Show your bandwidth numbers or posts in this section will be removed.
It also helps to have CPUTweaker open for extensive result sharing.
Please state the B2B setting for others to duplicate results.
Printable View
Show your bandwidth numbers or posts in this section will be removed.
It also helps to have CPUTweaker open for extensive result sharing.
Please state the B2B setting for others to duplicate results.
Is this up for discussion...?Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
This is pretty lame IMO....
CPU-Z max, suicide... That is one category...
B2B should always be stated... Though....
1M / 8M / 32M is another.....
BW, why? We all know that the ram isnt bottleneck...
Methinks this only applies to OC reports, where people try to prove that memory XXX is very good for 24/7 or for heavy duty benching. I can't imagine this would apply to suicide runs...
I hope so, cause whats the point to show bandwidth when you aim for max. freq? :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by G.Foyle
Not to shabby for 24/7
Marc, it is sad to see people exploiting/clueless to B2B to fudge results.
Look at Mat's results of 3Ghz yet he stats bandwidth was bad...
Look at your results, you exploited B2B to the fullest without a single bandwidth test.
Lastly, this is the "Xtreme Bandwidth" section, not the "Xtreme B2B exploit" section.
So, this better only apply to i7, correct? ...and only for results like that where its possible there were exploits? I'm not running Everest Memory Bandwidth for my 32M runs. Sorry.
I'm not buying the latest version of Everest again.
You oughta open up the "Xtreme Memory Overclocking Section" because this just opened up a huge can of worms all over some of us.
a few apps will show what is b2b setting and its freeQuote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
cpu tweaker is best
There are ways to extract more frequency at the cost of performance on AMD as well..........Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2
No one said you need use latest verion of everest.
I think the point is not to mislead users into purchasing a set of ram based on shady tactics used to extract the most speed.
Dear lord, you still believen that sh1t, dont ya?Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
As I said in my thread, I am aware of B2B CAS Delay and tried it, but it didn't do much good, because the memory (as M.Beier said) is not the problem. Even less under ln2 ... I tried to show that, nothing else. Have you even read my whole post? I am experimenting with things like that and just wanted to show my results.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Where again did I say that bandwidth was bad? Didn't test that yet, as I remember.
HUH?
90% of the posts in this section are valid, to be honest i think maximum mhz is a valid section also...
for a cpuz validation you don't need to show a superpi 32m result next to it to show how fast it is, how is this any different?
i really enjoy doing ram testing and posting up results here but i am not going to have a everest bandwidth result n every picture..
is this a requirement now for every post in this section?
I think thatīs ok- as I usually do DDR2 tests at the moment this doesnīt bother me, but I also have no problem in showing CPUTweaker or MaxMem whwn I test DDR3- buying my memory myself, testing on air and having no sponsor I think this new rule helps to see if a kit is worth buying it or not. High frequency isnīt evrything if it comes to performance
strange decision this one
Does anyone base their RAM purchase decisions based on max MHz validation? Cooled with LN2?
Of course. If you are looking for high clocking RAM for the same thing :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by K404
This isn't necessarily a section aimed at helping people find the RAM they want to purchase, it can also be used to showcase results, etc.
People chasing MHz seriously will know or at least have a pretty idea whats going on with B2B.
Its just part of a bigger picture and meeting of the right parts.... CPU with strong IMC, right board + BIOS, right RAM ICs + batch- regardless of the seller etc etc etc.
:eek: Is there any alternative methods? :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by K404
Its not strange, this is xtreme bandwidth and lack of a bandwidth shot kinda defeats the purpose.
Its like me showing my RPM and posting in a horsepower section and that is absolutely useless, deliver numbers proving the overclock is what I am asking.
If that 3Ghz cas 7 delivers a 13k read and 12k write it is a bogus overclock of the ram, now if it delivers 27k read then bravo, hats off to you.
After talking with reason (Gautam) I see my error in not stating this section is for bandwidth and performance shots only. Everything else belongs in XOC or AMD/Intel.
I will permanently post it in xtreme overclocking then....Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
so if i am not wrong :
Higher memory MHZ with any kind of performance must be post in XOC (if xtremecooling), intel/amd if previews or testing room (bought/got a kit want to show the tests etc)
High PERFORMANCE showing bandwidth with open cpu tweaker and other tools if needed in this section
right?
XOC = xtreme overclocking hiwa
i foresee the death of a section.
You probablky want to change the description of this forum too, it still says "Memory overclocking and bandwidth results"
death of a section >> yeah hence the reason i thought it was strange :shrug:
Quote:
Originally Posted by T_M
Are you guys saying that no one cares about bandwidth ?Quote:
Originally Posted by dinos22
I really can't see what all the fuss is about.... why such opposition to showing bandwidth ?
im not opposing or caring or not caring about anything but rather just looking at this from what this section was used for over the years and that is frequency RAM overclocking. I dont really get into that sort of thing myself and prefer performance based OC but at the same time i like watching these guys put the effort into getting every last MHz. What this section has been about is that...every last MHz. Mhz hunting is contradictory to bandwidth hunting. This section is as much about RAM OC as IMC stregth on CPUs. This sort of stuff is not easy to achieve and is much more exciting to a lot of guys than looking at raw bandwidth screenshots which mean what....i donno i certainly wouldnt bother with everest unless i was troubleshooting and finding things out in initial stages of ram testing
It is the same deal with CPU MHz OC for example where you pick your strongest core to shoot for best clocks or you use crazy low QPI on clarkdale for example to be able to reach the highest frequency such as a recent cracker effort from duck on 655K....It's the same thing to me. You wouldnt ask duck-san to run vantage CPU test at that frequency or any other form of intense CPU testing to prove it not running in crippled more even though it is
Well said Dinos :up:
I prefer also perfomance based oc but i like to see that high numbers here too....
It is not easy to push memory to the last MHz and i think there is no need to show some crappy Everest Benchmark :D
CPU-Z is the official validation and needed to prove WR's.
If B2B (i never use) makes that big difference in max. mhz the guys should report (or show cpu tweaker) what B2B used but...
...it is similar to cpu mhz hunting: It is more easy to push a Core i7 920 to BCLK 250+ with low qpi speed but it will be a regular WR (even if the other guy is using "normal" qpi speed and can't get same mhz cause of this fact).
I like this section and i would love to see raw memory mhz power in future here too :)
For me, i felt this section was good to cover all bases of RAM overclocking and performance.
For instance the latest thread about where teh Hyper ICs might still be coming from, the death list of a particular IC type, and the max overclocking results of PCS do not really belong here anymore if we play by the new rules.
guys keep posting frozen rams.....:D
Makes sense to me. Xtreme bandwidth = xtreme bandwidth. XOC section for super cooling/suicides sp32m whatever.
What doesn't make sense to me is why it's such a big deal. It's not like everest/sandra bandwidth tests take forever to run :rolleyes:
System specs are in sig.
http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/4...rybandwith.jpg
QFT :clap: Its sad to see even now though some time after this thread went up people still posting saying X memory can do X speed, showing CPU-Z and the like, but no bandwidth results :down: Such offenders that repeatedly do this should get a temp. ban IMO to learn them.Quote:
Originally Posted by FUGGER
Everest tools old and new makes diferent scores.
Is there any other tool to test bandwidth?
Aida bought Everest out , so one could use Aida64 Extreme edition . Si software Sandra have some mem bandwidth tests .Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikolasz
It's interesting to see comparative results eg. Lower speed / lower latency vs. Higher speed / higher latency ; dual channel vs triple channel vs quad channel memory . Would be cool if ppl posted uncore frequencies , ND Qpi Link Speeds . :shrug:
Aida64 home
http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/h...nch/aida64.jpg
:0 this thread went out the window I think.....looked great,topic header wise!
What do you recommend to use for benchmarking memory bandwidth in Linux (specifically SuSE Linux Enterprise Server (SLES) 12 SP1)?
Thanks.