AMD Black Edition Memory Profiles: One Click Memory Overclocking

There’s another little overclocking improvement that AMD implemented in software: Black Edition Memory Profiles (BEMP).


My Corsair memory can run at DDR3-1600 9-9-9-24, AMD's database knows this

If you have a motherboard with an AOD3 compatible BIOS (yes, there is such a thing) and you have a DDR3 memory module that has an AMD Black Edition Memory Profile, you can click one button and your system will overclock its memory to the settings that AMD and the memory vendor guarantee their platform at.

The memory/participating vendors list is as follows:

Manufacturer Memory Module(s)
Corsair CM3X2G1600C9DHX
Kingston KHX11000D3LLK2/2G
KHX12800D3K2/2G
Mushkin 991629
OCZ OCZ3AMD18002G

 

Yep, it’s not very long. But the effect is pretty neat. The AOD3 utility connects to AMD’s online database and finds your memory. It retrieves what settings AMD and the memory vendor agree will work and then applies them to your system. A simple reboot later and you have an overclocked un-core and DDR3 memory. The table below shows you what will happen:

Rated DDR3 Speed 1333MHz 1600MHz
NB Frequency 2200MHz 2400MHz
NB Voltage 1.200V 1.300V

 

The memory timings and voltages are also properly set. Unfortunately with my Gigabyte 790FX board there’s a bug where instead of setting the BEMP compliant Corsair memory to 1.75V it sets it to 1.70V which isn’t stable. AMD is clearly still working out bugs in the system, but thankfully it’s software so those bugs can be worked out.


These Corsair modules support BEMP

Additionally, you can always create your own profiles to avoid mishaps like this one. What sort of performance boost can a single click yield? The graph below shows you:

The average increase in performance was only 1.3%, mostly due to the fact that some numbers went down. The problem is that DDR3-1333 (my default speed) at CL7 is lower latency than DDR3-1600 at CL9; applications that can’t use the added bandwidth are penalized by the longer memory access latency. That being said, some applications did show performance boosts from 1 - 5%. Is it enough for me to specifically buy memory that has a Black Edition Memory Profile? No, but it’s a nice convenience if you happen to have some.

The Software Answer to Intel’s Turbo Mode Overclocking – Adventures in Frustration
Comments Locked

65 Comments

View All Comments

  • strikeback03 - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    Well, the most expensive X58 board is over $400, while the cheapest AM2+ boards are under $50, do you want them to say the range is over $350? I'd guess the thinking behind that statement was that you would pair the most expensive processor AMD sells with a higher-end board - the AMD boards top out at about $190, about where the i7 boards start (ignoring rebates).
  • just4U - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link

    It's the minimum entry level into each that I think most people would be curious about. The higher end stuff can really skyrocket the price after all and I am pretty sure it would be filled with features not likely to interest the majority.

  • strikeback03 - Friday, April 24, 2009 - link

    Again though, those who are looking to buy the 955 are probably interested in some of the stuff the better boards offer. Considering the performance available form the 720 or 940 at cheaper prices, I am still doubtful how many people would go for the 955 and the cheapest motherboard possible.
  • duploxxx - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    arrgghh stupied newegg search engine and no edit on anandtech posts

    the msi costs 131, that is still 40$

    http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...">http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
  • ssj4Gogeta - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    AMD is getting close and that's a good thing as all of us know. Not that I use AMD, but low prices on Intel chips is good.

    But I think that AMD is soon going to be left behind again when Intel introduces the affordable i5. From what I know the only difference between i7 is that i5 has only 2 channels of RAM and it has the PCIe controller on the package. Surely it won't be too far behind i7 in terms of performance.

    Also can someone clarify whether i5 will be using QPI?
  • duploxxx - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    well then you are one of the so many that have an issue about best price/performance and waht about know, all non i7 buyers are better of pricewise with a AMD based system unless you really want to stick with dualcore for no future at all... . On what planet were you living from 2003-2006 when AMD was the better choice of buying instead off Intel.
  • Sagath - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    Yes, and No. It uses a QPI derivative called CPI if my memory serves correct.

    I dont remember where I read this, so I cannot referance you to it. Nor do I know the difference between the two. Sorry.
  • knutjb - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    AMD still has a long way to go but they are improving. I am glad to see them improve since it pressures Intel to lower prices that benefit the majority of us who can't afford Intel's high end. The closer the competition the better for the consumer, we can't afford to see AMD die off as some joke about.
  • Griswold - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    "..but as applications and workloads become more threaded the i7 could be a wiser long-term purchase. "

    I bought my Q6600 in 2007 and for good reasons (then). I made good use of the four cores - but I've been hearing the above quoted sentence sind 2007 and before but it still has not become true and probably wont before quite some time.

    Where is this "more threaded" and when will it actually arrive? :P

    The situation is such, that I'm definitely going to wait for i5 for the next upgrade and may grab a dualie with hyperthreading, simply because theres only so much I need 4 physical cores for now so it starts to seem like 2 cores plus the two additional logic cores is the more cost efficient and rational way.

    An i7 is definitely not going to be my thing - I just dont need 8 logical cores enough to make it worthwhile.

    But maybe I can stick to my trusty Q6600 long enough for AMD to serve me the perfect solution, maybe with Bulldozer?
  • ssj4Gogeta - Thursday, April 23, 2009 - link

    Why do you look at the number of cores and decide? Look at the performance numbers and decided.

    Besides Hyper threading can't deliver performance boost in all applications. So if you're going 2 cores with hyperthreading you may not see as much performance as 4 physical cores in many apps. You need to look at performance numbers for the apps you most use, not the number of cores.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now