News AMD's Motherboard Support for 24GB and 48GB RAM Is Wonky

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
32GB RAM is already becoming a minimum for new gaming PC.

Consoles have 16GB shared VRAM, and the amount of data these consoles can copy from the SSD directly into VRAM in milliseconds is crazy.

The only way PC are able to keep up with consoles is with large pools of RAM. Many games are now recommending 32GB RAM.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amdlova
There is nothing "Wonky" about the AMD platform using 24/48 GB DDR 5 DRAM. The DRAM makers always support Intel first because that's where the higher volume sales are. As with all DRAM before there are typically DRAM that is tested to work best on AMD or on Intel systems. At the default JEDEC speeds/settings these DRAM modules work fine in both AMD and Intel because that is how the memory controllers and DRAM are designed.

When the DRAM makers start overclocking their DRAM for huge profit then they need to determine the proper timings that will allow their DRAM to function reliably on either an AMD or on an Intel system and advertise the DRAM accordingly.

All DRAM running faster than the JEDEC default specification for DDR 2/3/4/5, etc. is overclocked DRAM and not guaranteed to work unless your mobo and memory controller decide to play nice together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: phenomiix6
Amdlova said:
Amd ever a nightmare with compatability. Remember the first ryzen. Lol I have to purchase four kits to make the system stable. Even the motherboard list has flaws
Click to expand...

And there's a reason G.SKILL and Corsair have "AMD ready" referenced memory kit SKUs. That dates back to first Ryzen generation where memory would not run at full rated speed with XMP enabled - and that was if you were lucky enough to get it to even post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: atomicWAR and Amdlova
I will let others test drive these new RAM modules with various Ryzen configurations but I fully intend to build a Ryzen 7950X + 96GB mITX rig once the dust settles.
 
  • Like
Reactions: phenomiix6
PlaneInTheSky said:
32GB RAM is already becoming a minimum for new gaming PC.

Consoles have 16GB shared VRAM, and the amount of data these consoles can copy from the SSD directly into VRAM in milliseconds is crazy.

The only way PC are able to keep up with consoles is with large pools of RAM. Many games are now recommending 32GB RAM.
Click to expand...
Nowadays its best to have over 32gb of ram, for a new system.
For 32gb of ram, the system tends to use around half of it for file cache. There's been games that I've played that have done a bit of paging, with 32gb of system ram.

For my next build I'd probably go with 64 gb instead of trying to using a 48gb kit, for compatibilitys sake(and better options currently for speed and timings.).
 
  • Like
Reactions: cyrusfox
Honestly, if you're not maxing out the memory on your motherboard, you're just wasting your time. Why even bother building a computer if you're never gonna activate it's full potential. Just get a Steam deck instead.
 
Amdlova said:
Amd ever a nightmare with compatability. Remember the first ryzen. Lol I have to purchase four kits to make the system stable. Even the motherboard list has flaws
Click to expand...

Conveniently forgetting X99 taking 2 years to have support for 3000-3200 Mhz RAM while on Ryzen it took 1 year, at least for me. I only bought 1 RAM kit. It was clear to me it was a BIOS firmware issue AMD needed to solve, just like Intel with X99.
Hardware companies have issues, engineers solve them, nothing new under the sun.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted member 2928070 and mitch074
PlaneInTheSky said:
32GB RAM is already becoming a minimum for new gaming PC.

Consoles have 16GB shared VRAM, and the amount of data these consoles can copy from the SSD directly into VRAM in milliseconds is crazy.

The only way PC are able to keep up with consoles is with large pools of RAM. Many games are now recommending 32GB RAM.
Click to expand...

Most games coming out are still a minimum 8GB, with 16GB recommended. Very few games require more than 32. Even 4K ultra will still work on 16GB RAM for 99.9999999999999% of most games. 32GB is a niche thing and will be for the next 3 or 4 years yet. I have 64GB so Im good for probably 20 years. But 16 is still just fine
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GenericUser
YouFilthyHippo said:
Most games coming out are still a minimum 8GB, with 16GB recommended. Very few games require more than 32. Even 4K ultra will still work on 16GB RAM for 99.9999999999999% of most games. 32GB is a niche thing and will be for the next 3 or 4 years yet. I have 64GB so Im good for probably 20 years. But 16 is still just fine
Click to expand...
The games may only need 8-16 Gb still, but Windows is ballooning - a fresh Windows 10 install went from 1.3 Gb in 2015-2017 to 2.4 Gb in 2022, and Windows 11 is even worse. Let's not even mention Chrome and Chromium-based apps, merely loading MS Teams, Skype and Chrome in the background eats an extra 2-3 Gb.Then add an antivirus and whatever your GPU driver loads in the background...
Yeah, that's already 5-6 Gb of your system RAM eaten before you even load a single game.
 
TechieTwo said:
At the default JEDEC speeds/settings these DRAM modules work fine in both AMD and Intel because that is how the memory controllers and DRAM are designed.
Click to expand...
TFA is a case where RAM at JEDEC speeds is not working on an AMD platform.
mitch074 said:
The games may only need 8-16 Gb still, but Windows is ballooning - a fresh Windows 10 install went from 1.3 Gb in 2015-2017 to 2.4 Gb in 2022, and Windows 11 is even worse. Let's not even mention Chrome and Chromium-based apps, merely loading MS Teams, Skype and Chrome in the background eats an extra 2-3 Gb.Then add an antivirus and whatever your GPU driver loads in the background...
Yeah, that's already 5-6 Gb of your system RAM eaten before you even load a single game.
Click to expand...
Don't confuse RAM (and vRAM) occupied with RAM in use. Empty RAM is wasted RAM, and a competent OS can and should be cramming every byte available with whatever data it imagines make be useful, because every byte cached is a byte that does not have to be read from the backing store in the event it is accessed. As there is no penalty for overwriting a byte of cached data vs. overwriting an 'empty' (uninitialised or zeroed) byte of RAM, keeping RAM 'free' by avoiding caching gains you no performance.
 
TechieTwo said:
There is nothing "Wonky" about the AMD platform using 24/48 GB DDR 5 DRAM. The DRAM makers always support Intel first because that's where the higher volume sales are. As with all DRAM before there are typically DRAM that is tested to work best on AMD or on Intel systems. At the default JEDEC speeds/settings these DRAM modules work fine in both AMD and Intel because that is how the memory controllers and DRAM are designed.

When the DRAM makers start overclocking their DRAM for huge profit then they need to determine the proper timings that will allow their DRAM to function reliably on either an AMD or on an Intel system and advertise the DRAM accordingly.

All DRAM running faster than the JEDEC default specification for DDR 2/3/4/5, etc. is overclocked DRAM and not guaranteed to work unless your mobo and memory controller decide to play nice together.
Click to expand...

There's something to note here, AMD platform is wonky with these new non-binary module size.

RAM manufacturers will contact platform makers (for mainstream, we have almost only AMD and Intel) And motherboard makers as well, and Intel & AMD will have to work with their partners to add support in the firmware.

We all know that Intel has so much more engineers to work, so they acted quickly to the point that some motherboard makers already have support with their released hardware, while some other still doesn't have any. And from AMD side, there's nothing yet, so they're still working on adding support.
 
So still no news on what mainstream motherboards models support more than 128GB?

Then what's the rush in buying this kits now? They probably will get better support and are going to get cheaper later on.
 
edzieba said:
Don't confuse RAM (and vRAM) occupied with RAM in use. Empty RAM is wasted RAM, and a competent OS can and should be cramming every byte available with whatever data it imagines make be useful, because every byte cached is a byte that does not have to be read from the backing store in the event it is accessed. As there is no penalty for overwriting a byte of cached data vs. overwriting an 'empty' (uninitialised or zeroed) byte of RAM, keeping RAM 'free' by avoiding caching gains you no performance.
Click to expand...
I do mean allocated system RAM - ones with processes that have actually locked down some RAM for their own use. Yes, any OS worth its salt will use free RAM as a cache, but when it comes to processes their RAM is their own, and they can also prevent some or most of it from being swapped out. Add to that the non-sharing of non-executable RAM between processes that are statically linked to their own libs and how RAM-hungry Chromium is, and you get... Yes, a saturated 8 Gb PC with a single browser running. Nevermind running a game on it...
 
mitch074 said:
The games may only need 8-16 Gb still, but Windows is ballooning - a fresh Windows 10 install went from 1.3 Gb in 2015-2017 to 2.4 Gb in 2022, and Windows 11 is even worse. Let's not even mention Chrome and Chromium-based apps, merely loading MS Teams, Skype and Chrome in the background eats an extra 2-3 Gb.Then add an antivirus and whatever your GPU driver loads in the background...
Yeah, that's already 5-6 Gb of your system RAM eaten before you even load a single game.
Click to expand...

Those numbers are already factored in when devs deploy system requirements
 
YouFilthyHippo said:
Most games coming out are still a minimum 8GB, with 16GB recommended. Very few games require more than 32. Even 4K ultra will still work on 16GB RAM for 99.9999999999999% of most games. 32GB is a niche thing and will be for the next 3 or 4 years yet. I have 64GB so Im good for probably 20 years. But 16 is still just fine
Click to expand...

I think 24GB would be a good sweet spot for a lot of people, while 32GB will still be excessive for most people for a while. Someday it will probably become the new recommended minimum, but yeah, definitely not right now.
 
Firestone said:
Honestly, if you're not maxing out the memory on your motherboard, you're just wasting your time. Why even bother building a computer if you're never gonna activate it's full potential. Just get a Steam deck instead.
Click to expand...
Comments on this site are so much deranged sometimes that I can barely tell this is a joke... Thanks for the laugh
 
Amdlova said:
Amd ever a nightmare with compatability. Remember the first ryzen. Lol I have to purchase four kits to make the system stable. Even the motherboard list has flaws
Click to expand...
It's almost like when you actually dare to innovate instead of selling mainstream gaming chips with 4 cores for 7 years with the main difference being a bump of 200 MHz on the clock, <Mod Edit> happens.
Just look at Intel's foray into big.LITTLE, when they launched they could barely run a few of the more delicate games, some wouldn't even launch. And that's from a titan of industry that has had a stranglehold on PCs for such a long time they forgot how to actually put billions into new processes and designs instead of buying back their own stock (and that have Microsoft making sure Windows is an Intel-first platform).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mamasan2000 said:
Conveniently forgetting X99 taking 2 years to have support for 3000-3200 Mhz RAM while on Ryzen it took 1 year, at least for me. I only bought 1 RAM kit. It was clear to me it was a BIOS firmware issue AMD needed to solve, just like Intel with X99.
Hardware companies have issues, engineers solve them, nothing new under the sun.
Click to expand...


X99 has quad channel eights slots. Imc controller from a 2011 cpu work better than a tiny amd can't work at time with two dimm and x99 can do registered ecc at 256gb.
 
Amdlova said:
X99 has quad channel eights slots. Imc controller from a 2011 cpu work better than a tiny amd can't work at time with two dimm and x99 can do registered ecc at 256gb.
Click to expand...
You're comparing a workstation chipset with a mainstream one - you could use ECC RAM on a B350 motherboard in 2017 thanks to AMD, and the price was waiting a few months for UEFI updates to solve compatibility problems DRAM makers cared nothing about. Good luck getting that from Intel (I repeat, on mainstream hardware) before DDR5 made it mandatory...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom