post memory bandwith

[jedge78]

I was just wondering...since there are so many question along the lines of "which ddr ram is the fastest" or "which ddr ram is the best for overclocking" do you guys think it would be constructive to post sandra 2002 memory benchmarks? Sort of a ranking to compliment FatBurgers memory FAQ.

 

[FatBurger]

You want me to join? I might make the Athlons look worse than it really is.

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[lhgpoobaa]

i think scores like sandra depends more on the mobo and what mem timings and optimisations your able to squeeze out of it.


<font color=purple>Win ME Slayer. And PROUD of it!</font color=purple>

 

[jedge78]

lhgoo...i totally agree with you but I still think itll give readers some ideas of what the different ram is capable of.
PS....I am sorry if I discouraged fatburger by only reffering to ddr ram in my initial post...rdram results are more than welcome as well

 

[bum_jcrules]

I love this memory discussion section. It seems that anytime that someone wants to look at memory, its latency, bandwidth, or other factor it gets shot down. "Oh it is diferent for this... or for that..." Now this in not to all who read but to those who post and I mean no offense towards you lhgpoobaa or anyone else. I am just making this statement because it seems that no one can agree on how to benchmark memory in any capacity other than looking at gaming results.

I think that it is sad thing to discourage a positive, non-flaming, discussion. I understand that hardware configurations have a good deal to do with all aspects of memory performance just like with any other type of individual component. The question I pose here to all is..."How do we proceed in correctly measuring all aspects of memory performance in a way that is agreeable to the majority here?" There has to be a logical and accurate way to do this.

Are the members here just lazy and want to be uninformed zealots of company and industry propaganda. I want to make up my own mind about hardware issues and I am sure that there are others here that follow that train of thought. We trust what other sites post on many different issues. Why shouldn't we discuss the results that they get and test them under our own evaluation using their benchmarks and with our own?

<b>"I put instant coffee in the microwave and almost went back in time" - Steven Wright</b> :lol:

 

[FatBurger]

<A HREF="http://www.geocities.com/fattyburger/155benchmarks.html" target="_new">I think this link still works</A>

It does, good. Here are my specs:
P4 1.6A w/ stock heatsink @ 1.85v
Abit TH7II-RAID, no physical mods
2x 256MB of Samsung PC800, double-sided sticks

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by FatBurger on 04/30/02 10:19 AM.</EM></FONT></P>

 

[bum_jcrules]

Nice...!

I think that it is irronic that you have been asked a few times today for info for that machine.

<b>"Sometimes you can't hear me because I'm talking in parenthesis" - Steven Wright</b> :lol:

 

[FatBurger]

Have I? I mention it all the time, I've stopped noticing :lol:

<font color=blue>If you don't buy Windows, then the terrorists have already won!</font color=blue> - Microsoft

 

[lhgpoobaa]

interesting question.
definately no right answer.

despite the well know problems with them i would have to say that sandra does good comparisons, on the proviso that your systems are not too dissimilar.

i detest the 'quake3 @ 640x480' test as completely meaningless

hmmm


<font color=purple>Win ME Slayer. And PROUD of it!</font color=purple>

 

[lhgpoobaa]

not too shabby at all
definately the new celleron 300A.
(cept not a celleron of course!)


<font color=purple>Win ME Slayer. And PROUD of it!</font color=purple>