| So, now I tested the memory performance til the end, my friend.
To compare with multi 9.5 (@ 1.475 V) with multi 11 (@ 1,675 V Vcore), the other settings I didn't touch (2,5/4/4/10 - optimal) (Epox-September Bios ((sorry for wasting so much space with the stock bios in Merlin's thread)).
To make it more easy to compare I each time start with the cpu-speed, followed by multi and fsb. EverestHome: read (MB/s)/write (MB/s)/delay (ns)
1580 MHz:
9.5 x 166: 2382/905/126,3 (+21%/+14%)
11 x 143: 1954/792/146,3
1710 MHz:
9.5 x 180: 2577/977/117.2
11 x 156: 2128/866/133,6
1900 MHz:
9.5 x 200: 2864/1087/105,2 (+21%/+14%)
11 x 173: 2356/ 957/120,8
1995 MHz:
9.5 x 210: 3007/1144/100,8
11 x 181: 2459/1006/115
2086 MHz:
9.5 x 220: 3136/1196/ 95,7
11 x 190: 2593/1053/109,7
2181 MHz:
9.5 x 230: 3285/1250/ 91,6 (+21%/+14%)
11 x 198: 2707/1095/105,2
2287 MHz:
9.5 x 240: 3450/1310/ 87,5
11 x 208: 2843/1147/100,2
2327 MHz:
9.5 x 245: 3515/BSOD (@ 1,475 V)
11 x 212: 2886/1166/98,6
2416 MHz:
11 x 220: 2995/1216/95
2504 MHz:
11 x 228: 3102/1261/91,7
2525 MHz:
11 x 230: 3130/1274/91,1 ... 9.5 x 220= 2080 MHz: read 3136
... for the same write-performance: 9.5 x 235 = 2234 MHz: write: 1283 MB/s.
Conclusion: The memory read/write performance with multi 9.5 is about 21%/14% better compared to multi 11.
What does that tell us?
__________________
|