best bandwidth with conroe?

would like to see some bandwidth scores and conroe ,anyone wonna share with us?from what ive seen so far ,scores seem low :confused:

so ,no sissandra scores yet ,cmon help me find out whats going on here?conroe doese so good in other benches ,why so poor bandwidth?not even everest are showing high scores ,whats the deal?

I think bandwith benching is a bit too synthetic to be interesting for real world use on desktops. If you like bandwith have a look at AMD AM2, quite impressive BW (and would be more impressive if it gave considerable performance gain)

1) Bandwidth scores are indeed very low.

2) Memory latency is also very low (amazingly low...and in the good way ;))

3) Bandwidth literally means nothing on its own. For Netburst, it meant a lot; for K8, not a whole lot (just a little for dual cores, not nearly as important as latency); for Yonah, not at all.

4) And for Conroe, bandwidth means very little. Low latency is what Conroe wants :)

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/7831/search0do.jpg

I know their aren't much bandwith results. But if you search well enough you'll find some.
Try "Conroe Sisoft" and other terms, be creative.

Most of the bandwith results are indeed quiet low.

There is told you need 1:1 or 4:5 with Conroe for the best results.
So on stock this means 533MHz or 667MHz, with the timings as low as possible.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SMa

http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/7831/search0do.jpg

I know their aren't much bandwith results. But if you search well enough you'll find some.
Try "Conroe Sisoft" and other terms, be creative.

Most of the bandwith results are indeed quiet low.

There is told you need 1:1 or 4:5 with Conroe for the best results.
So on stock this means 533MHz or 667MHz, with the timings as low as possible.

---

well ,wouldnt you mean these timmings are good ?http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...=103025&page=2
this is what im trieng to point out ,i know conroe scores really good in other tests ,im going to get one myself,:) obviusely this chip doesnt need ram bandwidth!but , shouldnt these chips give some more bandwidth?

i just downloaded everest trail ver ,and tested my 955 with 340 fsb 4:5 and poor timmings, got 10300 in everst and 8300 ins sis. some thing to think over ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vapor

1) Bandwidth scores are indeed very low.

2) Memory latency is also very low (amazingly low...and in the good way ;))

3) Bandwidth literally means nothing on its own. For Netburst, it meant a lot; for K8, not a whole lot (just a little for dual cores, not nearly as important as latency); for Yonah, not at all.

4) And for Conroe, bandwidth means very little. Low latency is what Conroe wants :)

---

bandwith hasnt meant alot for any processor for a while lol...not really the prime bottleneck anymore

lol, yea other than the pIII or k6-3+ lol or lower