SimForums.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General Discussion Forums > Hardware, Software, and Computer Technology
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - XMP
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedXMP

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
Author
Message
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17272
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October-10-2018 at 4:52am
Yes it is Hans
 
The fact of the matter is we don't need to run any better, but IF you can get that DDR4 bandwidth up to speed WITH the latency, then gosh darn YES.. of course!!! (DDR4 4000+ whatever on CL17-17-17
 
 
If you have a Haswell running 4.7-4.8 and solid DDR3 with a 1080ti with solid SSD support, you ain't going nowhere better on Prepar3D and certainly no where better on FSX or FSXSE.
 
Now of course you will read all sorts of BS
 
 
Back to Top
robmw View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: April-02-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 282
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October-10-2018 at 7:34am
Originally posted by NickN NickN wrote:


 
If you have a Haswell running 4.7-4.8 and solid DDR3 with a 1080ti with solid SSD support, you ain't going nowhere better on Prepar3D and certainly no where better on FSX or FSXSE.
 
 


Yep, I've been running almost exactly that for 4 years now thanks to your Haswell guide. Thumbs Up I liked it so much I bought spares why they were available just in case. Can't see me moving on to anything else for the foreseeable future either.

In a similar vein I can also see us figuring out what to do in Jan 2020 when Win 7 goes out of support. I have a plan but am open to suggestions as well!

This has been an interesting thread, always good when some proper tech knowledge is imparted. There's very little anywhere else.

Rob
i7 4790K @4.4 GHz, Asus Z97 Deluxe, 8GB 2400 DDR3, EVGA GTX 1080Ti, Samsung SSDs 850 Pro + WD HD, Windows 7 Pro 64.
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17272
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October-10-2018 at 8:57am
Yes sir!   Unfortunately the OP got Ducked BECAUSE he can not use XMP. That is an INTEL setup and he must use MANUAL setup
 
uHmmmm.. case in point:
 
INTEL FAKED RELEASED BENCHMARKS FOR i9
 
Whoops!  I must be high!  wait for it..... .. wait,..for .............it...
 
 
I wish I could help the OP but unfortunately I have been so far out of the AMD loop for so many years, I simply can not help because Intel has infiltrated so deep that the above link is where we are now and requires the person running AMD to MANUALLY INPUT very engineering level memory numbers into the BIOS to obtain the result.
 
Intel will still get you the best,.... but AMD is getting close , not there yet, but getting close. Intel would not have purchased benchmark results if that wuzzent the case
 
The thing that is wacko to me... Is questioning\"Is Intel that effin STONED, or just plain stupid or is it that Intel is that effin bold
 
I vote #3
 
BOLD based on being the top dog for so long
 .
They have had the market for so long, Intel is actually stupid enough to try exactly that
 
 
 
Back to Top
AnkH View Drop Down
Intermediate Group
Intermediate Group


Joined: July-05-2013
Points: 84
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October-10-2018 at 10:45am
That was a fun read this fake benchmark article, thanks for that :-)
--------------------------------
Chris
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17272
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October-10-2018 at 2:36pm
Yea, that one is about as funny as a fart in a oxygen tank, but typical
 
 
Back to Top
Kalorien View Drop Down
New Member
New Member


Joined: September-12-2011
Points: 5
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October-10-2018 at 4:58pm
Yeah, I just wanted to say "Thank You" Smile.
Your Bible and Haswell Guides made me buy and built my own system. It's still there and right now just crossing the Atlantic Ocean Big smile doing it's job for FSX-SE.

I was thinking about going to X-Plane 11 and had thoughts about DDR3 RAM.
So I ended here and downgraded Confused from 16Gb to 8Gb 2x4 (I don't really need 16Gb in Windows 7). I was curious about the tests with Aida64. There is not really a difference between 8Gb 2x4 or 2 kits up to 24Gb, 8Gbs 2x4 and 16Gb 2x8 with FSB2400 TridentX.

The Readspeed with only 8Gb, Latency 45ns, is a bit faster than 24Gb 35.850Mb/s to 35.200Mb/s. The latency for both kits is about 48ns. That's not 39,5ns but not bad. Only one module was poor, about 11.000Mb/s Embarrassed. I think, I'll stick to FSX. I am not really excited to start with endless testsessions over and over again...Wacko, But doing this RAM tests was fun Thumbs Up

Handshake
Peter

Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17272
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October-11-2018 at 12:00am
Originally posted by AnkH AnkH wrote:

That was a fun read this fake benchmark article, thanks for that :-)
 
 
You have been asking about memory speed and timing, and your primary question has been: WHAT DOES THIS DO FOR ME?
 
 
The reason you asked that is because over the years you have read and heard all about how memory timing really doesn't make a difference. I am sure you have read that all over the net and especially at A...  never mind.
 
 
OK!!!   SO if memory timing is NOT THAT IMPORTANT then why all of a sudden it WAS USED to FAKE benchmarks..  
 
 
 
 
 
The memory manufactures are no better than the GPU manufactures. I don't know how many people remember the AMD-NVIDIA class action lawsuit for PRICE FIXING 
 
 
Yep, for those that do not remember or know...   AMD and Nvidia got together and drove the price of video cards sky-high some years back and they got nailed. ALSO before that the memory manufactures got POPPED doing the same thing.
 
 
So the next time someone tells you that memory timing really does not matter....  
 
Which by the way, this link is the epitome of why they used memory timing to fake the benchmarks.. http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-latency it firmly suggests that memory timing (latency) doesn't mater,.. just speed  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ask them then why a shill benchmark company used MEMORY TIMING to FAKE benchmarks in favor of the company that paid them. They could not use memory SPEED. They knew they could not use CPU SPEED, they could not use hard drive technology and they also knew they couldn't use GPU's... Everything had to look APPLES TO APPLES
 
....so what they did was use something that the entire market has been PROGRAMMED to believe is NOT an issue thinking it would have passed muster without being questioned.
 
 
 
MEMORY TIMING
 
 
 
 The really amazing thing to me is...  most of these websites that have popped Intel for fake benchmarks and how it was done, in the past suggested MEMORY TIMING was not that important. Now all of a sudden, it is  
 
 
go figure?
 
 
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17272
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October-11-2018 at 12:54am
Originally posted by Kalorien Kalorien wrote:

Yeah, I just wanted to say "Thank You" Smile.

 
You're welcome Peter
 
 
As everyone else here is. I do the best I can to present the facts and the technical in way folks can understand.
 
 
 
I might be a royal SOB and I know most of the snowflakes out there will trash me, that's ok.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <123
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.