Intel Core 2 Duo: Memory Performance Part Deux
by Gary Key on August 14, 2006 4:15 AM EST- Posted in
- Motherboards
Application Performance
We decided to test some real world applications that typically stress the CPU, memory, and storage systems to see if the results from our synthetic memory tests carry over to the desktop. Based upon those results, our DDR2-533 memory settings should significantly outperform the DDR2-667 and DDR-333/400 configurations, while the DDR2-800 setting available on 965/975 should come in at the top of the performance charts.
Our tasks include three activities that are common on the desktop. Our first test was to measure the time it takes to shrink the entire Office Space DVD that was extracted with AnyDVD into a single 4.5GB DVD image utilizing Nero Recode 2. Our second test utilizes WinRAR 3.6 and measures the time it takes to compress our test folder that contains 444 files, 10 folders, and has 602MB of data.
Our third test consists of utilizing Exact Audio Copy as the front end for our version 3.98a3 of LAME. We set up EAC for variable bit rate encoding, burst mode for extraction, use external program for compression, and to start the external compressor upon extraction (EAC will read the next track while LAME is working on the previous track, thus removing a potential bottleneck with the optical drive). Our test CD is INXS Greatest Hits and contains 16 tracks totaling 606MB of songs. The results of our tests are presented in minutes/seconds with lower numbers being better.
The results between our DDR355 settings on the Intel chipset and DDR400 on the VIA chipset are extremely close. If the i865 board was able to operate at a true DDR400 setting we are sure the results would have had a greater spread. Both of the DDR400 and DDR355 settings are very competitive with our DDR2 results, with DDR333 trailing behind.
Unlike the synthetic results, the DDR2-667 results on the VIA PT880 Pro chipset outpace those of the DDR2-533 setting. The Biostar P965 board continues to outperform the other solutions although all results are close to each other. We see that our P965 DDR2-800 memory setting places first in all applications with the largest margin of victory being a 13 second advantage in the WinRAR test. Our DDR-355 results are impressive as they are competitive with the DDR2-533/667 configurations. The effects of the other platform components have basically negated the pure performance advantage of our DDR2 settings in the synthetic memory tests. While our DDR2-800 setting still offers the best overall performance, it would be difficult to tell the actual performance difference between it and our DDR-355 memory without benchmarks.
We decided to test some real world applications that typically stress the CPU, memory, and storage systems to see if the results from our synthetic memory tests carry over to the desktop. Based upon those results, our DDR2-533 memory settings should significantly outperform the DDR2-667 and DDR-333/400 configurations, while the DDR2-800 setting available on 965/975 should come in at the top of the performance charts.
Our tasks include three activities that are common on the desktop. Our first test was to measure the time it takes to shrink the entire Office Space DVD that was extracted with AnyDVD into a single 4.5GB DVD image utilizing Nero Recode 2. Our second test utilizes WinRAR 3.6 and measures the time it takes to compress our test folder that contains 444 files, 10 folders, and has 602MB of data.
Our third test consists of utilizing Exact Audio Copy as the front end for our version 3.98a3 of LAME. We set up EAC for variable bit rate encoding, burst mode for extraction, use external program for compression, and to start the external compressor upon extraction (EAC will read the next track while LAME is working on the previous track, thus removing a potential bottleneck with the optical drive). Our test CD is INXS Greatest Hits and contains 16 tracks totaling 606MB of songs. The results of our tests are presented in minutes/seconds with lower numbers being better.
 |
| Click to enlarge |
The results between our DDR355 settings on the Intel chipset and DDR400 on the VIA chipset are extremely close. If the i865 board was able to operate at a true DDR400 setting we are sure the results would have had a greater spread. Both of the DDR400 and DDR355 settings are very competitive with our DDR2 results, with DDR333 trailing behind.
 |
 |
 |
| Click to enlarge |
Unlike the synthetic results, the DDR2-667 results on the VIA PT880 Pro chipset outpace those of the DDR2-533 setting. The Biostar P965 board continues to outperform the other solutions although all results are close to each other. We see that our P965 DDR2-800 memory setting places first in all applications with the largest margin of victory being a 13 second advantage in the WinRAR test. Our DDR-355 results are impressive as they are competitive with the DDR2-533/667 configurations. The effects of the other platform components have basically negated the pure performance advantage of our DDR2 settings in the synthetic memory tests. While our DDR2-800 setting still offers the best overall performance, it would be difficult to tell the actual performance difference between it and our DDR-355 memory without benchmarks.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
34 Comments
View All Comments
Kiijibari - Tuesday, August 15, 2006 - link
Hi,first I have to say, that it is a nice review, I liked it. I only have one minor critic with the following piece of text:
I strongly doubt, that you'll see any benefits with DDR2-800 modules, regardless of the GPU, because you forgot that the FSB1066 is limiting factor. Furthermore I assume, that the DDR2-667 scores are just better because of the better absolut memory latency.
Well, as you stated, your scores may be better again with DDR2-800 RAMs @CL3, but I think that such expensive oc modules are out of question in the low cost context of the article.
cheers
Kiijibari
giantpandaman2 - Monday, August 14, 2006 - link
Is there any way that you guys not use red and orange on the same graph? It's difficult to discern between the two. I mean, it's definitely possible, but it's a pain.Paradox999 - Monday, August 14, 2006 - link
You guys need to seriously have a deeper look at the ASRock 775i65G sisnce it obviously is extremely competitive. What I want to know is:what are the overclocking / voltage options and do they work with the Conroe?
I was seriously considering buying the 775DUAL-VSTA ... but since I'm running an overclocked D820 / 2 gig Mushkin DDR500 / AGP Radeon x850 XTPE.
Why bother with DDR2 as an upgrade path on the 775DUAL-VSTA when it doesn't make all that much difference and if I have to buy a new PCI card it'll have to be a very good one to best my overclocked x850 .... and that means I would want to stick it into a better motherboard than the 775DUAL-VSTA.
All I would need is the ASRock 775i65G and the Conroe for an upgrade that seems the best deal around. Who's with me ????
hibachirat - Monday, August 14, 2006 - link
775i65G?Exactly what i've been trying to find for the last week! :-)
But no luck getting any U.S. vendor too specify that they will ship me an R2 board.
Try googling 775i65G R2 and you'll find as many as you want...in Australia, U.K., Europe, etc...what's the deal with U.S. resellers?
I'm going to try emailing the article's author...
Gary Key - Monday, August 14, 2006 - link
http://www.mwave.com/mwave/skusearch.hmx?SCriteria...">http://www.mwave.com/mwave/skusearch.hmx?SCriteria...In stock at the above link, called them and they have a few of the rev. 2 boards in stock. The other board to have if you want the i865 chipset is the ConRoe865PE which should be released in a couple of weeks.
Paradox999 - Tuesday, August 15, 2006 - link
I would love if Anandtech would get Asrock to supply one of these ConRoe865PE boards for comparison testing. I saw that board at the Asrock site a while ago but couldn't find anyone in North America selling it.Asrock seems to slowly be creeping up from the back into the enthousiiast (on a buget) market. The first thing I would fix if I were them is add solid voltage control for the CPU and memory.
I'm an enthusiast but I hate dropping tons of cash for top drawer hardware when I can have very respectable performance by carefully selecting less expensive hardware.
Go Asrock!
hibachirat - Monday, August 14, 2006 - link
Thanks, i guess i should have called them. This was their email response:"Dear Valued Customer,
Unfortuantely, we are unable to guarantee what version of this motherboard we have. We do apologize for the inconvenience.
Mwave.com"
Gary Key - Monday, August 14, 2006 - link
We will have a comparison article with it and the other value boards in the near future.
Optimummind - Monday, August 14, 2006 - link
I'm thinking about purchasing this board along with a Conroe CPU until the prices come down on the higher-model mobos such as the Asus P5W-DH. My most pressing question is how much of a bottleneck in gaming performance will be introduced as a result of ASRock including only PCIe x4 for the GPU.I believe that in order to answer that question, a higher performing GPU needs to be used rather than a 7600GS. Could you guys also include an extra table/graph including a comparison between a 7800GS AGP 8x and 7800GS PCIe?
The reason I want to know is because I want to whether or not putting a DX10 card in the ASRock PCIe x4 slot will bottleneck the GPU.
Or, could you guys compare the performance of a 7900GT in the ASRock board with a 7900GT GPU in a P965, P975, or other mobos that has the full PCIe x16 connection? I don't to know what difference in performance there will be and to see if it's worth putting a 7900GT PCIe in the ASRock board.
Paladin165 - Monday, August 14, 2006 - link
Do you think adding better cooling on the chipset would improve FSB overclocking on this board?