's many like me that are silently watching the Ryzen release unfold per AMD's standard practice - release hardware early and probably before it's ready, and then issue patches and updates over the life of the product to bring it up to it's full potential. We see it with their graphics cards and we're seeing it now with Ryzen. They always seem to be one step behind the competition, so they rush out the hardware before it's been fully validated and then users spend the next several months getting improvements. I give them credit for still working on the software/firmware side after release, but it's certainly a pattern I've seen for a decade or more.
I don't really care one way or another, I have no allegiance to one brand over another. I do find it interesting that so many are willing to defend AMD, to the point that they're calling motherboard manufacturers lazy because they have to wait for AMD's microcode update before they can push a BIOS update. You can't blame motherboard mfg's for not pushing out BIOS updates when the CPU mfg is in the process of putting out a microcode update. They need to validate the BIOS against the new update before they can release it, otherwise it may brick everyone motherboard.
There was issues with DDR3 memory controllers early on. There were issues with DDR2 memory controllers early on as well. There was even issues with RDRAM memory controllers as well. No memory technology has been perfect out of the gate.
The fact that Ryzen supports DDR4 that's JEDEC compliant means there technically isn't an issue with their memory controller. JEDEC sets the maximum speed for DDR4 at 2400mhz. Anything beyond 2400mhz is not JEDEC compliant.
It's almost as if you're implying that Ryzen users should just shut up and be happy with 2400mhz DDR4, whereas Intel guys can run in excess of 4000mhz DDR4. It would be a little bit alibistic if you were suggesting that.
Not saying that at all. Just pointing out facts. People just need to be patient while AMD and motherboard makers work out bugs.
That doesn't change the fact that AMD is only responsible for ensuring that their memory controller is JEDEC compliant, as is Intel. Neither has any responsibility for ensuring that non-JEDEC compliant memory works. At the same time, memory makers are only going to push speeds as far as the memory controllers and memory chips will allow. It is in the best interest of AMD to allow their memory controllers to run beyond JEDEC specified memory speeds though being that Intel does and the Zen architecture appears to be heavily bandwidth starved.
I'm planning a new build around a Zen based APU once they're released. If it can't run at least DDR4 3200, I won't waste my money. Anything slower will just choke the APU to death. I'm expecting DDR4 3200 to be the minimum for Zen based APUs for reasonable performance.
That's an extreme far fetch considering what you quoted was stating something about AMD that is also the same with Intel. Of which both systems had their problems in the beginning, and therefore both systems are the same, yet people are stating they are not. They are hounding on AMD for its infancy period and giving absolutely no recollection of Intels infacy periods on new chipsets and designs, let alone massively overhauled designs.
So, seems the clocks are not any better then Ryzen 7 even when overclocking. As most expected.
I wasn't waiting for this CPU to replace mine like I was with Ryzen 7, but it's still disappointing for another CPU to come out and still no proper replacement. Itching to get a proper CPU upgrade.
That being said, this CPU has a fantastic 'bang for the buck' for new system builders on a budget.
As someone else mentioned, even Skylake had issues with the DDR4 memory controller in the beginning. My MSI Z170A Gaming Pro has had several updates for memory issues over the last 1.5 years. Once the issues with the new memory controller get worked out, things get better. If you're going to buy into new tech, you need to have patience while issues get ironed out.
Main thing that turned me off ryzen, aside from the teething problems, were bricked boards a few were were reporting due to rushed bios updates. Last thing I need is down time. Didnt care one bit about performance differences of KL vs ryzen or its multi-core superiority or the better gaming performance of 7700k. Main criteria was a rock solid platform to move to, performance was secondary since both were capable in every area for my needs.
There are things to consider.
1st, there was no bad BIOS which would brick MB.
2nd is that updating BIOS while overclocking and having memory OC into unstable region will result in corrupted flash on any board. (And big portion of people do not realize this.)
3rd, Ryzen is perfectly stable within its base parameters. So you could have it sitting on default BIOS provided at time, with your 3200MHz CL14 memory sitting at 2666MHz and use perfectly stable system till stuff gets ironed out on higher memory speeds.
4th, there are boards with internal "bootloader" which boots before BIOS and you can recover from bad flash. MSI even has function which allows you to load BIOS from Flash Drive to test its features and stability before you flash it.
Considering Guru3D just yesterday released a review of 3200MHz memory on Ryzen, I'd say it's alright for any buyer to blame the mobo manufacturer if their mobo can't do that. Assuming they didn't buy the cheapest mobo from the selection. If other manufacturers' mobos can do it, it'd be quite reckless for one manufacturer to keep sitting on their hands waiting for microcode updates for who knows how long.
Wrong. CH6 BIOS up to 0902 was flawed and could physically corrupt the EC due to high voltage. And this did not happen during flashing while overclocked, rather randomly. There were people running their PCs for a few days and then waking up to a PC with a dead board the next day. This has been confirmed by ASUS reps in the CH6 thread at overclock.net, citing:
A lot of help that did for chispy...
That was the clincher. Maybe a non-issue now, but again performance-wise I could flip a coin between KL and ryzen. Only thing that mattered to me is rock solid stability and no extra time wasted fiddling around with issues, minor or not.
My experience with the Ryzen platform has been pretty much problem free. It took a fair bit of research beforehand when buying my parts but I was able to reach 3200MHz C14 out of the box without issue. My system has been rock stable and a pleasure to work with. I see no reason why the R5 line would be any different.