Memory Bandwidth

copsey · 16 Sep 2007 at 10:41

Guys
Yesterday I went through and finally tweaked all my memory timings and sorted out the overclock on my system. On the memory front, I've got tight timings and a 1:1 ratio sorted, and Sandra shows me with extremely low latency and the windows experience score for them is 5.9. However the memory bandwidth is very poor compared to the other reference systems.

Is there something I'm missing here?

TIA

Cob · 16 Sep 2007 at 12:28

Try Everest's memory benchmarks.

gurusan · 16 Sep 2007 at 21:09

What scores are you getting?

According to Everest I score

READ 7960 mb/s
WRITE 8261 mb/s
COPY 6916 mb/s
LATENCY 65.0 ns

Are these any good?

copsey · 16 Sep 2007 at 21:57

i've got
read 5864
latency 63.5

others are not readable due to it being a trial version (on a domain) but i can see
write < 6279
copy < 5117

gurusan · 16 Sep 2007 at 22:54

What memory is it and what are the timings?

copsey · 17 Sep 2007 at 06:08

gskill 6400 DDR2
4-4-4-12

Talrinys · 17 Sep 2007 at 09:19

Which CPU and chipset, that has a bit to say too?
And is it running correctly in dual-channel?

copsey · 17 Sep 2007 at 18:12

I'm not sure how to find that out - please have a look...!

thanks!

copsey · 19 Sep 2007 at 09:37

oh - see where it says "Channels #" and that says Single. Should that be double?

Sticklyman · 19 Sep 2007 at 11:50

copsey said:
oh - see where it says "Channels #" and that says Single. Should that be double?

Ideally it should be "Dual". As you seem to have 2 1GB sticks of RAM, which slots do you have it in? It should be either slots 1 & 3 or 2 & 4. It should be in 2 slots of the same colour so either in both the black ones or both the yellow ones.

You can check from windows using CPU-Z. On the SPD tab, use the memory slot selection to see which slows you have it in (or you could just open your case and take a look

)

Hope this helps a bit!

DavidB · 19 Sep 2007 at 13:06

Also has to be 2 identical sticks of RAM for dual channel to work most the time.

copsey · 19 Sep 2007 at 14:58

that will be it - i'll swap them tonight and come back!

gurusan · 19 Sep 2007 at 15:01

also see if you can squeeze another 22mhz FSB out of that e6600...because then you can run the memory at 1:1 ratio which is ideal.

copsey · 19 Sep 2007 at 18:05

i will have a go but i'll need to take all the voltages into the red. Its reported as 1:1 in cpuz at the moment, does it lie?

Cob · 19 Sep 2007 at 18:08

Nope.

Sticklyman · 19 Sep 2007 at 18:48

It is not lying but thats only because your e6600 is not running at full speed (2.4GHz). If you increase your FSB to 400MHz, your CPU will run at 2.4GHz and your memory will run at 800MHz (400MHz x 2). However, don't go frying things

I want no blame placed on me

copsey · 19 Sep 2007 at 20:44

ah this has done the trick! Talk about schoolboy error!

Everest:
Read: 7836
Write > 6279
Copy > 5568 (significantly so)
latency 58.4

God that is a MASSIVE difference.

Wicked thanks all!

Sticklyman, my CPU is overclocked running at 3.42GHz. I tried nudging it further but no go...

Sticklyman · 19 Sep 2007 at 22:32

Glad you have got it working

copsey said:
Sticklyman, my CPU is overclocked running at 3.42GHz. I tried nudging it further but no go...

Sorry, I thought you had just fixed your multiplier on 6x and the clock on 378 so that you could get the most out of your RAM. I made a schoolboy error too :rolleyes:

Nice overclock though

I can't get my Q6600 up to that on stock volts (3.15 is approx the max before it starts failing prime) - don't really want to kill it by upping the voltage.....yet

BTW, yes I did notice that you upped the volts - I'm just not daring (Have not even had the Q6600 a week)

copsey · 20 Sep 2007 at 19:02

I went to 3.15 on stock voltages also.

3.4 is a pretty good step up from 2.4 though!