• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

What performance gain for same overclocked Athlon64 running sync vs async mem speed?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Bar81

Disabled
Joined
Mar 23, 2004
Location
SoCal
What performance gain for same overclocked Athlon64 running sync vs async mem speed?

The question is this:

Take for example a A64 3200+ running at 2.4Ghz at 240 FSB/HTT with memory running 1:1

Versus

The same setup running say a 5/6 divisor (166mhz) such that memory speed is 200 (or 400 actual DDR)

I would think that the 1:1 setup would obviously be faster, but how much of a performance benefit would there be versus running the system async with the lower clocked memory (timings as tight as can be had by the person nice enough to test this out)?
 
I was bored so I did some testing allbeit limited.
A64 3200+ run at 2407 in all test. Ram is single stick of KHX3000 with 2-2-2-5 timmings @ 200 (CPU/12 divider as listed by CPU-Z)and 2.5-4-4-8 timmings @240 ( I know I could do better timmings here but these are average crap timmings for PC4000 ram)

Hexus Pifast
1:1 52.05 seconds
CPU/12 52.14 seconds

SuperPI 8meg
1:1 7 min 50 sec.
CPU/12 7 min 38 sec.

SuperPI 1meg
1:1 37 sec
CPU/12 37 sec

Sandra CPU arithmetic
1:1 10495/3817/4912
CPU/12 10495/3817/4911

Sandra CPU multimedia
1:1 23053/24787
CPU/12 23052/24787

Sandra MEM bandwidth
1:1 3728/3728
CPU/12 3135/3136


All but 2 test are equal Superpi 8meg seems to like tight timmings no matter what, And sandra memory bench I have always taken with a grain of salt.
I would have done some 3d test for you but if ya look in the sig you will understand why I didn't
If ya have another bench you want me to try LMK and dig me up a link.
 
Thanks, I appreciate it. Seems like no real difference. Guess A64 is all about the clock speed of the CPU; very little reliance on the mem speed. hmmm...

Anyone willing to offer up some Far Cry/Halo/UT 2K4 benchmarks with a 9700 Pro or above or same class nVidia card?
 
If that helps, I've seen almost no performance difference in UT2k4 between Athlon XP 1800+@2000 at 145 fsb and Barton 2500+ @ 166*12.5; On Athlon 900 (no typo) I've seen performance decrease of 20-50% depending on situation, comparing to Barton. (details to max, Ge4)

This game isn't CPU-dependant if you have any not-that-bad CPU. Difference may appear with flyby tests, but still you'll have just hundreds of fps :]

FarCry is said to be dependant on other things than VGA, so it might be good for test.
 
Back