i7-9700kf, really slow memory access

Joined
Dec 13, 2002
Messages
1,002
image_2020_01_16T18_49_40_320Z.png


So some of those are blanked out since I have a trial version (above image is my machine), and my mem latency and bandwidth seem really low compared to what this CPU is suppose to do. Performance is low too, I'm only getting 206 single threaded in R15. I've looked at the review over at guru3d and saw their memory results (below) the gap seems like it probably explains the R15 results. But I have no idea what could effect L1 and L2 speed, much less the latency gap to main memory.

cachemem.png


My settings are all either the same or faster yet I have what appears to be roughly a 20% decrease in memory performance.
 

Shikami

Gawd
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
688
Have you tried non-overclock with the normal operation with Speed Shift handling things?
 
Joined
Dec 13, 2002
Messages
1,002
Have you tried non-overclock with the normal operation with Speed Shift handling things?
Yes I have, the initial results from booting with defaults were also below expected values, I didn't try running the AIDA64 at stock, but cinebench r15 was giving me a singlethreaded score of like 189. Eveywhere I look says cinebench R15 should be in the 210-220 range even at stock speed.
 

tangoseal

[H]ardForum Junkie
Joined
Dec 18, 2010
Messages
8,262
Update to latest Bios and then hard reset your bios after flashing.

Then use default settings, auto overclocking, and do not change voltages or anything. Use only XMP for your ram. Then boot and see what is happening. Sometimes someting in bios gets fuckered up and can cause a degradation in performance.Even a much lower or higher setting that you have no way to access through the human machine interface of Bios. That is why it is pertinent to update to latest bios (microcode) and do a hard reset each time you do a flash.

A hard reset is physically toggling the DIP switch or removing battery or shorting the jumper if so equipped.
 

vick1000

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 15, 2007
Messages
1,973
49397787707_64ece47557_o.png
cachemem by Tim Vickers, on Flickr

My 9600K matches the 3DGuru results pretty much. I was curious, but it looks like the two SKUs are different. Maybe like said above, some BIOS related memory settings are funky.
 
Last edited:

Shikami

Gawd
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
688
Honestly I haven't installed it since its initial carnations; I am talking about the mid 90's. Memory testing in Windows will not be very consistent due to prefetching, caching, and other OS mechanisms. However, in the name of "Science!" I was curious.

Gigabyte Z390 Auros Pro Wi-Fi (F10 EFI)
9900K, MCE disabled, and no overclock.
GSkill F4-2666C15-16GVR 15-15-15 2T (Dual Rank)


The difference between our systems are:
Obiwansotti's processor 9700KF, and memory 3200 16-18-18 2T (Unknown Rank)
Vick1000's processor 9600K, and memory 3224 16-18-18 2T (Unknown Rank)
Shikami's processor 9900K, and memory 2666 15-15-15 2T Dual Rank



Posting my first results. To note, I ran this five times with a reboot for the last 3. I also used HWiNFO64 to watch clocks and also see C-States. I noticed that the northbridge did not always "report" the proper 4300clk, and that also the L2 write would fluctuate. This would most likely be due to C-States, and still similar. One thing that I noticed is that your memory might not be using XMP because it is similar to mine, and that you may still be on a beta. Gigabyte, correct? The alpha by the numeric is usually beta notation. Perhaps check up on firmware and memory configuration. Firmware though can create a whole new issue with your overclocking.

 
Joined
Dec 13, 2002
Messages
1,002
I booted into safe mode to run a few of the benchmarks, and got "normal" results, so it must have been something with my windows install.

Blanked the drive and reinstalled and it's working well now. Somthing must have been running in the background.
 
Top