i keep getting low bandwidth and very high ns..
bandwidth = 6924
latency = 126ns????
anyone care to shed some light on this
This post has been edited by cstkl1: Mar 30 2007, 07:20 PM
Problem, Sandra Lite Multi-Core Efficientcy
|
|
Mar 30 2007, 07:20 PM, updated 19y ago
Show posts by this member only | Post
#1
|
|
Elite
6,799 posts Joined: Jan 2003 |
I have problem running this at stock for my x6800
i keep getting low bandwidth and very high ns.. bandwidth = 6924 latency = 126ns???? anyone care to shed some light on this This post has been edited by cstkl1: Mar 30 2007, 07:20 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Mar 30 2007, 07:31 PM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#2
|
|
Staff
9,417 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Bladin Point, Northern Territory |
Probably your timings are out of line with the processor's efficient timings. Or it might just be another 680i bug, Nvidia's mobos are famous for bugs anyways.
|
|
|
Mar 30 2007, 07:39 PM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#3
|
|
Elite
6,799 posts Joined: Jan 2003 |
QUOTE(empire23 @ Mar 30 2007, 07:31 PM) Probably your timings are out of line with the processor's efficient timings. Or it might just be another 680i bug, Nvidia's mobos are famous for bugs anyways. u mean my mem timings are off??ok now running at 800 3-3-3-4 2t passed orthos 24hours, memtest 24hours. 2nd rig seems to be ok. all other benching is ok. y this the only prob?? also hmm is this a proc problem or mobo?? does this affect real time performance. This post has been edited by cstkl1: Mar 30 2007, 08:20 PM |
|
|
Mar 31 2007, 02:07 AM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#4
|
|
Staff
9,417 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Bladin Point, Northern Territory |
Whether it passes or not isn't the questio, whether it's optimal, now that's the answer. Try loosening your timings abit, updating your BIOS and checking out the other settings.
|
|
|
Mar 31 2007, 05:22 PM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#5
|
|
Elite
6,799 posts Joined: Jan 2003 |
QUOTE(empire23 @ Mar 31 2007, 02:07 AM) Whether it passes or not isn't the questio, whether it's optimal, now that's the answer. Try loosening your timings abit, updating your BIOS and checking out the other settings. ok and riddle me this.on this test. google it at stock clocks. stock ram speed all the ns is higher. y so?? |
|
|
Mar 31 2007, 05:51 PM
Show posts by this member only | Post
#6
|
|
Staff
9,417 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Bladin Point, Northern Territory |
QUOTE(cstkl1 @ Mar 31 2007, 05:22 PM) ok and riddle me this. Like i said, not all memory controller operate better as the latency is turned down, it's a simple fact of computing, it actually might even miss cycles more due to the lower latency not working well with the MCH's internal timings. Ns is measure of memory latency and it's respond to commands, i won't be surprised if i see a RAM timed at 2.5-2-2-7 performing better than one at 2-2-2-5 depending on chipset. on this test. google it at stock clocks. stock ram speed all the ns is higher. y so?? Stability and GMHC timings aren't the same thing, the only way to get optimal timings is by trail and error and testing. You also haven't mentioned other memory settings like clock skew and such that might affect the timing. So just relax the timings and see. Either it's a bug with the motherboard's mem controller, which Nvidia is famous for or the software, in which case i would recommend SPEC latency numbers or atleast the CPU-Z timed ones. This post has been edited by empire23: Mar 31 2007, 05:53 PM |
|
Topic ClosedOptions
|
| Change to: | 0.0143sec
0.42
5 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 30th November 2025 - 09:59 AM |