I was looking to understand from others experiences, if in situations where the performance is limited by the CPU, whether it makes any improvement to upgrade to faster RAM.
I tried this months ago, shortly after installing FS for the first time, going from 3200 MHz to 3600 MHz, but at the time I was not aware of the differences in CPU vs GPU bottleneck, and I didn’t see any difference.
However, looking back now, I think that was most likely a situation of GPU bottleneck (GA aircraft and easy scenery)
Could that outcome be different in a CPU bottleneck situation instead, to get a few extra FPS ?
The Ryzen CPU’s do benefit from faster RAM, since that increases the infinity fabric clock. On intel I think it makes less of a difference.
Even so, I doubt you’ll see that much of a significant increase by going from 3200 to 3600. Maybe a couple FPS on Ryzen in CPU limited scenario’s.
2 Likes
IIRC I saw a small improvement from the default setting of (?) 2000 MHz to the actually-correct XMP-provided setting of 3200 MHz when I set up my Ryzen 3700X system, but it was only like 3 fps difference.
I would expect the difference between 3200 and 3600 to be smaller than that, if visible beyond noise at all.
1 Like
The only way ram will benifit performance in this sim or just in general, is not todo with speeds but rather size
Example if you was to have 64GB of ram, you could easily use software like ram cache to cache 32gb, and stop page sharing that way rather then extra data being offloaded, it will use the dedicated 32gb of ram.
That’s just my thoughts and I have seen people mention that and it made the gameplay smoother, I can see it possibly helping but that’s more for load times /loading of scenery etc
1 Like
I should have mention that I have:
- Ryzen 5 5600X
- RTX 3080
- RAM 32 GB at 3200 Mhz
- Playing at 1440p, most settings on ultra.
It’s a pretty decent hardware, and to be fair, it’s well capable of handling any situation in FS, even airliners over big cities, rarely dropping below 40/45 fps, but I still wonder if it’s the RAM the weakest link here.
From what you have currently… no, you won’t see any difference, nor will you even if you went with lower CAS latency ram. The issue lies in their poor coding that needs to be tweaked out and optimized and also made to better handle multicore CPU usage and also still being on DirectX 11. Don’t waste your money.
If the bios is defaulting to 2666 it wouldn’t make much difference then would it?
well, not utilizing the RAM speed you paid for seems like you’re leaving free performance on the table.
BIOS will default to non-XMP / DOCP settings, regardless of the RAM sticks you plug in.
If you have 3600MHz RAM then running it at 2666 or 2433MHz is not very smart. You will notice a difference. It just won’t give 10+ FPS in MSFS.
2 Likes
Bios is correctly configured XMP for 3200 MHz, and assuming it would be also with 3600 MHz
1 Like
I would not ■■■-u-me anything. If you upgraded then check your bios settings and confirm.
Concur. I have 128GB Hyper X DDR 4 RAM at 3200Mhz, along with a 3090, i9 at 5.3Ghz with 100 rendering (VR) with clouds the only thing set to ultra and get random slow downs (less than 10-15fps) several times in a flight–not location dependent–after SU3.
2 Likes
Bios does not default memory timing.
It will default on the initial boot. (first install boot)
After that, it is up to you. Keep it or change the timing to
suite your memory. It will never change after it’s set it in the BIOS.
Use “CPUZ” to see what it is set to.
In my experience, it is not just the RAM clock rate. It is also the CL timing of the RAM that matters, especially in flight sims with lots of little memory reads all over the place.
I have always applied the following “non scientific” test when evaluating RAM.
Speed / CL = performance_value (the higher the better)
3200/14 = 228
3600/16 = 225
I would argue, that all things being equal (and a 1:1 Fabric relationship on Ryzen systems), there isn’t much difference between 3200/14 and 3600/16 RAM. Bandwidth for large memory transfers is greater with 3600, but overall, so long as attention is given to the CL timing (the lower the better), the difference is marginal.
I would apply my math to your existing RAM, and then do the same for any RAM you are thinking of buying to see if the numbers improve.
My approach is not scientific, just “rule of thumb”
2 Likes
Right, probably from the economic point of view it’s not worth it at all.
A set of 32 GB 3600 MHz with low timings is still fairly expensive and I’d say prices are more likely to go up at this time.
Hi @Nando998 ,
Don’t underestimate the value of fast ram - I changed my 2000 to 4000 ram (32 gig) and you could see the difference. It really helped.
Thanks
PaulyFSPauly
If you’re going out to buy RAM, then I’d recommend buying 3600CL16 for Ryzen, but if you’re already rocking 3200CL16 or something like that, I wouldnt bother. If you had bog standard RAM running at 2666 or something, maaaybe I’d consider upgrading it, but when you’re already at 3200CL16 you’re not gonna notice much of a difference. There are several benchmarks online which show you what faster RAM will do in different scenarios, and yes, 3600CL16 is considered the optimal for AMD Ryzen 5000 series unless overclocking, but it would be single digits in performance difference. Not enough to upgrade for, but a “why the heck not” if you’re buying RAM for a new computer. You could also see if you can push your current RAM kit to higher frequencies, maybe 3400 or something. It’s not gonna damage anything, save from lost time and a few blue screens while testing for stability
Short Answer: Yes
Longer Answer: Yes, in some cases
The way to describe it, think of it like this.
There is a bus which takes people (data) from Point A (Your RAM) to Point B (Your CPU) and then back to Point A (Your RAM).
When it gets to Point B (Your CPU) it unloads all the people (Data) and then Point B (CPU) takes the people (Data) and changes their clothes (changes the information) and then loads them back onto the bus and sends them back to Point A (Your RAM).
If your RAM is slow, then the bus only travels at 20mph for example. Where-as if it was fast the bus travels at 60mph.
If the bus is too slow then the people at Point B (CPU) literally have to stop and wait for the bus to arrive, which will effect the amount of operations it can do per second.
But it depends on
- How many people (Data) Point A (CPU) needs
- How frequently it needs them
- How quickly Point (CPU) A can process the people (people)
Hope that helps explain it!
Thanks all for the input.
I guess the difference is not substantial just by going from 3200 to 3600.
I might give it a try and if it still doesn’t make an improvement, I can always sent it back for refund.
There is also something more apart from the bus speed.
It is called memory latency and is known with some numbers that accompany memory products in the market.
Those timers mean, in very simple words, how long the processor has to wait until the RAM responds in several scenarios.
The lower the better. Again. Not huge difference, but every little counts.