Enhancing Stability of 8 Gb OCZ-AMD at Cl-7 on a UD5P

Hi Folks--I'm now running 4 sticks of OCZ Platinum ram (3P1600LVAM4GK) on a GA-MA790FXT-UD5P mainboard. I am also using a AMD
Phenom 965, C3 processor. My system is somewhat stable most of the time but does not pass hard core stresstests like OCCT. I get core errors after 4 to 5 minutes. Although I've ran my system at 1066, and 1333 MHz, on my first try at 1600 MHz, my system would crash after loading the operating system until I used these settings after a recommendation by the moderator at an OCZ forum:

Set System Voltage Control to {Manual}
Set DDR3 Voltage Control to {1.65 volts}
Set the system to run at x8 {1600 MHz}
Set CPU NB VID Control to {1.35 volts} [this setting was the key to get my system to boot properly into Windows]
Set DDR3 Timing Items to {Manual}
Set DRAM Timings to CL 7-7-7-24 (CL-TRCD-TRP-TRAS)
Set 1T/2T Command Timing to {2T}

Now I'm currently using these settings and my computer works right at 1600 MHz 99% of the time even during gaming. Occasionally. I do get a spontaneous reboot but not often.
Are there any other bios changes (voltage or otherwise) I can make to improve the stability of my system so it can pass stress tests or should I leave things the way they are.
Should I dial back the speed or timings to acheive greater stability?

Thanks for any help

Mobo: GA-MA790FXT-UD5P
CPU: AMD Phenom II 965, C3, 125 watt
RAM: OCZ 3P1600LVAM4GK (4 sticks, 8Gb)
Vid: Gigabyte GV-R489OC-1GD (2 of these cards in crossfire)
PSU: Corsair 850 TX
HDD: Western Digital Velociraptor (300Gb)
OS: Windows 7 (64-bit)
4 answers Last reply
More about enhancing stability ud5p
  1. Great tuning guide here:

    You may need to increase the NB voltage a tad to get four DIMMs working properly

    I think on those boards, "CPU NB VID Control" is the basic register-controlled 'set-point', and "NB Voltage Control" is the 'offset' described in the tuning doc...

    Note AMD's warning on page seven:


  2. Try running 4GB instead of 8GB instead to see what happens.

    Use MEMTEST and whatever else you wish to determine stability (Run Memtest for at least two hours).

    Run 4GB then switch and try the other sticks of RAM to see if the problem is with the RAM or the Motherboard.

    If you have stability errors on one 4GB set but not the other then it's a RAM issue. If both have stability issues it's likely the Motherboard.

    *You would be hard pressed to find scenarios where having 1600MHz instead of 1333MHz would make a difference.

    You also need to investigate you are doing things correctly. I've scene some statements that say 1600MHz is only if you are overclocking your CPU as well so it could be the CPU if that was the case. Anyway, if still in doubt you could contact your RAM and motherboard manufacturer.
  3. I should add that it seems like having the fastest RAM seems to bring out issues with RAM or motherboards. Any time you go to the extreme you can find errors.

    The good news is that if it runs at all at 1600MHz then you know you're unlikely to have issues at 1333MHz.

    I say just stick with 1333MHz. Again, there are few scenarios were having 1600MHz over 1333MHz makes a difference. You wouldn't notice a difference in a video game.
  4. Photonboy is right - it seems I spend half my time here lately telling people that A - they don't have to pay the big bucks for the highest memory clock in the list at NewEgg; B - that they'll only have enormous amounts of difficulty in getting it to work; C - that the only place it's apparent is in 'synthetic' memory benchmarks; and D - that the processors aren't made for it in the first place! This whole idiocy seems to have started with the new Intel 1156/1366 platforms, and now, because the RAM is available, and people think they've just got to have it, the problems are 'leaking down' into AMD and 775't' boards. Used to be the 'rules' for AMDs were simple and brutal - maximum of two DIMMs at 1066, you want four DIMMs, you stick with 800. I have seen no such 'hard and fast' for the DDR3 chipsets, but, I have seen oceans of people having troubles, all related to 'can't get this fast crap to work!' The 1156/1366 processors only have three valid register sets for RAM - 800, 1066, and 1333 (and some of them don't even have the 1333!); anything else is in the territory that was marked on thirteenth century maps "here be dragons!"

    Memory speed just doesn't show up - latencies do... I've posted this a number of times:

    The fact is that the new i7/i5 architecture is much more responsive to low-latency, as opposed to faster-clocked RAM; I recently wrote this, in explanation:
    "There is a place where high speed, versus low latency, will be an advantage - any operations that require large, sustained, reads from and writes to RAM - like, as I mentioned, video transcoding... I always consider my 'pass/fail' system stress test to be: watch/pause one HDTV stream off a networked ATSC tuner, while recording a second stream off a PCI NTSC tuner, while transcoding and 'de-commercialing' a third stream to an NAS media server... But, for the vast majority of people, for the vast majority of use, this is not the case. What's going on behind the scenes: the task scheduler is scurrying around, busier than a centipede learning to tap-dance, counting 'ticks': ...tick... yo - over there, you gotta finish up, your tick is over, push your environment, that's a good fella; oops - cache snoops says we've got an incoherency - grab me a page for him from over there; ...tick... you - get me the address of the block being used by {F92BFB9B-59E9-4B65-8AA3-D004C26BA193}, will 'ya; yeah - UAC says he has permission - I dunno - we'll just have to trust him; damnit - everybody listen up, we've got a pending interrupt request, everyone drop what you're doing, and you - over there - query interrupt handler for a vector - this is important!!! ...tick.... This is why (aside from the obvious matter of access architecture) that swap files are optimized in 4k 'chunks'... And the most fascinating (scary) thing about it all, is that, at some synaptic, neural level, we're doin' the same thing! (...though, the older I get, the less dependable my interrupt return mechanism is - I repeatedly find myself at the bottom of the basement steps, wondering "now what did I come down here for?!" )

    The huge majority of times you access memory, it's to 'cure' the cache - either to write out a 'dirty' page, or grab one due to a 'miss'; as these 'pieces' are coming and going, in 'dribs and drabs' to/from 'here and there', every time, you're 'waiting' on one or the other of the access latencies!
Ask a new question

Read More

Gigabyte OCZ AMD Motherboards