1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Share your AIDA 64 cache and memory benchmark here

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by itsakjt, Jun 27, 2013.

  1. Arjai

    Arjai

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138 (2.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,513
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    OK, found it, TOOLS! :D

    [​IMG]
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  2. Mydog

    Mydog

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    Messages:
    473 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    566
    XMP settings on memory, not to bad :)

    4.7 GHz on CPU vs 5.1 GHz
    Aida 4,7 T2.JPG Aida 5,1 T2.JPG

    Edit:
    Changed the timings and CR but it didn't change much at 4.7 GHz but a bit better at 5.1 GHz CPU speed.
    Aida 4,7 T1.JPG Aida 5,1 T1.JPG
     
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2014
    itsakjt says thanks.
  3. freeleacher

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2013
    Messages:
    104 (0.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    34
    [​IMG]
     
  4. itsakjt

    itsakjt

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,175 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    382
    Location:
    Kolkata, India
    To have the full benchmark and unlock all the functionality of the program, you need to register. If you don't want to do that, you can also submit the scores you get. You can of course compare the read speeds and latency which will give you a fair idea about the memory bandwidth. :)
     
  5. itsakjt

    itsakjt

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,175 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    382
    Location:
    Kolkata, India
    Added. :)

    The best score is added. :) Awesome scores BTW. :)
    Please use the latest version(currently 4.20.2800). Thanks.
     
  6. Arjai

    Arjai

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,138 (2.29/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,513
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    So, I think maybe the Memory Bandwith might be the bottleneck for my Hyperx's?

    67ns seems a little long for these. Am I wrong?
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  7. Mydog

    Mydog

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2010
    Messages:
    473 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    566
    A bit better with higher memory and CPU speed and using the 125 BCLK strap.

    Aida 5,123 T2.JPG
     
  8. Renesis New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2014
    Messages:
    1 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1
    Here are some mobile numbers (its not overclocked, its just turbo):
    Also it would be nice if the table on the first page would have a column with declared memory speed so it can be compared how same memory types behave with different processors.

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 2, 2014
    cadaveca says thanks.
  9. freeleacher

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2013
    Messages:
    104 (0.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    34
    [​IMG]

    Corsair Vengeance RED 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 PC3-17100C11 2133MHz Dual Channel Kit (CMZ8GX3M2A2133C11R)


    Cheap £80
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2014
  10. agent00skid

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    572 (0.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    395
    I think they're stable at, but need a bit longer to solidly confirm.
    Damn IMC that can't handle 2*8GB 2400MHz. :(
    And that awful latency. :S

    cachemem.png
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2014
    Crunching for Team TPU
  11. freeleacher

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2013
    Messages:
    104 (0.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    34
  12. marsey99

    marsey99

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,590 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    299
    i think this is as good as i can get my ram for 24/7 use.

    1.75vdimm.

    memcache.jpg
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2014
  13. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,058 (6.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,271
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    I am not sure I would be running 1.75v on the vdimm for Haswell. Max I have been told to run at, where its OKAY to do so, is 1.7v.
     
    marsey99 says thanks.
  14. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,468 (6.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,189
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Pretty sure that Intel has said for several years that you really shouldn't go over 1.65v. I would suspect that it would put more strain on the memory controller since every clock generated won't just have to go faster (since you're overclocking,) but it has to have higher voltages. Something like transients could become a problem I would imagine.
     
  15. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,058 (6.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,271
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    This a direct quote from cadaveca while we were talking about overclocking my memory over the last week. However my situation is perhaps different than others. Still, that guy is running 1.75v though his DIMMs, which is quite a bit over 1.65.

    The DIMMs can handle it, its the IMC that is questionable, but IIRC, if you have the cooling it is fine.
     
  16. Aquinus

    Aquinus Resident Wat-man

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2012
    Messages:
    6,468 (6.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,189
    Location:
    Concord, NH
    Very true. It's thermal expansion and contraction that harms CPUs. A CPU is essentially a resistive circuit, much like an electric heater. If you turn it on and off where temperature goes up and down a lot, you'll have a lot less life in comparison to just leaving the circuit on and running 24/7 at a consistent temperature. CPUs aren't a whole lot different. The more the temperature goes up and down and the more drastic that change is, the more it will wear out the CPU or any IC because the the constant contraction and expansion in the metals in the CPU can increase resistance or even break the circuit (in cases of failure or permanent instability.)

    All in all, crunchers aren't hurting their CPUs any more than your average joe because of this.

    Note: As a side note, I personally don't think that it's wise to buy a CPU that has gone under LN2 for this very reason.
     
  17. marsey99

    marsey99

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,590 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    299
    thanks for the concern dude, but 1.7vdimm is fine :)

    i am more concerned about the 1.38vcore i give the core everyday than i am the imc tbh but even that gets given little thought.

    just to clear up any confusion btw, intel only mention max vdimm on x58 as you need to keep the imc volts within 50mv of the vdimm. so if you set it over 1.65vdimm you need to increase the imc from 1.15v. sandy, ivy and haswell are all done different so that is no longer a constraint but people still bring up the x58 issue for some reason?
     
  18. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,058 (6.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,271
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    1.35v is the absolute max I would take the vcore too.

    Im not too sure about that. Yep, fine till your shit pops, or degrades due to heat.

    Why do you think on every motherboard ever released these days, advises,to keep memory voltage at or below 1.65?
     
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2014
  19. marsey99

    marsey99

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,590 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    299
    statistically speaking most ram needs 1.65v at most?

    i know ddr3 needed upto 1.9v at first but it soon dropped to 1.65v "stock" with the passing of socket 775. since then stock vdimm for ddr3 has dropped lots. i mean i have some which does 1333 on 1.2v and 1600 on 1.3v but they are not very common.

    my chip is a dog, runs cool as anything, delid'd and under water but it still sucks the juice like a bitch.
     
  20. itsakjt

    itsakjt

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,175 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    382
    Location:
    Kolkata, India
    Table is updated again. :) Sorry for the delay. Kinda busy with studies and presentations. Hope you understand.
    @freeleacher - Thanks for that icon pack. :)
     
    Mydog and freeleacher say thanks.
  21. agent00skid

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    572 (0.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    395
    Just because it's not much, doesn't mean my system isn't overclocked. :p
     
    Crunching for Team TPU
  22. MxPhenom 216

    MxPhenom 216 Corsair Fanboy

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2010
    Messages:
    10,058 (6.63/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,271
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    The actual DIMMs can easily handle more, its the IMC in the chip thats the problem.
     
  23. itsakjt

    itsakjt

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2010
    Messages:
    1,175 (0.79/day)
    Thanks Received:
    382
    Location:
    Kolkata, India
    LOL. :p Done. :)
     
  24. arskatb

    arskatb

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2014
    Messages:
    206 (0.83/day)
    Thanks Received:
    45
    Location:
    Finland
    Be afraid my hcpc :D:D
    [​IMG]
     
  25. marsey99

    marsey99

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    1,590 (0.60/day)
    Thanks Received:
    299
    slacker timings but more efficient tertiary timings.

    memcacheslack.jpg
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page