[G4] System Performance Memory

[Philip J Robar]

On May 1, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Daniel Brieck Jr. wrote:

> I decided to do some checking of my own and discovered to my  
> surprise a PC-100 module. My computer is a Power Mac G4 Quicksilver  
> 867 Mhz and it can take full advantage of PC-133 memory with a 133  
> MHZ system bus. Well, anyway I was wondering if anyone knew of how  
> much of a real world performance penalty I am causing myself. To my  
> understanding this computer slows all of the other ram to 100 Mhz  
> if a PC-100 module is used.


On Nov 2, 2005, at 2:49 PM, Philip J Robar wrote:

> A regular question on the lists that I frequent is whether or not  
> it is worth seeking out low latency memory. Here's yet another  
> review that definitively says that for most of us the answer is no:
>
> "Although tighter memory timings and a 1T command rate can  
> certainly improve the performance of the Athlon 64's memory  
> subsystem, that improvement doesn't always translate to better  
> application performance. In fact, with the exception of the Sphinx  
> speech recognition engine, moving to tighter memory timings or a  
> more aggressive command rate generally didn't improve performance  
> by more than a few percentage points, if at all, in our tests.  
> Lower latencies only improved WorldBench's overall score by a  
> single point, and performance gains in games were generally limited  
> to lower resolutions and detail levels.
>
> So how much does the modest performance improvement brought by  
> tighter memory latencies cost? Close to twice as much."
>
> http://techreport.com/etc/2005q4/mem-latency/index.x?pg=1
>
> As they explain in the article lower latency memory is useful for  
> over clocking.


Phil
--
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do  
because I notice it always coincides with their own desires."
-- Susan B. Anthony