how to overclock my 3200mhz ram

P

Phlorge

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
507
Hello - I am looking for some help.. from what I understand the RAM I bought doesn't automatically clock to 3200mhz out of the box even though my skylake computer supports it. I have no idea what to do in order to overclock the RAM. I know how to increase the speed to 3200 mhz but was getting some crashes and aren't sure what settings to change to make it stabel.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0143UM4TC/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1

this is the ram I bought.

I have a ASUS Hero VIII Mobo
6700k

Appreciate any help I can get
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
the ram never clocks. its a slave to the memory controller.. the memory controller... well controls the memory and decides its speed.
if you are getting crashed you issues might be that you memroy controller just dont want to run that speed. you CPU is only offical certiied to run memmroy at 2133 mhz and anything above that is overclocking your memory controlle on the CPU.
so you might want to see if you mobo can provide increase voltage to you IMC ( intergrated memory controller). but expect to probably have to lower you memory speed to 2400mhz
 
SvenBent said:
the ram never clocks. its a slave to the memory controller.. the memory controller... well controls the memory and decides its speed.
if you are getting crashed you issues might be that you memroy controller just dont want to run that speed. you CPU is only offical certiied to run memmroy at 2133 mhz and anything above that is overclocking your memory controlle on the CPU.
so you might want to see if you mobo can provide increase voltage to you IMC ( intergrated memory controller). but expect to probably have to lower you memory speed to 2400mhz
Click to expand...


I see.. so officially this is a CPU limitation ? does kaby lake support higher ram speeds?

do you know what I should increase my IMC to?
 
Step 1 - Load the XMP profile in the BIOS. That should pull the factory OC settings and set the memory up for that speed automatically.

Most "high performance" memory will default to much lower settings to ensure compatibility.
 
#3
Correct you ram is teste to run 3200mhz but the memory controller is not.

i haven o die how much voltage to give to your imc. my systme does not provide me that option for me to paly with sadly

my 2400mhz DDR3 ram i have to run at 2133 :(

oh you might wanna check that you have the right voltage set. high speed memroy tends to take more memory than the default. maybe try just one notch higher than specified for the memory and see if it helps
 
Bandalo said:
Step 1 - Load the XMP profile in the BIOS. That should pull the factory OC settings and set the memory up for that speed automatically.
Click to expand...
He has already set the speed correct speed for it according to #1
 
SvenBent said:
He has already set the speed correct speed for it according to #1
Click to expand...

If he set it manually, then there's no way to tell if he set all the various timing elements properly. I'd think it would make sense to ensure he's at a good starting position before tweaking voltages. He should NOT have to tweak anything outside the XMP profile if he's just trying to achieve the "rated" OC on that memory.
 
Bandalo said:
If he set it manually, then there's no way to tell if he set all the various timing elements properly. I'd think it would make sense to ensure he's at a good starting position before tweaking voltages. He should NOT have to tweak anything outside the XMP profile if he's just trying to achieve the "rated" OC on that memory.
Click to expand...
Correct. I did assume that.

on the other hand some times tweaks are needde besides setting XMP profile because you are overclocking the IMC. most of the times OC one step it works fine but multiple steps can ( not always) give issues.
 
Bandalo said:
Step 1 - Load the XMP profile in the BIOS. That should pull the factory OC settings and set the memory up for that speed automatically.

Most "high performance" memory will default to much lower settings to ensure compatibility.
Click to expand...

ah so I just changed the frequency before to 3200

I just loaded the XMP and it put it at 3200 with 1.35v I think.. should I be good now
 
Phlorge said:
I just loaded the XMP and it put it at 3200 with 1.35v I think.. should I be good now
Click to expand...
fair chance
you have a good mb with a thick pcb this will help make it easier on the memory controller when running high ram speeds so i would be surprised if you had to tweak the VCCSA & VCCIO for that 3200 kit with slack timings
 
SvenBent said:
Correct. I did assume that.

on the other hand some times tweaks are needde besides setting XMP profile because you are overclocking the IMC. most of the times OC one step it works fine but multiple steps can ( not always) give issues.
Click to expand...

I agree, but in 99% of cases, the memory SHOULD reach it's factory overclock just by setting the XMP profile. If it doesn't, I'd get a new motherboard or RAM before I went to adjust anything else, since I'm not getting what I paid for "out of the box".

Manually setting voltages, frequencies and timing outside that is good when you're trying to push the memory or CPU beyond those basic OCs.
 
Bandalo said:
I agree, but in 99% of cases, the memory SHOULD reach it's factory overclock just by setting the XMP profile. If it doesn't, I'd get a new motherboard or RAM before I went to adjust anything else, since I'm not getting what I paid for "out of the box".

Manually setting voltages, frequencies and timing outside that is good when you're trying to push the memory or CPU beyond those basic OCs.
Click to expand...

But you ARE trying to push the CPU outside its rated speed when you add memory running are speed higher than the IMC is rated.

I cannot agree with the 99% when you are trying 2 steps or higher above the standard speed of the IMC.
aka 1600MHz rated IMC with 1866mhz memory OK pretty much just by enabling XMP
but 1600MHz rated IMC with 2400MHz memory No go without tweaking and then still a low percentage.
That is just my experience and what iIhear from around different forums.


And you ARE getting exactly what you paid for. An IMC that can run at 1600Mhz speed and memory at 2400MHz speed. That you combined two products that that are out of specs of each other is not the factories fault.
If you buy a fast SSD and combined in on a SATA1 controller you still think you didn't get what you paid "out of the box" because you can't run the SSD at full speed?
 
SvenBent said:
But you ARE trying to push the CPU outside its rated speed when you add memory running are speed higher than the IMC is rated.

I cannot agree with the 99% when you are trying 2 steps or higher above the standard speed of the IMC.
aka 1600MHz rated IMC with 1866mhz memory OK pretty much just by enabling XMP
but 1600MHz rated IMC with 2400MHz memory No go without tweaking and then still a low percentage.
That is just my experience and what iIhear from around different forums.


And you ARE getting exactly what you paid for. An IMC that can run at 1600Mhz speed and memory at 2400MHz speed. That you combined two products that that are out of specs of each other is not the factories fault.
If you buy a fast SSD and combined in on a SATA1 controller you still think you didn't get what you paid "out of the box" because you can't run the SSD at full speed?
Click to expand...

For this type of thing, I go by MB and RAM ratings. All the "good" motherboards out there will list support of RAM up to XXXX speed, say in this case they list 3200MHz. And then you buy a RAM kit that's listed at 3200Mhz. In that case, if I can't get to 3200Mhz with little-to-no effort besides setting the XMP profile, then I'd return one or both items. They were advertised with that support, and should provide that support. That's not true with CPUs, since neither the MB manufacturer or the CPU manufacturer will claim any overclock beyond the "rated speed".

It's not the same on the SATA / SSD side. In that case, the MB manufacturer never said the SATA port would run beyond SATA1 speeds. In the case of RAM speeds, all the big manufacturers CLEARLY advertise that their MB will support RAM speeds far above the officially listed Intel specs.
 
Bandalo said:
For this type of thing, I go by MB and RAM ratings. All the "good" motherboards out there will list support of RAM up to XXXX speed, say in this case they list 3200MHz. And then you buy a RAM kit that's listed at 3200Mhz. In that case, if I can't get to 3200Mhz with little-to-no effort besides setting the XMP profile, then I'd return one or both items. They were advertised with that support, and should provide that support. That's not true with CPUs, since neither the MB manufacturer or the CPU manufacturer will claim any overclock beyond the "rated speed".

It's not the same on the SATA / SSD side. In that case, the MB manufacturer never said the SATA port would run beyond SATA1 speeds. In the case of RAM speeds, all the big manufacturers CLEARLY advertise that their MB will support RAM speeds far above the officially listed Intel specs.
Click to expand...

You do realize the memory controller is not on the motherboard. it not just you motherboard and ram that has a speed rating for memory. it also you CPU.
so yes it is very much the same

you combined a products with one rated speed with its controller with a lower rated speed and say it factory fault they don't work at the high speed.
Whatever it is memory on a memory controller or storage on a storage controller. both have to support the communication speed. and in this case they dont.


It doesnt matter what the motherboard promises you. in this regards, thats only a promise on the motherboard. Your CPU still has a max rated speed for its MC and anything above that is overclocking your CPU's MC . aka taking over and beyond the promised speed.
That you don't check all the things involved in the situation does not make anyone elses fault than your own

againg the motherboard would be aking to the rating of the sata cable its just a connecter between the controller and the storage

soo:
Memory controller 1600mhz - Mother board 2400mhz - memory 2400mhxz
is the same as:
Storage controller SATA1 - Cable SATA3. SSD SATA3.

You combined it out of specs
 
SvenBent said:
You do realize the memory controller is not on the motherboard. it not just you motherboard and ram that has a speed rating for memory. it also you CPU.
so yes it is very much the same

you combined a products with one rated speed with its controller with a lower rated speed and say it factory fault they don't work at the high speed.
Whatever it is memory on a memory controller or storage on a storage controller. both have to support the communication speed. and in this case they dont.


It doesnt matter what the motherboard promises you. in this regards, thats only a promise on the motherboard. Your CPU still has a max rated speed for its MC and anything above that is overclocking your CPU's MC . aka taking over and beyond the promised speed.
That you don't check all the things involved in the situation does not make anyone elses fault than your own

againg the motherboard would be aking to the rating of the sata cable its just a connecter between the controller and the storage

soo:
Memory controller 1600mhz - Mother board 2400mhz - memory 2400mhxz
is the same as:
Storage controller SATA1 - Cable SATA3. SSD SATA3.

You combined it out of specs
Click to expand...

I do realize the memory controller is built into the CPU. I also know exactly what the MB advertised, and exactly what the memory kit advertised. If they can't match what they advertised, then they're going back to the store and I'll get something different. I wouldn't return the CPU, but I would return the memory and/or motherboard.

I fully understand the ratings and how they relate to the CPU. I've never personally seen or read about an Intel CPU that's had this hypothetical situation you're talking about though, every one I've seen with memory speeds not reaching the claimed factory OC values have been caused by bad MBs or bad memory. NEVER a bad CPU. The CPU has a rated speed, and the MB manufacturer, by their advertising and listed specs, is giving you a promise you can exceed that rating.

This is a promise from ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI or whoever and Corsair, Kingston, Crucial, or whoever. NOT Intel and you.
 
Bandalo said:
I do realize the memory controller is built into the CPU. I also know exactly what the MB advertised, and exactly what the memory kit advertised. If they can't match what they advertised, then they're going back to the store and I'll get something different. I wouldn't return the CPU, but I would return the memory and/or motherboard.

I fully understand the ratings and how they relate to the CPU. I've never personally seen or read about an Intel CPU that's had this hypothetical situation you're talking about though, every one I've seen with memory speeds not reaching the claimed factory OC values have been caused by bad MBs or bad memory. NEVER a bad CPU. The CPU has a rated speed, and the MB manufacturer, by their advertising and listed specs, is giving you a promise you can exceed that rating.

This is a promise from ASUS, Gigabyte, MSI or whoever and Corsair, Kingston, Crucial, or whoever. NOT Intel and you.
Click to expand...

The promise what the board can do it. Not what the CPU can do i don't know why you don't understand that. please show my anywhere where the board specifies this promise is about the CPU and not the board they are advertising for otherwise you are just going on wishfull thinking here
What do you mean by you have never read about this hypothetical situations... The rating is in the Intel ARK for a reason.
and you might not have seen it but it does not mean it does not happen. trying to proving something negative is a false way of proving something, as you cant prove a negative.

Tons of time eve seen increasing the IMC voltage help and solved the issues because the IMC is beeing overclocked out of specs. and its a advice generally given
http://www.overclock.net/t/1562680/cant-run-2400mhz-memory-on-higher-than-1333mhz-with-sandy-bridge

or to quote Anandtech
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6372/...333-to-ddr32400-on-ivy-bridge-igp-with-gskill
"We could plug at DDR3-2666 kit into a Sandy Bridge system, but the memory controller would refuse to run at 2666 MHz. However, take the same motherboard and an Ivy Bridge processor, and the memory should be able to work. "
Because again i in this situations its the freaking IMC not the motherboard that wouldbe the issue.


anyway its pointless to continue this debate and its not helping the OP at all whatever you think motherboard manufacturers gives promises on something they cant control or just about their own product.
 
I disagree with the above viewpoint and I actually don't think people hold the memory manufacturers with enough responsibility for this issue.

Your final achievable speeds on the memory will be dependent on the CPU, Motherboard and Memory. The more marginal any one of those aspects are the more "stress" is placed on the others is to be able to handle an above spec configuration.

Intel likely builds a huge amount of buffer in terms of reliability testing for their CPU but how much testing and margins are built into Motherboards and Memory? I would be extremely interested in how the memory manufactures actually qualify specific kits for certain speeds. From what I remember there was mentions (this is from years ago though) that not all the major memory manufactures even have hardware testing in place to qualify over JEDEC standard memory kits.

Especially since it is the memory manufacturers that are directly advertising these speeds. So they need to specifically say what hardware setup their product is qualified for. If they do not build enough tolerances into their product to achieve advertised speeds at those settings that is their responsibility. Either build in margins and higher price or accept more RMAs.
 
Last edited:
you also need to be careful when looking at mb max rated ram speed that they advertise as when you look at there qvl sometimes the only ram that reaches that 3866mhz speed is a single 4gb stick
2x4g only manages 3466
2x8g single sided only manages 3200
and double sided\dual ranked dimms are 3000mhz and below
 
limitedaccess said:
I disagree with the above viewpoint and I actually don't think people hold the memory manufacturers with enough responsibility for this issue.

Your final achievable speeds on the memory will be dependent on the CPU, Motherboard and Memory. The more marginal any one of those aspects are the more "stress" is placed on the others is to be able to handle an above spec configuration.

Intel likely builds a huge amount of buffer in terms of reliability testing for their CPU but how much testing and margins are built into Motherboards and Memory? I would be extremely interested in how the memory manufactures actually qualify specific kits for certain speeds. From what I remember there was mentions (this is from years ago though) that not all the major memory manufactures even have hardware testing in place to qualify over JEDEC standard memory kits.

Especially since it is the memory manufacturers that are directly advertising these speeds. So they need to specifically say what hardware setup their product is qualified for. If they do not build enough tolerances into their product to achieve advertised speeds at those settings that is their responsibility. Either build in margins and higher price or accept more RMAs.
Click to expand...

If the memory can not run the speed it would indeed be an issue.
but if the memory can run at that speed but you gave no controller to can work at that speed its hardly the memory manufacturers problem.
they are advertising the speed for their memory. not other things you buy.

motherboard manufacturers advertise what the board can deliver
CPU manufacturers advertise what the part can deliver.
Lowest common denominator is what you will get

I don't get why people think memory is a special snowflake care where suddenly you are entitle to get promise on a product that never advertised said speed you wanted
"The USB thumb-drive manufacture promised USB3 speed and I am not getting it on my USB 2.0 motherboard... must be the thumb-drive manufactures fault...
 
SvenBent said:
The promise what the board can do it. Not what the CPU can do i don't know why you don't understand that. please show my anywhere where the board specifies this promise is about the CPU and not the board they are advertising for otherwise you are just going on wishfull thinking here
What do you mean by you have never read about this hypothetical situations... The rating is in the Intel ARK for a reason.
and you might not have seen it but it does not mean it does not happen. trying to proving something negative is a false way of proving something, as you cant prove a negative.

Tons of time eve seen increasing the IMC voltage help and solved the issues because the IMC is beeing overclocked out of specs. and its a advice generally given
http://www.overclock.net/t/1562680/cant-run-2400mhz-memory-on-higher-than-1333mhz-with-sandy-bridge

or to quote Anandtech
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6372/...333-to-ddr32400-on-ivy-bridge-igp-with-gskill
"We could plug at DDR3-2666 kit into a Sandy Bridge system, but the memory controller would refuse to run at 2666 MHz. However, take the same motherboard and an Ivy Bridge processor, and the memory should be able to work. "
Because again i in this situations its the freaking IMC not the motherboard that wouldbe the issue.


anyway its pointless to continue this debate and its not helping the OP at all whatever you think motherboard manufacturers gives promises on something they cant control or just about their own product.
Click to expand...

I'm not trying to get adversarial. I know exactly what the MB manufacturers claim, what the CPU manufacturer claims, and what the memory manufacturer claims. I'm not operating on "wishful thinking", I'm going by exactly how I would act in a real world scenario if it happened to me. I've personally built quite a few systems, and never had a memory kit fail to reach the advertised speeds, regardless of what rated memory speed for the CPU claimed.

While it's certainly possible that you might get a very poorly performing CPU which doesn't allow those "rated" OC memory speeds, I've honestly never seen it happen. Not saying it doesn't happen, just saying it's very rare. Rare to the point it'd be far more likely to be a MB or RAM kit problem rather than a CPU issue.

Both the motherboard manufacturers and the RAM manufacturers are well aware of all these facts, and they do plenty of their own testing, which is why they advertise those speeds in the first place. If they knew that 3000Mhz DDR4 kit would only hit 3000Mhz on SOME CPUs, they wouldn't sell them as a 3000Mhz kit, because they'd be raped on RMAs.

I'm not sure exactly what you're arguing at here. Are you saying that running any memory beyond what the listed speed on Intel ARK for your CPU is not valid and should be expected to fail? If so, does that mean the MB and Memory kit manufacturers should all be sued for false advertising?
 
Last edited:
Bandalo said:
I'm not sure exactly what you're arguing at here. Are you saying that running any memory beyond what the listed speed on Intel ARK for your CPU is not valid and should be expected to fail? If so, does that mean the MB and Memory kit manufacturers should all be sued for false advertising?
Click to expand...

Expectations can be whatever you want to be.
what i am saying is that running memory with a higher speed than Intels listed speed. is OC the IMC and just like any other clock you mileage my vary. and you are not guaranteed it.
We expect almost all I5 and I7 desktop CPU to easily go to 4.5+ but some get its to 5.1 some to 5.2 and it takes differences tweaks to get there.
But if you get a units that can only do 4.4 you are not entitled to that 4.5 even though you expected it its to deliver it. there was no promise anywhere from the intel to promise it could run that speed.
Simply the same foes for the IMC that is in the CPU.

Just because the IMC does not deliver 3200mhz speed. it is not a fault of the memory or the motherboard factory. Its simply that the IMC could not overclock to that speed.

That you feel entieeld to something else does not change how things works and works together
 
or just look into [H]'s IPC test of SB vs KL

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review
The ASUS P8Z68-V PRO/Gen 3 was up and running quickly, but try as we may to get our Corsair Dominator Platinum RAM rated at 2400MHz up to 2400MHz was not in the cards. The best RAM speed I could get with good stability was 2133MHz

The memory, we know from the review of them, is perfectly capable of running 2400MHz. but on this SB system the products its combined wit simply cannot follow up to that speed.
its not a memory fault its other parts of the system that is also affected by this speed that is not capable of running at that speed.

That is perfect inline with a lot of experience with running 2400MHz on sandy bridges with no luck but it works perfectly on ivory bridge because the newer IMC better handles the OC speed of the IMC. So again not a memory issues but an simple OC issue.


for reffrence
Sandy bridge is 1333MHz official cap on memory speed for the IMC
Ivory bridge is 1600MHz Official cap on memory speed IMC
 
SvenBent said:
Expectations can be whatever you want to be.
what i am saying is that running memory with a higher speed than Intels listed speed. is OC the IMC and just like any other clock you mileage my vary. and you are not guaranteed it.
We expect almost all I5 and I7 desktop CPU to easily go to 4.5+ but some get its to 5.1 some to 5.2 and it takes differences tweaks to get there.
But if you get a units that can only do 4.4 you are not entitled to that 4.5 even though you expected it its to deliver it. there was no promise anywhere from the intel to promise it could run that speed.
Simply the same foes for the IMC that is in the CPU.

Just because the IMC does not deliver 3200mhz speed. it is not a fault of the memory or the motherboard factory. Its simply that the IMC could not overclock to that speed.

That you feel entieeld to something else does not change how things works and works together
Click to expand...

You are misrepresenting my words here.

If a CPU vendor advertised that I WOULD get a 4.5Ghz OC, and I didn't, then I would rightfully be upset and entitled to a refund.

If a MB manufacturer and a memory kit were advertised as reaching 3200Mhz with a given CPU and they didn't make it, then I would rightfully be upset and entitled to a refund.

Intel to my knowledge has never guaranteed or advertised a CPU overclock level. They will only advertise base and turbo speeds.

The point I'm making is NOT that you're overclocking the memory controller, I'm well aware of that. The point I'm making is in the ADVERTISING. If ASUS and Corsair are going to tell me a motherboard with 3200Mhz memory listed, a 3200Mhz kit on their QVL, and specific XMP profiles designed for 3200Mhz, any customer should expect to reach 3200Mhz, and if not, they would be rightfully upset and entitled to a refund.
 
Bandalo
You just still don't get it. and there is no way i can explain it to you any simplier that when you build a system you ere the one responsible for paring up the parts .
You keep thinking its the memory even though it is not.
Its futile for me to try to educate you on how basic computer parts work.
 
SvenBent said:
or just look into [H]'s IPC test of SB vs KL

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2017/01/13/kaby_lake_7700k_vs_sandy_bridge_2600k_ipc_review
The ASUS P8Z68-V PRO/Gen 3 was up and running quickly, but try as we may to get our Corsair Dominator Platinum RAM rated at 2400MHz up to 2400MHz was not in the cards. The best RAM speed I could get with good stability was 2133MHz

The memory, we know from the review of them, is perfectly capable of running 2400MHz. but on this SB system the products its combined wit simply cannot follow up to that speed.
its not a memory fault its other parts of the system that is also affected by this speed that is not capable of running at that speed.
Click to expand...

This is NOT an example that supports your case. According to the documentation on the P8Z68-V PRO/Gen 3, it does not support anything over 2133Mhz for memory. So that directly supports MY point, that the MB manufacturer never said that MB would support 2400Mhz regardless of memory or CPU/IMC.
 
Bandalo said:
This is NOT an example that supports your case. According to the documentation on the P8Z68-V PRO/Gen 3, it does not support anything over 2133Mhz for memory. So that directly supports MY point, that the MB manufacturer never said that MB would support 2400Mhz regardless of memory or CPU/IMC.
Click to expand...

just like the CPU said they never supported more than 1333mhz. get why you don thinksthe CPU is not a part of it when it has the MC.
Again this is futile debate. You refuse to understand the 3 elements of the memory subsystem. that fine you go with that.


im more curious about if OP got his issues solved with his memory
 
SvenBent said:
Bandalo
You just still don't get it. and there is no way i can explain it to you any simplier that when you build a system you ere the one responsible for paring up the parts .
You keep thinking its the memory even though it is not.
Its futile for me to try to educate you on how basic computer parts work.
Click to expand...

One, don't be a dick, I'm having a discussion here, and I'm not looking for your education. I've been doing this computer stuff for a couple decades now, and I'm pretty sure I have the basics down.

Two, it's not JUST the memory, it's the memory, the MB, and the specific frequency dividers and base memory clock inside the CPU. My point is simply if your motherboard lists support for a specific speed, and the memory kit lists that speed, a consumer should EXPECT to get that speed.

Unless you're saying I shouldn't expect to get wait I paid for in terms of memory speed. In which case every motherboard and memory maker out there is ripe for a HUGE class-action lawsuit for false advertising.
 
SvenBent said:
just like the CPU said they never supported more than 1333mhz. get why you don thinksthe CPU is not a part of it when it has the MC.
Again this is futile debate. You refuse to understand the 3 elements of the memory subsystem. that fine you go with that.


im more curious about if OP got his issues solved with his memory
Click to expand...

He did when he set the XMP profile like I said. Oddly getting exactly what he paid for, which you seem to be opposed to.
 
You keep making up more and more stuff. please continue your fantasy stories.
But glad to see it worked for the OP
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top