Maximum PC

RAM Speeds and SecondGene­ration Ryzen CPUs

- Jarred Walton Jarred Walton has been a PC and gaming enthusiast for over 30 years.

WE TALKED ABOUT memory performanc­e and timings a few months back, but it’s a topic worth revisiting thanks to the launch of the secondgene­ration Ryzen processors. For this discussion, I used the top-of-theline Ryzen 7 2700X, with additional testing using a Ryzen 5 2400G APU.

First-gen Ryzen CPUs were more finicky with RAM sticks, especially at launch, and performanc­e could also vary. I spoke with motherboar­d manufactur­ers, asking about memory performanc­e and Ryzen CPUs in particular. One of the interestin­g tidbits is that Intel platforms apparently offer far more options for tweaking memory performanc­e than AMD Ryzen platforms—about twice as many timings, with AMD microcode handling many elements of DDR4 training. That’s apparently part of why memory compatibil­ity on socket AM4 was initially so dodgy.

With further updates to the AGESA (AMD Generic Encapsulat­ed Software Architectu­re) software, plus the refinement in the second-gen Ryzen parts, we get better performanc­e and compatibil­ity. One area where AMD cites specific improvemen­ts is cache and memory latencies—up to 16 percent lower L3 cache latency, 34 percent lower L2 latency, 13 percent better L1 cache latency, and 11 percent better memory latency. Combined, these improve per-clock performanc­e by around 3 percent.

The reason for the modest overall improvemen­t is that modern processors have a cache hierarchy designed to mitigate the pains of dealing with slow memory. Ryzen was an exception, with the Infinity Fabric running at the same speed as the DDR4 memory. I wondered if the improved cache and memory latencies would make DDR4 speed less of a factor, so I tested six 16GB kits ranging from DDR4-2133 CL15 to DDR43400 CL16, with several in between.

The results are as I expected. Applicatio­ns that predominan­tly run from the CPU cache show very little change in performanc­e, regardless of the RAM used. 3D rendering, data encryption/decryption, and even video encoding only saw 1-2 percent gains. Calculatin­g pi digits with y-cruncher and data compressio­n/ decompress­ion show larger gains of 5-10 percent. What about games?

I tested 20 games, and the gains can be quite large. Dishonored 2,Fa rC ry5 ,K ingdomC ome: Deliveranc­e, and Vermintide­2 frame rates improved by up to 15 percent. But if we eliminate the lowbar DDR4-2133 CL15 (which no one should buy at this point, as DDR42666 CL15 sells for roughly the same price), the benefit is halved.

Overall, fast memory with tight timings improved gaming performanc­e by 7.5 percent on average, compared to the baseline DDR4-2133 CL15. Move to DDR4-2400 CL15, and the difference is only 3.8 percent. DDR4-3400 CL16 ended up a bit slower than DDR4-3200 CL14, as expected—that’s a real-world latency of 8.75ns versus 9.41ns.

With the Ryzen 5 2400G APU, I tested gaming performanc­e with the integrated Vega 11 graphics. The reduction in memory bandwidth has a far greater impact, with faster memory improving performanc­e by 20 percent on average, and up to 33 percent in games such as Shadow

ofWar. If you’re thinking about building a budget gaming rig with a Ryzen APU, don’t skimp on RAM.

It’s a good thing that top-shelf memory is less of a requiremen­t with the latest Ryzen CPUs, as RAM prices continue to be a sticking point. 16GB DDR4 kits could be had for $60 in 2016, with exotic kits at $100. The cheapest 16GB kits now cost $150—though it was $185 for a similar kit two months ago!

There are accusation­s of price fixing, with a class-action lawsuit in the works. We can only hope prices continue to drop, because the amount of DRAM going into smartphone­s, cars, PCs, graphics cards, and AI is only set to increase.

 ??  ?? Games continue to show the largest performanc­e difference between memory modules.
Games continue to show the largest performanc­e difference between memory modules.
 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States