CORSAIR VENGEANCE LPX 64GB (2 x 32 GB) DDR4 3600 (PC4-28800) C18 1.35V Desktop Memory - Black

Product Information

The small form factor makes it ideal for smaller cases or any system where internal space is at a premium. I paired the Ryzen 5 3600 with an Asus Prime X470-Pro, and spent slightly more on the RAM compared to an ordinary 3200MHz CL16 set: I went for a Corsair Vengeance LPX kit at 3600MHz CL18-22-22-42. After reading up on RAM OC'ing a bit, I found the DRAM Calculator for Ryzen on TPU. Helpful tool, definitely! To figure out which chips are on the DIMMs, I used Thaiphoon Burned. It tells me it has Micron E dies. Every few tests I also ran a run of TechArp's x264 HD Benchmark. The avg of 4 runs are also shown at the bottom. It's free, and you could say this is a real-world test. While Membench is more a synthetic test, I guess. I also ran MemTest86 a few times, and even while bumping up the voltage to 1.45V I can't get it to pass 4 runs successfully. And this I take quite seriously. Stability stays the prime focus.

Now, what bothers me is that the timings in column BG have the highest score for the x264 test. I did further tweak some other timings, which resulted in a faster Membench run, but lower fps for x264 encoding. That's kinda contradictory... First of, next to the Ryzen DRAM Calc I also found some useful info and suggestions here and here. Maybe it can help someone else... I can try to reduce CL to 15 or 14. I haven't tried anything lower than 16 so far. Any other timings I could focus on? I left out some of my early tests, and all the failed tests. I tried tweaking every timing up to row 39 'power down enable', but those last ones I couldn't get to work without spawning errors. There's no way to get gear 1 working. I get the occasional boot with 3600 G2 but it's not stable. Tried auto SA voltage and manual.Even this failed OCCT: XMP off - 3200 G2 - 18-22-22 - mem 1.25v (which is basically very close to JEDEC). But does that 30% difference really translate to something humanly noticeable? We've all had the "wow a NVMe drive is 7 times faster than a SATA drive!" but then had the crushing disappointment of it feeling in 99% of cases just like the old SATA it replaced. It's a theory that may seems reasonable but I cannot confirm for sure in any way and would be interesting to understand the difference.

I started extremely conservative, and after a few iterations I currently have CL16, tRCDrd 19, tRCDwr 16, tRP 16, tRAS 36. Still at 1.35V btw. Gonna be a tough job. How I miss the days when a new GPU or a CPU could boost your simple Quake experience from unplayable to playable. Remember when more RAM even made a huge difference or even a good soundcard? If you're building a Ryzen machine, it might be a better idea to get CMK16GX4M2Z3200C16. I'd recommend just getting a 2x8 kit and running it in Dual Channel mode. I've used this motherboard before with Intel 12th gen and 64GB DDR4-3600 was not an issue then but the same doesn't go for Intel 13th.The CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 seems to be optimized for Intel boards. It runs at a slightly higher voltage than the CMK16GX4M2Z3200C16 and supports XMP 2.0. The CMK16GX4M2Z3200C16 appears to be optimized for Ryzen. What's the deal with the tRCDrd? How could I get it from 19 to the suggested 17. A higher voltage? Or do the other mentioned voltages in the calc play a role? daglesj said:But does that 30% difference really translate to something humanly noticeable? We've all had the "wow a NVMe drive is 7 times faster than a SATA drive!" but then had the crushing disappointment of it feeling in 99% of cases just like the old SATA it replaced. There's some weirdness with this motherboard such as XMP timings and voltage being applied even though XMP is disabled.

I'm sorry to revive an old thread but i'm investigating the issue and I have a theory that i could not confirm or discard as invalid. What is the difference between these two kits: CMK16GX4M2Z3200C16 vs. CMK16GX4M2B3200C16. I will be using it with the r7 1700 with the C6H. What kit is the best to get the highest speed on? I plan on getting 2 sets of them. Are there any other kits you recommend that can fit while using the NH-D15?Part of our exhaustive testing process includes performance and compatibility testing on nearly every motherboard on the market – and a few that aren’t.

I specifically want the samsung b-die version (the Vengeance cost ~170€ while others ram modules like G skill Flare X or other modules with samsung b-die chip usually costs 200€+). My online research has found till now that everyone with hynix chip (RAM version 5.39) have the Intel optimized(B) module while those who owns the samsung b-die (RAM version 4.31) have the AMD Optimized(Z) module. I tried getting tRCDrd under 19, but I can't get the system completely stable, even after cranking up the voltage to 1.4V which the calc suggests as max.Most likely, but temperature dependent. I run 1.40v and never break 40-42C, but different case environments can produce vastly different results. Blowing a little dust of this topic, cause I think I've reached the end of the line on tinkering with my RAM timings. It may be that the CMK16GX4M2B3200C16 (Optimized for Intel) is using the less expensive and worse hynix chips (they have problems with AM4 but works good with Intel) while We're seeing roughly a 30% difference between our best and worst configurations, and these are just for performance memory kits. Whether that matters depends on what you're doing. The reason those big differences don't show up in a review is because it's "not fair" to compare 16GB of DDR4-2400 to 32GB of DDR4-4400. For tRFC I got a bit confused with what the calc suggested: 630 and alt 560. When I look in the BIOS (well, I should say UEFI) it's set to 'auto' with an actual value of 312 (and tRFC2 192, tRFC4 132). So, that's good, right? Lower is better for this one?