# Autumn Equinox AIDA64 Cache and Memory Benchmark Competition



## storm-chaser (Nov 4, 2018)

Rules of Engagement:
-Activated version preferred, however demo version will work in a pinch
-The ONLY benchmark we will be scoring here is the AIDA64 Cache and Memory Benchmark (Also run the AIDA64 CPUID or CPUz for system details)
-Leaderboard will include champions in READ, WRITE and LATENCY divisions
-Please include a snip of your result and post it here (that's it, plus CPU details)
-We will also include awards for those with the highest overclock percentage for both CPU and FSB (as revealed by AIDA64)
-We will also have a combativity award and a combination champion for a member who does exceedingly well in all three categories
-Leaderboards will be updated on a near daily basis (will do my best)
-Competition will run until the end of the year (deadline = December 30th, 2018 11:59pm)
-Please include a brief summary of your system, if you wish. I.E. CPU, Memory, Mainboard, PSU and CPU cooler, etc
-Multiple admissions and hardware changes are allowed, no OS requirement
-Red Landern Award gifted to the slowest rig(s)

EDIT: Depending on admissions we will split this into AMD/INTEL categories respectively to keep it competitive. We may also include sub-categories respective to DUAL/TRIPLE/QUAD channel systems, again, to keep it competitive.  Your submissions are valued and I see we are already getting some interest going. THANK YOU!

MEMORY LATENCY:
1) DR4G00N            28.8 ns
2) Woomack 34.6 ns
3) Agent_x007 35.3 ns
4) DR4G00N 35.7 ns
5) bxcounter 36.4 ns
6) PolRoger 36.9 ns
7) MrGenius 37.1 ns
8) freeagent 37.2 ns
9) Arctucas 38.7 ns
10) Agent_x007 40.5 ns
11) PolRoger 44.0 ns
12) Divinity 44.3 ns
13 Knoxx29 44.5 ns
14) Storm-Chaser     44.9 ns
15) gdallsk                 45.9 ns
16) Storm-Chaser 47.7 ns
17) Agent_x007         48.6 ns
18) cucker tarlson:   50.0 ns
19) JorgeRod              57.2 ns
20) biffzinker:            66.5 ns
21) infrared: 66.7
22) Final_Fighter:    72.2 ns
23) Zwilhoit 88.7 ns
24) er557 92.0 ns

MEMORY BANDWIDTH:
1) Zwilhoit 311592 MB/s (16 Channel) (AMD EPYC 7301)
2) Woomack 99137 MB/s Quad (INTEL)
3) er557 98025 MB/s Octal (INTEL)
4) phanbuey 97131 MB/s Quad (INTEL)
5) Woomack 96823 MB/s Quad (AMD)
6) jorgeRod 76019 MB/s Quad (INTEL)
7) PolRoger 67380 MB/s Quad (INTEL)
8) bxcounter 64240 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
9) DR4G00N              62744 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
10) Knoxx29 57755 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
11) ECPOWERS 57550 MB/s Dual (AMD)
12) Agent_x007           56724 MB/s Quad (INTEL)
13) infrared: 54850 MB/s Dual (AMD)
14) Arctucas 53493 MB/s Dual (Intel)
15) johnspack 52809 MB/s Quad (INTEL)
16) Final_Fighter         49245 MB/s Dual (AMD)
17) biffzinker               47793 MB/s Dual (AMD)
18) Wilson 45667 MB/s Dual (AMD)
19) gdallsk                   43886 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
20) Divinity                  39087 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
22) DR4G00N 35767 MB/s (INTEL)
23) natr0n 35502 MB/s Hexa (INTEL)
24) INSTG8R 35342 MB/s (INTEL)
25) MrGenius              35009 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
26) cucker tarlson:     33944 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
27) freeagent 32212 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
28) PolRoger               31105 MB/s Triple (INTEL)
29) Agent_x007 30474 MB/s Triple (INTEL)
30) sam_86314 23288 MB/s (INTEL)
31) Storm-Chaser:   17790 MB/s Dual (AMD)
32) Storm-Chaser: 16548 MB/s Dual (AMD)
33) Nuckles56 15896 MB/s Single (Intel)
34) PolRoger 12165 MB/s Dual (Intel)
35) Storm-Chaser 11320 MB/s Dual (Intel) Q9650
36) Agent_x007 11308 MB/s Dual (Intel) QX6850
37) PolRoger 11018 MB/s Dual (INTEL)
38) Storm-Chaser 10942 MB/s Dual (INTEL)


FSB%
Woomack 301%
Agent_x007 100%

CPU/FSB%
Agent_x007 84%

Combination Classification:
1) DR4G00N
2) Woomack
3) PolRoger

Combativity Award:
Agent_x007

Highest Latency Award:
1) MrGenius 462.5 ns
2) DR4G00N 295.3 ns
3) MrGenius 258.9 ns
4) PolRoger 216.5 ns
5) PolRoger 165.3 ns
6) Agent_X007 136.3 ns
7) PolRoger 132.9 ns
8) Storm-Chaser 95.0 ns
9) Agent_x007: 80.3 ns

Red Lantern Award (given to the slowest rig)
MrGenius

Leader, 16 Channel:
Zwihoit (And your Overall Champion)
Leader, Quad Channel:
Woomack
Leader, Triple Channel:
PolRoger
Leader, Dual Channel:
Bxcounter
Leader, Memory Read:
Zwilhoit
Leader, Memory Write:
Zwilhoit
Leader, Memory Copy:
Zwilhoit


----------



## cucker tarlson (Nov 4, 2018)

I dare anyone to beat me in L4 cache score.


----------



## Final_Fighter (Nov 4, 2018)

i can get my memory to boot at 3466 sometimes but is not stable. if i manage to run it threw a benchmark i will post the results.

edit: rerun with memory at 3266


----------



## biffzinker (Nov 4, 2018)

Who needs a L4 Cache? @cucker tarlson


----------



## cucker tarlson (Nov 4, 2018)

biffzinker said:


> Who needs a L4 Cache? @cucker tarlson
> View attachment 109887


Who *doesn't* ?


----------



## agent_x007 (Nov 4, 2018)

I bet highest Read/Write will go to highest clocked, 16+ core count CPU.
"Latency" will go to Coffee Lake chip with 4GHz+ RAM and UnCore, while best three highest "%" CPU/FSB will be dominated by Celeron Ds and/or Pentium Dual-Cores on LGA 775.
I may be wrong though 
Also : Which version of AIDA64 must be used ?


----------



## cucker tarlson (Nov 4, 2018)

r/w is easy, will go to quad channel cpu. latency can go to kaby lake or coffee lake, though if anyone runs a quad channel broadwell that's still on the ring bus it may be up for the contest.


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 4, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> I bet highest Read/Write will go to highest clocked, 16+ core count CPU.
> "Latency" will go to Coffee Lake chip with 4GHz+ RAM and UnCore, while best three highest "%" CPU/FSB will be dominated by Celeron Ds and/or Pentium Dual-Cores on LGA 775.
> I may be wrong though
> Also : Which version of AIDA64 must be used ?


I think you might be surprised 
Use any version of AIDA64 preferably Extreme or Engineer edition - I can help you get it setup PM me with any questions.



cucker tarlson said:


> r/w is easy, will go to quad channel cpu. latency can go to kaby lake or coffee lake, though if anyone runs a quad channel broadwell that's still on the ring bus it may be up for the contest.


Thats why we are going to make separate categories for DUAL, TRIPLE and QUAD channel rigs to keep it competitive for everyone.


----------



## DR4G00N (Nov 4, 2018)

Quick run with DDR4-4133 12-11 Mems.
Need to re-try with all cores enabled.


----------



## agent_x007 (Nov 4, 2018)

Sure, for everyone...
Pull out one of the sticks out of Quad Channel boards, and you get Triple Channel.
So... good bye LGA 1366.
Coffee lake will crush Dual Channel metrics.
But OK, I'll bite to see how it goes 

Quad Channel :




Triple Channel :




FSB % :




CPU/FSB % :


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 4, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> Sure, for everyone...
> Pull out one of the sticks out of Quad Channel boards, and you get Triple Channel.
> So... good bye LGA 1366.
> Coffee lake will crush Dual Channel metrics.


That's why we will have separate divisions for DUAL, TRIPLE AND QUAD channel memory submissions. 
You can keep bench racing or submit your own result! lol


----------



## MrGenius (Nov 4, 2018)

I'm still having some motherboard issues(specifically memory related too).

But...here's some old numbers I had saved from a while back.







If I can get things straightened out in time I might be able to do a little better with what I've got.


----------



## Divinity (Nov 4, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I dare anyone to beat me in L4 cache score.



Here you go:





Ps I think there should be separate scoreboards for DDR4/DDR3/DDR2, dual/quad channel etc...


----------



## cucker tarlson (Nov 4, 2018)

lucky you, with my board I can't go over 20x on edram. though that old screenshot was taken when I ran 2133 cl9-10-10-27 1t, now I got 2133 cl9-9-9-24 stable. I could maybe match what you've got, but not really beat it with edram maxing at 2GHz. Plus higher frequency memory is just better for synthetic benchmarks than lower speed with lower latency.My sticks are overclocked 1600 1.35v low profile ones, they overclock well till 2133, maybe 2200, but 2400 is just a no go.


----------



## DR4G00N (Nov 4, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> lucky you, with my board I can't go over 20x on edram. though that old screenshot was taken when I ran 2133 cl9-10-10-27 1t, now I got 2133 cl9-9-9-24 stable. I could maybe match what you've got, but not really beat it with edram maxing at 2GHz. Plus higher frequency memory is just better for synthetic benchmarks than lower speed with lower latency.My sticks are overclocked 1600 1.35v low profile ones, they overclock well till 2133, maybe 2200, but 2400 is just a no go.



Your memory OC may be due to the motherboard, I had that board a while ago and it was pretty bad for ram OC. My best stick of samsung D-Die could only do 2400 9-12-12 no matter what voltage I used, whereas on my Z87 OCF the same stick does 2800 9-11-11 @ 2.1V.


----------



## PolRoger (Nov 5, 2018)

Triple Channel:


----------



## R00kie (Nov 5, 2018)




----------



## JorgeRod (Nov 5, 2018)




----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 5, 2018)




----------



## er557 (Nov 6, 2018)

yup, that was an easy one...


----------



## MrGenius (Nov 6, 2018)

That latency though...:barf:


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 6, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> That latency though...:barf:


Right.. I think my Lenovo T61p laptop from 2007 benches about 90ns.
Still very impressive in the overall bandwidth competition. With those numbers other members are gonna be hard pressed to pull off an upset.


----------



## DR4G00N (Nov 6, 2018)

Here's my sub for cpu/fsb percentage, might need to get out the E4500 for over 100% fsb.


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 6, 2018)

Guys it looks like we are at a standstill at the moment in terms of updating the leaderboards.

I can't seem to edit the first post at the moment and I have a request into the mods to help out.

If you have a result please continue to post it here and I will update leaderboards as soon as the issue is fixed.

DR4G00N - Excellent submission! I have the same board, an Asus P5Q3 and love it. Talk about rock solid. In a past life it survived some serious liquid nitrogen cooling and since I've acquired it we've gone back to air cooling but still benches like a champ!

EDIT: LEADERBOARDS WILL BE UPDATED LATER TODAY! THANKS TO THE MODS FOR GETTING US BACK IN ACTION!


----------



## agent_x007 (Nov 6, 2018)

CPU/FSB % :




Triple Channel update :




PS. How does slowest rig work ?


----------



## Woomack (Nov 6, 2018)

These 3 for now.

TR 1920X / ASRock X399M Taichi / DDR4-3726 CL14-14-14-32 1N (4x Samsung / quad channel)







8086K / ASRock Z390 Phantom Gaming ITX/ac / DDR4-4500 CL17-17-17-37 2N (2x Samsung / dual channel)






i9-7900X / ASRock X299 Professional XE / DDR4-3800 CL20-23-23-45 2N ( 8x Micron / quad channel)


----------



## infrared (Nov 6, 2018)

I guess I'm at the point of diminishing returns here on this first gen Ryzen..

Benchmark settings:




Daily settings:




I'll compare to a 3700X when I get one  Not sure if it'll let me go further on the RAM on this C6H, hopefully it will.


----------



## agent_x007 (Nov 6, 2018)

Slowest rig with second best extreme CPU for the platform (not sure how "slowest rig" works, but I still can try right ?) 




It's interesting how my RAM wtih 4960X is faster than L1 cache in this test 
Also, NVMe RAID0 can get in the around the same bandwidth as RAM of this platform 
^That, is what I call progress.


----------



## JorgeRod (Nov 6, 2018)




----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 6, 2018)

Thanks for the submissions guys! Leaderboards will be updated this afternoon!


----------



## PolRoger (Nov 6, 2018)

These two runs were recently post here on the TPU Forum in other threads...

Dual channel DDR4-3866C16 for latency score:





Quad channel DDR3-2333C7 for bandwidth:


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 7, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> PS. How does slowest rig work ?



Slowest rig is simply that, lowest clock speed and lowest memory speed is what we are looking for. Vintage machine will likely win out here.


----------



## delshay (Nov 7, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> Slowest rig is simply that, lowest clock speed and lowest memory speed is what we are looking for. Vintage machine will likely win out here.



I take it your not allowed to underclock. If you want to be slow just add some really rubbish memory with poor timing.. ie don't fit PC-3200, find some old 100MHz DDR.

EDIT: Run single channel with very low memory 128MB or lower so that windows comes to a crawl & don't forget to add a very old slow hard drive from the 70's or better still use a tape drive.

Same applies to standard SDRAM & 72 pin simms (80ns or worse).

Your not cheating because your running at standard specification, "no underclocking" including memory


----------



## agent_x007 (Nov 7, 2018)

I know what you mean :


----------



## Final_Fighter (Nov 7, 2018)

i wounder how high i can get the latency on a ryzen? is there a category for slowest mem latency?


----------



## Regeneration (Nov 7, 2018)

AIDA64 Cache & Memory Benchmark is a bit flawed since the RAM bandwidth test runs on a single core.

You'll get better results with C-states on and/or Turbo boost on. Something like 10 percent.

Perhaps @W1zzard can make a few adjustments to MemTest64 and release it as MemBench64


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 7, 2018)

Final_Fighter said:


> i wounder how high i can get the latency on a ryzen? is there a category for slowest mem latency?


Sure we can add that category... have a little patience here as I'm busy with a few things from work for the next couple hours, but yeah we will get something going for sure... for slowest memory latency I'm going to sub my T61p but Agent_x007 still has me beat... for now


----------



## Final_Fighter (Nov 7, 2018)

It will be interesting to see because im sure the oldest system will win but exactly how old can you go back and still run aida64 i dont know. we need to get the Nostalgic Hardware club involved.


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 7, 2018)

Final_Fighter said:


> It will be interesting to see because im sure the oldest system will win but exactly how old can you go back and still run aida64 i dont know. we need to get the Nostalgic Hardware club involved.



I'm thinking something like this might give the nostalgic guys a run for their money... 





But... is it real?


----------



## er557 (Nov 7, 2018)

Regeneration said:


> AIDA64 Cache & Memory Benchmark is a bit flawed since the RAM bandwidth test runs on a single core.
> 
> You'll get better results with C-states on and/or Turbo boost on. Something like 10 percent.
> 
> Perhaps @W1zzard can make a few adjustments to MemTest64 and release it as MemBench64



Maybe so, but the additional memory read benchmark and for example the ray tracing fp64 benchmarks in aida64 don't seem to be running on one core, and represent real world performance


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 7, 2018)

er557 said:


> yup, that was an easy one...



Question is, do you have a response for Woomack's powerhouse submission? You are only a few thousand megabytes R/W/C away!


----------



## er557 (Nov 7, 2018)

I can live with that, being that my cpu scores are about four times than that rig....
I hope once I get my corsair rgb 128gb kit the latencies shall improve a bit...


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 7, 2018)

Lenovo T61p with x9000 Core 2 Extreme CPU (stock speed, undervolted)







*Leaderboards Updated*


----------



## freeagent (Nov 8, 2018)

Nothing too crazy, but still snappy.


----------



## PolRoger (Nov 8, 2018)

@storm-chaser: You missed my post #31 submissions...



Triple channel update using GSkill kit with Elpida BBSE ic.

DDR3-2175C8:




DDR3-2275C9:




***Edit***
Slow rig submissions...

Socket 370 Celeron 466Mhz (Mendocino) single channel PC100:




Socket 370 Pentium III 933MHz (Coppermine) single channel PC133:


----------



## Woomack (Nov 8, 2018)

Little update on TR4 rig:

TR 1920X / ASRock X399M Taichi / DDR4-3726 CL14-14-14-28 1N (4x Samsung / quad channel)






This one was on Micron SODIMM some time ago.


----------



## PolRoger (Nov 8, 2018)

Red Lantern (slow rig) AMD...

Athlon XP 2500+ Barton, Socket A (unlocked) DDR333 single channel:


----------



## DR4G00N (Nov 8, 2018)

Figured I'd give it a shot on my Slot 1 system, had to use a 66MHz FSB cpu of course to get the slowest mem speed.  Almost 1/3 sec of latency. (edit: Wait, that's not quite right.)
Tried to activate it but it didn't want to work even with my legit Aida key. 

PII 300MHz 4.5x66MHz
128MB PC133 3-3-3 @ PC66 3-3-3
Abit BH6 V1.01


----------



## MrGenius (Nov 8, 2018)

Single Channel DDR200 SDRAM (3-4-4-6 CR2)


----------



## johnspack (Nov 8, 2018)

Here's old Sandy Bridge xeon trying...  I must try to oc this ram at some point....


----------



## PolRoger (Nov 9, 2018)

Update on my last 6700K dual channel sub (Samsung ic):


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 9, 2018)

*Leaderboards UPDATED 11-08*


----------



## Woomack (Nov 9, 2018)

bclk/fsb% - 301%


----------



## INSTG8R (Nov 9, 2018)

The old fella still has some punt?


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 9, 2018)

*Leaderboards Updated* 11-9



Regeneration said:


> AIDA64 Cache & Memory Benchmark is a bit flawed since the RAM bandwidth test runs on a single core.
> 
> You'll get better results with C-states on and/or Turbo boost on. Something like 10 percent.
> 
> Perhaps @W1zzard can make a few adjustments to MemTest64 and release it as MemBench64


All benchmarks are flawed in one way or another but I think AIDA64 offers the most complete package to express memory bandwidth potential. Is there even a second best out there? Just curious what else we have for memory bandwidth and latency testing....


----------



## PolRoger (Nov 9, 2018)

IB-E Quad channel DDR3-2333C7:




C2D dual channel DDR3-1700C7:


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 10, 2018)

*Leaderboards Updated 11-10*


----------



## Enterprise24 (Nov 12, 2018)

Can I submit my old system ?


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 12, 2018)

Enterprise24 said:


> Can I submit my old system ?



Go for it!


----------



## JorgeRod (Nov 12, 2018)

Update results


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 13, 2018)

*Leaderboards Updated*


----------



## DR4G00N (Nov 15, 2018)

I was messing around with some 4 Dimm DDR3 SuperPi 32M efficiency so I figured I'd give this a try. 4x4GB OEM Samsung D-Die HCH9 @ 2666 9-12-12-28 1T 1.95V. 2800 is also doable but only one stick is really what would be considered good, so I'd need to run 10-13-13 @ 2.2V.
Scores are a bit low, probably because I only have two cores enabled and I'm on XP 32 instead of Win 7 64.


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 15, 2018)

Impressive latency on that rig. Well done. 

*Leaderboards updated*


----------



## er557 (Nov 20, 2018)

does this get me any further up the chart? new ram installed, 96gb total. As a side note, I dare anyone to best these cpu queen and photoworxx benchmarks.
Latency isn't an issue, due to much of the data residing in the 90mb L3 cache, which are accordingly much faster.


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 20, 2018)

Damn dude, that moves you up to second place in the bandwidth division. Only 1112 MB/s short of Woomack.

*LEADERBOARDS UPDATED*

I am thinking there must be something left on the table... lets see what you can do.


----------



## er557 (Nov 20, 2018)

Unfortunately that's about as high as it can get, this is a pure workstation board, no overclocking except that custom turbo hack efi driver. Also, cpu limitation puts the ram @2133 and nothing else. Only thing going for me is the octal channel bandwidth and NUMA/ local memory feature


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 20, 2018)

er557 said:


> Unfortunately that's about as high as it can get, this is a pure workstation board, no overclocking except that custom turbo hack efi driver. Also, cpu limitation puts the ram @2133 and nothing else. Only thing going for me is the octal channel bandwidth and NUMA/ local memory feature



Tell me more about this custom turbo hack / efi driver. Looks like you got a pretty substantial overclock there. 3GHz?


----------



## phanbuey (Nov 20, 2018)

er557 said:


> does this get me any further up the chart? new ram installed, 96gb total. As a side note, I dare anyone to best these cpu queen and photoworxx benchmarks.



^ I will be back with a higher avx512 multi real quick to snag that photoworxx








edit: @er557 - avx 512 @ 4.4 ghz - no HT.  I think I'm bandwidth bound, but just snuck by


----------



## natr0n (Nov 20, 2018)




----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 20, 2018)

Thanks for your subs, natr0n and phanbuey. *Leaderboards Updated*

*Phanbuey* gets the combativity award for today.


----------



## er557 (Nov 21, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> Tell me more about this custom turbo hack / efi driver. Looks like you got a pretty substantial overclock there. 3GHz?



https://github.com/freecableguy/v3x4


----------



## MrGenius (Nov 22, 2018)

Looks like I've got one 8GB stick that'll do 2800. Nice!


----------



## Woomack (Nov 23, 2018)

Right now I don't have any memory that can even boot at CR1 above 3700 or run at tight timings at 4000+ so it's hard to drop latency some more ...


----------



## DR4G00N (Nov 23, 2018)

Better DDR4 latency sub, finally learned how to properly OC b-die on this board  Was too lazy to swap in the 8700K.
4200 12-11-11 @ 2.0V Real on Air.


----------



## MrGenius (Nov 23, 2018)




----------



## Divinity (Nov 24, 2018)

Update


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 24, 2018)

In all my years, that's got to be the first time I've seen a sub 30 ns submission. Well done, DR4G000N! 

*Leaderboards Updated 11-24 6:00PM*


----------



## er557 (Nov 24, 2018)

what specific advantages would be to such low latency, in real world usage, let's say when not backed by high bandwidth?


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 24, 2018)

er557 said:


> what specific advantages would be to such low latency, in real world usage, let's say when not backed by high bandwidth?


Just a very snappy system... Like a formula one engine: you have to be in the drivers seat to take advantage.


----------



## mouacyk (Nov 24, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> Just a very snappy system... Like a formula one engine: you have to be in the drivers seat to take advantage


On a very very very short course.


----------



## agent_x007 (Nov 25, 2018)

er557 said:


> what specific advantages would be to such low latency, in real world usage, let's say when not backed by high bandwidth?


64GB/s on Dual Channel isn't high enough for you ?
You do realise this is memory clocked at 4GHz effective, right ?


----------



## MrGenius (Nov 25, 2018)

Exactly. That's like a decent sized game's worth of data per second. The mind boggles when you put it in proper perspective. In all fairness though...he did say "when *not* backed by high bandwidth".


storm-chaser said:


> *Leaderboards Updated 11-24 6:00PM*


You missed my 37.6 ns latency score.


----------



## storm-chaser (Nov 25, 2018)

Okay, should be fixed now. Thanks guys!


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 11, 2018)

Leaderboard Updated


----------



## PolRoger (Dec 12, 2018)

Working the bus/memory speeds up... 333 latch @PL8 with 4x1GB sticks.


----------



## sam_86314 (Dec 12, 2018)

I have a newer memory kit on the way. This is what I have now.


----------



## agent_x007 (Dec 12, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> -Leaderboard will include champions in READ, WRITE and LATENCY divisions
> -We will also include awards for those with the highest overclock percentage for both CPU and FSB (as revealed by AIDA64)
> -We will also have a combativity award and a combination champion for a member who does exceedingly well in all three categories
> -Leaderboards will be updated on a near daily basis (will do my best)
> *-Competition will run until the end of the month (deadline = November 30th, 2018 11:59pm)*


?


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 12, 2018)

agent_x007 said:


> ?



Sorry, my mistake end of the year: deadline is December 31st, 2018 11:59pm


----------



## MrGenius (Dec 12, 2018)

If I could just get .1 ns less latency...I could move myself up a notch on the list. But, until then, I'll have to settle with a tie for 5th. 






Spoiler



I've got a bit more speed in reserve. So that oughta do it. We'll see if it does...
CPU-Z Validation @ 2866.4


----------



## sam_86314 (Dec 13, 2018)

Higher numbers are better for everything... even latency


----------



## MrGenius (Dec 13, 2018)

sam_86314 said:


> Higher numbers are better for everything... even latency


Wait...no. It's a joke. At least...I hope it's a joke. 

Well...I got something that's most certainly not a joke. Check this read speed!


----------



## sam_86314 (Dec 13, 2018)

MrGenius said:


> Wait...no. It's a joke. At least...I hope it's a joke.
> 
> Well...I got something that's most certainly not a joke. Check this read speed!
> View attachment 112443


I figure if I can't get the best score, might as well aim for the worst score.


----------



## bxcounter (Dec 14, 2018)




----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 14, 2018)

Leaderboards updated * Friday 12:30pm


----------



## MrGenius (Dec 14, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> Leaderboards updated * Friday 12:30pm


You missed my updated Read speed from post #91. And I've got a highest latency update too.

256MB DDR-200 (3-4-4-6 CR2)




I guess that's just not enough RAM to do most of the other tests.


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 14, 2018)

Okay will fix later... here is my sub to match the Q9550 which I also missed from earlier...


----------



## MrGenius (Dec 17, 2018)

Single Channel DDR125 SDRAM (3-4-4-6 CR2)




The highest latency trophy *IS MINE!!!*


----------



## mouacyk (Dec 17, 2018)

cucker tarlson said:


> I dare anyone to beat me in L4 cache score.





Divinity said:


> Here you gos I think there should be separate scoreboards for DDR4/DDR3/DDR2, dual/quad channel etc..







Dare someone to beat this efficiency score of 95.75%:


----------



## cucker tarlson (Dec 17, 2018)

mouacyk said:


> View attachment 112729
> 
> Dare someone to beat this efficiency score of 95.75%:
> View attachment 112730


damn,I can't get my cache ratio to 4000, it crashes as soon as I hit apply.


----------



## zwilhoit (Dec 17, 2018)

Custom build for CFD simulations.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 17, 2018)

zwilhoit said:


> Custom build for CFD simulations.
> 
> View attachment 112775



That read score is sick...


----------



## zwilhoit (Dec 17, 2018)

phanbuey said:


> View attachment 111015



@er557 @phanbuey 

PhotoWorxx with 128 MB L3 cache. This is with SMT off. I leave it off because SMT is no good for my CFD app..... I can't force it to lock threads to physical cores. 

@er557 

I can't hang with you on Queen though. These 32 cores top out at 2.7 all-core boost.


----------



## er557 (Dec 17, 2018)

cool, I see photoworxx is actually memory bandwidth bound, It cant be all L3 cache as I got 90 MB, and they're only slightly slower too,

also, if you turn SMT off can you leave NUMA on? It would better serve you in quick ram access situations.
Can you post a cinebecnh r15 result?


----------



## zwilhoit (Dec 17, 2018)

er557 said:


> cool, I see photoworxx is actually memory bandwidth bound, It cant be all L3 cache as I got 90 MB, and they're only slightly slower too,
> 
> also, if you turn SMT off can you leave NUMA on? It would better serve you in quick ram access situations.
> Can you post a cinebecnh r15 result?



Regardless of SMT status I have 8 NUMA nodes, forcing me to run Windows Server.

I don't think the Cinebench score is anything special.... I optimized for memory bandwidth, not compute. This scores less than a single 32C workstation Threadripper, right? I estimated bumping from 32 to 64 total cores would only give us about 20% more performance in our CFD app, but would double the total cost of the server, bumping each CPU from $1k to $4k. I've yet to benchmark our target app yet, so we'll see how real-world scaling works.

When Rome gets released, I'll check out their 32 core dual-socket offerings to re-evaluate 64 total cores. I've heard they are doubling cache, doubling cores, and will be pushing near 4Ghz all-core turbo on 7nm.

(32/16)*(4.0/2.7) would be 3x our current compute power. Useful for ray-tracing, which is actually a minor/sometimes use case.....

CFD time is very expensive for us so this server should pay off quickly.


----------



## er557 (Dec 17, 2018)

How many NUMA nodes does windows enterprise( or pro for workstations) support?

BTW,   this is from an 850$ QS xeon pair from ebay


----------



## zwilhoit (Dec 17, 2018)

er557 said:


> How many NUMA nodes does windows enterprise( or pro for workstations) support?
> 
> BTW,   this is from an 850$ QS xeon pair from ebay



Win pro for workstations tops out at 4 NUMA nodes.


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 18, 2018)

zwilhoit said:


> Custom build for CFD simulations.



If you can download the full version of AIDA we can get you added to the leaderboard. Very Impressive read speed!


----------



## MrGenius (Dec 18, 2018)

Got that .1 ns less latency I was after. 5th place is mine...and mine ALONE! Nice!!!


----------



## FireFox (Dec 18, 2018)




----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 19, 2018)

zwilhoit said:


> Custom build for CFD simulations.
> 
> View attachment 112775



If you can re-run the test a couple times we should be able to get those missing fields to fill with good data. Then we can add you to the winners' circle.


----------



## zwilhoit (Dec 20, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> If you can re-run the test a couple times we should be able to get those missing fields to fill with good data. Then we can add you to the winners' circle.


Rerunning the cache/memory tool populates the same fields every time. Here are the manual tests.


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 20, 2018)

You averaged 311592 MB/s between your read, write and copy speed. 

This is a historic moment as you have just dethroned Woomack in the memory bandwidth division. Very impressive!

Do you have any pictures of that server build? I'd be interested to see what you are working with.


----------



## zwilhoit (Dec 20, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> You averaged 311592 MB/s between your read, write and copy speed.
> 
> This is a historic moment as you have just dethroned Woomack in the memory bandwidth division. Very impressive!
> 
> Do you have any pictures of that server build? I'd be interested to see what you are working with.


----------



## DR4G00N (Dec 20, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> You averaged 311592 MB/s between your read, write and copy speed.
> 
> This is a historic moment as you have just dethroned Woomack in the memory bandwidth division. Very impressive!
> 
> Do you have any pictures of that server build? I'd be interested to see what you are working with.


This is usually the reason why server hardware is not allowed in competition. I mean how are you going to compete against 16 channel DDR4?


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 20, 2018)

DR4G00N said:


> This is usually the reason why server hardware is not allowed in competition. I mean how are you going to compete against 16 channel DDR4?



I guess that's a very good point. Not sure if we can use the result in this case. I technically didn't specify this as a desktop only comp, but it probably should be just that.


----------



## er557 (Dec 20, 2018)

what about workstations then? my board is a workstation board which contains server hardware, so any xeon user could be defined as server hardware user. There are dual cpu charts and single cpu charts, those could be separated. The fact he has 16 channel ram cant be held against him.


----------



## phanbuey (Dec 20, 2018)

IMO - there should be no restrictions on type of hardware.  If it can run the code, and you own the machine -  it should be allowed.

I mean he's got a 1070ti in there... one does not have such a card if one does not occasionally game on the machine.


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 20, 2018)

Agreed. The results will stand.


----------



## Nuckles56 (Dec 20, 2018)

My bone stock i5 6500 with 2133MHz RAM


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 20, 2018)

Nuckles56 said:


> My bone stock i5 6500 with 2133MHz RAMView attachment 113001


Nuckles56, is there any way you can run the tests manually so we can get all the required data for the leaderboards?


----------



## Nuckles56 (Dec 21, 2018)




----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 21, 2018)

leaderboards updated


----------



## Wilson (Dec 22, 2018)

Built for exploring platforms possibilities and gaming so it got 2R S-Die kit since it was almost as cheap as the cheapest one. RAM requires 1.37V for 2933c14-15-15 and 1.5V for 2933c12-15-15. Cant post Clock/RCDRD or Clock/RP >200 and run RC<50 but RRDS+RRDL+FAW+RFC is default B-Die package. Anything above 2933 is unstable because of board or IMC.


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 22, 2018)

Leaderboards updated, 12-22-18 12:30 PM


----------



## bxcounter (Dec 27, 2018)




----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 28, 2018)

Leaderboards updated December 27th


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 29, 2018)

Here is my best effort on the Q9650 rig... Daily driver settings on the 3:5 400Mhz FSB strap so it's more like 1440Mhz...


----------



## mouacyk (Dec 29, 2018)

That actually looks great. a for affort


----------



## agent_x007 (Dec 29, 2018)

PS. My Triple Channel latency isn't on list (first page, last post).

EDIT : Not sure if this should count (I did asked), so I'm posting it :


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 29, 2018)

Time to get those last minute subs in....

EDIT: *LEADERBOARDS UPDATED 12-29 5:00PM*

@agent_x007 Looks like you got me in memory latency but I've got you beat in memory bandwidth by 12MB/s! lol still have anything left on the table? Very impressive for a QX6850!!


----------



## ECP0WERS (Dec 30, 2018)

AMD Ryzen 7 2700 @ 4.1 allcore
ASUS RoG Strix B450-i Gaming
G.Skill Trident Z RGB 2*8Gb 4266MT/s
Corsair H100X w/ 2x Nidec Servo Gentle Typhoon
XFX Radeon RX Vega 64 Liquid
Samsung PM981 512GB NVMe
Hynix PC300 256GB NVMe + Seagate ST2000DM008 Fuzedrive
Corsair RM850X (2018)
NZXT H200i


----------



## Arctucas (Dec 30, 2018)




----------



## agent_x007 (Dec 30, 2018)

storm-chaser said:


> @agent_x007 Looks like you got me in memory latency but I've got you beat in memory bandwidth by 12MB/s! lol still have anything left on the table? Very impressive for a QX6850!!


I got this score on different settings. However it's a bit lower on overall bandwidth,
Still better in memory latency , also 16GB FTW


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 30, 2018)

Leaderboards updated...

Leader, 16 Channel:
Zwihoit

Leader, Quad Channel:
Woomack

Leader, Triple Channel:
PolRoger

Leader, Dual Channel:
Bxcounter

Leader, Memory Read:
Zwilhoit

Leader, Memory Write:
Zwilhoit

Leader, Memory Copy:
Zwilhoit


----------



## agent_x007 (Dec 30, 2018)

Improving my worst score :


----------



## storm-chaser (Dec 30, 2018)

Leaderboards updated...


----------



## storm-chaser (Jan 1, 2019)

Thanks to all who participated! Zwilhoit takes the overall crown in the memory bandwidth division, while DR4G00N takes the crown in the memory latency division. 

Woomack dominated the quad channel category,  followed by PolRoger in the triple channel configuration, as well as Bxcounter in the dual channel division.


----------



## zwilhoit (Jan 3, 2019)

storm-chaser said:


> Thanks to all who participated! Zwilhoit takes the overall crown in the memory bandwidth division, while DR4G00N takes the crown in the memory latency division.
> 
> Woomack dominated the quad channel category,  followed by PolRoger in the triple channel configuration, as well as Bxcounter in the dual channel division.



Thanks for hosting.


----------



## storm-chaser (Jan 3, 2019)

Here's to our 2018 Autumn Equinox champions...


----------

