Any reason to go to 32GB of ram and is this the best ram to have?

[Xa3phod]

Hey folks. I have a Ryzen 3900x. I had ram from my Ryzen 1700 which I transferred over (G.SKILL Flare X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200).

Is this the best ram for the 3900x? and any speed boost from moving to 32GB and having all the dimms filled? I am not going to reinvest in a new CPU for a while, so I want to max out the performance of this cpu.

 

Thanks

[Guest]

Memory part number please.

[TheVirtualNomad]

Ryzen generally performs better with higher speed/lower cl latency ram, but you generally get diminishing returns at 3400/cl 16 and up

[Archerr]

You only need more ram for video editing / other work station applications, if you won’t be doing that it’s not necessary. But it’s a cool little flex.

[Arrogath]

9 minutes ago, Xa3phod said:

Hey folks. I have a Ryzen 3900x. I had ram from my Ryzen 1700 which I transferred over (G.SKILL Flare X Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 3200).

Is this the best ram for the 3900x? and any speed boost from moving to 32GB and having all the dimms filled? I am not going to reinvest in a new CPU for a while, so I want to max out the performance of this cpu.

 

Thanks

Technically ram clocked around 3600/3800 cl14 or cl16 would be around the top performance wise for Zen 2, but 3200 cl14 or cl16 will give you almost the same performance so it isn't worth spending extra unless you need that 0.1%. Do note that some Zen 2 infinity fabric doesn't like running over 1800, and you want 1:1 with your base mem clock so going above 3600 (1800 memclk doubled) probably isn't worth the tuning headache. There are a handful of reasons to run higher speed ram out of sync, but that's more of a memory benchmarking thing mostly from my knowledge.

In terms of 32 GB being worthwhile, technically it is better than 16 GB performance wise due to running 2 memory ranks per channel (single rank 16 GB sticks not withstanding). There is a noticeable performance difference in some tasks that benefit from more memory bandwidth. Depending on your usage you probably won't find yourself using all 32 GB on the 12 core, so it's more about bandwidth than quantity. Personally I've used most of my 32 GB on the 16 core when running some BOINC projects with SMT on

[Zando_]

2 minutes ago, Archerr said:

You only need more ram for video editing / other work station applications

And some games, or just really hefty multitasking. Honestly not too hard to push a system past 16GB used if you wanna, and even if you don't do it often the headroom is nice to have if money isn't an issue. 

As for filling all DIMM slots, I saw something about 5000 series Ryzens benefitting from that, for 3000 I don't think it makes a difference. 

[Arrogath]

8 minutes ago, TheVirtualNomad said:

Ryzen generally performs better with higher speed/lower cl latency ram, but you generally get diminishing returns at 3400/cl 16 and up

I can verify that the difference from 3200 cl14 to 3600 cl14 isn't really worth the price premium, I just bought the 3600 cl14 because it was the best I could get for Ryzen at the time and was running with a practically unlimited budget.

 

edit: I misremember 5000 info as 3000 info, the bump is smaller on 3000 but potentially still worthwhile if you feel like spending money I guess
Some tech channels have even tested with dual vs single rank comparing between higher and lower speeds and seen more of a performance bump from dual rank slower ram over single rank faster ram

[Chris Pratt]

The sweet spot for Zen 2 is 3600MHz because that lets the FCLK run at its stock max of 1800MHz. Anything slower technically leaves performance on the table, but how much you'll notice that depends entirely on how memory-bound your workloads are.

 

Having more RAM capacity does nothing for you unless you don't currently have enough, and are paging to the filesystem. If you already have enough RAM, adding more is pointless. However, there's some value in going to 32GB, aside from capacity, as that lets you get to 4 ranks, either from 2x16GB dual rank DIMMs or 4x8GB single ranked DIMMs. Having four total ranks is ideal for Ryzen, but it's not going to necessarily make or break your system one way or another. Again, you feel the most impact for heavily memory-bound workloads.

 

 

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Zando Bob said:

As for filling all DIMM slots, I saw something about 5000 series Ryzens benefitting from that, for 3000 I don't think it makes a difference. 

Any and all systems all the way back to ddr, certain applications/games can benefit from all slots populated, generally with a reduction of frequency. So it evens out.

 

I wouldn't run a Ryzen on anything less than 3600mhz 2x8 B-Die myself. So that's my suggestion. 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, Arrogath said:

I can verify that the difference from 3200 cl14 to 3600 cl14 isn't really worth the price premium,

 

I just bought the 3600 cl14 because it was the best I could get for Ryzen at the time and was running with a practically unlimited budget. Some tech channels have even tested with dual vs single rank comparing between higher and lower speeds and seen more of a performance bump from dual rank slower ram over single rank faster ram

No way

 

Some tech channels must have no idea how to optimize memory frequency and efficiency lol. (kidding) But rough testing on early bios released demo boards can sometimes do that. You guys really have to pay attention to all those variables honestly. 

 

Cause I can guarantee, 2x8gb performance over populating 4 slots at a measly 3200mhz.... the bandwidth is really lacking at that frequency. Probably sub 50GB a second read and write.... latency isn't everything.

[Mister Woof]

I wouldn't get 16 in 2021, but that's me. With how much RAM stuff takes nowadays in background apps, like RGB, etc., then adding in the fact many people multitask with multiple displays, 16 gets populated pretty fast.

[Jurrunio]

Then do you still care about staying good value? Imo your 3200MHz kit is below the point of balance between price and performance for me to recommend someone starting from scratch, but now that you already have the memory kit it's not so bad that I would say "replace it".

 

If you do use more memory than say, 15GB? Adding an extra 2 sticks can improve performance on their own, but then the XMP profile wouldnt work because you are no longer running one kit at a time so you would have to adjust frequency and timings yourself.

 

[Zando_]

27 minutes ago, ShrimpBrime said:

Any and all systems all the way back to ddr, certain applications/games can benefit from all slots populated, generally with a reduction of frequency. So it evens out.

 

I wouldn't run a Ryzen on anything less than 3600mhz 2x8 B-Die myself. So that's my suggestion. 

Ooooooo interesting. I didn't know there was a noticeable benefit unless you had a quad-channel capable system. 

[SupaKomputa]

35 minutes ago, Xa3phod said:

any speed boost from moving to 32GB and having all the dimms filled?

Not at all. But since ram are cheap, why not?

 

10 minutes ago, Mister Woof said:

16 gets populated pretty fast.

16gb is enough for the masses. At least for the near future.

I browse heavily (...lazy closing tabs actually ), coding while playing music. 
Opening multiple browser at the same time to test the code.

Never touch 16gb,  i use more than that only when video editing or playing sim games.

[Mister Woof]

7 minutes ago, SupaKomputa said:

Not at all. But since ram are cheap, why not?

 

16gb is enough for the masses. At least for the near future.

I browse heavily (...lazy closing tabs actually ), coding while playing music. 
Opening multiple browser at the same time to test the code.

Never touch 16gb,  i use more than that only when video editing or playing sim games.

There's enough infrequent use cases where 32gb makes sense (certain games, lots of dumb RGB apps, occasional video eliding, etc.) and people are doing more on their PC's these days than they ever used to - it used to be editing video and whatnot was the realm of the pros - but not anymore.

 

Getting a bit more than you need and not worrying about it ever again is not a bad piece of advice.

 

And if we're pairing it with a 3900x.....why wouldn't you want to pair it with extra memory? For sure you have extra cores. Or at least if you need those cores, the chances of needing the extra RAM increases.

 

In my opinion you should have 32gb in a premium system.

[Guest]

47 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

Ooooooo interesting. I didn't know there was a noticeable benefit unless you had a quad-channel capable system. 

Yes, there are some things that may fair well from dual channel and 4 sticks of memory. But really to populate that many slots for working, you're not in need to overclock. Redundancy is what you look for. Lower clocks, but the system memory to do lots of tasks ect. 

 

Triple over dual and Quad over triple channel. There's always more performance from having additional channels. But not necessarily from populating 4 slots on a dual channel board.

[Archerr]

Well for chrome

[Mister Woof]

I'd like to say that I saw a performance improvement going from 2x8 single rank to 4x8 dual rank, but it's all theoretical at this point. Even if there were gains, they were small enough that I'd need a benchmark before and after to tell.

 

But I see the theory and the explanation often enough - I believe it.