| Corsair Vengeance LP 16GB DDR3-1600 |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Memory | ||||||||
| Written by David Ramsey | ||||||||
| Monday, 12 December 2011 | ||||||||
Page 5 of 6
CINEBENCH 11.5 Multi-Core Rendering TestMaxon CINEBENCH is a real-world test suite that assesses the computer's performance capabilities. CINEBENCH is based on Maxon's award-winning animation software, Cinema 4D, which is used extensively by studios and production houses worldwide for 3D content creation. Maxon software has been used in blockbuster movies such as Spider-Man, Star Wars, The Chronicles of Narnia, and many more. CINEBENCH Release 11.5 includes the ability to more accurately test the industry's latest hardware, including systems with up to 64 processor threads, and the testing environment better reflects the expectations of today's production demands. For this test I ran the multi-core rendering test, which resulted in 12 threads rendering the test scene. The CINEBENCH score is a dimensionless number that's only useful for comparison to other CINEBENCH results. 
Here we see results that will be mirrored in the remaining two application benchmarks...virtually no difference in performance between the various quad-channel memory kits. Blender/IcetestBlender is an open-source, free content creation suite of 3D modeling, rendering, and animation capabilities. Originally released in 2002, it's available in versions for Mac OS X, Windows, Linux, and several Unix distributions. It supports rigid and soft-body objects and can handle the draping and animation of cloth, as well as the rendering and animation of smoke, water, and general particle handling. Our Blender test renders multiple frames of an animation of a rotating chunk of ice, with translucency and reflections. Rendering of this model uses ray-tracing algorithms and the program reports the rendering time for each of the animation's 25 frames. The results are a summation of the rendering times for all frames and the lower the score, the better. 
Memory speed makes little difference in this test. Oddly, though, the generic DDR3-1333 memory posts a better score than the Corsair 1600MHz memory, and the Kingston HyperX memory posts a better score at the lower 1866MHz speed. Still, the differences between the various memory kits are minimal. Handbrake 0.95The immense power (and cost!) of Intel's Sandy Bridge Extreme Core i7-3960X CPU virtually ensure that it will see a lot of video rendering and transcoding work, since this is one of the few applications that can really use the resources this processor has. My standard Handbrake test transcodes a standard-definition video of a Family Guy episode to the "iPhone and iPod Touch" presets. I report the time it took to perform the transcode in seconds; lower scores are better. 
Here again we see razor-thin differences: Frankly, with only 1.2 seconds separating the best and worst scores, all scores can be considered equal within a reasonable margin of error. |
||||||||
Comments
Importantly, as the reviewer notes, you do not really see a perceptible difference between high speeds and lower latencies. It is good RAM, and the low profile heatsinks (which is all you need if you are going to run at 1600Mhz, these do not get hot at all, they are warm to the touch) enable them to fit even under large heatsink overhangs. Perfect.
enable C state tech and rebench please, the memory performance suffers greatly on Core i processors when C state tech is disabled.
In benchmarking tests the most important thing is consistency, so that users can judge the relative performance of the products being tested. All the memory in these benchmarks was tested on the same system with the same settings, so even if the C state thing is legitimate (and I will do more research on this), the results are comparable.
these write results are also a good deal less than what i've seen from other benchmarks using the C9 vengeance kit on lesser hardware (the C8 sticks should obviously be a little faster)
see
##pureoverclock.com/review.php?id=1216&page=5
Can you provide an example of a reproducible benchmark I can use to test this? If so I can incorporate it into future memory reviews.
C states enabled: read 18924,, write 14995, copy 16914, latency 48.8ns
C states disabled: read 18897, write 15082, copy 17101, latency 48.9ns
The difference in write performance is a fraction over 1%, well within the margin of error of these tests. I conclude that at least with this motherboard and CPU, whether or not C states are enabled makes no difference in memory performance as measured by AIDA64's tests.
"You can choose red, blue, or black heat spreaders (there's also a special white, low-voltage version)."
In any case I can only review what a vendors sends me. Corsair sent me a black memory kit, so that's what the appearance score was judged on.
Sigh.
#forums.aida64.com/index.php?/topic/292-c-state-tech-disabled-negatively-affects-memory-bandwidth-tests/page__p__1712#entry1712