Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Memory arrow Mushkin Ridgeback Redline Enhanced DDR3
Mushkin Ridgeback Redline Enhanced DDR3 E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Memory
Written by Austin Downing   
Saturday, 09 July 2011
Table of Contents: Page Index
Mushkin Ridgeback Redline Enhanced DDR3
Closer Look: Mushkin Enhanced Redline 1600Mhz
RAM Testing and Results
Synthetic Benchmarks
Application Benchmarks
Final Thoughts and Conclusion

Synthetic Benchmarks

Benchmark Reviews users synthetic benchmarks to more effectively show difference between the hardware being tested. These tests are very sensitive to the most minor changes and therefore can highlight the performance difference that exist between different sets of RAM.

G_Skill_Sniper_1866_AIDA64.png

AIDA64 provides a memory benchmarking tool that scales well with speed but unfortunately does not respond nearly as well to tightening timings. Because of this compared to the higher latency 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24 kit we only receive a 3% boost in performance with an increase in write speed from 19968MB/s to 20264MB/s. Although this early test may not bode well for the Mushkin Enhanced Redline 1600Mhz 7-8-7-24 kit as we will see later it is vindicated in real world test later.

G_Skill_Sniper_1866_MaxxMEM.png

One of our newest benchmarking applications MaxxMEM2 provides results that are more responsive to speed changes rather than tightening of timings. With less than a 1-2% difference in these tests the differentiation between our higher latency 1600Mhz kit is negligible. The only test that shows some difference is the write test with a 3.4% difference in bandwidth with this Mushkin kit leading at 20820MB/s compared to the RipJaws 20116MB/s.

G_Skill_Sniper_1866_SiSandra.png

Using STREAM SiSoft's Sandra provides a near linear performance increase as the speed of RAM increases and has some sensativities to changes in timing. Our Integer Buffered performance sees a 2.3% boost in performance compared to our 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24 kit at 21.275GB/s compared to 21GB/s. At the same time our Floating Buffered performance gets a 2.2% boost compared to the 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24 kit at 21.26GB/s compared to 21GB/s. As we will see in real world application benchmarks the lower latency of this kit can easily make up for its lower speed.



 

Comments 

 
# Low CAS ImpactsJackNaylorPE 2011-07-14 09:06
There's an ole Anandtech article which shows some significant performance increases with low CAS RAM, even in games.....but it's minimum frame rates that shows the biggest impact, not average frame rates. My interest in RAM is for AutoDesk and other demanding apps but do manage to get some game time in.....minimum frame rates however is rarely a part of RAM tests ....

##anandtech.com/show/2792/12

22.3 % (SLI) increase in minimum frame rates w/ C6 instead of C8 in Far Cry 2
18% (single card) / 5% (SLI) increase in minimum frame rates w/ C6 instead of C8 in Dawn of War
15% (single card) / 5% (SLI) increase in minimum frame rates w/ C6 instead of C8 in World in Conflict

Also see ##bit-tech.net/hardware/memory/2011/01/11/the-best-memory-for-sandy-bridge/1

I would love to see how / if this carries over to today's systems .... Minimum frame rate impacts also also seems to be ignored in testing x8 x8 versus x16 x16
Report Comment
 
 
# @ JackNaylorPEGanjaSMK 2011-07-15 23:20
Real world performance differs greatly from generic and game benchmarking.
Report Comment
 
 
# RE: @ JackNaylorPEAustin Downing 2011-07-16 12:52
That is very true, and something I try to show off in each of my reviews.
Report Comment
 
 
# Love mynGlamdring 2011-07-25 14:19
I love my Mushkin Redline series, except I got the set with the frostbyte cooler to save room for CPU cooler. I would recommend their products over and over again based on past experience.
Report Comment
 

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews
QNAP Network Storage Servers

Follow Benchmark Reviews on FacebookReceive Tweets from Benchmark Reviews on Twitter