Slashdot Mirror
Memory Timings Analysis
keefe007 writes "It's generally known that smaller and more aggressive memory timings combined with higher clock speeds leads to higher performance, but for the most part, the increase in performance from tweaking each individual setting is relatively unknown. Perhaps in a bit too ambitious move, I set out to examine the impact of each individual memory timing and clock speed on overall performance. Find out the results of the tests at Techware Labs."
I read several articles that said that PC3200 is not worth the price difference and that in many casses PC2700 is faster.
/.ers have experience with this? Is PC3200 worth the price?
Before I plunk down $$$ for PC3200, I wanted to know if it is worth it. I was hoping this article would help answer the question, but it looks like he is only testing various BIOS settings with a single DIMM, and not comparing memory with different access speeds. Any
std::disclaimer<std::legalese> sig=new std::disclaimer; sig->dump(); delete sig;
Hmm, what a surprise.
Sisoft Sandra memory bandwidth tests are good at exactly that, memory bandwidth tests.
What would be much more interesting is how programs that rely on small memory latencies (especially scientific programs) depend on changing the CAS.
What, only Windows XP was used for the tests as well? Why not run tests also against Linux and BSD on the same hardware too? Your result will vary...
... driving a Pinto. You certainly won't be getting the full eXPerience.
Testing just Windows is like test driving the Indy 500
The last server shindig I went to for Compaq had all these "advanced" memory options (hotswap, interleave, RAID for RAM [and for RAM only, it wasn't a solid-state disk system]).
Does it really turn out that 4 way interleave is kind of bogus and only a 2-8% increase in performance? I suppose 8% might mean a lot, but on average it could be just 4% or so.
Well, I'll get my flamebait mods, but what a no shit article.
He finally concludes that memory clock speed has a significant effect on bandwidth, while CAS and other settings hardly have an effect at all. Something I've known intuitively all along, and anyone with a rudimentary understanding would know.
In other words, when all those "super dooper case-moddin' overclockin' nothing-knowin' computer experts" payed an extra hundred bucks for stick of CAS 2 ram instead of CAS 2.5, they got ripped off. No surprise. A fool and his money, after all.
God bless the kids who think they're super computer savvy, but are absolutely clueless and easily swayed by hype - they subsidize the industry for the rest of us.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
I did my own memory timing tests, I found that I got 40 more FPS in Q3 with DDR200@2-3-3-5 than at DDR166@2-3-3-5. When I lowered the timings to DDR166@2-2-2-5 I gained back all but a few of those 40FPS. To me that looks like memory timings have a significant effect in Q3 at least.
I learned this the other day from an article at Tom's Hardware. In retrospect it makes logical sense but I don't think it would have occured to me. We're sorta trained to think faster == more performance.
Anyways, what the article discovers is that you'll get BEST performance when memory speed == FSB speed. In benchmarks they find that a Athlon 3000+ (333Mhz FSB) with DDR333 is faster than the 3000+ with DDR400 (or DDR444). So, mental note, when shopping for a system, don't bother paying extra for that faster RAM, just get whatever matches your FSB.