Windows Performance Index RAM scores

Discussion in 'Windows Vista Performance' started by admuh, Mar 6, 2008.

  1. admuh

    admuh Guest

    Hi, I'm just wondering how the 2x 1GB 5-5-5-18 2T DDR2-4200(Scores 5.9) in my
    mums computer scores more than my 4x1GB 4-3-3-10 1T DDR2-6400(Scores 5.4).
    The timings have made no difference to the score when I have changed them and
    I can play modern games perfectly. Could it be due to my processor(Core 2 Duo
    Quad) or my motherboard(Fatal1ty IN-9 SLI)? An overall rating of 5.4 for my
    computer seems a tad low since it's all top of the range components. Thanks
    for any help
     
    admuh, Mar 6, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. admuh

    CJM Guest

    Have a look at what CPU-Z is reporting - see how both sets of RAM are
    actually being utilized.

    In my experience, increasing my 4GB PC6400 RAM to 6GB PC6400 RAM cause a
    drop of 0.2 (5.8 -> 5.6) in the WE Index. I think this was because I'd
    dropped from 4-4-4-12 to 5-5-5-18. Tightening the timings a little allowed
    me to pull back to 5.7, but I haven't investigated further.

    Nevertheless, it seems that beyond a certain amount, quantity is not an
    issue, but timings are.
     
    CJM, Mar 6, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. admuh

    admuh Guest

    Thanks for the reply. My timings are pretty low though, and I dont see why
    cheaper, slower ram scores better. 6400 ram should easily be 5.9 really CPU-Z
    says what my timings are however its reporting my frequency to be 400mhz (I
    take it it's real speed is double though?)
     
    admuh, Mar 6, 2008
    #3
  4. admuh

    Mark Guest

    It has been seen in some cases that the clock speed of the CPU and the bus
    speed of the memory may not be a good match. _Sometimes_ with DDR2-6400, it
    is better to slow it down to 667MHz in the BIOS.
     
    Mark, Mar 6, 2008
    #4
  5. admuh

    Mark Guest

    PS. Sometimes you will find that the memory sold as 800 MHz is only
    recognized and runs as 667 MHz unless overclocked. This can be seen in the
    BIOS also.
     
    Mark, Mar 6, 2008
    #5
  6. admuh

    admuh Guest

    Thanks i'll give that a try

     
    admuh, Mar 7, 2008
    #6
  7. admuh

    CJM Guest

    When overclocking, it is often better to make sure the RAM:FSB ration is
    1:1, and hence you often choose to reduce the RAM speed, but in general use,
    I've never come across a situation where properly rated RAM is better run at
    a lower frequency.
     
    CJM, Mar 7, 2008
    #7
  8. admuh

    CJM Guest

    Again, if something is sold as PC2-6400, it should be corrected rated to run
    and 800MHz. Anyone selling PC2-5300 RAM as PC2-6400 RAM on the basis of
    overclocking is breaking the law.

    However, official DDR2 RAM speeds only go upto 800MHz, so DDR2 RAM that has
    a higher rating is outside the official standard - I'm not sure in this case
    what SPD information is stored in these chips... is it the highest official
    rating (PC2-6400) or its actual rating (PC2-1066 for example).
     
    CJM, Mar 7, 2008
    #8
  9. admuh

    Mark Guest

    First, PC-6400 is sometimes sold with the following statement on the
    package:

    Dual-Channel DDR2 800
    DDR2 is the next generation memory technology to replace the current DDR.
    With the highest speed up to 800MHz, DDR2 memory provides great performance
    for 3D graphics and other memory demanding applications.

    It's that "up to 800 MHz" you got to watch for. If it is stated this way, or
    shown with anything other than 1.8v rating, then it can only be achieved by
    overclocking the memory. It may actually be PC-5300-667.

    Second, the default FSB speed of your machine may not be 400 MHz. If it's
    333 MHz, then your PC-6400-800 will run at 667 MHz.
    Fatal1ty IN-9 SLI is factory overclocked. It's default is 333MHz and
    overclocked to 375MHz, not 400 MHz and has been reported stable up to
    490MHz. But, the factory setting resets the speed on every boot back to
    375MHz. This is probably the ding in WEI you are experiencing.

    Third, the latency of the memory sticks should be matched. If not, WEI will
    use the worst case scenario.

    Last, WEI sucks as a performance indication of your machine. Get CPU-Z and
    find out what your memory is really doing.
    http://www.cpuid.com/download/cpuz_144.zip
     
    Mark, Mar 7, 2008
    #9
  10. admuh

    admuh Guest

    Well, my timings were 4-3-3-10 1T on CPU-Z and the speed was 800mhz. My RAM
    is OCZ SLI 6400, all sticks are at the same. However, I OC'd the RAM to
    850Mhz and changed the timings to 4-4-4-12 2T and Vista scored it the same
    which seems a bit odd. I think even DDR1 RAM can score higher than 5.4 as
    well. I think it's either Vista or my motherboard, unless I have a bandwidth
    issue because of the Q6600. Thanks for the suggestions,
     
    admuh, Mar 7, 2008
    #10
  11. admuh

    Mark Guest

    See my reply to CMJ.
    I think it's your motherboard.
     
    Mark, Mar 7, 2008
    #11
  12. admuh

    admuh Guest

    Well, I had a play with FSB, I put it up to 1200 and my cpu multiplyer to 8x
    and my RAM to 800. I got .1 better on the windows performance index :)
    although I still think 5.5 is low. I think it's likely to be a bandwidth
    issue although underclocking my cpu to 2.1 didnt change things either (not
    even the processor score). Thanks for the help so far
     
    admuh, Mar 7, 2008
    #12
  13. I have a Gigabyte GA-P35-DS4 board with the [email protected] and 4gb 800Mhz ram
    (2x2gb) running 5-5-5-15 timings and vista is giving me 5.5 as the score.
    Just something to compare it to.
    Robert
     
    Robert McMillan, Mar 7, 2008
    #13
  14. admuh

    admuh Guest

    Hm, well that should really be getting 5.5 too if my mums 2GB DDR2 4200 gets
    5.9. Maybe it's something to do with Quads
     
    admuh, Mar 8, 2008
    #14
  15. admuh

    Mark Guest

    I'm actually wondering if your computers suffer a ding in performance
    because the memory is not faster.
    A quad processor has four CPUs trying to access the same memory and may be
    reaching a bottleneck on bandwidth due to the memory being limited to 800
    MHz. Basically, in your case, the WEI may be right in implying there is room
    to grow. The quad processor should be capable of a particular bandwidth for
    I/O to memory and the memory bus is reaching it's limit before the CPUs are
    reaching their limit.

    I have a two core system and it gets a WEI of 5.9 on memory (800 MHz). But,
    in my case, that's the best it will ever do based on the CPUs bandwidth
    availability.
     
    Mark, Mar 8, 2008
    #15
  16. admuh

    Papeep Guest

    It's definitely something to do with having a quad-core.

    I have the same processor and RAM as you, and i get 5.2 on the WEI.
    However, if I use msconfig (just type it into the search bar) to
    disable one core, making it a triple-core processor, i get a 5.9.

    I've been searching all over the internet and I haven't figured out
    why yet, let me know if you find anything else out. :)
     
    Papeep, Sep 17, 2008
    #16
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.