G.Skill 2133 on Gigabyte GA-970A-UD3

[uKER]

I just purchased a 2-module set of this memory and I'm trying to get it to work on my motherboard.

What I expected to do was to set the mem multiplier to 10.66 (200x10.66~2133), set the memory to 1.65, set the timings manually (9-11-10-28) and be done with it, but doing this the machine won't post.

It just sits there, blank screen for a couple of seconds, and I get a notice over the post screen saying that overclocking caused boot problems and the values have been reverted.

I also tried the 2133 DOCP profile, and tried increasing the voltage to the RAM by 0.05 to 1.7v, and setting the CPU NB VID control to +0.1v, but none of that helped.
Actually, none of the "frequency-named" DOCP profiles works, not even 1600 MHz.

Strangely, there's a "Profile2" DOCP setting that sets the system frequency to 228 MHz and the DDR multiplier to 9.33, thus reaching 2127 MHz (same system voltages, same memory timings as I had set), and it seems to work, but that leaves my NB, processor and HT with weird timing values, which I'd really like to avoid.

Since even setting the base frequency to 229 (which leaves the memory at 2136 MHz) seems to work, I tend to think the controller is actually capable of handling 2133 with no issues.

Now, can anybody help me find a way to get the memory to 2133 without messing up with all of the system's timings?

Thanks in advance!
.

[Ripshod]

2133 is very hard to attain. These memory modules are designed for serious overclockers, and is well outside the design of AMD CPUs. Designed RAM speeds are as follows:

The fact that they say 2133 means the RAM will run at 2133, but it doesn't mean your CPU will do it without some serious work, and strange timings as you've already discovered.

[Vezina]

Run 2 modules single sided to get that and even then you may not reach it as the IMC does a 1866 max.
Double sided sticks one notch lower than the official max in speed.
Single rank = single sided ,chips on only one side of the module
AMD IMC works best with only 2 banks/ranks taken in the IMC ,ergo 2 single sided RAM modules/sticks.

Good table and informative.

[kosobai]

Single rank = single sided ,chips on only one side of the module

Not sure about this. I believe dual rank memory has two rows of chips on the memory board, whereas single rank only has one. I don't think that having a single row of chips on each side of the memory board counts as dual rank, but having two rows on one side would. Sidedness and rank seem to be different.

For the record, I can get my x6 running four banks of single rank memory at 1600 MHz with the correct memory timings, but the performance gain over running the memory at 1333 MHz is negligible. It does increase the power consumption of the memory, though. The law of diminishing returns, perhaps?

OP: It's probably not what you want to hear, but you're better off just leaving the memory at 1866 MHz. AMD have gone on record as stating that overclocking the memory on the non-APU chips really doesn't yield much benefit. In my experience of benchmarking, AMD are right. The biggest performance gain I got was adopting Windows 8 - core performance boosting now works properly on the Thubans and as an added bonus, memory stream performance in Geekbench has increased by 50% + over Windows 7 - far more than any tweaking will get you.

[Vezina]

Single rank = single sided ,chips on only one side of the module

Not sure about this. I believe dual rank memory has two rows of chips on the memory board, whereas single rank only has one. I don't think that having a single row of chips on each side of the memory board counts as dual rank, but having two rows on one side would. Sidedness and rank seem to be different.

Maybe you should read more regarding this aspect ,ranks ,banks and so on.It s good that you are not sure about it though.

[kosobai]

Maybe you should read more regarding this aspect ,ranks ,banks and so on.It s good that you are not sure about it though.

 For your information, I did a Google search of dual/single rank memory, and as I explained dual rank memory has two rows of chips per side whereas single rank only has one.

Now if I'm wrong you could have  explained why (for the benefit of ALL readers), but instead you chose to make a snarky comment.

Needless to say, I don't need to tell you where to stick your keyboard.