Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
LGA 1156 Memory Performance: What Speed DDR3 Should You Buy?
By ,
1. Which Memory Speed Do You Want?

Intel’s mainstream LGA 1156 interface hosts the Core i5 and Core i7-800 series, plus the Core i3 soon expected to cover lower price points. It’s possible to run DDR3 memory on the platform at speeds between DDR3-800 and DDR3-2000—or even faster if overclocked. From prior analysis of Socket AM3-, LGA 775-, and LGA 1366-based platforms, we know that faster RAM is favorable in overclocking scenarios, but it doesn’t provide additional performance. This time we looked at a Core i7-860 system and cross-tested various popular memory speeds and timings.

Memory: The Market

The memory market is dominated by several competing manufacturers that all focus on brand recognition. Memory companies without such brand sensitivity—meaning large OEMs business like Micron or Samsung—typically have to be more aggressive in releasing high-end and enthusiast products that will attract attention and highlight their product as a preferable choice.

There are definitely quality differences in memory. Top-shelf memory (products from the likes of A-Data, Buffalo, Corsair, Crucial, G.Skill, Kingston, Mushkin, OCZ, Patriot, Super Talent) depends on using high-quality parts and having modules undergo extensive validation and testing. Different memory IC series' have varying characteristics, as well.

The better a vendor’s reputation, the more likely it is for different products to sell well. This means that memory vendors must be quick with releasing top-end products to make sure that they constantly remain in the news. Whether or not these products are actually top sellers is a different story.

A Bigger Question

Because there is a significant cost difference between mainstream memory products at average speeds/timings and performance parts, we have to ask the old question again: which memory should you buy for Core i7? Only now, because we’re looking at the LGA 1156 platform (with its two channels and more mainstream pinning), the question is broader. The answer we find will likely affect systems spread across the Core i7-800 series, Core i5-700, and the upcoming Core i3 entry-level processor families.

2. Speeds: DDR3-800 And -1066

DDR3-800 is probably irrelevant in the consumer space. No one would think of purchasing this slow memory given today’s nonexistent price differences versus DDR3-1066. However, since binning for slow memory can help a manufacturer increase its yield, we’re still seeing some low-cost business PCs still shipping with this memory type. In addition, notebook designs may opt for slower clock speeds in order to reduce power consumption.

We first used DDR3-800 at CL6-6-6-18 speeds.

Since there are various types of DDR3-1066 memory available, we decided to run it at slow CL8-8-8-24 timings first, which can be considered average. This is what you’ll usually get when you buy an ordinary office PC with DDR3 memory.

Next, we ran the DDR3-1066 at faster CL6-6-6-18 timings. Although most memory should be capable of running at these speeds, you should probably look for vendor-specified fast timings rather than overclocking, just to be on the safe side, especially if you're hoping for even higher data transfer rates.

3. Speeds: DDR3-1333 And 1600

DDR3-1333 is currently the mainstream speed for DDR3, providing clearly better memory performance than DDR2-800, while still being reasonably-priced. Today, 4GB dual-channel kits still offer the best bang for the buck, but 8GB dual-channel DIMM kits should soon be available in decent quantities, albeit at higher prices, obviously. If you look at entry-level DDR3-1333 memory, you’ll probably only see CL10-10-10-26 timings, which is what we used first.

CL7-7-7-20 timings are tight—one of the fastest industry standard timings available today—and won’t be possible on as many DDR3 solutions. Going to CL6 would no longer be specified by JEDEC, and probably be expensive enough to render this configuration unreasonable compared to faster clock rates at slightly reduced timings.

Again, we started testing DDR3-1600 at relaxed timings of CL11-11-11-30.

Finally, we also ran tests using DDR3-1600 at more aggressive CL8-8-8-24 timings.

4. Test System Details

We used the Asus Maximus III Formula, a high-end P55 motherboard, and an Intel Core i7-870 processor to analyze memory performance.

To be able to set all described memory clock speeds and timings, we grabbed two Corsair CM3X2G1600C9DHX Dominator DIMMs. These are specified for DDR3-1600 speed at CL9 timings, but they can also run at CL8 settings. Keep in mind that all other system parameters, such as the processor speed, remained unchanged for the sake of consistency.

     

System Hardware
Hardware
Details
CPU
Intel Core i7-870 (45 nm, 2.93 GHz, 4 x 256KB L2 and 8MB L3 Cache, TDP 95W, Rev. B1)
Motherboard (Socket 1156)
Asus Maximus III Formula (Rev. 1.0)
Chipset: Intel P55
BIOS: 0902 (09/24/2009)
RAM DDR3 (Dual)
2 x 2GB DDR3-1600 (Corsair CM3X2G1600C9DHX)
Graphics
Zotac Geforce GTX 260²
GPU: Geforce GTX 260 (576 MHz)
Graphics RAM: 896MB DDR3 (1998 MHz)
Stream Processors: 216
Shader Clock: 1242 MHz
Hard Drive
Western Digital VelociRaptor, 300GB (WD3000HLFS)
10,000 RPM, SATA/300, 16MB Cache
Blu-ray Drive
LG GGW-H20L, SATA/150
Power Supply
PC Power & Cooling, Silencer 750EPS12V 750W
System Software and Drivers
Operating System
Windows Vista Enterprise Version 6.0 x64
Service Pack 2 (Build 6000)
Drivers and Settings
Nvidia GeForce Drivers
GeForce 185.85
Intel Chipset Drivers
Chipset Installation Utility Ver. 9.1.0.1015
Intel storage Drivers
Matrix Storage Drivers Ver. 8.8.0.1009


3D Game Benchmarks and Settings
Benchmarks
Details
Far Cry 2
Version: 1.0.1
Far Cry 2 Benchmark Tool
Video Mode: 1280x800
Direct3D 9
Overall Quality: Medium
Bloom activated
HDR off
Demo: Ranch Small
GTA IV
Version: 1.0.3
Video Mode: 1280x1024
- 1280x1024
- Aspect Ratio: Auto
- All options: Medium
- View Distance: 30
- Detail Distance: 100
- Vehicle Density: 100
- Shadow Density: 16
- Definition: On
- Vsync: Off
Ingame Benchmark
Left 4 Dead
Version: 1.0.0.5
Video Mode: 1280x800
Game Settings
- Anti Aliasing none
- Filtering Trilinear
- Wait for vertical sync disabled
- Shader Detail Medium
- Effect Detail Medium
- Model/Texture Detail Medium
Demo: THG Demo 1
Audio Benchmarks and Settings
Benchmarks
Details
iTunes
Version: 8.1.0.52
Audio CD ("Terminator II" SE), 53 min.
Convert to AAC audio format
Lame MP3
Version 3.98
Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 min.
convert WAV to MP3 audio format
Command: -b 160 --nores (160 Kbps)
Video Benchmarks and Settings
Benchmarks
Details
TMPEG 4.6
Version: 4.6.3.268
Video: Terminator 2 SE DVD (720x576, 16:9) 5 Minutes
Audio: Dolby Digital, 48000 Hz, 6-channel, English
Advanced Acoustic Engine MP3 Encoder (160 Kbps, 44.1 kHz)
DivX 6.8.5
Version: 6.8.5
== Main Menu ==
default
== Codec Menu ==
Encoding mode: Insane Quality
Enhanced multithreading
Enabled using SSE4
Quarter-pixel search
== Video Menu ==
Quantization: MPEG-2
XviD 1.2.1
Version: 1.2.1
Other Options / Encoder Menu -
Display encoding status = off
Mainconcept Reference 1.6.1
Version: 1.6.1
MPEG-2 to MPEG-2 (H.264)
MainConcept H.264/AVC Codec
28 sec. HDTV 1920x1080 (MPEG-2)
Audio:
MPEG-2 (44.1 kHz, 2-Channel, 16 Bit, 224 Kbps)
Codec: H.264
Mode: PAL (25 FPS)
Profile: Settings for eight threads
Adobe Premiere Pro CS4
Version: 4.0
WMV 1920x1080 (39 sec.)
Export: Adobe Media Encoder
== Video ==
H.264 Blu-ray
1440x1080i 25 High Quality
Encoding Passes: one
Bitrate Mode: VBR
Frame: 1440x1080
Frame Rate: 25
== Audio ==
PCM Audio, 48 kHz, Stereo
EncodingPasses: one
Application Benchmarks and Settings
Benchmarks
Details
Grisoft AVG Anti Virus 8
Version: 8.5.287
Virus base: 270.12.16/2094
Benchmark
Scan: compressed ZIP and RAR archives
Winrar 3.9
Version 3.90 x64 BETA 1
Best compression
Benchmark: THG Workload
Winzip 12
Version 12.0 (8252)
WinZIP command line Version 3
Compression = Best
Dictionary = 4096KB
Benchmark: THG Workload
Autodesk 3D Studio Max 2009
Version: 9.0, x64
Rendering Dragon Image
Resolution: 1920 x 1280 (frame 1-5)
Adobe Photoshop CS4 (64-bit)
Version: 11
Filtering a 16MB TIF (15000x7266)
Filters:
Radial Blur (Amount: 10; Method: zoom; Quality: good)
Shape Blur (Radius: 46 px; custom shape: Trademark sysmbol)
Median (Radius: 1px)
Polar Coordinates (Rectangular to Polar)
Adobe Acrobat 9 Professional
Version: 9.0.0 (Extended)
== Printing Preferenced Menu ==
Default Settings: Standard
== Adobe PDF Security - Edit Menu ==
Encrypt all documents (128-bit RC4)
Open Password: 123
Permissions Password: 321
Synthetic Benchmarks and Settings
Benchmarks
Details
3DMark Vantage
Version: 1.02
Options: Performance
Graphics Test 1
Graphics Test 2
CPU Test 1
CPU Test 2
PCMark Vantage
Version: 1.00
PCMark Benchmark
Memories Benchmark
SiSoftware Sandra 2009
Version: 2009 SP3
Processor Arithmetic, Cryptography, Memory Bandwith
5. Benchmark Results: Synthetics

High memory bandwidth has an effect on Sandra’s throughput test, but little impact on most of the other benchmark sections. PCMark Vantage shows that high clock speed, paired with tight timings, yields the best and only noteworthy results. Obviously, this isn’t surprising. Let’s look at real word tests now.

6. Benchmark Results: Applications

3ds Max runs slightly faster on low latency RAM (DDR3-1333) and on high speed memory. You want at least DDR3-1333 speed at quick timings here.

There is hardly any performance difference between fast and slower DDR3 memory when checking for viruses using AVG Anti-Virus.

The results of creating a PDF document out of a huge PowerPoint presentation vary quite a bit and reveal slight benefits with faster memory. The difference isn’t really significant, though.

There is no real performance difference when working with large images using extensive filters in Adobe Photoshop CS4.

Results are different when editing video using Adobe Premiere Pro CS4. The difference between the slowest and the fastest memory setup is 6 seconds, which is quite a bit considering that we're talking about memory performance here. You’ll probably get similar performance variance when going from one processor speed bin to another. High clock speed wins under Premiere, but quick timings have a positive impact, too.

Once again, there are noticeable differences between memory speeds, this time when using WinRAR to compress and archive files. The differences are significant, and WinRAR is clearly more sensitive to timing than clock speed changes.

Unlike WinRAR, WinZIP doesn’t scale very well with faster memory.

7. Benchmark Results: Audio/Video Performance

The performance differences in converting audio into Apple’s AAC format using iTunes is negligible.

There were no measurable differences when using LAME.

DivX transcoding runs slightly faster with higher-performance memory, but we found wide variance in the results, meaning that performance isn’t very consistent.

Using Xvid provided another case of measurable benefit with faster memory.

 Finally, there’s little reason to pay for fast RAM if you use MainConcept on a regular basis.

8. Benchmark Results: 3D Performance

The graphics performance in 3DMark Vantage improves with low latency memory and with faster clock speeds. The benefits are small, though.

 The CPU score doesn’t provide any helpful information.

Far Cry 2 is our first real-world 3D game in this review and proves that you can indeed generate higher gaming performance when using faster RAM. The DDR3-1600 settings were best.

GTA IV didn’t return straightforward results.

Left 4 Dead is another example that shows how fast RAM speeds and timings do have benefits. Clearly, you should go for gold with this game title.

9. Conclusion

We looked at different memory speeds for the LGA 1156-based Core i7-870 and chose to run DDR3-800, -1066, -1333, and -1600 at fast, as well as relaxed, timings. Although the differences were typically very small, there were a few applications that obviously benefited from faster memory. This wasn’t surprising, as we already did similar comparisons on most of the other popular platforms:

DDR3 Memory Scaling: Intel’s Core 2 Quad Examined

Core i7 Memory Scaling: From DDR3-800 to DDR3-1600

DDR3 Memory Scaling on AMD’s Phenom II X4

In all cases, we’ve seen significant performance differences when looking at the synthetic or low-level benchmarks. Memory bandwidth does increase considerably if you speed up the memory transfer rate, and tightening timings also improves performance by cutting latencies. However, only a marginal fraction of these benefits actually arrive at the application level. Even going for the fastest memory available will give you a performance boost that is probably smaller than the effect a faster processor speed bin would deliver.

Nevertheless, there are some applications that are more sensitive to memory performance differences than others. Some 3D games (Left 4 Dead in our case) show a noticeable performance boost, likely because it isn't being bottlenecked by graphics performance. Memory-intensive applications, such as Adobe Premiere Pro CS4 and WinRAR, ran quicker, as well. However, the majority of our benchmarks saw little to scarce performance improvement when going for faster memory, so we tend to stay with our original recommendation: go with brand-name memory at mainstream speeds, which still are in the DDR3-1333 space.

However, memory prices have dropped quite a bit, making even DDR3-1600 products more attractive and bringing even some DDR3-2000 products within range. We believe that it’s acceptable to spend a little more on faster memory today if you’re about to invest in other valuable components. Here is our recommendation list (in this order):

  • Make sure you have 4GB of RAM. Two 2GB DIMMs are favorable to ensure you can use the tightest timings.
  • Make sure you pick a branded product of at least DDR3-1333 speed and timings of CL8 or faster.
  • Go for a faster product if you find DDR3-1600 memory that provides the same timings as your preferred DDR3-1333 RAM kit at only a little price premium. Don’t do it if you could get a faster processor for less or the same extra money.