Everest Memory Benchmark

While not truly indicative of real world performance, Everest's memory performance tool is widely recognized as a bona-fide benchmark of gauging the effects of memory and chipset performance tuning. We lined up a number of boards under similar timing ranges and stock performance to see how they compare with one another at the stock 9.5x333FSB versus tuned for best stable performance at 500FSB.

Everest Read Bandwidth

Everest Write bandwidth

Everest Copy Bandwidth

Everest Memory Latency

The Black Ops fares really well in all tests, losing out only to the Striker II Extreme in Read Bandwidth. It will be interesting to see if any of these gains, however small, are reflected in the upcoming benchmarks.

Testbed Setup Standard Performance Results
Comments Locked

32 Comments

View All Comments

  • ImmortalZ - Thursday, July 31, 2008 - link

    You do realize these people are given QX9770s, GTX280s and assorted hardware for free, every generation?

    Do you know most of these people end up working for the very manufacturer's products they torture test?

    Do you know that you're a moron?
  • strikeback03 - Thursday, July 31, 2008 - link

    Personally, I'd rather grow a mullet, buy a Mustang, and head for the local drag strip.
  • Berger - Thursday, July 31, 2008 - link

    'Digital Freak' what a freaking handle.

    No need to be discriminative you narrow minded moron.

  • Nyarlathotep - Thursday, July 31, 2008 - link

    I used to really like linux but the more posts I´ve read by linux users, the more I hate it. Linux nerds probably get paid by Microsoft for ruining linux chances. They are everywhere whining and crying. For every decent linux user there seem to be 5 obnoxious nerds.

    Yesterday I uninstalled Ubuntu from my laptop because it made me feel like if I supported obnoxious linux nerds. If it wasn´t for them linux would probably be the most popular OS right now, not windows.
  • TA152H - Thursday, July 31, 2008 - link

    One thing I have been saying for 25 years, and has been validated by the years is that Unix will never be a popular operating system. Linux often mentioned by people that don't really use it that much, they want to whine about Microsoft and such, or at a higher level, whine about the establishment in general. Don't get me wrong, I despise Microsoft too, but I'm not so pathetic as to act like Unix is the answer. It's a horrible operating system that's a pain in the backside to work with. They can sugar coat that dung all they want, but it will always smell and will only be a niche product. GUIs help some by insulated the user from the miserable underpinnings, but, really, anyone that likes the word "grep", and thinks upper and lower case parameters should have different meanings, is generally going to be a maladjusted dickhead.

    I still think OS/2 was better than Windows, but it's very much a niche product now (in its new incarnation as Ecomstation) and is used about as often as rotary telephones. I whined for a while about Windows too, but mainly because all my work experience had been with OS/2, and I didn't want to be jobless :-P.

    No one really listens to the whining dorks that cry to the sky about foul play. Linux isn't popular because, basically, it sucks like all Unix varieties do. They'll exist in niches, but you can't expect the mainstream market to embrace it. Apple did a good job of hiding the difficulty of the underlying operating system, but it's still a niche product as well. Even if there were a good operating system it would be extremely difficult to break the software monopoly of Microsoft, so saying a Unix variety would be the dominant operating system were it not for some oft-ignored dweebs, is as silly as the whiners are.

    We've already gone from MVS, to DOS, to Windows NT as the dominating operating systems during the lifetime of Unix. It's always been a niche product. Outside of the Microsoft haters, do many people really want it to be anything more than that? It's a pity IBM still won't make OS/2 open source. It would at least have a chance as an open source competitor. Unix? Never. But, as has been the case for 30 years, you'll still hear them saying it's just about to take off. It never changes, and kind of gives one a sense of security in a world that changes too fast. Unix will take over soon! Just wait! It's even money if it will happen before the Sun eats the Earth.
  • swaaye - Friday, August 1, 2008 - link

    :)
  • yyrkoon - Thursday, July 31, 2008 - link

    Look. You should be using your OS of choice for YOU, not anyone else.

    The whole idea is HAVING the ability to make that choice.

    I use Windows on my main machines here at home, but I like the option of being able to use which over OS I please on them, and yes, I have a couple of Linux boxen too, as well as an openSolaris machine. Hell, I would not be adverse to putting OSX on my own hardware, IF Steve Jobs and Apple will ever pull its head out of their backsides . . . In a general purpose computer world, proprietary systems are the 'bad guys' not the OS.
  • yyrkoon - Thursday, July 31, 2008 - link

    http://ubuntu-virginia.ubuntuforums.org/showthread...

    Companies need to learn that business tactics as such will put you into a world of hurt in a hurry. Behold the wonderful internet at its finest.
  • swaaye - Friday, August 1, 2008 - link

    Just how much of an audience in the real world do you think slashdot gets? lol.
  • swaaye - Friday, August 1, 2008 - link

    or any site, for that matter.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now