![]() ![]() The score on our hierarchy may differ slightly from the geometric mean in the individual review. Then, we ranked the memory kits for each capacity from best to worst for both Intel and AMD systems. Our tests include Microsoft Office, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Premiere, Adobe Lightroom, Cinebench R23, Corona benchmark, 7-Zip compression and decompression, Handbrake x264 and x265 conversion, LuxMark, and Y-Cruncher.įor simplicity, we've separated the memory kits into different categories according to their densities. The score results originate from the geometric mean from our RAM benchmark suite consisting of scripted and real-world tests. However, the geometric means don't always tell the whole story: If you're looking for performance in a specific workload or gaming, we recommend looking at the full review of the memory kit you have in mind. ![]() Furthermore, we suspect many of you would value performance over anything else. We've got those details in the individual RAM reviews. We use a geometric mean of our memory benchmarking results to keep the ranking objective and discard the intangibles, like aesthetics and overclocking headroom. ![]() Our RAM benchmark hierarchy aims to provide a simple database that ranks the best memory kits based on pure performance. Remember, frequency is half the chip's label frequency.Companies regularly release new memory kits with different speeds, timings, capacities, and ranks, making sifting through seemingly endless models surprisingly time-consuming. Rather than calculating all the values, which puts the 1866MHZ chip on top across the board. Wikipedia recommends more simply calculating the CL time in nanoseconds (ns) with (CL/(freq-in-MHZ) * 1000) = timing in ns Has a 0.00000000035 second advantage in CAS Latency and RAS-to-Precharge, is faster than 0.0000000007 seconds slower than the 800MHz chip in RAS-to-CAS is faster than 4e-10 faster at tRAS (this variance is seriously negligible but worth noting). So, by comparing the time, we can see that the 1866MHz chip: Since timings are in "ticks", you just multiply the rating by the interval in seconds.įor your RAM, we end up with (these figures are rounded to the hundredth): 800 8-8-8-24 1.25e-9 seconds per clock tickĩ33 9-10-9-28 1.07e-9 seconds per clock tick You can calculate the time interval between clock ticks with 1/(1/2 * frequency * 10e6) = T seconds In general, as the frequency goes up, the time for a tick interval goes down (which is why faster RAM always seem to have higher timing values). People can mean a lot of things when they say "performance" but I'm going to assume you mean "fast" and convert to seconds per rating. Timings are given in clock ticks, so comparing the timings of a pair of chips of different frequency is an apples-to-oranges comparison, and requires some conversion. The has the higher transfer rate (14928MB/s vs 12800MB/s), and as you will see, the chips both have pretty much equal advantage on each other in terms of timings. You want two chips because the actual per-chip bandwidth of DDR modules is actually half the advertised rating, since they are made to be installed in pairs on dual Buses or "channels", so always make sure you have an even number of chips of the same frequency installed if you want to get full bandwidth. Before we get into calculating anything, I'd recommend that you double check that your motherboard and CPU support overclocking to use DDR3 1866, and if so, go with the 2x4GB DDR3 1866MHZ pack. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |