PSA: AMD is locking ECC UDIMM frequency on consumer AM5
Posted by ParanoidZoid@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 93 comments
TL;DR: If you are lucky enough to have ECC UDIMMs on AM5 and they're manufacturer rated above 5200 MT/s, AGESA ComboAM5 PI version Pre1.3.0.0 and later caps ECC UDIMM down to 5200 MT/s on Ryzen 9000 series consumer CPUs. It's an AMD-side change, and the cap seems to live in the signed PSP firmware, so board vendors can't override it. To keep running ECC above 5200, stay on AGESA 1.2.7.0 or earlier.
Confirmation from Asus
This warning now appears on every recent Asus AM5 BIOS download page (B650, B650E, X670, X670E, X870, X870E across PRIME, TUF, ROG Strix, etc.):
"Starting from AGESA ComboAM5 PI version Pre1.3.0.0*, ECC-UDIMM memory speed will be limited to 5200 MT/s when paired with 9000 series CPUs."*
And on the ROG forum X670/X870 resource thread, one of the Asus bios engineers said this directly:
"AMD limited the speed of ECC UDIMM dual rank to 5200 start with AGESA 1300 BIOS (It means Granite Ridge). This is not an ASUS issue. If you want a high clock speed can use the AGESA 1270 BIOS or need ecc disabled with new bios."
This problem is not limited to Asus by the way, other motherboard vendors (e.g. Asrock) are also experiencing the same issue.
BIOS inspection
Before Asus confirmed it was AMD side, I was inspired by someone else modding a BIOS using Claude. So I had Claude look into the BIOS files. The below is a summary from it, I had it run APCB parser and PSPTool.
The APCB Memory groups for the PSP IDs the 9800X3D actually reads (
0xbc0d0300and0xbc0d0b00) are byte-identical between 3112 and 3603. Same DIMM tables, same platform tuning data. The UEFI CBS options are also unchanged: same speed selectors, same ECC submenu, same defaults.The only meaningful change between the two firmwares is the ABL, which is AMD's signed PSP binary that drives memory training. Same APCB input, different speed output for ECC DR specifically. Non-ECC at 6000 still trains fine on 3603, which means there's ECC-specific logic in the training path that changed between AGESA versions, and it's in code nobody outside AMD can read or patch.
Notes from L1Techs Users
- ASRock DeskMeet X600: With the same Kingston ECC UDIMM kit, same AGESA 1.3.0.0a, and testing with a CPU swap. A 7800X3D can train and boot at the rated 5600 MT/s with ECC enabled. With a 9700X on the same board it caps at 5200.
- Asus ProArt X870E Creator: Kingston ECC UDIMM locked at 5200.
- Asus X670E ProArt: Nemix ECC UDIMM max 4200 with ECC enabled, 5200 with it disabled.
- Asus Crosshair X870E Hero: Kingston ECC UDIMM locked at 5200 CL42 1T on AGESA 1.3.0.0a (kit's SPD is JEDEC 5600 CL46).
One open question: nobody has posted a clean test on Ryzen Pro 9000 yet. Would be interesting to see if these SKUs that officially advertise ECC support. If anyone here has access to that, it would be interesting to know if you're experiencing this limitation.
So what?
It's a niche within a niche, and at current RAM prices we should at least be thankful AMD still supports ECC on consumer CPUs at all as Intel doesn't even pretend to on theirs. What's puzzling is that this is only on Zen 5 but not Zen 4. Ideally AMD would just say something officially instead of leaving motherboard vendors like Asus to publish it as a footnote.
Links
https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-crosshair/rog-crosshair-x670e-hero-model/helpdesk_bios/
https://rog.asus.com/motherboards/rog-crosshair/rog-crosshair-x870e-apex/helpdesk_bios/
Die4Ever@reddit
I can't believe the entire industry hasn't moved to ECC. Don't random crashes hurt OEM's reputations?? I would think if one brand had ECC, they would slowly gain a reputation for being more stable, they could even put it in their commercials (in some non technical words)
is-this-a-nick@reddit
So does memory overclocking, which AMD seems to have fixed according to op :D
airmantharp@reddit
They really, really don't happen often in normal systems.
Other things do happen of course, but they're not caused by RAM itself misbehaving in such a way that ECC would fix.
xb9j@reddit
Problems that would be mitigated with sideband ECC are so rare, it’s not worth the 25% increase in BOM per DIMM, especially with current DRAM prices.
pmjm@reddit
Depends on your use case. If you're running a game server or something non-critical, then yeah nbd. But if you're running a storage cluster where the risk of data corruption is real, you want every precaution.
S7relok@reddit
Actually runs one, and FS on disk corruptions are in general more a problem than RAM non ECC corruption.
One of my ceph nodes had a RAM failure, and the 2 others were enough to recover and not having data corruption. Running pools with replication and others with erasure coding, both were pretty solid during that RAM failure problem
On the contrary, a perfectly trivial filesystem on a local ssd made me work overnight because the ssd cell began to be really tired. Ended up by changing it and restore complete backup
asssuber@reddit
Why 25% BOM increase for DDR5 who already has on-DIMM ECC?
xb9j@reddit
On die ECC and sideband ECC are different. On die has extra bits it generates and stores in the array to correct errors caused by bad DRAM cells causing bit flips, sideband requires extra chips on a DIMM to correct data transfer between DRAM and CPU. DDR5 needs 5 chips for ECC per channel vs only 4 chips in a non ECC channel, so 25%
Pristine-Ebb-1819@reddit
I think some of the sentiment around that is changing. Is there any recent empirical data on this? Far from slam dunk evidence but this post has made me suspicious lately: https://mas.to/@gabrielesvelto/116171750653898304
pmjm@reddit
I would venture a guess that most people blame Microsoft.
More_Feature8687@reddit
It is market segmentation
mostwanted002@reddit
They may have done it for the segmentation.
Full speed ECC -> EPYC AM5 CPUs
Locked ECC -> Ryzen AM5 CPUs
terraphantm@reddit
Yep found this when I did my recent CPU upgrade (during which time I also updated the bios).
Thankfully downgrading to 12.7.0 os easy enough with bios flashback and even the newest CPUs don’t actually need the agenda update
I’m still hoping it’s a bug on AMD’s part. Seems really odd to fix the clock to 5200 rather than allow anything 5200 and below.
Beefmytaco@reddit
Many of the company named subs are like this because they have literal employees on as mods. The corsair sub proved that one years ago when it was found out they had employees there deleting anything negative about their products and hiding people complaining about bad quality.
CheesyCaption@reddit
I'm not sure what else you'd expect from a sub named after a company. Reddit isn't a niche community anymore, it's a massive PR and advertising platform, nakedly so in the corporate subs and astroturfed elsewhere.
wankthisway@reddit
For a while it was more about the stock price than the actual hardware. And there are still some stonk dudes active there
terraphantm@reddit
Agreed. And if it’s not literal employees it’s often shareholders. I kinda knew that would be the outcome when I saw the sub is on manual approval mode. It’s definitely annoying how much control mods have over shaping a narrative (you can even see that here with how certain key words causes threads to be instantly locked)
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
I see this sort of accusation a lot on here, and it sounds like bullshit.
I can imagine someone might suborn the mod team of a subreddit for market manipulation purposes, but if multiple actors are trying it, they would come into conflict with each other, and the most well-resourced one should win.
I would expect the most well-resourced one to be some kind of hedge fund with a more sophisticated use for their control of the mod team than, "hide negative news about the company and promote positive news".
(The other form of this accusation -- that specific posters are stockholders talking their books -- would also be an idiotic investing strategy, but it doesn't stretch imagination that idiot retail investors exist.)
terraphantm@reddit
And yet it definitely happens. Tesla and all the musk adjacent subs are well known for their mods being nuts and being shareholders. Wouldn’t at all be a surprise for amd and nvidia to be along the same lines. They certainly suppress negative news there
And it’s almost certainly retail guys. Hedge fund managers have better things to do than mod a sub
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
I don't follow the Musk adjacent subs, but accepting that as true, it seems more likely to me that
Generally unwell -> Reddit Mod for brand subreddit -> emotional investment in brand -> financial investment
than the other direction.
terraphantm@reddit
Not sure why it’s hard to believe that someone with a clear conflict of interest would act in accordance with their wallet. It might not be effective, but people get stupid about money.
Whirblewind@reddit
Ask for proof. About any company, really. Ask the kind of person like /u/terraphantm to show any amount of proof of investor censorship. It won't come.
xole@reddit
as an AMD shareholder since it was $3 a share, I want their feet held to the fire. If something is a bad decision, I want people talking about it before it causes problems.
bogglingsnog@reddit
the good ol astroturfing huh. The Internet sure is fun since it turned into a gigantic golf club.
SirActionhaHAA@reddit
The amd sub is a community sub, it ain't run by amd employees.
It used to allow almost anything provided it's related to amd in some way, trolls from r/intel and r/nvidia flooded it with troll posts and they probably decided that they've had enough.
inyue@reddit
There was a big thread about gamer nexus and amd on this sub past week that the amd sub didn't allow to discuss.
And it's very interesting that you blame Intel and Nvidia while both of these subs were heavily brigated by the "innocent people" that you love so much 😨
AbhishMuk@reddit
Fwiw I think your post (from 2 days ago?) still is up. Perhaps the mods reverted it?
terraphantm@reddit
Looks like it was reverted sometime this afternoon
JoeZocktGames@reddit
I don't understand any of this so I just ask here: Is my DDR5 CL30 6000Mhz Expo RAM compatible with 9000 CPUs?
PssyGotWifi@reddit
This is a discussion about ECC ram. Move along, you're fine.
JoeZocktGames@reddit
I have no idea what this is
RealThanny@reddit
Search engines exist. Waste your own time before you waste that of others.
JoeZocktGames@reddit
What a nice thing to say. You sound angry, may I ask why?
Yebi@reddit
Don't play the victim, you are the asshole here
JoeZocktGames@reddit
Why am I getting insulted now?!
Yebi@reddit
Maybe because you came to a subreddit that, between its description and rules, very clearly says like 5 times in different ways that this is not the place for help or tech support, went into a random thread asking for help and tech support, and then got all hurt and preachycwhen people pointed out what you're doing? I've no idea how or why you're not banned yet
RealThanny@reddit
It's a very nice thing to say. It's solid life advice that you ignore at your peril.
reddit_equals_censor@reddit
ecc means, that the memory sticks have actual error correcting code, that makes sure, that the data in transit and when on the dimms does not get corrupted.
if data gets corrupted in transit or while sitting on the stick, it would get CORRECTED through the error correcting code and a report would be made.
do NOT confuse real ecc with the marketing lie "on-die ecc", which is just chip yield increase sold as a lie.
every bit of memory, that touches user data should be ecc memory, but the evil tech companies hate the public and laugh as people lose endless amounts of data and get crashes due to corruption happening when things work AS INTENDED or when a stick fails.
in case you don't know the as intended part.
a memory stick will randomly error once in a long while. again this is NOT a failed stick, but that is what the industry calls "working as intended". a random bit flip, that may corrupt your data or crash your system is according to this industry "working" and "working as intended".
ecc prevents this.
JoeZocktGames@reddit
Thank you for the detailed breakdown.
ICEpear8472@reddit
Your question is already answered but just in case someone else is wondering: If you do not know if you have ECC RAM you in all likelihood don‘t. ECC RAM is somewhat unusual in consumer space.
PssyGotWifi@reddit
Pretty much. The price of unbuffered (even before the price hikes) ECC ram would be enough to alert someone that their stick of ram is not like the others.
JoeZocktGames@reddit
So the specs sheet says it's On-Die ECC, so the fake stuff.
AK-Brian@reddit
If true (and it certainly seems to be), this is a baffling and rather indefensible platform regression, kneecapping one of the few advantages held over B860/Z890.
I don't know if Robert Hallock still browses this sub, but if so, this is exactly what Z990 needs. Not W980. Z990. Send AMD a thank you card for their gift.
ParanoidZoid@reddit (OP)
This is just a hypothesis, but the reason why AGESA was incremented from version 1.2.7.0 to 1.3.0.0 was because of the Phoenix Rowhammer attack. Capping ECC UDIMM on 9000 series seem to be a result of that. But it still doesn't explain why 7000 series are not affected by this same issue when they share the same I/O die.
terraphantm@reddit
I’m still not convinced it isn’t a bug. It’s not simply limited to a max of 5200. You simply can’t set any frequency other than 5200. Doesn’t matter if your ram is rated for less than that.
bogglingsnog@reddit
If that's true that's definitely not only a bug but potentially a huge consumer rights issue if it invalidates their hardware from functioning.
VenditatioDelendaEst@reddit
Can't we just call a bug a bug and criticize developers for grossly inadequate testing without invoking the Reddit Karen spell to demand a nanny state Do Something?
bogglingsnog@reddit
No, just because an automaker releases a lemon that affects tens of thousands and is willing to own up to it doesn't mean the government shouldn't be notified of the mistake.
SirActionhaHAA@reddit
Ecc on consumer boards is a niche among niche, idk why you would even think that it changes anything. Intel doesn't even support ecc.
Aw3som3Guy@reddit
Intel has supported ECC for ages. Not just the HEDT chips, obviously, but consumer grade i3s as long as they were in the right motherboard. I want to say they expanded the range of CPUs that supported it in recent generations.
I mean, Intel’s artificial gatekeeping of ECC is typically quoted as the sole reason we aren’t all using ECC ram by now.
pmjm@reddit
I'm running ecc on an i9-285k to type this as we speak. Technically not a consumer board (W880), but it was priced like one.
zir_blazer@reddit
Intel actually regressed too. W680 for LGA 1700 could do ECC AND overclock same time, the only Intel consumer platform Chipset in generations that could do that. For W880 Arrow Lake Intel decided to went back to disable overclock.
goldcakes@reddit
This is horrifically anti consumer and should not be tolerated or accepted.
S7relok@reddit
Thing that may be put in place after maybe a bug or incompatibilities found
Cyber Karen : let me or my representative speak to the manager
And honestly, ecc ram is more relevant in servers, and even big companies machines still run 3200 ECC DDR4 sticks. Pay your early adopter price and please don't embarass yourself like that
Auautheawesome@reddit
Crazy for AMD to start regressing their platform when Intel is slowly coming back.
Ram shortage has saved me from switching over to ECC already, hopefully the community is able to bully AMD to start supporting ECC fully again like the community did the early AM4 support for Zen 3.
kikimaru024@reddit
News to me.
Unless you think "Intel forced to lower prices / sell i9 as i7" is sustainable lmao
imaginary_num6er@reddit
I mean initially with AM5, only ASUS and AsRock Rack supported ECC ram with 7000 series and Pro CPUs. So the pendulum is swinging back
ParanoidZoid@reddit (OP)
Hopefully it isn't a sign of things to come. It would be disappointing if AMD ends up not supporting ECC on consumer platforms with the upcoming Zen 6 and its new I/O die.
kikimaru024@reddit
Stop worrying about hypotheticals.
imaginary_num6er@reddit
One thing for sure. MSI motherboards are the least likely to support consumer ECC RAM. This was the case for all their 600 series boards and also did not support PCIe bifurcation, despite many of their competitors supporting the latter.
PssyGotWifi@reddit
MSI are so annoying for that. One of the only vendors not to support ECC ram with AM4. Had to go out and buy a second-hand Asus X570-P, because my MSI MEG Unify couldn't do ECC. Thankfully, I'm in no rush for AM5, AM4 with ECC and 5900XT is more than enough for my server.
TDYDave2@reddit
The manual for my MSI B55M Pro VDH WiFI claims to support ECC UDIMMs (page 15)
PssyGotWifi@reddit
Yes, what they mean is you can put ECC ram in there and it will run as ram. I'm talking about the actual ECC function of the ram. ECC ram will simply run in non-ECC mode in your board.
TDYDave2@reddit
I will take your word for it, but ECC functionality should be baked into the modules, not requiring any support off module.
PssyGotWifi@reddit
Have a look into it, don't just take my word for it. ECC support is motherboard vendor driven for AM4 and AM5 consumer boards (and restricted to 'Pro' CPUs, so some of the G models don't have it).
Trust me, I would liked to have not to have had to go out and buy a second hand X570. Spent enough on the MSI MEG Unify back in 2020.
TDYDave2@reddit
Honestly, don't care enough to go down that rabbit hole, which is why I will just take your word for it.
PssyGotWifi@reddit
The price of the ECC sticks, right now, will have your head falling off, too.
TDYDave2@reddit
I'm old, I can remember a time when I had enough RAM chips in an office desk draw to more than pay for my house.
PssyGotWifi@reddit
Fair enough, haha. To me, it's the rapid sudden increase. Paid under $200AUD each for each 32GB 3200mhz ECC stick about 1.5 years ago. This is how much they are at the same store right now:
https://www.umart.com.au/product/kingston-32gb-1x32gb-ksm32ed8-32hc-cl22-hynix-c-3200mhz-ecc-unbuffered-ddr4-sdram-92981
Love how they say it's on special from $889, lmao
TDYDave2@reddit
Memory has always had dynamic pricing cycles.
I remember once when our quoted price jumped X3 in the course of a week.
Luckily we had ordered the previous week.
It helps to remember the the low price just before a jump is also a pricing anomaly.
RenlyHoekster@reddit
Can't confirm this isue, as I am not seeing it:
ASrock X870E Taichi Creator with AGESA to ComboAM5 PI 1.3.0.0a (BIOS 4.10) with Ryzen 9700X and 2x Kingston EUDIMM 32GB DDR5 is running at 5600 MT/s.
RealPjotr@reddit
I built two Asus WS B850M Pro mATX systems with official ECC support, with 2 x DDR5-5600 48 GB UDIMMs each in December, I caught the last (double normal cost) before RAM went nuts.
I put in a mid 9900X instead of Epyc 4005 because I plan to upgrade the CPU to Zen 6 high end by 2027/28. I've already updated the BIOS, so I will have to wait and hope Zen6 can raise the speed again! 😡
terraphantm@reddit
You can downgrade with bios flashback if you want.
ParanoidZoid@reddit (OP)
The one caveat is that you lose out on rowhammer attack mitigations with the introduction of FGR and Mixed refresh modes (which became the new default) on the AM5 platform for anything prior to AGESA Pre1.3.0.0.
TruthHistorical7515@reddit
Lets be real. No rowhammer attacks were ever actually used in practice.
terraphantm@reddit
Isn’t real ECC already a pretty good mitigation for the various hammer attacks (which to date don’t seem to have been deployed on a wide scale anyway)?
Leondre@reddit
So that's what is going on, I've got an x870e xtreme from gigabyte and noticed that after one of the recent bios updates I have been entirely unable to get it to run at anything other than 5200, it completely ignores all bios settings. Guess it is downgrade time.
porcinechoirmaster@reddit
The fact that it's fixed, as opposed to capped, makes me strongly suspect it's either a bug or a temporary workaround for a problem they couldn't fix another way.
Hias2019@reddit
I don’t know what the motivation is, but I‘d imagine, from a PM‘s point of view it is quite simple: If you need ECC, you don‘t need overclocking, and vice versa.
terraphantm@reddit
Except 5200 isn’t a JEDEC speed. So anything 4800 or lower is forced to be overclocked, and 5600 can’t run its rated speed.
Hias2019@reddit
Haha, good point - maybe they have been receiving complaints about instabilities at 5600 and ... it does not make sense at all to speculate about the motivation. But really - if I invest in ECC RAM because I want the stability and operational security, maybe on a system that runs 24/7 - then I do not overclock it like my desktop where I want to squeeze the last frame out of my rig. Probably there are applications where you want RAM speed and data integrity, but overclocking will not help there, either, you'll have to go Pro with more memory channels, I suppose. For MUCH more money.
Would it hurt AMD to allow people to run unstable configurations? Or do they have financial incentives? That's the question here, right?
terraphantm@reddit
Again if it’s about stability, it makes zero sense for people with ddr 4800 kits to be forced to run at 5200
ParanoidZoid@reddit (OP)
As u/terraphantm has stated, its hard fixed to 5200 MT/s. Regardless of whether your kit is rated by the module manufacturer for 4800 MT/s or 6400 MT/s (the highest ECC UDIMM kit I've seen), for some unstated reason AMD has decided to fix it to 5200 MT/s. So for 4800 MT/s you'll be overclocked and for anything higher than 5200 MT/s you'll be underclocked even if the module manufacturer has verified the speed.
One thing that makes it even weirder is that they still let you set custom subtimings! The only thing they lock on Zen 5 is the frequency, but on Zen 4 both frequency and timings are unlocked despite having the same I/O die.
reddit_equals_censor@reddit
so has amd completely lost it?
was their MASSIVE step back from am4 ecc support not enough?
hell i was hoping for am5 "docp" sticks, which ddr4 on am4 had with 3600 mts cl16 ecc sticks for example.
so is amd hating people so much, that they made ecc support on am5 a hell in general, but weren't happy enough and removed 6000 mts sweetspot support with ecc as well just to screw with people in their criminal anti consumer move?
absolutely insane.
and as more normies will be here, this is NOT OPTIONAL.
you may need to update the bios for security reasons, so amd would hold a gun at you and say "either have a massive security risk, or massively downgrade your performance, which will it be??? "
phire@reddit
It's kind of stupid that the DDR bus is the only bus on modern computers that isn't protected by some kind of ECC or CRC. PCI-E is protected, USB is protected, the GDDR ram in your GPU is protected. I'm pretty sure even HDMI and DisplayPort have CRCs. But DDR doesn't.
I'm kind of hoping DDR6 will save us from this nightmare.
The standard moves from two 32-bit sub channels per DIMM to four 24-bit sub channels. And that the same time, they seem to be eliminating the whole concept of side-band ECC (because it requires 8 extra bits per sub-channel, which was bad enough when you only had two sub-channels).
No details yet, but I assume we will be getting something like the inline ECC scheme that already exists for LPDDR5. Basically, it's the current on-die ECC scheme, but actually communicated across the bus (at the cost of some bandwidth) so that the CPU can actually check it.
The good news, is that ECC will no longer require extra chips, it should be built in to every single DRR6 die. Which eliminates the extra cost overheads and hopefully allows it to become a default feature, even on consumer devices.
reddit_equals_censor@reddit
i like the comparison, where we look inside of the cpu.
chip fabric? of course it has ecc. (as far as i know am5 dropped infinity fabric error reporting to hide those errors i think from users, but let's not get into those details too much, it at least prevents errors for sure)
all the cache in a cpu? of course it has ecc. the stacked l3 cache in x3d chips and the on chip l3 cache all has error correction, BUT we got out to the system memory, just another tier of cache basically, then oh now we are hoping, that we won't have corrupted data, when it comes back to the cpu...
just completely and utterly insane anti consumer evil.
from my understanding you'd be wrong. you are using 1/8 the memory CAPACITY and bandwidth of lpddr5x to have inline ecc. a trade i make every day for forever of course.
so 128 GB with inline ecc becomes 112 GB then for example.
i mean on-die FAKE ecc exists (to be generous) almost entirely to increase yields, so that the memory cartel can sell failed chips as working chips just fine.
your idea of not using the same practice of inline ecc with lpddr5/x, which cuts capacity, but use the worthless extra bits for the fake on-die ecc would i guess theoretically make sense, except that this would expose the errors, that the failed chips would have by design to the system.
if it would be real ecc, it would have real error reporting and the memory cartel doesn't want people to see those silent errors of the failed chips, that they deep with the fake "on-die ecc".
so while theoretically your idea of turning the fake on-die ecc part into real ecc sounds reasonable, i don't think the cartel would let this happen and instead it would be fake on-die ecc, that hides its corrections and then HOPEFULLY OH PLEASE!!! inline ecc that cuts off part of the memory capacity when it is enabled and it properly reports errors.
and in regards to the advantages of in-line ecc. every single stick of memory would then be possible to be real ecc memory. so on that hardware level people would no longer need to pay DOUBLE to get xmp/docp sticks.
even if motherboard support would be shit, at least you could always buy sweetspot memory.
so if we get inline ecc with ddr6 and amd keeps support at least as shit as it was with am5 before this current middle finger locking speeds, then we'd be so much freaking closer!!!! to an all ecc future.
all ecc for all memory, that touches user data.
this is part of why i'm waiting for am6 btw.
am5 was a massive disapointment feature and cost wise and now this ecc memory clock bricking by amd? yeah certainly a good choice and hopefully am6 will be a lot better.
then again am6 could require some purely evil cancer like oh idk no way to disable the cancerous spying part of the cpu tpm 2.0 for example. (long story short tpm 2.0 has a unique identifier number, that can't be changed, that would be part of a way to spy on you and that apis can just access if the tpm is enabled)
ParanoidZoid@reddit (OP)
The only uncertainty here is with this direction that AMD is currently taking ECC support in Zen 5. There is an non-zero chance that they have completely ripped out support for it in the next gen I/O die in Zen 6, but I know this is complete speculation. I would love to be proven wrong when it comes out in Q4 this year or H1 of next year.
phire@reddit
Yeah, I sat down and couldn't think of a single modern bus inside or outside of CPUs that didn't have some form of error detection, except for DDR (well it has it, it's just "optional")
Which is crazy.
Not 1/8th. That's the overhead for DDR4's side-band ECC scheme.
The LPDDR5 scheme uses only 16 bits of ECC for every 240 bits of data, which works out to just 6.25% overhead.
And I think it's only bandwidth, as we already have on die ECC with DDR5.... unless we are doing both? Which you are right, might be necessary since the on-die ECC is there to increase yields.
I know I would pay the price, just for peace of mind. Especially if it's only 6.25%
iBoMbY@reddit
Ohh no, the drama! Has anyone reported the possible bug to AMD, or asked them?
ParanoidZoid@reddit (OP)
Wendell from Level1Techs has already reported it to his AMD representative. The AMD representative gave a non-clear response but insinuated that it is intended behavior and not a bug.
terraphantm@reddit
Have you ever tried getting support from a multinational company with regards to a new bug? Damn near impossible to get through to anyone who would actually understand, especially when the bug is something that affects a small niche. Stirring it up on social media is about the only way to draw attention these days.
SharkBaitDLS@reddit
A shame. One of the things I appreciated about AM4 was that as I upgraded my personal rig I could shunt the old CPU into a server build.
AutoModerator@reddit
Hello! It looks like this might be a question or a request for help that violates our rules on /r/hardware. If your post is about a computer build or tech support, please delete this post and resubmit it to /r/buildapc or /r/techsupport. If not please click report on this comment and the moderators will take a look. Thanks!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.