Testing (continued):
Sisoftware Sandra Lite 2008.1.12.34:
The memory benchmarks in SiSoftware's Sandra suite were used to analyze other facets of the memory's performance. Values for integer (in MB/s), float (in MB/s), and latency (in ns) are shown below, and higher values are better for the first two, while lower values are better for latency.
Here we see again exactly how much of a performance boost the higher clock speeds can provide, as well as seeing that the 1280MHz plateau would be a good place to shoot for if you couldn't quite reach 1600MHz. Comparing the two DDR3 kits once again shows that the Crucial kit puts up better numbers, even while running at lower speeds.
Performance Test v6.1:
This final benchmark is still rather new to me, and I am running it for a while after seeing it used on a few other review sites. Performance Test v6.1's memory benchmarks provide six different values, and higher is better for all of them.
While this may be a much harder chart to read, it does provide a similar trend as was seen in the first two tests. Faster is generally better, but here the Kingston kit running at 1400MHz gives the Crucial kit a bit more competition. For most phases of testing in this review the 1280MHz mark for the Crucial kit ran a close second to the performance of the 1600MHz results, but this test actually indicates that the 1280MHz results are better than the 1600MHz results in 5 out of 6 components.
|
|
