AMD Ryzen – Single-Rank Versus Dual-Rank DDR4 Memory Performance

Jump To:

AMD Ryzen – Single-Rank Versus Dual-Rank DDR4 Memory Performance

After finishing up our DDR4 memory scaling article on an AMD Ryzen processor with an AMD X370 chipset powered board we were left wondering if memory performance and scaling was similar on different AMX X370 motherboards from different manufacturers. We gathered up the MSI X370 XPOWER GAMING TITANIUM ($299.99), GIGABYTE GA-AX370-Gaming 5 ($194.99) and ASUS ROG Crosshair VI Hero ($254.99) motherboards as the three boards that we were going to try out. Looking at the ‘big 3’ motherboard markers should give us a pretty good idea if there are any big differences to be had on memory.

When it comes to the memory kits we wanted to test with just two and then all four DIMM slots populated and we also needed to test with single-rank and dual-rank memory modules. Knowing that Samsung Rev B memory IC’s are said to do well on this platform we turned to Corsair Vengeance LPX memory kits and ended up getting the Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB (4x16GB) DDR4 3600MHz C18 ($669.99) for dual-rank testing and the Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB (4x8GB) DDR4 4000MHz C19 memory kit ($504.99) for single-rank testing. Both of these kits are overkill for the AMD X370 platform, but we’ll also use them down the road for testing on Intel platforms and hopefully Ryzen again if any performance improvements are ever unlocked.

AMD Ryzen X370 Motherboards and Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 Memory Kits

What $1,925 Worth of AMD X370 Boards and Corsair DDR4 DRAM Look Like!

So, we’ll test each of the three boards at 2133MHz, 2400MHz, 2666MHz, 2933MHz and 3200MHz DDR4 memory settings with the single-rank kit in 2-DIMM and 4-DIMM configurations and then again with the dual-rank configuration in 2-DIMM and 4-DIMM configurations. Easy right? Actually, that adds up to being 60 different testing configurations if we can hit those speeds for on each board. Times that by 3 and you’ll end up with a couple hundred data points per benchmark. Since, we’ve already tested a handful of benchmarks in our Ryzen DDR4 memory scaling article we’ll just be using AIDA64 this time around to catch any big differences between the boards.

Official Ryzen DDR4 Memory Support

Officially, AMD Ryzen platforms support the following memory configurations:

  • Dual-Rank w/ 4 DIMM: Up to 1866 MHz
  • Dual-Rank w/ 2 DIMM: Up to 2400 MHz
  • Single-Rank w/ 4 DIMM: Up to 2133 MHz
  • Single-Rank w/ 2 DIMM: Up to 2667 MHz

The good news is that we were able to exceed all of AMD’s specifications for Ryzen memory! Let’s take a look and see what we were able to come up with.

Print
Jump To:
1 2 3 4 5  Next »
  • Ivan

    The single rank memory should be listed as 16 GB for 2 DIMM and 32 GB for 4 DIMM. It is misleading as it is since single rank memory used for testing comes in 8 GB sticks.

  • Pat Gregory

    It would be interesting to revisit this with the updated bios

    • Nathan Kirsch

      That is in the works! It’s a pet project of mine, so trying to fit it in the free time.

  • David Smith

    So, at the AMD rated speeds, which gives better performance?

  • aces

    What is rank? Might be worth explaining that in the article and save me the google search.

  • pyroxide

    Was considering buying Ryzen 5 1600X when X300 ITX comes out but this article tells me that my ram (DDR4-3200 @ 14-14-14-34) is overkill.

  • ronch

    This is why I almost never buy stuff that just came out. Let them sort things out first then I’ll buy. Since my FX-8350 is still more than I need there’s really no rush for me to get Ryzen.

  • Terry Perry

    Made over a Million MB’s and then find out the Bios is Bad. Last week it was said 2-3 weeks and the new ones will be here. Not AMD fault just Poor Quality Control on the MB.

  • KeyboardG

    I’d love it if any of these motherboards were in stock. It’s been weeks.

    • Greg Bryett

      No idea where you live, however if in the USA Frys and Microcenter have stock, regardless of what their website says. I went down to Frys yesterday to replace my Gigabyte board with the MSI X370 and even though their website said backorder they have 4 on the shelves!!!

      • KeyboardG

        Near NYC. Closest Frys is 700+ miles away.

  • Greg Bryett

    Hey Nathan, another interesting deep dive in to memory on X370. Thanks.
    Do you know what type of memory my Ripjaws V F4-3200C16D-16GVKB is? I’m running 2 dimms and best I can get is 2933mhz on the MSI board to date. I assume that this memory is also Samsung rev B single rank like your Corsair….

    • Nathan Kirsch

      If you download AIDA64 and look under the motherboard sensor section at the memory/SPD tab it should tell you the brand and rank type! I also asked G.Skill, but likely won’t hear a response until next week as it is already 11pm on a Friday night there.

      • Greg Bryett

        Good idea about AIDA64. I’m just using CPU-Z currently.
        Cheers.

  • nallWhite

    Big 3? Some where a Biostar exec is crying.

    • Nathan Kirsch

      And ASRock and ECS 🙂 ASUS, Gigabyte and MSI are the big three enthusiast companies in terms of volume and availability.

    • Tiberius Jonez

      I got the Biostar X370GT7 – it had the best power/phase setup of all the boards available – it’s built like a tank! – with 32GBs of Corsair Vengeance LPX 2666 OC’d to 3200 – everything is running smooth. My 1700X is running at 3.8 at stock volts, and I’ve been nothing but happy with the board so far. ;0-)

      • nallWhite

        I’m waiting for the GT3’s to show up.

      • nallWhite

        I may pick that one up. Thanks.

        • Tiberius Jonez

          Yeah, I ended up having problems with the Biostar board. Settled on the Gigabyte GA-AX370 Gaming 5 and it has been outstanding. Better feature set, Gigabyte’s support is MUCH better, and the stability has been much better all around. Much better option. And the audio is amazing! Just make sure you get Flare X ram if you want to be GUARANTEED to have your memory run at 3200mhz. Otherwise you’ll likely top out at 2933.

        • nallWhite

          I’ll keep that in mind. Thanks.

  • Stop AMD

    More useless compute, now with Mantle and AMD. AMD does not care about top of the line core operation, however they focus more on duplicating cores. This measure will lower battery life to 6 hours and could lower reliability with its computer. Problem computing mean adding too many non-reliable cores which does not equal innovation. DirectX 12 and new GPU apis also tolerate more inventions and reliable graphics performance than Mantle.

    Go with core i5 or i7 now because it’s best

    • You must be the biggest idiot around!

    • KeyboardG

      Do you just have this reply saved in notepad and go around pasting it on AMD articles?

    • Ken Hodson

      This isn’t even trolling, it borderlines on mental illness.

    • SteelCrysis

      This is really old. Mantle is dead now.

      • Tiberius Jonez

        Who’s talking about Mantle… Mantle became Vulkan, and guess what? Both AMD AND Nvidia hardware are now optimizing for it, (because Nvidia was forced to wake up and smell the dollars they’d be missing in the next couple years) because of the fact that now Microsoft, Sony AND Nintendo are all developing games with it as a primary API, so you better get used to hearing the name ’cause it ain’t going anywhere.

      • Tiberius Jonez

        Mantle is not dead, Mantle became Vulkan

    • ronch

      I don’t see how AMD’s cores are unreliable. They’ve always been reliable. They’re no less reliable than Intel’s cores. Less performance and efficiency prior to Ryzen but you gotta realize out-engineering Intel is almost impossible especially for a much smaller company like AMD, and they did the impossible with Ryzen with a far smaller R&D budget. Ryzen is a completely new design from scratch so it’s bound to have some issues. And it’s only been less than a month since it came out so everyone’s still playing around with it.

    • Tiberius Jonez

      LOLOLOLOL… just… LOLOLOLOL

    • David Smith

      Core performance? Or core speed? Core performance is pretty similar, or maybe AMD core performance is better. The core speed of the higher end Intel CPUs are faster, and that’s what gives them the advantage.

      AMD Ryzen does as well with DX12 as it does DX11. Do you read much? But when you bring that tech up, you’re talking about games, and since the release of RyZen and now, there have been a few improvements that have made the AMD run about the same or better than the Intel setups in many games.

      But here’s the kicker. Many of the game developer companies have said they’re going to start writing with more emphasis on multi core procs, or should we say, multi-threaded code. Yeah, they could have done that years ago and the AMD FX-8xxx CPUs would have been doing GREAT. Only AMD is set up to take advantage of that for a modest price point.

      So, most productivity software that is CPU intensive is already multi-threaded and the RyZen runs just as well or better than higher priced Intels, the RyZen, even at 8 cores isn’t that power hungry, it runs most games just as well (within a margin that’s too small for a human to notice) and the list is getting bigger in favor of AMD, AND you can get the RyZen on sale for prices that say you’d be a FOOL to buy an Intel system.

      Oh, and that thing about core count that you went after? Intel came out with a new line of CPUs with more cores. Gee, wonder why?

      There is one downside to the RyZen platform and it isn’t what you said, basically because you’re spitting out crap and don’t actually know anything, and that’s the fact that you have to spend more money on a higher speed memory kit and OC your setup to get Intel performance.

      And your statement about lowering reliability for more cores? Where in the world did you come up with THAT??!! NEVER HEARD THAT ONE BEFORE!

      LOL!!! WHAT A JOKE!!!