Tech-Hounds.com

Because gamers play games, not benchmarks




Performance - Capacity

Brothers In Arms - Chapter One, 1024 x 768
CL 2 1T 512 MB
CL 3 1T 2 GB
CL 3 2T 4 GB
61
98.16
130
70
96.981
128
64
97.756
129
.
60
98.231
131
70
97.48
128
65
97.545
129
.
57
96.98
130
57
95.664
128
63
96.836
128

Since we had to use not just higher timings but also higher Command Rate as well, the slower results with 4 GB is expected. The good news is that the performance difference is minimal at most. Since this game already runs quite fluidly on a 512 MB system, the additional memory from a 2 GB or 4 GB is wasted and unused.

Dungeon Siege - Benchmark, 1024 x 768
CL 2 1T 512 MB
CL 3 1T 2 GB
CL 3 2T 4 GB
28
111.155
420
31
111.378
417
32
112.406
427
.
31
110.835
410
31
112.415
428
28
111.011
413
.
30
108.718
407
31
110.213
417
32
109.658
416

Again, we're seeing the same story here. We have pretty much the same level of performance from these three memory configurations. One thing to note though, looks like the added memory does seem to help 'stabilize' minimum fps as well. But let's look at how the sequel stands up.

Dungeon Siege II - Northern Greilyn Beach, 1024 x 768
CL 2 1T 512 MB
CL 3 1T 2 GB
CL 3 2T 4 GB
33
69.965
186
32
70.99
190
31
69.357
187
.
34
73.636
193
38
74.633
192
30
70.773
191
.
30
72.37
195
32
70.007
196
30
68.712
191

Looks like the best compromise will be to maintain Command Rate 1T while trying to satisfy memory capacity needs of your games. Out of three games so far, it's CAS Latency 3 plus Command Rate 1T that works best. You can still use this combo even if you have 2 1 GB memory modules. If you're planning to use 512 MB modules, make sure they are single banks so you could utilize Command Rate 1T.

[Previous Page]
[Go to top]
[Next Page]
Disclaimer and Privacy policy.