by Rob Williams on December 13, 2006 in Memory
It’s been a few months since we’ve had the opportunity to play with a Mushkin kit, but we now have their XP2-8500 on the hotseat. We compare its performance to Super Talents and Kingstons top kits to see who comes out on top.
Sandra is one of those applications that enthusiasts are not foolish enough to leave out of their toolbox. It’s not only a memory benchmarking tool, but can test the performance of anything else in your system. They have recently updated their application to XI, which resulted in a small redesign of the app.
In all of the tests here, the XP2-8500s actually came in last except for one.
The same goes for our unbuffered tests, for the most part. All of the results are still tight.
Everest is another popular benchmarking tool, but primarily handles memory and CPU, in addition to some disk testing. One thing to note with Everest is that with each new version, the results in the tests can change drastically. That being the case, results from 3.0 cannot be compared to results from 3.5.
The situation is a little different with our Everest run over the Sandra one. Our 800MHz and 1100MHz results are very close to one enough, between modules. The middle sets sway a little bit, but is nothing worth noting.
Same for our latency tests… very close results all around.
Without a doubt, Sciencemark has proven to be one of my favorite CPU and memory benching tools. Oddly enough, the developers behind the program seem to have lost their domain, so it’s unlikely we will ever see a Sciencemark 3. It’s too bad too, considering it gives far more in-depth results than anything else out there.
Once again the results are in line with what we expect, and there is no clear superior.