| ||
| by 3oh6 | January 25, 2008 | ||
| 3D/Gaming Benchmarks 3D/Gaming Benchmarks: If history is any kind of indicator, the 3D results won't show a whole lot of change amongst the memory sets, even with the CPU frequency differences. ![]() As expected, there aren't a lot of differences between the results but a consistent theme from top to bottom is that the DDR2 setup does come out ahead of the Project X at the stock results. This is likely due to the small CPU frequency difference but none-the-less, they are almost identical results. Now, this may be more of a difference between the two motherboards and chipsets but it does beg the question, where exactly is DDR3 better if it doesn't even show up in 3D Mark? ![]() Much like the 3D Mark series, the differences in performance amongst results at the same CPU frequency are almost non-existent in Half-Life 2. You may be wondering why there aren't more gaming results and that is a simple answer, because memory plays a very miniscule role in gaming performance as these results show. Keep in mind that the Source engine is one of few games that really use system resources and not strictly graphics processor power. With the differences being so small here at only 1024x768, it is obvious that most other GPU intensive games show even less difference to memory frequency and timings. | ||
| |
| Latest Reviews in RAM | |||||||||
|