Everest Memory Benches

mrk

mrk

mrk

Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
105,249
Location
South Coast
I have been tpying with some BIOS settings in the MIT menu of my EP45 and found something interesting.

Setting the DRAM performance from Standard to Extreme the Mem benches in Everest report:

Code: 
                    Standard   /      Extreme
read:               6311       /      7352 MB/s
write:              7198       /      7201 MB/s
copy:               7293       /      7650 MB/s
latency:            87         /      70.5 ns

I have 4x2GB of GSkill PC8000 (1GHz) modules.

So write speed has improved by 1000MB/s whilst latency has dropped 17.5ns and copy speed has increased a few hundred.

Are these figure increases standard across the board in real world performance wise or is it unlikely to yield any difference does anyone know?

My RAM is not OCd but in fact 1:1 (400MHz DDR) so it's not being stressed in Extreme mode but it would be interesting to know the above!
 
Last edited:
You'll notice very little realworld difference in performance... if you were unzipping an extremely large file you might knock 30 seconds off an approx ~5-6minute job. Ingame performanec might increase 1-2fps.
 
mrk said:
Are these figure increases standard across the board in real world performance wise or is it unlikely to yield any difference does anyone know?
Click to expand...
I think the lower latency would help make the system feel *snappier* and the increased bandwidth helps out with most things including gaming and FPS benchmarking! :)

By themselves these little enhancements don't make a night and day difference but you chain half a dozen of the smaller tweaks together and you get a nice *boost!*

sub 60ns latency is what your aiming for, happy tweaking! :cool:
 
Ah yeah I'd forgotten about that aspect... it might seem silly when your talking about nano seconds but lower latency deffinatly can make windows feel more responsive.
 
Thanks! what other tweaks can be done to lower my latency can you recommend?
 
I'm pretty sure windows "snappiness" and such due to latency is all placebo. I have just gone from some OCZ sticks that run at 1192mhz 5,5,5,15...to OCZ sticks that run 824mhz 3,4,4,12....and there's absolutely no noticeable difference in anything really...Certainly not just in general windows use.

That said, I am a memory junky and may pick up those OCZ Blade Low Voltage sticks as 1150mhz @ 1.8V is just quite tempting. THat or a DDR3 setup but I really would like to wait to switch platforms before I do that.

But yes, it's very easy to get wrapped up in benchmark bandwidths and latencies.....but there really is no noticeable difference for 99% of the tasks.
 
Yeah I'm soooo tempted by those 1150 blades... the low voltage attracts me as DDR2 seems to die so quickly above 2.1v.

/me reaches for wallet, contemplates...

I know I don't really need anything above the 800Mhz I'm running now - but its a bit of a climb down after running some g.skill HZ @ 1333Mhz CAS5.

Think I might just flip a coin.

I don't even bother overclocking my RAM anymore as the performance gains really aren't that noticeable outside of benchmarking... even between setups clocking up 80ns latency and 7000MB/s read against 40ns latency and 12,000MB/s read. I personally feel windows is a bit snappier if you get the latency down to around 40-50ns but I can't guarantee its not placebo as said above.
 
Last edited:
gurusan said:
I'm pretty sure windows "snappiness" and such due to latency is all placebo
Click to expand...
You maybe can't tell the difference but I can. A low latency system just is faster in general use :)

gurusan said:
I have just gone from some OCZ sticks that run at 1192mhz 5,5,5,15...to OCZ sticks that run 824mhz 3,4,4,12....and there's absolutely no noticeable difference in anything really...Certainly not just in general windows use
Click to expand...
DDR2-1092 (546MHz) CAS5 - 9.2 ns - 8,736 MB/s
DDR2--824 (412MHz) CAS3 - 7.3 ns - 6,592 MB/s

Did you know that the latter config is actually lower latency (albeit with less bandwidth), I never got 7.3ns memory stable . . .very nice! :cool:

mrk said:
In that case I'll just leave it and be happy :p
Click to expand...
You really shouldn't let anyone else do the thinking for you, to disregard low latency as a placebo effect and not something you can notice in actual realworld would be the same as disregarding an extra 400MHz-600MHz extra to a processor speed (kinda).

More Processor Speed
More System Bandwidth
Less System Latency

All desirable features to a Tweaker, if I had to choose from the three I would take system latency every time as it's something that makes the user experience nicer to me, every time I click the mouse the Window has appeared before I have begun to raise my finger up from the mouse, it's a good thing honest! ;)
 
Well latency wise I can't say my system is slow because it's exactly as you say, click mouse>window opens before you can move your finger!

But then again with 8GB of the stuff and a 3.2GHz quad it should damn well be snappy!

Hmm, i just need to know how ot get some more latency drops out of it without affecting stability really. I'm at 1GHz on the ram modules and 2.1v (rated) but if I drop to 667MHz the timngs naturally tighten.
 
gurusan said:
But yes, it's very easy to get wrapped up in [overclocking your processor and swapping out your CPU every few weeks].....but there really is no noticeable difference for 99% of the tasks.
Click to expand...

Hey Buddy, hope you don't mind the creative edit! :)

You above many others love overclocking Core 2, seeing how many MHz you can squeeze from the little processor and generally keeping yourself entertained and tweaking away doing your thing . . . I would never dream of telling you that in the real world (outside of benchmarking) there really is no noticeable difference for 99% of the tasks.

I hope this makes a point in the right way oh great one! :cool:
 
mrk said:
Well latency wise I can't say my system is slow because it's exactly as you say, click mouse>window opens before you can move your finger!
Click to expand...
well we can't call a Core 2 system slow, any modern computer is a piece of wonderkit but some are just faster than others, I guess its all relative but we geeks tends to really exaggerate what is the smallest of things . .

mrk said:
But then again with 8GB of the stuff and a 3.2GHz quad it should damn well be snappy!
Click to expand...
I don't think memory capacity really impacts anything except once its all filled up, a 2GB system with 1GB load and a 8GB system with 1GB load should in theory operate at identical speeds? :confused:

Of course once your memory workload exceeds 2GB (intense gaming or whatever) the 2GB system will begin swapping data to disk and little micropauses will be noticeable whereas the 8GB system just keeps breezing along.

I'm yet to exceed a 3GB memory useage, heh what am I doing wrong? :o

mrk said:
Hmm, i just need to know how ot get some more latency drops out of it without affecting stability really. I'm at 1GHz on the ram modules and 2.1v (rated) but if I drop to 667MHz the timngs naturally tighten.
Click to expand...

A low latency system is comprised of the following:

  • Memory configured for low latency operation
  • Fast Processor Cache Speed
  • Fast System Bus
  • Low Northbridge tweaks (i.e low tRD/Performance Level)
I didn't understand how Memory and system latency worked before, then I learnt about tRD and found the results positive. I also didn't understand how Memory latency is worked out i.e DDR2-800 CAS5 = 12.5ns and DDR2-800 CAS4 = 10ns etc

Look at the page below and either read it or scroll down to the bottom and download the TTR Overclocking Guide.xls and have a play, helped me a lot! :)

TTR's Guide to Determining Optimum Overclocked System Performance Points - The Tech Repository Forums
 
I cannot use decimal places for the multi on the Q6600 :(

At 1GHz the RAM runs at 7-7-7-18 instead of 800MHz's 5-5-5-15 too.
 
Mine is not far off (cpu 400x8 ram 500x2) which is why I said it's your mobo giving you the extra advantage really as the Rampage is highly efficient
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom