Ryzen 3rd Gen

[MattBurt]

Ok, I did not know this benchmark either so I ran it too. 691.2 here. I could probably do a little more tuning but it seems acceptable for my daily needs for what it cost.

[armand]

Did any here built or saw a system with the latest Ryzen or with the Intel 9900K that has 128GB RAM?

In theory it's supported but I have yet to see or hear about a system like this and when I looked through the supported RAM list on motherboards there is a singular 2666MHz Crucial @ 32GB that might work in a 128GB setting but it's not clear. Everything else that I saw was up to 64GB RAM and even there many had issues with 32GB sticks, particularly faster than 2666MHz. The closest that I've seen that makes think it should be possible it's the configurator from Puget for a LR machine where they have the option for 128GB but even there they change to a Samsung memory which I have yet to see for sale.

[geneo]

Made me curious how my system stacked up against Puget 9900k. I have an 6 core/12 thread 8086k which  I have a daily overclock of  5.1 GHz all cores, 2070 Super and 64 GB memory for which I allocated 40 GB to photoshop. Pretty darn close but I wonder why it is worse than their stock 8700k, especially on the filter score. is it different versions of their benchmark, photoshop?

At the moment, ff I were going for a new build from mostly scratch, I think I would go with AMD.



EDIT: FWIW, a lot of the difference is in Spectre patches (disabled below), some from increasing memory for photoshop. So there is something like a 5% hit for Spectre/meltdown for Intel that may or may not be accounted for if you compare results.

[alatreille]

My intention is to build my Ryzen computer with 128gb.
Aiming for the middle of Feb as a finished build.

Did any here built or saw a system with the latest Ryzen or with the Intel 9900K that has 128GB RAM?

In theory it's supported but I have yet to see or hear about a system like this and when I looked through the supported RAM list on motherboards there is a singular 2666MHz Crucial @ 32GB that might work in a 128GB setting but it's not clear. Everything else that I saw was up to 64GB RAM and even there many had issues with 32GB sticks, particularly faster than 2666MHz. The closest that I've seen that makes think it should be possible it's the configurator from Puget for a LR machine where they have the option for 128GB but even there they change to a Samsung memory which I have yet to see for sale.

[Christopher]

I‘m currently building a Ryzen 3960 system with 256Gb.
I choose the G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3200 32Gb each.

Did any here built or saw a system with the latest Ryzen or with the Intel 9900K that has 128GB RAM?

I would need to check for x570 boards.

In theory it's supported but I have yet to see or hear about a system like this and when I looked through the supported RAM list on motherboards there is a singular 2666MHz Crucial @ 32GB that might work in a 128GB setting but it's not clear. Everything else that I saw was up to 64GB RAM and even there many had issues with 32GB sticks, particularly faster than 2666MHz. The closest that I've seen that makes think it should be possible it's the configurator from Puget for a LR machine where they have the option for 128GB but even there they change to a Samsung memory which I have yet to see for sale.

[armand]

I‘m currently building a Ryzen 3960 system with 256Gb.
I choose the G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3200 32Gb each.

That's on TR40, right?

[armand]

My intention is to build my Ryzen computer with 128gb.
Aiming for the middle of Feb as a finished build.

Great, we are almost in sync. I will reuse my PSU, case and most of the storage.
So I've been looking everywhere for a 128GB build and have yet to find it. I know Puget offers it with a 2666MHz Samsung RAM that's not really on the market and I hear that going above 2666MHz for 128GB total might cause stability headaches.
In the pcpartpicker lists of completed builds with my tentative motherboard I have yet to find somebody with a 128GB. I did find a couple of build with 64GB @ 3200MHz and 3600MHz.

So far I'm at this stage, trying to figure the RAM problem: https://pcpartpicker.com/list/PJGhmg

PS. I should have been more clear, Ryzen 9 3rd generation, 3900x in particular. Willing to look again at 9900K if it will offer 128GB RAM and Ryzen won't. Ryzen Threadripper are just too expensive and the Intel i9x don't offer similar performance to the 9900K unless you pay triple.

[Christopher]

That's on TR40, right?

Yes that is correct. My current intel system is running 128Gb and I’m running out to often. Or let’s say often enough so that I want more on my next build.

I’m currently building with MSI boards because I have very good recent experiences with them. However, Asus and Gigabyte are fine as well.

For example the MSI PRESTIGE X570 CREATION Supports ( would choose it for the 10g LAN support) same goes for the MSI MEG X570 ACE
Corsair   CMV32GX4M1A2666C18   2666MHz   2666MHz   2666 MHz   Spectek PP038-093TP   1.2V   DUAL   32GB   √ | √ | √ (The third ok is for all 4 memory banks)
Or
G.SKILL   F4-3200C16Q-128GVK   2666MHz   3200MHz   3200 MHz   SK hynix MFR   1.35v   DUAL   32GB   √ | √ | √

So it should be 100% fine to go with either Memory on that board.

I can check the Gigabyte as well just don’t have time right now.

A few more points to your list. I would go with Noctua NF-A12x25 as in my testing and opinion these are by far the best fans out there currently. I would combine it with one noctua NF-A14 ULN.

I would choose a SSD without any heat sink on, as you will put it under the mainboards cooling system. I’m not sure if you can remove it easily on the SSD.

If you have any question just ask. I will try to help where I can.

[armand]

Yes that is correct. My current intel system is running 128Gb and I’m running out to often. Or let’s say often enough so that I want more on my next build.

I’m currently building with MSI boards because I have very good recent experiences with them. However, Asus and Gigabyte are fine as well.

For example the MSI PRESTIGE X570 CREATION Supports ( would choose it for the 10g LAN support) same goes for the MSI MEG X570 ACE
Corsair   CMV32GX4M1A2666C18   2666MHz   2666MHz   2666 MHz   Spectek PP038-093TP   1.2V   DUAL   32GB   √ | √ | √ (The third ok is for all 4 memory banks)
Or
G.SKILL   F4-3200C16Q-128GVK   2666MHz   3200MHz   3200 MHz   SK hynix MFR   1.35v   DUAL   32GB   √ | √ | √

So it should be 100% fine to go with either Memory on that board.

I can check the Gigabyte as well just don’t have time right now.

A few more points to your list. I would go with Noctua NF-A12x25 as in my testing and opinion these are by far the best fans out there currently. I would combine it with one noctua NF-A14 ULN.

I would choose a SSD without any heat sink on, as you will put it under the mainboards cooling system. I’m not sure if you can remove it easily on the SSD.

If you have any question just ask. I will try to help where I can.

Thank you.
It's a little weird because I looked at those MSI supported RAM and I missed it, wonder if I was looking at something different than Matisse or maybe because when I sort by stick size 16GB is shown to be bigger than 32GB. So they support 128GB up to 3200MHz (certified). For Gigabyte and AsRock I can only find the Crucial 2666MHz, for Asus up to 64GB. In the same time the MSI list is the only one that looks that it was updated after the board was released (12/5/2019) while the others are on the launch date (8/2/2019) and they didn't bother updating them after.
Until now I've used only Asus boards but on my last there are small nagging things (mostly software related) that I'm willing to look somewhere else; Gigabyte because that's what Puget uses but I can look at others.


Regarding the fan; I already have case fans right now, those in the build are in addition to (or maybe replace the older ones), because I hear X570 is hot. I only have Noctua that I added my my existing Fractal Design that came with the case. Noise is my main concern, currently my computer is practically silent as in I can't hear it if when I listen. When I overclocked the CPU I had an initial faint whoosh upon starting, for few seconds, but that's about it.


As for the SSD with heat sink, it depends on the board. On the Gigabyte the M2 shields are separate from the cooling so I can just have SSD with the built in heat sink and not cover it; on the MSI that you referenced I can see that they are part of the cooling system.

[kers]

Still don't understand why people need more than say 32 GB RAM...
I check my ram use frequently and hardly ever i need more. ( and i work with large GB panorama's)
If i do need more, I just close a program that is not in use and have enough again.
It is mostly unused cache that piles up, also because some programs just gather and gather without releasing it. ( photoshop for one)
I am on a Mac 13.6

[armand]

Still don't understand why people need more than say 32 GB RAM...
I check my ram use frequently and hardly ever i need more. ( and i work with large GB panorama's)
If i do need more, I just close a program that is not in use and have enough again.
It is mostly unused cache that piles up, also because some programs just gather and gather without releasing it. ( photoshop for one)
I am on a Mac 13.6

For one thing I'm lazy and keep many things open, including a Chrome with 10-30 tabs, and if Photoshop is opened then LR is too (I almost always make a trip only from LR). Lately my PS has been giving me errors in regards to memory, I had to do some registry editing to run that Puget test. I didn't test enough after to see if it really fixed the problem. My idea is that I want to maximize my build to keep me the longest and it's easier to add the max RAM now than to try to find identical sticks later.
I'm not earning a living out of photography (on the contrary) so I want to have this flexibility.

The question mark with X570 and 128GB is that while theoretically is supported I don't see builds with that much RAM. I do see many problems with 4 sticks/faster memory through, at least with XMP enabled, that I'm a little apprehensive about it.
Christopher quoted above some G.SKILL RAM at 3200MHz (not seen supported on my Gigabyte info) but shown as supported on MSI motherboard and shown as compatible with the Gigabyte board on G.SKILL compatibility list; problem is it suddenly went out of stock everywhere in US, quite weird, makes me think it was pulled off the market that actually sold.


On a side note the Aorus Master remains on the list of motherboards and I added the MSI Prestige X570 Creation (10GbE LAN, tons of USB 3.2 ports) and ASRock X570 Creator (10GbE LAN, TB3 that might work).

[geneo]

From what I've seen, there never has  been much supply of the high-density 128GB kits. It is new and there is not a lot of demand.

Generally, if someone needs that much RAM. they are looking at motherboards with more than 4 dimm slots and more than 2 channels.

[Christopher]

Still don't understand why people need more than say 32 GB RAM...
I check my ram use frequently and hardly ever i need more. ( and i work with large GB panorama's)
If i do need more, I just close a program that is not in use and have enough again.
It is mostly unused cache that piles up, also because some programs just gather and gather without releasing it. ( photoshop for one)
I am on a Mac 13.6

You probably don’t work on 200-1000Mp images.... sure you. An do that with 32 or even 16Gb of ram. However, it’s painfully slow if Photoshop hast to use a scratch disk all the time. Even if it’s a modern m2 SSD.

[kers]

You probably don’t work on 200-1000Mp images.... sure you. An do that with 32 or even 16Gb of ram. However, it’s painfully slow if Photoshop hast to use a scratch disk all the time. Even if it’s a modern m2 SSD.

I do - not slow at all- certainly in relation to how slow it is to make these giant photographs.
https://www.beeld.nu/beeld/

[Christopher]

As I said the definition of slow and fast is difficult to judge for people not experiencing both. I can say that the difference between 64GB and 128GB is there on larger images and it’s very significant.

All in all Photoshop shows very nicely if you are at full speed or not, as when it’s dropping efficiency it’s not as it’s fastest and this is happening to me quite often. I do work with lots and lots of layers at some points of my processing.

If you don’t run out of memory then it’s absolutely true you don’t need more. It’s also true that 64GB is probably enough for 99% of us all.

[armand]

I was contemplating stepping up to the Creator/Creation series from ASRock or MSI because they have 10GbE LAN and TB3 (for ASRock). The rational for having those is to move my fast access storage from inside my computer to a NAS/DAS. The reason would be easier computer upgrades and easier access for other computers.
However, I think I'm having an epiphany in regards to how much I truly need this.

Currently my fast storage is on SATA SSD in a storage pool in Windows (basically JBOD). I can reasonably expect somewhere around 500 MB/s.

Moving to 10 GbE LAN I'm looking at 1000 MB/s or so (if the NAS can provide that reading speed). A higher level Synology can have up to 2000 MB/s although I have my doubts how they got to that (probably dual aggregate 10 GbE LAN card and SSDs). A higher level QNAP can provide 1000 MB/s or so, through a 10 GbE or TB3.

So in theory with one of those options I can double my speed. If I look at the cost though I will pay more than $1500 either way (likely more for QNAP). A TB3 DAS isn't that easy to come by, not one that will easily exceed my current 500 MB/s.


Now, if I look again at the internal fast storage option, I can add 2 more Gen4 (even Gen3 will be good) at 4TB each for a total of 8TB at a speed reaching 5000 MB/s and currently at $1500. I don't like that there is only one option though, the Sabrent Rocket. I could go with a add-in PCI-E NVME card and have 4 2TB drives but it's more complicated. My current video card doesn't saturate even a PCI gen3 x8 and I don't need much SATA ports either (sharing bandwidth with the add-in card) so it's possible.


If I don't need a fast NAS I can just keep up with what I have right now for a little longer, so no extra cost here.

So, in conclusion, I think the priority has become for me how many M2 gen4 slots the motherboards has and how easy is to use all (and add more).

[Joe Towner]

An OWC ThunderBay6 would give you 6x SATA plus a M.2 NVMe slot off a single TB3 port. Their OWC Express 4M2 is 4x NVMe drives off a single TB3 port.

There are a couple of PCIe 3.0 16x cards to 4x NVMe adapters out there, but I haven't seen a PCIe 4 one yet.

The ThunderBay6 seems to be the best option out there.  I haven't dealt with Windows Storage Pools yet, but if you can use a NVMe as a caching device in front of a bunch of SATA SSD's, with it tuned for performance it'll be fast & mobile.  I actually think checking on the SSD units themselves as to their performance & tech might actually get you better results.  Some SSD's just aren't up for the higher workloads.

[armand]

The ThunderBay6 RAID was the main option that looks reasonable, the OWC Express not so much (see my previous post about getting the NVME drives internal) with a max 8TB capacity.

The problem is that it can go up to 1150 MB/s or so, but is similar to a 10GbE would do so not much advantage here. And that's the maximum speed which you rarely achieve in real world. IF I were on a Mac, then this would still be a decent option. However, the SoftRAID that they base their speed calculations on (https://www.softraid.com/pages/features/raid_levels.html#raid_speeds_chart ) is not available for Windows, not yet at least. So in Windows you have to use storage pools, the best would be the "parity" option, similar to a RAID5.
Then it's the big elephant in the room, TB3 on windows on an AMD processor. Basically one option, ASRock X570 Creator (I hear Taichi with a add-on PCIE card works too but then the cost difference is much smaller and not worth it). I don't know how reliable the TB3 connection is on this motherboard. And going back to actual speed, getting a similar speed on a 10 GbE makes me less interested in TB3 in a desktop if I can add enough NVME SSD internal capacity. I would have an opposite opinion if I had only a laptop as a primary computer though.

[armand]

Upon further reading it looks like the write performance of Storage Pool with parity in Win10 is pretty bad so for fast SSDs you are probably better with simple storage pools (similar to JBOD), you lose some read speed but gain a lot more write speed. Not too mention that if a drive fails with the first option it will take much longer to recover in comparison to restoring from a backup.

[Joe Towner]

It was once said that Mac's were just Photoshop machines, as in they were used for that purpose alone. Much like Mac folks had Wintendo's, pc's just to play games.  I like NAS'es because they separate my complex & large storage from my day to day technology uses.

That the storage pool setup on Win10 has limitations like that sucks big time - especially when you have invested in SSD's.