IS THIS CORRECT??? ASUS A7N8X Deluxe + benchmark with AIDA32

[Shogun]

Oh well in that case you've got 2.7GB/s less 10-15% ~2.4GB/s, still a little
higher than what you've got, what timings are you using?

Ben

Well Ben , here are MY settings:

ADVANCED CHIPSET FEATURES:

CPU External Freq. (MHz): [166]
CPU Frequency Multiple Setting: [AUTO]
CPU Freq. Multiple: [13x]
System Performance: [AGGRESSIVE]
CPU Interface: [AGGRESSIVE]
Memory Frequency: [100%]
Resulting Frequency: [166MHZ]

SDRAM Active Precharge Delay: [7]
SDRAM RAS to CAS Delay: [3]
SDRAM RAS Precharge Delay: [3]
SDRAM CAS Latency: [3]

FSB Spread Spectrum: [0.50%]
AGP Spread Spectrum: [DISABLED]

CPU Vcore Setting: [AUTO]
CPU Vcore: [1.650V]

Graphics Aperture Size: [64M]


When booting up this message occures:

PERFORMANCE DDR TIMING ENABLED


I hope you can give me more help with this information you got ...

 

[Ben Pope]

Oh well in that case you've got 2.7GB/s less 10-15% ~2.4GB/s, still a
little higher than what you've got, what timings are you using?

Ben

Well Ben , here are MY settings:

ADVANCED CHIPSET FEATURES:

CPU External Freq. (MHz): [166]
CPU Frequency Multiple Setting: [AUTO]
CPU Freq. Multiple: [13x]
System Performance: [AGGRESSIVE]
CPU Interface: [AGGRESSIVE]
Memory Frequency: [100%]
Resulting Frequency: [166MHZ]

SDRAM Active Precharge Delay: [7]
SDRAM RAS to CAS Delay: [3]
SDRAM RAS Precharge Delay: [3]
SDRAM CAS Latency: [3]

Thats your primary reason for getting 2.22GB/s... CAS 3. If you want to get
to nearer 2.5GB/s you'll want RAM with a CAS Latency of 2.

If I change my RAS to CAS and RAS Precharge from 2 to 3, results go from
2520/940 to about 2490/970 ... interesting that my write speed came up, but
there's not a massive difference... CL is the big one.

I'd adjust my CL to 3 and bench it, but that would require rebooting...

FSB Spread Spectrum: [0.50%]

Can disable this in most cases, but shouldn't cause you any problems.

Ben

 

[AJ]

SDRAM Active Precharge Delay: [7]
SDRAM RAS to CAS Delay: [3]
SDRAM RAS Precharge Delay: [3]
SDRAM CAS Latency: [3]

Change that 7 to 11 if you care about score results.

 

[Doug Ramage]

Gosh!! Your system was not stable? What about it was? Man that is much
higher than Martin and i can get!!! And YOU got a XP 2100 and we subs. a
XP2800 and a XP3000+ !!!!!
So you shold think we must had better much better reslults than you could
get .... So question is now HOW to solve this???

Instability showed up incomplete screen re-draws and, sometimes BSODs.

Just tweaked the timings, so :

Reads: 2818
Writes : 1074

Been OK for the past hour.

You need to run the memory in sync for the best performance.-, and set to
100% not SPD.

You should be aiming for 200FSB. Depending on which XP3000 you have, the
clock speed should be 2.100 GHZ or 2.167GHZ - so your multiplier should be
10.5. This should be better than 166* 10.5, or 166* 13. Try this with some
slack timings initially.

 

[Shogun]

I forgot the newest Benchmark after setting the memory up to aggressive.
Well here are the new results ...

Benchmark Memory Read: 1047 MB/s (920 MB/s)
Benchmark Memory Write: 2419 MB/s (2223 MB/s)

This looks better for me ...

--
"Never look down on anybody unless you helping him up."
[Jesse Jackson]

Oh well in that case you've got 2.7GB/s less 10-15% ~2.4GB/s, still a
little higher than what you've got, what timings are you using?

Ben

Well Ben , here are MY settings:

ADVANCED CHIPSET FEATURES:

CPU External Freq. (MHz): [166]
CPU Frequency Multiple Setting: [AUTO]
CPU Freq. Multiple: [13x]
System Performance: [AGGRESSIVE]
CPU Interface: [AGGRESSIVE]
Memory Frequency: [100%]
Resulting Frequency: [166MHZ]

SDRAM Active Precharge Delay: [7]
SDRAM RAS to CAS Delay: [3]
SDRAM RAS Precharge Delay: [3]
SDRAM CAS Latency: [3]

Thats your primary reason for getting 2.22GB/s... CAS 3. If you want to get
to nearer 2.5GB/s you'll want RAM with a CAS Latency of 2.

If I change my RAS to CAS and RAS Precharge from 2 to 3, results go from
2520/940 to about 2490/970 ... interesting that my write speed came up, but
there's not a massive difference... CL is the big one.

I'd adjust my CL to 3 and bench it, but that would require rebooting...

FSB Spread Spectrum: [0.50%]

Can disable this in most cases, but shouldn't cause you any problems.

Ben

 

[Shogun]

SDRAM Active Precharge Delay: [7]
SDRAM RAS to CAS Delay: [3]
SDRAM RAS Precharge Delay: [3]
SDRAM CAS Latency: [3]

Change that 7 to 11 if you care about score results.

If i do there is no risk for damaging anything?

 

[AJ]

If i do there is no risk for damaging anything?

No, it adds a slight amount to the delay which is known to help Nvidia
boards and most likely not any others.

 

[Shogun]

I don't know if that workls for my MB, because it's the Rev. 1.02 version
and not the 2.0

--
"Never look down on anybody unless you helping him up."
[Jesse Jackson]

 

[Shogun]

Can you be more specific by what you mean with that? (NVIDIA + slight delay)

 

[Ben Pope]

SDRAM Active Precharge Delay: [7]
SDRAM RAS to CAS Delay: [3]
SDRAM RAS Precharge Delay: [3]
SDRAM CAS Latency: [3]

Change that 7 to 11 if you care about score results.

From my test results, 7 appears to be the sewwt spot, but there's very
little variation (in the order of 3%) between the top and bottom scores for
all the numbers between 5 and 11. In fact, performance starts to drop above
11 or so, and below 7.

If i do there is no risk for damaging anything?

No.

Shortening the delay can give you memory errors (temporary problem, just
change the timings and it'll be fine), lengthening it is fine.

Ben

 

[Shogun]

SDRAM Active Precharge Delay: [7]
SDRAM RAS to CAS Delay: [3]
SDRAM RAS Precharge Delay: [3]
SDRAM CAS Latency: [3]

Change that 7 to 11 if you care about score results.

From my test results, 7 appears to be the sewwt spot, but there's very
little variation (in the order of 3%) between the top and bottom scores for
all the numbers between 5 and 11. In fact, performance starts to drop above
11 or so, and below 7.

If i do there is no risk for damaging anything?

No.

Shortening the delay can give you memory errors (temporary problem, just
change the timings and it'll be fine), lengthening it is fine.

Ben

So in my case i can change the 7 into 11 and don't have to do anyhthing
further?
If i am correct i don't need to change the timings, but if i have to do,
what do you suggets and where can i do this?

 

[Ben Pope]

Can you be more specific by what you mean with that? (NVIDIA + slight
delay)

The "7" to which he is referring is the Active Precharge Delay, it's the
number of clock cycles between certain events when accessing memory.
Corsair have some nice info about memory timings on their site.

Ben

 

[Ben Pope]

So in my case i can change the 7 into 11 and don't have to do anyhthing
further?
If i am correct i don't need to change the timings, but if i have to do,
what do you suggets and where can i do this?

I suggest you leave it at 7.

If you want to change it and check for yourself, then get hold of nVidia
System Utility and change the timings from there, that way you can benchmark
your system without having to keep rebooting. If you want a setting to be
permanent, set it in the BIOS.

Ben

 

[Shogun]

Okay Ben, i listen to your advice and won't make any changes from now on.
I leave the BIOS Settings as they are right now - Aggressive - and let the 7
be the 7.
Thanx for your support ... Same for the other fellows ;-)

 

[Martin]

My timings are: 7, 3, 3, 2,5T
But I already learned from the other posts that the CAS Latency of 2,5
should be 2 for better performance, right? That would require new memory,
and I build this system last week ;-)

I think I'm happy with how it runs now.

 

[Shogun]

Me too Martin ;-)
('t Is me wat ...)

 

[Martin]

Ook naar de HCC geweest? ;-)
(for the English people: "also been to the HCC?" (big computer fair in the
Netherlands, where I bought my system last week))

--
Martin
The Netherlands

Me too Martin ;-)
('t Is me wat ...)

 

[Shogun]

No ... No time for it. Busy in my family with two twins of almost 3 years
old ;-)
Every year again i have the plans but never come to it :-(

I saw your Memory Timings and you have exactly the same like me: 7-3-3-2.5

But maybe i have another issue ... I somewhere read about the possibility to
increase the Memory not with the Agressive method but with MANUAL and then
130%, however i can't find it back where i read that ......

Maybe Ben can tell us more about this ... I saw in the BIOS that this
feature MENU was for the Experts, which i am not, so i didn't want to burn
my fingers on it ( i hope i translated this well, hehe) Should we do that,
what will be the consequences then and what do we take care of regarding the
other memory settings?

--
"Never look down on anybody unless you helping him up."
[Jesse Jackson]

Ook naar de HCC geweest? ;-)
(for the English people: "also been to the HCC?" (big computer fair in the
Netherlands, where I bought my system last week))

--
Martin
The Netherlands

Me too Martin ;-)
('t Is me wat ...)
--
"Never look down on anybody unless you helping him up."
[Jesse Jackson]

My timings are: 7, 3, 3, 2,5T
But I already learned from the other posts that the CAS Latency of 2,5
should be 2 for better performance, right? That would require new memory,
and I build this system last week ;-)

I think I'm happy with how it runs now.

--
Martin
The Netherlands


"Ben Pope" <[email protected]> schreef in bericht
Martin wrote:
Plus I'm not running on 200 Mhz, but 166 Mhz.
When I put the memory on 200 Mhz (by choosing 'optimal' and 'by

SPD'
in

the BIOS, I'm getting lower memory speeds then when I put the BIOS on
'agressive', 166 Mhz.

Oh well in that case you've got 2.7GB/s less 10-15% ~2.4GB/s, still a
little
higher than what you've got, what timings are you using?

Ben

 

[Shogun]

I suggest you leave it at 7.

If you want to change it and check for yourself, then get hold of nVidia
System Utility and change the timings from there, that way you can benchmark
your system without having to keep rebooting. If you want a setting to be
permanent, set it in the BIOS.

Ben
--

This is what i read in the Dutch NG: (try to translate)

My mainboard A7N8X Deluxe with Athlon 2600 has 2x 256 MB pc3200
The Memory Frequency at first was set at 'SPD', AIDA gave: 2240/898 MB/s.
After setting the Memory Frequency in the BIOS at 'AUTO' , AIDA gave:
2407/934 MB/s
At bootup the BIOS gives a message that the system uses Dual Channel.

This is unbelievable for me. I just got the strange feeling that the Athlon
3000+ with the 2x 512 VDATA PC3200 DDRAM 400 MHZ is equally on the system
above!!!!

This can't be true ... What the hell is going on? Do we really get screwed
by AMD or by ASUS? I expected a dramatic increase of the memspeed and the
whole system, but it seems that i put all my spend money for nothing and
that i better had keeping my former processor, because the differences are
minimal.

I am wondering if other people have the same results as mentioned above.

I feel a little pissed off now!

 

[AJ]

My mainboard A7N8X Deluxe with Athlon 2600 has 2x 256 MB pc3200
The Memory Frequency at first was set at 'SPD', AIDA gave: 2240/898 MB/s.
After setting the Memory Frequency in the BIOS at 'AUTO' , AIDA gave:
2407/934 MB/s
At bootup the BIOS gives a message that the system uses Dual Channel.

This is unbelievable for me. I just got the strange feeling that the Athlon
3000+ with the 2x 512 VDATA PC3200 DDRAM 400 MHZ is equally on the system
above!!!!

This can't be true ... What the hell is going on? Do we really get screwed
by AMD or by ASUS? I expected a dramatic increase of the memspeed and the
whole system, but it seems that i put all my spend money for nothing and
that i better had keeping my former processor, because the differences are
minimal.

I am wondering if other people have the same results as mentioned above.

I feel a little pissed off now!

Trouble in paradise, LOL. Get a hold of yourself man. You have a kick
ass system. If you spent that small amount on an Intel setup you
wouldn't even have piss.