Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would run the ram at 2933 if you have an x370 motherboard. Some can handle 3200 fine, but my gigabyte board just refuses with my kit.Ok, running benchmarks. If you have any settings I should change, let me know.
In fact, you are 58MiB short of filling all of your 8GiB (8192MiB) of RAM. No doubt, the MS kernel scheduler is hard at work swapping out memory to disk (if not constantly, then at least in bursts). More RAM would certainly help smooth out your experience, but I couldn't say how much.In this screenshot, I am in the mid 60's. You can see the ram usage is over 8GB (8134MB). I have no other programs running, I am totally shocked.
Faster is better, but on a 1700x you probably wouldn't see much benefit beyond 3200, iirc even 2933 (or 3000) to 3200 isn't a big bump. That said, if you plan to upgrade to another ddr4 processor in the future, it doesn't hurt to go faster (well, other than your wallet). Though, I haven't looked at zen+ memory comparisons, so I can't say whether faster ram benefits it more than zen.Would you see any improvement from 16GB of 3000ram vs 16GB of 3200ram? Should I go as high as 4000Mhz ram? Will it show any improvement? 10% FPS is a lot.
Never! I want eye candy! Should I just get a 9900K?Also, start turning down the eye candy.
Never! I want eye candy! Should I just get a 9900K?
You don't need 16 GB but it is how the PC environment works. If the gpu has 8 GB then it will mirror in your normal ram allowing changes from ram to go 1:1 to the gpu. Without this the system would need to swap the last bit of addressable memory in order to perform.In this screenshot you can see I dropped to the mid 30's. GPU is at 73% @ 66C. The CPU is at 38% @ 45C. Ram usage is at 7890MB, which I am surprised about, but I guess you do need 16gigs to run a game.
It was an ok experience this time, didn't suck, but it wasn't as good as my 6700K. Would you see any improvement from 16GB of 3000ram vs 16GB of 3200ram? Should I go as high as 4000Mhz ram? Will it show any improvement? 10% FPS is a lot.
Also, @ 73% the vega 56 isn't bottle-necking, so what is the deal?? I overclocked the vega, I read about undervolting, but don't really know anything about it and I don't care about heat or power. (You can see both are well within safe parameters, if not cool and frosty).
You don't need 16 GB but it is how the PC environment works. If the gpu has 8 GB then it will mirror in your normal ram allowing changes from ram to go 1:1 to the gpu. Without this the system would need to swap the last bit of addressable memory in order to perform.
Never! I want eye candy! Should I just get a 9900K?
This would have annoyed me intensely.If more ram doesn't satisfy you, pull out your wallet and throw more GPU at it :-D
Personally, jumping from a 5930k to a 2700x (and I'm still fiddling with it), I've noticed that AMD is more picky with ram and the important thing - recycling my ram from my older x99 rig into my AMD build just doesn't work that well.
While I could run 3200 all day long with just an XMP bios toggle on my intel rig - since I don't have AMD specific ram - getting any of my DDR4 sets (Corsair Vegeance LPX, G Skill Ripjaw V and Crucial Ballistic Sport) to work well has been an experience.
This would have annoyed me intensely.
My LPX 3000 C15 ram (D-Die) runs at 3733MHz C17 in my Intel Maximus VIII board.
It wouldnt even reach 2600MHz fully stable in lesser motherboards, it needs a very good motherboard for memory.
AMD need to address this.
try giving it more juice, add .1v see if that helps. but also keep in mind that amd doesn't support as high of speeds as intel does and Ryzen 1 is finicky, so stick to the qvl. the 2000 series seems to be less picky from what ive read but I haven't had hands on yet...I'm also fairly annoyed with AMD's memory quirks. I can't get 4 sticks to run above 2933MHz regardless of what I do on a 1700x with X470. Here is to hoping they fix it with Zen2...
I'm also fairly annoyed with AMD's memory quirks. I can't get 4 sticks to run above 2933MHz regardless of what I do on a 1700x with X470. Here is to hoping they fix it with Zen2...
I'm also fairly annoyed with AMD's memory quirks. I can't get 4 sticks to run above 2933MHz regardless of what I do on a 1700x with X470. Here is to hoping they fix it with Zen2...
Overclocking is never a sure thing
I understand that, but from the last 8 Intel CPUs I've had these sticks with, I've never come across something so lame. AMD has a lot of ground to make up.
you might look into trying disabling certain number of cores "ryzen master app" and see if your cpu can clock higher even if its less cores...that game might not make use of many cores very well....ITs not the first time we have heard intel cpus handling large mmo type games but it also sounds like that games doesn't use the best coding . Me i would just turn the dam eye candy up even more to get the dam card running 100% usage one way or another or find a better game lolWell, just played a very large battle in Planetside 2. Huge. I was getting around 35FPS. Its not good. The CPU is good, but the 6700K is better at gaming, no buts about it. I don't do enough productivity to make it worth it. Dunno, its stable. running at 3.9Ghz. The ram is running real nicely. The GPU is well overclocked. Just not enough power to give me the FPS I want. I tried. I refuse to turn down the eye candy, because I don't need to with the Intel. What am I missing? I want it to work!
or it could be you were just unlucky with you oc on this cpu
judging AMD on one single CPU overclock seems to be really bad for anykind of conklussions
Tons of ppl are running 3200 so its not like its a trend.
Yes 3200, wow. I mean I have only been running the same 4 sticks of ram at 4133MHz on Intel (in both dual and quad channel). I can run it at 3333MHz with two sticks but I didn't try to go any higher. You're kidding yourself if you think AMD is anywhere close to being in the ram game here.
OK.. still does not really matter compared to that you are using a single example as a basis of conclusion.
No I'm using your statement saying tons of people are doing it. Yes mine sucks, but tons of people can't be wrong (even if it still sucks).
OK well as long as we agree your inital statement based on a single cpu test really is badly based I guess we are fine then
Well, I don't know what I'm doing wrong. It sucks at gaming.
Ryzen 1700 OC to 3.9Ghz
8 gigs DDR4-3200 (Some name brand, can't remember, but its good!)
2 SSD. One for OS one for games
R9-Fury X (I also tried a Vega 56).
Are there settings I am totally missing? I compare it to my I7 6700K OCed to 4.5Ghz with the same Vega 56.
The I7 just beats the pants off the Ryzen 1700. I am running a 75hz monitor, so I only need to max out 75fps, but the Ryen feels like a dud!
Yes 3200, wow. I mean I have only been running the same 4 sticks of ram at 4133MHz on Intel (in both dual and quad channel). I can run it at 3333MHz with two sticks but I didn't try to go any higher. You're kidding yourself if you think AMD is anywhere close to being in the ram game here.
Well, just played a very large battle in Planetside 2. Huge. I was getting around 35FPS. Its not good. The CPU is good, but the 6700K is better at gaming, no buts about it. I don't do enough productivity to make it worth it. Dunno, its stable. running at 3.9Ghz. The ram is running real nicely. The GPU is well overclocked. Just not enough power to give me the FPS I want. I tried. I refuse to turn down the eye candy, because I don't need to with the Intel. What am I missing? I want it to work!