DDR4 Haswell-E Scaling Review: 2133 to 3200 with G.Skill, Corsair, ADATA and Crucial
by Ian Cutress on February 5, 2015 10:10 AM ESTSingle GTX 770 Gaming
The normal avenue for faster memory lies in integrated graphics solutions, but as Haswell-E does not have integrated graphics we are testing typical gaming scenarios using relatively high end graphics cards. First up is a single MSI GTX 770 Lightning in our Haswell-E system, running our benchmarks at 1080p and maximum settings. We take the average frame rates and minimum frame rates for each of our tests.
Dirt 3: Average FPS
Dirt 3: Minimum FPS
Bioshock Infinite: Average FPS
Bioshock Infinite: Minimum FPS
Tomb Raider: Average FPS
Tomb Raider: Minimum FPS
Sleeping Dogs: Average FPS
Sleeping Dogs: Minimum FPS
Conclusions at 1080p/Max with a GTX 770
The only real deficit observed throughout our testing is the DDR4-2133 C15 4x4GB kit dropping down to 121 FPS in F1 2013 from a 126 FPS average from the other kits, resulting in a less-than 5% drop by choosing the default JEDEC kit in the 4x4 configuration. Moving up to the 4x8 and 8x8 produces 125 FPS, but anything above 2133 C15 gets around the top result from 125-127.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
120 Comments
View All Comments
Tunnah - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
Solid data I can use to stop myself being impulsive and upgrading my rig, thank you!Every now and again I get upgrade pangs, trying to justify it with numbers, and this article does a great job of showing what I already know - my system is fine, an upgrade will only show results on paper.
*Doffs cap*
HiTechObsessed - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
Just further proof that faster (more expensive) RAM doesn't do anything for gaming. I laugh when people buy Dominator Platinums for 2x or even 3x the cost of regular Corsair or G Skill for solely gaming rigs.FlushedBubblyJock - Sunday, February 15, 2015 - link
Despair not, one must understand that inside that stupid thick skulll, and beneath that irritating idiot bragging because he's so stupid he doesn't know any better, the doofus is happy, because he is so thick and so easily parted with his less than adequate money supply.So bottom line is every time dummy sits down to game, his moron noggin gets all fired up and happy because ignorance in that case is bliss.
MrSpadge - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
This calibration at boot slowing the process down 5-8s: can't the system save the proper values from the last boot and start optimization from this point on? Wouldn't those values change only slowly, e.g. when the module is aging or their amount is changed?name99 - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
I understand that the goal here is to test the PAIR of Haswell-E and DDR4.However, when it becomes practical, might I suggest that you try for a comparison of
(easier) AMD and DDR-4
(harder) one of the ARM server chips and DDR-4
The reason I suggest this is that we all know that Intel, especially on Xeon, has the best cache+memory controller subsystem in the business, which, by design, means they're the least helped or hurt by changes to DIMM performance. Vendors whose memory subsystems are not as spectacular will likely see larger swings in performance, and it would be of interest to see how large those swings are (which, in a way, also tells us something about the gap between these vendors' memory subsystems and Intel).
MikeMurphy - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
I'm flood that precise timings aren't built into the eeprom for each system to use. Why is XMP even necessary with DDR4??davidthemaster30 - Thursday, February 5, 2015 - link
I would have liked to see DDR3 clocked to 2133 15-15-15 (like the JEDEC DDR4 spec) vs DDR4 at the same speeds in single, dual, triple and quad channel to see scaling from DDR3 to DDR4 and from the # of channels. Also in the DDR3 vs DDR4 page, the specs for DDR4 are "DDR4-2133 14-14-14 350 2T" but I'm pretty sure that 350 is supposed to be 35 ... and the speed of the DDR3 for those tests is not stated.Ranger101 - Friday, February 6, 2015 - link
A very detailed, well written article, but for me, somewhat academic asthe conclusion in comparative memory articles always seems to be the
same."There are a few edge cases where upgrading to faster memory makes
sense."
galta - Friday, February 6, 2015 - link
Yes, because this is the only logical conclusion.Having said that, the community should probably stop discussing RAM, at least until we get to DDR9
menting - Friday, February 6, 2015 - link
that means never discussing RAM again :)