"We are back" « oc.at

Memory Bandwidth vs. Latency Timings

reichsverweser 19.02.2004 - 03:49 778 1
Posts

reichsverweser

Banned
Avatar
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: vienna
Posts: 163
Also das habe ich bei http://www.neoseeker.com gefunden
bei suchen: "Memory Bandwidth vs. Latency Timings" eingeben und ihr findet auch diverse benchmarks
2-3% Improvement
While bandwidth is still very important to the Intel Pentium 4, it's not as important as it once was in the i845PE days of single channel memory controllers. Thanks to the i865PE/i875P's dual channel memory controller things are much brighter. On average, the system with the memory running at 400 MHz (5:4 memory divider enabled) with aggressive memory timings performed 2-3% faster than the system using high speed memory with loose timings.

While that may not seem like a lot to most people, it can make a world of a difference to the enthusiast, especially if you're gunning for that high score in a clan match where every FPS counts.

It seems as if all the large memory manufacturers/suppliers are afraid to lose face by not pumping out high speed memory modules with lax memory timings just so they can list them in their product lines. Many enthusiasts I know, tend to favour slower memory which allows them to run aggressive timings however.

One might say that the benchmarks we used were stacked against memory that uses conservative timings, but if you think about it, games and simple 2D applications are the programs that most consumers run where speedy performance really is important. That's why we ran the benchmarks we did; office environments with their servers or workstation PC are more interested in stability, and overclocking has an element of risk involved for both hardware and software.

Athlon64 based systems seem to act a lot like the 800 MHz FSB Pentium 4 processors in regard to their memory bandwidth and timings when overclocked. However, before conclusions can be drawn in this field, more research has to be done before....

If you're in the market for new memory for your Pentium 4 system and you're only thinking about gaming performance, then you're best bet is to get DDR which is rated to run aggressive timings. Some examples include Mushkin's PC3500 Level II which is rated to run 2-2-2-5 at 217 MHz FSB or Corair's TwinX-3200LL which are rated for 2-2-2-5 at 200 MHz.

If you're a newbie/novice overclocker and would prefer to buy something that takes a little less work while still producing good numbers on your Pentium 4 system, then by all means get some of the high speed DIMM's that are available on the market. They're not quite as fast as the low latency modules as we've shown, but they're much easier to set up. Now for AMD systems, because the AthlonXP cannot hit as high speeds as the Pentium 4 in general, it is always best to pair an AMD processor with nice low latency memory for the best results.

hoffe das regt diskussionen an

sorry für den doppelpost :bash: aber ich fand das so wichtig um es gleich jedem unter die nase zu reiben

wie auch immer
opa sagte immer doppelt hält besser
und ich will ja nicht das er sich im grabe undreht

reichsverweser

Banned
Avatar
Registered: Jan 2004
Location: vienna
Posts: 163
in zahlen ohne zu übersetzen

Winstone 2002 Benchmark Results
Content Content Score Ranking
1. 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 33.3
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 34.4
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 32.2
Business Winstone

1 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 49.5
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 48.1
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 46.5


SiSoft Sandra 2004 Benchmark Results
Memory Benchmark Score

5a. Integer SSE2 - 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 5942 MB/s
5b. Integer SSE2 - 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 5534 MB/s
5c. Integer SSE2 - 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 4908 MB/s
6a. Float SSE2 - 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 5909 MB/s
6b. Float SSE2 - 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 5519 MB/s
6c. Float SSE2 - 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 4904 MB/s

PCMark2002 Benchmark Results
Memory
PCMarks Ranking
1 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 10865
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 9712
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 9318

3DMark2001 SE Benchmark Results
Processor 3DMarks Ranking
1. 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 18545
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 18823
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 18352

AquaMark 3 Benchmark Results
Overall 3DMarks Ranking
1. 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 44913
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 45882
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 44942

Quake III Arena Fastest demo001 (SYSTEM)
Processor FPS Ranking
1. 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 503.4
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 512.3
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 496.9


Quake III Arena Fastest nv15demo (CPU TESTER)
Processor FPS Ranking
1. 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8 137.4
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 138.2
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 136.5


UT2003 Demo 640x480 Flyby
Video Card FPS Ranking
1. 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8
247.36
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 251.51
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 243.12


UT2003 Demo 640x460 Botmatch
Video Card FPS Ranking
1. 250 MHz FSB, 500 MHz Memory, 3-4-4-8
83.42
2. 250 MHz FSB, 400 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 83.87
3. 250 MHz FSB, 333 MHz Memory, 2-2-2-5 83.14

Computer Hardware:

Processor: Intel Pentium 4 2.4C HyperThreading was enabled for all the tests.


Clock Speed: 12 x 250 MHz = 3 GHz

Motherboards: Abit IC7 MAX3

Chipsets: i875P

Videocard: ATi Radeon 9800 Pro

Memory: 2x 512MB Corsair TwinX-4000
2x 512MB Corsair XMS3500 CAS2

Hard Drive: 20GB WD 7200 RPM HDD
CDROM: NEC 52x CD-ROM
Floppy: Panasonic 1.44MB Floppy Drive

Heatsink: Prometeia Mach I
PowerSupply: PC Power & Cooling TurboCool 510
Software Setup WindowsXP Build 2600
Intel INF 5.20.1002
Catalyst 3.7

Workstation Benchmarks Business Winstone 2002
Content Creation 2002
SiSoft Sandra 2004
PCMark2002
3DMark2001SE
AquaMark 3
Quake III Arena
UT2003
Kontakt | Unser Forum | Über overclockers.at | Impressum | Datenschutz