Jukka Larja (roskakori2006.delete@this.gmail.com) on January 1, 2021 10:43 am wrote:
> Trying to google about how well the unofficial support works, I get lot of hits about people saying that
> yes, it works, without any proof. I don't see people with a test DIMMs known to produce single bit errors
> making sure the unofficial support works, or making sure it works in every CPU or at least gives some easy
> to see error somewhere if it doesn't (I'm sure someone somewhere has tested something, but it gets lost
> in the noise. Anecdotes are only useful if there's enough of them to be statistically significant).
>
> I really like what AMD is doing with CPUs, but unofficial ECC support just
> annoys me. It's supposed to give me peace of mind and eliminate one source
> of random problems. "Unofficial" really doesn't work great with that goal.

I wrote an article on how to monitor ECC memory on Linux. On my Ryzen machine I could inject errors just by overclocking the memory. I used Crucial CT16G4WFD8266 DIMMs, clocking them over 3000MHz would cause them to throw out single-bit errors which were corrected and reported.