# Latency Benchmark Competition



## xvi (Jan 4, 2007)

It was pointed out to me that both overclocking and lowering your timings will lower your overall memory latency. With this in mind, I thought it would be very interesting to see a comparison for Memory Latencies.
So, here it is! Download Everest Ultimate and run the "Memory Latency" benchmark.

When submitting your score, post a screenshot of the benchmarks and your brief system specs.



***********************************************
Memory Latency Benchmark Competition
***********************************************​

1: *dino25 = 32.5 ns* (2x512MB GeIL One @ DDR-560 2-2-2-11 1T)


2: *KennyT772 = 38.6 ns* (2x512MB Crucial Tracer PC4000 @ DDR2-533 2.5-2-2-11 1T)


3: *PT (aka: The Former Latency King) = 38.9 ns* (2x512MB A-DATA DDR2-800 Extreme Edition @ DDR2-1121 5-5-5-13 2T)


4: *Judas = 39.0 ns* (G Skill F2-6400CL4D-2GBHK @ DDR2-967 4-4-3-5 2T)


5: *Darknova = 40.1 ns* (2x512MB Corsair Value DDR400 @ DDR-427 2-3-2-6 1T)


6: *Nitro-Max = 41.7 ns* (2x512 PC3200 OCZ Premiere @ DDR-400 2-3-2-5 1T)


7: *KennyT772 = 40.2 ns* (Curcial Tracer DDR-500 @ DDR-520 2.5-3-3-8 1T)


8: *DRDNA = 40.7 ns* (??? @ DDR-448 2-3-3-5 1T)


9: *cdawall = 42.5 ns* (1x512MB ULTRA DDR400 @ DDR-488 2.5-3-2-6 1T)


10: *giorgos th. = 43.1 ns* (2x1024MB G.SKILL PC6400HZ @ DDR2-856 4-4-4-8 2T)


11: *Steevo = 43.6 ns* (2x512MB OCZ DDR400 @ DDR-385 2-2-2-5 1T)


12: *AthlonX2 = 46.7 ns* (1GB Kingston HyperX DDR-400 @ DDR-548 2-3-3-6 2T)


13: *Wile E = 47.0 ns* (2x512MB OCZ Platinum @ DDR2-948MHz 5-5-5-15 2T)


14: *PyroInc = 47.9 ns* (4096MB Corsair XMS2 Pro Series @ DDR2-804MHz 4-4-4-12 2T)


15: *Batou1986 = 48.1 ns* (2x512MB Corsair Value Select @ DDR-440 2.5-3-3-8-12 2T)


16: *xvi = 48.4 ns* (2x512MB Corsair XMS CMX512-3200C2 @ DDR-477 3-3-3-8-12 2T)


17: *mortal = 49.1 ns* (2x1024MB Corsair Value @ DDR-472 3-3-3-7 2T)


18: *jms45 = 49.3 ns* (2x512MB Corsair XMS2 DDR2 675 @ DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 1T)


19: *technicks = 54.2 ns* (2x512MB Dane-Elec DDR PC3200 @ DDR-371 2.5-3-3-7 2T)


20: *Tigger69 = 63.4 ns* (2x512mb Patriot EP DDR2 900 @ 560/DDR2-1120 5-5-5-15)


21: *Demos_sav = 72.6 ns* (2x512MB Kingston Hyper-X, 2x256MB Infineon DDR2-533 @ DDR2-701 3-4-4-6)


22: *sno.lcn = 73.1 ns* (2x1024MB OCZ Platinum DDR2-800 @ DDR2-826 5-5-5-15)


23: *magibeg = 87.4ns * Unofficial (1024MB DDR2-??? @ DDR2-??? ?-?-?-?)


24: *DanTheBanjoman = 89 ns* Unofficial (4x512MB PC5300 FB @ 400MHz Quad channel)


----------



## xvi (Jan 4, 2007)

DFI LanParty UT nForce3 250gb
2x512MB Corsair CMX512-3200C2
238FSB @ 3-3-3-8-12 2T


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Jan 4, 2007)

How about combining all memory related results in a single thread? My latency is about 89 ns btw 
Which gives me about the highest latency, let's go for highest.


----------



## xvi (Jan 4, 2007)

DanTheBanjoman said:


> How about combining all memory related results in a single thread? My latency is about 89 ns btw
> Which gives me about the highest latency, let's go for highest.



Aww.. Highest? Where's the performance in that? 

Care to give me a screenshot and make it official?


----------



## jms45 (Jan 4, 2007)

Asus M2N-SLI Deluxe NF570
2x 512MB Corsair XMS2 675 @ 800Mhz 4-4-4-12 CR1
255 FSB


----------



## Wile E (Jan 4, 2007)

Here's mine. I don't know why, but it Identifies my CPU wrong. 2x512MB OCZ Platinum. 5-5-5-15 @ 948MHz 2T


----------



## Deleted member 3 (Jan 4, 2007)

xvi said:


> Aww.. Highest? Where's the performance in that?
> 
> Care to give me a screenshot and make it official?



It's like smoking weed. It's relaxed  so it's good?

Can't make a screeny while I'm at work. Somewhere in the future I see the possibility though.


----------



## xvi (Jan 4, 2007)

Wile E said:


> Here's mine. I don't know why, but it Identifies my CPU wrong. 2x512MB OCZ Platinum. 5-5-5-15 @ 947MHz



Ahh.. Dethroned by Wile E. I was hoping I'd remain on top for longer than that. *Evil glare at Sempron*


----------



## dino25 (Jan 9, 2007)

*Hhahaha*



Ej people...what about this!!!!!!!!!!

Amd Athlon 64 3200 venice
Dfi lanparty nf4 Ultra-d
Geil one W 2x512 mb


----------



## mortal (Jan 9, 2007)

Nice rusult


----------



## Wile E (Jan 10, 2007)

dino25 said:


> View attachment 5584
> 
> Ej people...what about this!!!!!!!!!!
> 
> ...


PHOTOSHOP!!!! lol j/k   Very nice score.


----------



## dino25 (Jan 10, 2007)

Tnx..i had aircodition pointed at my pc to cool it down..and ram had 3.9 volts..


----------



## Deleted member 24505 (Jan 10, 2007)

heres mine-


----------



## mortal (Jan 10, 2007)

DDR2 can't compete in latency with good DDR1. I can beat best DDR2 with worst DDR1.


----------



## xvi (Jan 10, 2007)

mortal said:


> DDR2 can't compete in latency with good DDR1. I can beat best DDR2 with worst DDR1.



That seems to be the trend. That's one of the reasons why I started this thread, too. I wanted some sort of competition that I had a chance at winning.


----------



## mortal (Jan 10, 2007)

You can do much better with that configuration! You must put 1T play with timming. I thin you can go under 40


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Jan 10, 2007)

here is my A64X2


----------



## Darknova (Jan 10, 2007)

Here is mine. It's the highest I can currently get it to go and POST.


----------



## Demos_sav (Jan 10, 2007)

*Here is mine*

Dual channel DDR2 2*512MB Kingston Hyper-X  &   2*256 Infineon
533MHz @ *666*MHz


----------



## xvi (Jan 10, 2007)

Demos_sav said:


> Dual channel DDR2 2*512MB Kingston Hyper-X  &   2*256 Infineon
> 533MHz @ *666*MHz



Are your timings seriously 3-4-3-*1*? You should bring up your trc to at least 5. A lower trc isn't better, from what I've heard.


----------



## Darknova (Jan 10, 2007)

New Overclock (upped voltage to 2.8 on RAM)


----------



## Athlon2K15 (Jan 10, 2007)

lowered timings a bit


----------



## xvi (Jan 10, 2007)

AthlonX2 said:


> lowered timings a bit



Noooooo!! Now I'm in 5th! Oh well.. Cheers.


----------



## Darknova (Jan 10, 2007)

AthlonX2, try using a CR of 1, should provide a bit of a boost.


----------



## xvi (Jan 10, 2007)

Darknova said:


> AthlonX2, try using a CR of 1, should provide a bit of a boost.



That's if he can still post at 2T..

Speaking of that specific timing, anyone know what to look for in the BIOS to change it?


----------



## dino25 (Jan 10, 2007)

Hey gays i have a small change..






[/URL][/IMG]


----------



## Darknova (Jan 10, 2007)

xvi said:


> That's if he can still post at 2T..
> 
> Speaking of that specific timing, anyone know what to look for in the BIOS to change it?



Command Rate, that's what it's been in every motherboard I've had. Look under Advanced Chipset Features


----------



## xvi (Jan 10, 2007)

dino25 said:


> Hey gays i have a small change..



*sigh* It's not like you were beating us enough... _Noooo!_ You just had to go and rub it in our faces some more. 

Updated. Cheers!

Oh! And I'd be very interested to see what happens when you change your Trc to something between 8 and 12. I keep hearing that you get better performance around those ranges.

I'm off to see if I can do 1T.

Edit: I'm off to try 1T, _after_ my downloads finish though.


----------



## dino25 (Jan 10, 2007)

yea you have right..about Trc..i think that soon you can aspect some more reasults..


----------



## pt (Jan 10, 2007)

2nd place for me   
with some tweaking i could get 1st


----------



## cdawall (Jan 10, 2007)

ULTRA DDR400 2.5-3-3-7


----------



## PyroInc (Jan 10, 2007)




----------



## magibeg (Jan 10, 2007)

man this test is rough i score 87.4ns, hardly worth of scoring at all (but still ahead of dan )


----------



## KennyT772 (Jan 10, 2007)

3200+ at 2.6 1.475 vcore
dfi ultra-d
curcial tracer ddr500 at 260mhz 2.5-3-3-8-1t


----------



## pt (Jan 10, 2007)

damn, i'm good at this benchmark  
i'm the king of latency


----------



## pt (Jan 10, 2007)

@dino25
can you do better?


----------



## PyroInc (Jan 10, 2007)

I think I just may adjust my timings and redo the test


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

how the hell did you get does results..whit that timings..???
its something strange...............


----------



## xvi (Jan 11, 2007)

pt said:


> damn, i'm good at this benchmark
> i'm the king of latency



PT!! That's not even funny. What did you change? Seriously! Enlighten the noobs please!


----------



## xvi (Jan 11, 2007)

*Hey PT! I've got somethin' for you!*






That's what I think of *your* benchmark, so THERE!


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

xvi said:


> That's what I think of *your* benchmark, so THERE!



i think it was real when i posted here but i guess it was just a bug
i opened cpu-z when the test was almost finish and got it
i got 18s too  
put the 1st result


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

ok..i think that this comptition is gone....when you cant validate it ..by by


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

dino25 said:


> ok..i think that this comptition is gone....when you cant validate it ..by by



atention i didn't cheat it on purpose,


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

It was strange when you got this...

Memory Read bechmarks Club:
11.)pt = 4800mb/s (300fsb)

so latency cant be so hi...


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 11, 2007)




----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

you must remove the exsident cheater from the list..


----------



## cdawall (Jan 11, 2007)

9: cdawall = 51.6 ns (2x512MB ULTRA DDR400 @ DDR-400 2.5-3-3-7 1T)

1x512mb sry i ddnt post a cpuz screenie


----------



## xvi (Jan 11, 2007)

pt said:


> i think it was real when i posted here but i guess it was just a bug
> i opened cpu-z when the test was almost finish and got it
> i got 18s too
> put the 1st result



Alright.. I'll set you back to the first result. I was thinking something was fishy.. It looks like all you changed was your Trc and your latency went down nearly by half. 



cdawall said:


> 1x512mb sry i ddnt post a cpuz screenie


Fixed



dino25 said:


> you must remove the exsident cheater from the list..


I wouldn't call PT a cheater, but rather the victim of a bug. He asked to be set back to his first score, and now he is.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 11, 2007)

woopwoop worst score


----------



## Darknova (Jan 11, 2007)

cdawall said:


> woopwoop worst score



Jesus...that's with no overclock right?


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 11, 2007)

xvi if i was with 2-3-3-6 i`d have 0.5ns latency...
4-4-4-8 for me please..


----------



## KennyT772 (Jan 11, 2007)

what speed/timings do you guys think i could get with micron 5B G chips?


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

ok i have better reasults..but i will not put it oficial..i am saving it for later..


----------



## technicks (Jan 11, 2007)




----------



## mortal (Jan 11, 2007)

49.1

Corsair value 2 x 1024MB - 2,80V - 3 3 3 7 - 472mhz - BE-5 chips


----------



## PyroInc (Jan 11, 2007)

dino25 said:


> ok gays ia have better reasults..but i will not put it oficial..i am saving it for later..



did you just call us gay.... lol


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

dino25 said:


> It was strange when you got this...
> 
> Memory Read bechmarks Club:
> 11.)pt = 4800mb/s (300fsb)
> ...



eh, stop it right now IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE F^CK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!
i'm no cheater in anything, the 1st one was a everest bug i acidentally found and only realized after running the test some more times

in that one you do the math (*IT'S THEORICAL IF YOU CAN'T READ PROPERLY*)
300(fsb)x1 (single channel) x 2 (dual data rate 2) x 8 (8bits if i'm not mistaked) 

now you go call someone else cheater to another place if you do not have proves
capiche?
thanks for your comprehension


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

i think that you cant read i sad an axsident cheater...


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

xvi said:


> Alright.. I'll set you back to the first result. I was thinking something was fishy.. It looks like all you changed was your Trc and your latency went down nearly by half.



yep, i tought it was strange too when i couldn't replicate the latency, and when i opened cpu-z again it read 10s or something


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

dino25 said:


> i think that you cant read i sad an axsident cheater...



axsident isn't english, i read that (whatever it is) as ascendent, guess it's you who can't write

enough of this, i'm too tired to be discusting this things, if you believe me fine if you don't fine again, don't care anymore about your toughts, since ppl here know me


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

so what do i care that ppl knows you..beat me if you can....


----------



## technicks (Jan 11, 2007)

pt said:


> axsident isn't english, i read that (whatever it is) as ascendent, guess it's you who can't write
> 
> enough of this, i'm too tired to be discusting this things, if you believe me fine if you don't fine again, don't care anymore about your toughts, since ppl here know me



You go girl.


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

prc..32.5...


----------



## cdawall (Jan 11, 2007)

Darknova said:


> Jesus...that's with no overclock right?



yep stock no options to change anything in bios or anything else  but its good for laughs  90+ns ram thats sad


----------



## Darknova (Jan 11, 2007)

cdawall said:


> yep stock no options to change anything in bios or anything else  but its good for laughs  90+ns ram thats sad



Lol it is good for laughs you're right


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

dino25 said:


> so what the fuck do i care that ppl knows you..beat me if you can....



  


 
they know i'm not a cheater, i didnt mean REALLY know me

btw, you should say f^ck instead, it's more educated, and you won't get banned


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

technicks said:


> You go girl.



yes man


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

who is the girl here.????


----------



## technicks (Jan 11, 2007)

lol


----------



## technicks (Jan 11, 2007)




----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

technicks said:


>


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

you didn't get the joke do you?


----------



## technicks (Jan 11, 2007)

No girls here.


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

pt said:


> you didn't get the joke do you?


----------



## technicks (Jan 11, 2007)

Look he is post whore'ing now


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 11, 2007)

guys............behave your selves......


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

giorgos th. said:


> guys............behave your selves......



yes you have a point


come on guys behave your selves


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 11, 2007)

i was also reffering to you M8..


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

technicks said:


> Look he is post whore'ing now



lol, go make rm company, he feels lonely


----------



## technicks (Jan 11, 2007)

Just like with a little puppy. Stop reacting and it will go away by it self


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

technicks said:


> Just like with a little puppy. Stop reacting and it will go away by it self



lol, let's stop spamming this thread, it's a good thread, we have good threads for that


----------



## dino25 (Jan 11, 2007)

prc..stop talking guys beet my score...


----------



## pt (Jan 11, 2007)

dino25 said:


> prc..stop talking guys beet my score...



i haven't spent a milion on ram, so i cant compete


----------



## technicks (Jan 11, 2007)

Me neither i only have 110 euro crappy ram.


----------



## mortal (Jan 11, 2007)

Geil one BH or TCCD (used) 2x512 can be bought for 100Euro


----------



## pt (Jan 12, 2007)

mortal said:


> Geil one BH or TCCD (used) 2x512 can be bought for 100Euro



where?


----------



## Batou1986 (Jan 12, 2007)

I believe this takes 9th, Corsair Value Select 2x512


----------



## Darknova (Jan 12, 2007)

Batou1986 said:


> I believe this takes 9th, Corsair Value Select 2x512



You can push those timings tighter, I'm using the same memory as you.


----------



## Batou1986 (Jan 12, 2007)

my mobo don't have timing control


----------



## Darknova (Jan 12, 2007)

Batou1986 said:


> my mobo don't have timing control



That sucks....


----------



## dino25 (Jan 12, 2007)

dino25 said:


> prc..32.5...
> 
> 
> View attachment 5611




NEW SCORE!!


----------



## xvi (Jan 12, 2007)

dino25 said:


> NEW SCORE!!



Sorry.. Got it.


----------



## dino25 (Jan 12, 2007)

no problem...


----------



## pt (Jan 12, 2007)

the score posted on 1st page was at 5-5-5-14


----------



## Judas (Jan 12, 2007)

Not too bad ..it'll do for now


----------



## pt (Jan 12, 2007)

Judas said:


> Not too bad ..it'll do for now



you got the same i did  
i lowered some timmings and still 39 or 38.9, could am2 be maxed at 39?


----------



## cdawall (Jan 13, 2007)

hahahahaha thats the coolest score


----------



## cdawall (Jan 13, 2007)

dual channel ddr400@428mhz 1x512mb centon 1x512mb ultra (in dual channel)
on a pentium d 930 @ 3.2ghz


----------



## mortal (Jan 13, 2007)

Update mine result 49,1 i've post it 2 days ago


----------



## Darknova (Jan 13, 2007)

This is my latest one






I'm catching up lol


----------



## DRDNA (Jan 13, 2007)

I am right there with you!!


----------



## Steevo (Jan 13, 2007)




----------



## sno.lcn (Jan 14, 2007)




----------



## xvi (Jan 15, 2007)

cdawall said:


> yep stock no options to change anything in bios or anything else  but its good for laughs  90+ns ram thats sad



I vote we start a "Buy cdawall a new motherboard" campaign. 
Cheers, cdawall.


----------



## xvi (Jan 15, 2007)

Updated. Tell me if I missed anything.


----------



## Darknova (Jan 15, 2007)




----------



## xvi (Jan 15, 2007)

...and Darknova leaps ahead. Did you actually change anything, or just run it again?


----------



## Darknova (Jan 15, 2007)

xvi said:


> ...and Darknova leaps ahead. Did you actually change anything, or just run it again?



Yes, an extra 5Mhz to the FSB  don't think it'll go much further.


----------



## cdawall (Jan 15, 2007)

xvi said:


> I vote we start a "Buy cdawall a new motherboard" campaign.
> Cheers, cdawall.



how bout a buy cdawall a s939


----------



## pt (Jan 15, 2007)

cdawall said:


> how bout a buy cdawall a s939



dont you want a connie?


----------



## Judas (Jan 15, 2007)

pt said:


> dont you want a connie?



And pt s paying


----------



## pt (Jan 15, 2007)

Judas said:


> And pt s paying



when i have the money i will pay you one 

(never...)


----------



## Darknova (Jan 15, 2007)

Or how about we use that money to buy a new CPU for me, god knows I'd use it better heheh


----------



## giorgos th. (Jan 17, 2007)

a bit better


----------



## xvi (Jan 22, 2007)

giorgos th. said:


> a bit better


Enough to push you into 7th. Nice!

Sorry for taking forever to update. I wasn't getting e-mail notifications like I normally do.


----------



## pt (Feb 1, 2007)

free bump


----------



## KennyT772 (Feb 1, 2007)

ugh you all are beating me by small fractions of a nanosecond. i guess i need to pull my ram up to 3.2v and run 270mhz at 2.5-2-2-7


----------



## Demos_sav (Feb 1, 2007)

*Moved up a spot*

He he!!   

2*512MB DDR2 Hyper-X(533MHz) + 2*256MB Infineon(533MHz) @ 701MHz( *3*-4-4-6)


----------



## xvi (Feb 11, 2007)

*Bump* ..because I wasn't getting e-mail notifications.

Demos, isn't that result 20 ms slower than your previous result? Nice FSB, though.


----------



## Darknova (Feb 12, 2007)

Because I can


----------



## xvi (Feb 12, 2007)

Updated. Darknova takes 4th!


----------



## cdawall (Feb 12, 2007)

Ultra DDR400 single channel 2.5-3-3-7 1T @DDR484---only 2.65v going thru it


----------



## Darknova (Feb 12, 2007)

Xvi, my RAM is running at 427, not 443  Less than last time but quicker latency


----------



## xvi (Feb 13, 2007)

cdawall said:


> Ultra DDR400 single channel 2.5-3-3-7 1T @DDR484---only 2.65v going thru it



From 16th to 9th! Seriously nice! My Corsair sticks don't seem to like any extra voltage, so I can't seem to get them up over DDR480.

Time for dinner. Homemade stir fry! Woot!


----------



## infrared (Feb 13, 2007)

Hmm, i'm wanting to see how i compare. I know my Crucial DDR2 does around 45-48ns @ ~900mhz cl3. I'm still waiting for Overclockers.co.uk to send me the rest of my parts from my motherboard rma though, so i'm not sure when i can join the competition =/

I'm hoping to have the lowest latency ddr2 here tho


----------



## pt (Feb 13, 2007)

infrared said:


> Hmm, i'm wanting to see how i compare. I know my Crucial DDR2 does around 45-48ns @ ~900mhz cl3. I'm still waiting for Overclockers.co.uk to send me the rest of my parts from my motherboard rma though, so i'm not sure when i can join the competition =/
> 
> I'm hoping to have the lowest latency ddr2 here tho



that belongs to ketxxx in other thread, and then me  
http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=24727&highlight=latency


----------



## KennyT772 (Feb 13, 2007)

38.6
3.0v
265mhz


----------



## cdawall (Feb 13, 2007)

xvi said:


> From 16th to 9th! Seriously nice! My Corsair sticks don't seem to like any extra voltage, so I can't seem to get them up over DDR480.
> 
> Time for dinner. Homemade stir fry! Woot!



mine goes up to DDR500 but my CPU isnt stable at that :shadedshu crummy mobo oh well i managed to get the things to do DDR488 2.5-3-3-7 @ STOCK volts (2.6v)  yeah ultra value ram


----------



## infrared (Feb 14, 2007)

pt said:


> that belongs to ketxxx in other thread, and then me
> http://forums.techpowerup.com/showthread.php?t=24727&highlight=latency



Holy crap! Some nice latencies there!


----------



## cdawall (Feb 16, 2007)

new low


----------



## Darknova (Feb 16, 2007)

cdawall said:


> new low



Try bringing the Bank Cycle Time down to 9 or 8, that's what I did and it decreased by 2ns


----------



## cdawall (Feb 16, 2007)

Darknova said:


> Try bringing the Bank Cycle Time down to 9 or 8, that's what I did and it decreased by 2ns



tried at 10 then 9 and neither bettered 43.3ns both got ~44ns
thanx anyways though


----------



## Darknova (Feb 16, 2007)

That's odd, have you tried bringing Tras down to 6?


----------



## cdawall (Feb 16, 2007)

now i just gotta set that in BIOS and run it and the lats will go down 
---had to raise the vDIMM to 2.65v though


----------



## Darknova (Feb 16, 2007)

cdawall said:


> now i just gotta set that in BIOS and run it and the lats will go down
> ---had to raise the vDIMM to 2.65v though



I'm running mine at 2.7v, its not a problem


----------



## cdawall (Feb 16, 2007)

it would appear thats the best lat this mobo/cpu can do :shadedshu @DDR488


----------



## Darknova (Feb 16, 2007)

cdawall said:


> it would appear thats the best lat this mobo/cpu can do :shadedshu @DDR488



Erm...can u bring CAS down? and Row Cycle to 8...


----------



## Nitro-Max (Feb 16, 2007)

Athlon 64 4000 @ 3ghz
Winfast 6100-rs mobo
2X 512 pc3200 OCZ premiere matched ram timmings 2-3-2-5 1T @ 400mhz
x1900xt graphics

my memory write & copy beats everything on the list but cant see the scores as its trial


----------



## cdawall (Feb 17, 2007)

Darknova said:


> Erm...can u bring CAS down? and Row Cycle to 8...



nope i have tried 2.0-3-2-6 @2.7v but the pc wont post


----------



## Nitro-Max (Feb 18, 2007)

whens this thing get updates i should be were here were this guy is 7: giorgos th. = 43.1 ns (2x1024MB G.SKILL PC6400HZ @ DDR2-856 4-4-4-8 2T)


----------



## cdawall (Feb 19, 2007)

9: cdawall = 44.0 ns (1x512MB ULTRA DDR400 @ DDR-484 2.5-3-3-7 1T)
hehe got 42.5ns on my ram 2.5-3-2-6 1T DDR488mhz


----------

