ASUS Striker 2 Extreme + 2 pairs of TW3X4G1333C9DHX

[dtsormpa]

Hi guys. I have recently build a new system. The system is very stable. However the thing is that, although the memory reads 1333MHz 9-9-9-24 in the box, in the BIOS runs only at 1067MHz 9-10-10-27. I tried manually increasing the frequency, by syncing the RAM with the processor, and setting the timings at 9-9-9-24. But the system then freezes at "DET DRAM" - I hit reset and then it goes back to the old settings (as it is supposed). I have the 1104 BIOS. I didn't tamper with any voltages (all settings in that field are set to AUTO).

 

I want to set the ram at 9-9-9-24, at 1333MHz and I'm not an experienced overclocker. Can someone help me with the settings that I should use? There were suggestions in ASUS forum that I should configure the NB and SB voltages and memory voltages. How much exactly?

 

If I'm gonna run the CPU at an increased FSB (I would like to reach it at about 3.2-3.4 - now it runs on stock frequency 2.67GHz) how much can I configure the settings? Would the memory be able to run at 1600MHz with CL7?

 

Thanks

[Wired]

Moved to correct area.

 

Your motherboard's memory controller may not be able to handle 4 sticks @ full load, let alone OCing them.

[dtsormpa]

But I don't want to OC them. The stock timings of the RAM are 9-9-9-24 at 1333MHz. Plus the motherboard supports 8GB with 1800 and 2000MHz overclocked, and 1067, 1333, 1666Mhz. There is NO WAY it can't support the load.

[Wired]

You asked if the memory would be able to be run above their rated specs, so this is where the OC comment came from.

 

As for your motherboard, they say 8 GB, and those speeds, but not 8 GB AT those speeds.

[dtsormpa]

So at THE RATED specs which are 1333MHz 9-9-9-24, what kind of settings should I have (memory voltage, nb and sb voltage etc)?

[RAM GUY]

So at THE RATED specs which are 1333MHz 9-9-9-24, what kind of settings should I have (memory voltage, nb and sb voltage etc)?

 

You will want to set the memory voltage to 1.6-1.7v (the exact value will be listed on the memory label). I would try the modules one pair at a time and make sure they do not cause any problems when running 2 of them in the system. If both pairs work individually, but you have problems when running four modules together, then you may try bumping the northbridge voltage up to about 1.45-1.5v and see if that helps. Here is a helpful article that may help explain the limitations of using four modules in a system.

[dtsormpa]

So I checked the memory by pairs, and everything checked out. Then I set the voltage to 1.7 (it's the value that is on the modules) and the timings to 9-9-9-24 and 1333Mhz. At first it seemed to work, but when I run Sandra 2009 (memory bandwidth benchmark) it froze. I tried upping the NB voltage to 1.4 - 1.5 but still nothing. At some time I had to reset - the system booted just fine, and run the benchmark again at 9-9-9-24 and 1333MHz- one observation is that I didn't gain much from all this fuzz (from 6.5GB/sec, went to 6.89GB/sec). So I decided to reset to 1067MHz and 9-10-10-27.

 

Is that performance gain what I should have expected? It doen't seem much, compairing to 2GB referrence tests from Sandra that showed a bandwidth of 8.2GB/sec. Is this due to the 8GB of memory installed?

 

Another thing that I noticed is that the modules require 1.8-1.87V at this frequency and timings. Is this normal?

[dtsormpa]

Today I ran a different procedure, as follows:

 

- I installed only one 2GB module, set it to 9-9-9-24 at 1333 with 1.6V and worked (I set 1.6V because on the module reads 1.7 whereas in Corsair's page reads 1.6V). I benchmarked it with Sandra 2009 mem bandwidth. Tested OK and had a performance increase at 7GB/sec.

 

- I overclocked the processor to 3.0GHz, but kept the memory unlinked to 1333MHz (same timings as before). Benchmarked and gained another 0.2GB/sec.

 

- I lowered the timings to 8-8-8-21 at 1333, benchmarked and reached 7.5GB/sec with 3.0GHz.

 

- Installed another 2GB. The system froze at Windows boot logo. I increased the voltage to 1.66V. Booted and sustained 7.5GB/sec at Sandra.

 

- Installed another 2GB with 1.7V (at 1.66 the system didn't boot). Sustained the benchmark but froze on Crysis Warhead. I set the timings to 9-9-9-24. Froze again on Crysis Warhead.

 

- Finally installed the last 2GB with AUTO voltage 1050MHz (set by system when I manually set 1066) at 9-9-9-24. Again froze on Crysis. Fed up and set everything to AUTO. System more stable than Ovelix's menir.

 

All the tests were done with AUTO voltage for NB. I can't understand why on AUTO can't acquire the voltage that it needs, and I have to manually increase it. Whatever. I will run however memtest (i have it on a CD - 2.01 I think) during night. Any recommended settings for that? I will post results tomorrow.

 

PS: my BIOS is 1104. Should I return to 1002 or 0901? The motherboard shipped with 05... something.

[RAM GUY]

With 4 modules I would suggest setting the memory frequency at DDR1066 and set the memory Voltage to 1.7-1.90 Volts and set the NB/MCH/SPP Voltage to +.2 Volts as well and test the system with http://www.memtest.org. In addition, with some MB's (Mostly ASUS) you have to disable legacy USB in the bios when running any memory test.

[dtsormpa]

With 4 modules I would suggest setting the memory frequency at DDR1066 and set the memory Voltage to 1.7-1.90 Volts and set the NB/MCH/SPP Voltage to +.2 Volts as well and test the system with http://www.memtest.org. In addition, with some MB's (Mostly ASUS) you have to disable legacy USB in the bios when running any memory test.

 

All these settings, are set by default by the motherboard, without having to mess with any settings. At those settings the system is very stable. I can even set the memory at 9-9-9-24. I have already done that, and the memory automatically uses 1.82-1.86V. My original post was aiming at setting those timings (9-9-9-24) at 1333MHz, at which the system refuses to be stable, or boot. The NB voltage on AUTO, uses 1.38V.

[RAM GUY]

Then I am sorry but if its stable at DDR1066 that would be the suggested frequency for this part with 4 modules.

[DerekT]

Please research this thread:

 

http://www.houseofhelp.com/v3/showthread.php?t=64360&highlight=Unpredictable+results+QUAD2X4096+Gigabyte+X38-DS5

 

The issue is the memory controller and a population of all four banks at the full speed of a two bank run. This issue is across the board with both Nvidia and Intel chipset based boards, DDR, DDR2 and DDR3.

 

Keep in mind that often issues arise in the longer term. The issues seldom damage the DRAM. They damage the on motherboard memory controller which has a harder time keeping up with the demands of a four DRAM slot population being run as fast as a two DRAM slot population. Those who want to be secure in their system either purchase a single kit of the DRAM capacity that the four singles have or they move to a higher bandwidth DRAM and drop the bandwidth, which is what RAM GUY is advising. I also advise it as I have personally seen the issues that can and often do arise with a four DRAM slot population running at the full speed of a single kit speed.

 

You are now informed as to the possible issues that can and often do arise when you run a system with two kits of DRAM as fast as a single kit. Also, keep in mind, that there is no support from the motherboard manufacturers for a full bore population of four DRAM slots.

[dtsormpa]

As it seems, I will settle with 1067MHz at 9-9-9-24. I'm actually a little bit tired over the constant search over the internet, trying to find a sollution. However I wish the companies could start report on the specs of their products about such things.

[DerekT]

Just wondering. Do you really find a use for the 8GB? I have one machine that I work with on quite a few virtual machines and the 8GB is far more useful than speed on that box. Howerver, for multi-media, both playback and creation (encoding with multiplex of audtio/video), gaming, etc. I have personally found no use of the extra 4GB. You may find that the way to go is with 4GB at full bore.

 

I agree, the mainboard manufacturers should say "Support of 8GB at 800MHz", rather than Support of 8GB and 800Mhz. It leads to confusion.

[dtsormpa]

Just wondering. Do you really find a use for the 8GB? I have one machine that I work with on quite a few virtual machines and the 8GB is far more useful than speed on that box. Howerver, for multi-media, both playback and creation (encoding with multiplex of audtio/video), gaming, etc. I have personally found no use of the extra 4GB. You may find that the way to go is with 4GB at full bore.

 

I agree, the mainboard manufacturers should say "Support of 8GB at 800MHz", rather than Support of 8GB and 800Mhz. It leads to confusion.

 

The first thing is that I don't even need to think about whether I have enough memory. In the old days (when I was using 1GB 333MHz on a laptop Pentium 4) I used to open a program like maya or max, and didn't have enough room for anything else. Now I'm using about 120 processes just with opening windows, and the machine doesn't even blink. I can have simultaneously open Max, Maya, ZBrush, Photoshop, Illustrator, and Painter, and there is still room.

 

I guess if you are considering just the speed, then you're right - 8gigs are just an overhaul and 4gigs will get the job done. But having lags and crashes with 1gig of ram, and due to the nature of the software that I use, I preferred to play it safe - and the cost wasn't tremendous, just thing that I bought 2 4GB kits, for about 270 euros. I guess I'm always gonna wonder, if I had chosen a DDR2 motherboard, will thinks would be any different?

 

Still 7 - 7.5GB/sec is a respectable bandwidth for a system with 8GB.

[DerekT]

When it comes down to it, bandwidth increases greater than the mandatory 1:1 (With Intel) are small percentages, even when doubled. Given a 266Mhz FSB Processor and 533Mhz DRAM will bring you the 1:1 ratio. Given a 333Mhz FSB Processor and 667Mhz DRAM will bring you that 1:1 ratio. So, if you run with a 266Mhz FSB Processor and 1066Mhz DRAM, you are running a 1:2 ratio with the DRAM theoretically running twice as fast as the CPU. But that is only if the data bandwidth bank was fully populated at all times and it NEVER is at any time.

 

Think of it this way. If a four lane highway can populate 10,000 autos per hour at a given stretch we are given a theoretical population. If there are never more than 6,000 autos at any time and often even less, then the theoretical population is a moot point.

 

With DRAM there are movements that take place in the DRAM and through ECC can benefit from a faster speed than the CPU, but again, this is limited and minimal.

 

The percentage of increase between the 1:2 ratio is ~3 - 5 percent. Yes, that's all. The benchmark numbers are theoretical, not practical reality.

 

Now, given a quad core (or greater) with all four cores fully sharing the cache (which has yet to happen and with Nehalem will finally occur) there will be a need for faster DRAM speed than the parallel processing. Then there will be a saturation greater than 1:1, but for now, it's just not very necessary.