Jump to content

Benchmark Testing of Spaced out


Recommended Posts

On 11/16/2021 at 4:20 PM, gabberworld said:

ok i found ddr5 memory selling but price is idiotic high

https://www.corsair.com/eu/en/Categories/Products/Memory/DOMINATOR-PLATINUM-RGB-DDR5-Memory---Black/p/CMT32GX5M2A4800C34

why its idiotic high? because ddr5 is not new technology ddr5 is been used at video cards long time now. and they jumped to ddr6

jfyi: GDDR5 is not DDR5, and DDR5 has never been used for graphics card and probably never will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Big Hat Logan said:

jfyi: GDDR5 is not DDR5, and DDR5 has never been used for graphics card and probably never will

yes know that its called GDDR at graphic cards, G stands for graphics. they added for DDR5 the ecc control but that is also old technology, amd even supports ecc for they motherboards, in intel you see them only at servers

i not see point atm for buy the ddr5 anyway, reason is that very good ddr4 performs currently same like ddr5

when thy increase they cpu to 5000 then that is different story

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gabberworld said:

yes know that its called GDDR at graphic cards,

GDDR and DDR are fundamentally different technologies. GDDR5 for example have more in common with DDR3 than with DDR4 or DDR5. The # (sometimes an X behind it) does not in any way corrolate between the two. They have separate development paths as laid out by their JEDEC specification.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Saturnus said:

GDDR and DDR are fundamentally different technologies. GDDR5 for example have more in common with DDR3 than with DDR4 or DDR5. The # (sometimes an X behind it) does not in any way corrolate between the two. They have separate development paths as laid out by their JEDEC specification.

there nothing commend about that as i already read that multi times from wikipedia

but technology not starts only about at numbers behind the text, if you read closer they are sdram what goes back to 1996

what you see in ddr5 is the upgrade from ddr4 but its not new

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gabberworld said:

what you see in ddr5 is the upgrade from ddr4 but its not new

That's not completely true either. DDR5 switches to dual independant half-width channel with twice the chop and burst length.

If your company is a JEDEC member or associate member you can download the white papers on the JEDEC site. Alternatively, if you're an IEEE member with 2 years of senority you can apply for a limited access account of the JEDEC stie after you've signed the pre-requisite NDAs.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Saturnus said:

That's not completely true either. DDR5 switches to dual independant half-width channel with twice the chop and burst length.

If your company is a JEDEC member or associate member you can download the white papers on the JEDEC site. Alternatively, if you're an IEEE member with 2 years of senority you can apply for a limited access account of the JEDEC stie after you've signed the pre-requisite NDAs.  

if you cut 64bit to 2x you indeed get the 2 x 32 bit memory lanes, you know what that means? in theoretically you can use 32 bit memory in 64 bit machine, but i to like that they todo that in ddr5, because in programming language it means, integer can be stored only one side memory as it is 32bit or it was 8

anyway it means we to may see allot performance at some apps

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, gabberworld said:

if you cut 64bit to 2x you indeed get the 2 x 32 bit memory lanes, you know what that means? in theoretically you can use 32 bit memory in 64 bit machine, but i to like that they todo that in ddr5, because in programming language it means, integer can be stored only one side memory as it is 32bit

Not quite, the packet size is still the same for both channels in DDR5. In DDR4 the channel width is 72bit (64bit data + 8bit ECC) and the chop and burst lengths is 4 and 8 giving a packet size of 256bit data/512bit data respectively. In DDR5 the channel width is 40bit (32bit data + 8bit ECC) but the chop and burst lengths are doubled to 8 and 16 giving the same 256bit data/512bit data packet sizes. In DDR5 there's 2 channels however so the data bandwidth is doubled while the total amount of bits transferred (including the now non-optional ECC) is actually 2.22(2) times that of DDR5. Given the same relative base frequency naturally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Saturnus said:

Not quite, the packet size is still the same for both channels. In DDR4 the channel width is 72bit (64bit data + 8bit ECC) and the chop and burst lengths is 4 and 8 giving a packet size of 256bit data/512bit data respectively. In DDR5 the channel width is 40bit (32bit data + 8bit ECC) but the chop and burst lengths are doubled to 8 and 16 giving the same 256bit data/512bit data packet sizes. In DDR5 there's 2 channels however so the data bandwidth is doubled while the total amount of data transferred is actually 2.22(2) times that of DDR5. Given the same relative base frequency naturally.

i heard that ecc is controlled only inside memory, in regular pc. server uses little different ecc types

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/1/2021 at 8:26 PM, Oreoplanes said:

Time : 180 seconds
CPU : i7-1185G7 @3.00GHz
Graphics card : Iris(R) Xe
RAM 16 GB, LPDDR4x, 4267 MHz, integrated, dual channel

HDD : 1TB M.2 PCIe NVMe Micron 2300 Solid State Drive

Basically a Dell XPS 13

hmm, 180 sec is kind off allot for this cpu

for me it looks like that Iris(R) Xe slows you down

or memory latency is very bad

i recommend get rid off this laptop as fast as possible, never buy laptop what have LPDDR

you cant upgrade your memory at there when factory decides add garbage memory latency modules

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just bought a new PC and thought I'd contribute.

Old PC

Time : 2:34 or 154 seconds
CPU : i7-4790K @ 4.00GHz 
Graphics card : GTX 970
RAM : 2x8GB DDR3 @ 1904MHz (Kingston HyperX Fury)

CAS : ??
HDD : WD Black SN750 1TB

MB: Asus Z97-E
PSU : EVGA 750GQ
CPU cooler : Cooler Master Hyper 212 EVO

 

New PC (old GPU and SSD)

Time : 1:43 or 103 seconds
CPU : i7-12700K @ 3.70GHz - 5.10GHz (auto managed by Asus AI Suite)
Graphics card : GTX 970 (same as before)
RAM : 2x16GB DDR4 @ 3200 MHz (Corsair Vengeance RGB Pro CMW32GX4M2E3200C16)

CAS : 16-20-20-38
HDD : WD Black SN750 1TB (same as before)

MB: Asus TUF Gaming Z690-Plus D4
PSU : Corsair HX850
CPU cooler : Noctua NH-D15 chromax black (only mid-fan, no RAM+case clearance for the second fan)

 

Notes
- Managed to snatch an RTX 3070 but it's not yet arrived, don't think it matters for this benchmark though;
- I haven't installed the game or Windows in my new WD SN850 drive but I doubt it'd make it any faster.
  Seems to be CPU and RAM bound.
  Curious to see what happens with DDR5, but I'm not upgrading MB and RAM for at least another year;
- Not only is in-game faster, but the save file loads substantially faster too, like 2-3x faster, on the exact same SSD so clearly CPU bound;
- I only ran one test on the old build but several on the new one, all with the same suggested method - right after restart.

  The standard deviation was only 2 seconds, I presented the median as the result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, darksense said:

  Curious to see what happens with DDR5, but I'm not upgrading MB and RAM for at least another year;

depends what games you play, at some games GPU is more important than PC memory, oni is memory based game as it have allot data stored in memory self

as you get 103 sec with this test you are already in elite club what means you pc performs very good even in late game

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time: 2:00

Intel I7 9700K, OC @ 4.68Ghz
16x GB RAM 2666 Mhz

Graphics: NVIDIA 2070 Super 

SSD

 

Edit: Change on RAM.

Time: 1:55

Intel I7 9700K, OC @ 4.68Ghz
32x GB RAM 3000 Mhz [XMP]

Graphics: NVIDIA 2070 Super 

SSD

Overall fps improved from 11 to 13 after the change on RAM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm  a late to the party but felt obligated to contribute as I'm curious on this Subject matter of ONI performace vs Parts and also love Francis's Channel 

 

Hopefully my info helps someone somewhere :)

 

 

Time : 01:42.38 or 102.38 seconds 
CPU :  i9 12900kF (stock settings) (this was on windows10)
Graphics card : GTX 1080 (MSI aftermarket)
RAM : 2x16GB DDR4 3600Mhz (corsair) 

CAS : 18,22,22,42,64 CR1T
SSD :   Samsung SSD 980 500 GB Pcie gen 3x4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2021 at 4:46 PM, babba said:

Thanks for sharing dear @YourMomOnShrooms :razz:

It took weeks to get the song out of my head, I think the great @cpy posted it. Ahhhhh, reading your forum name I now got it in my head again all day long :lol: Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, mushroom, mushroom ! :ghost:

You can never have enough badgers in your life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

waiting other pc stuff, my i9-12900 arrive with some other parts, probaply next week i can build that up,

for me it will be huge performance jump because i still currently use the ddr3 what is most scenarios still just fine as i to have 32gib memory and some spitted stuff between ssd for get maximum out. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Please be aware that the content of this thread may be outdated and no longer applicable.

×
  • Create New...