Performance has been tested on the AMD Ryzen platform, which contains the Ryzen 5 Pro 4650G, 6-core processor, ASUS Crosshair VIII (X570) motherboard, MSI GTX1660Ti graphics card, and Silicon Power US70 1TB SSD. Used OS is Windows 10 x64 with the latest updates.
Our comparison includes overclocking results and settings at which the Vulcan Z DDR4-3600 was stable. Sadly, the memory couldn’t really overclock and even at DDR4-3733 had stability issues. The best we could do was to set DDR4-3600 CL16-20-20-40 1.40V. The memory wasn’t scaling with voltages at all, and more relaxed timings were not helping. It doesn’t change the fact that results are pretty good and should be more than enough for gamers.
To the list has been added DDR4-3200 C16-18-18 1.35V result as some users may buy this memory for a cheaper motherboard or wish to see the difference in memory settings.
As usual, we will start with AIDA64 Cache and Memory benchmark, which is probably the best software for synthetic memory speed tests.
The XMP is performing well. Over 53GB/s read and write are already great results for DDR4-3600 memory. In this test, we can see how much higher bandwidth has the DDR4-3600 over the DDR4-3200. It’s not translating directly into performance gain in all applications but shows us that AMD Ryzen clearly likes high memory frequency.
PCMark 10 shows us high performance in mixed load tests, so about the same as we see daily on our PC. All our results are close to each other, but the DDR4-3600 is slightly faster.
About the same story, we can see in the Cinebench series benchmarks. These tests are not using much data, so results are based more on the CPU speed. We can still see that the DDR4-3600 is slightly faster.
It’s time for some 3D benchmarks from UL(previously Futuremark).
3DMark and VRMark series benchmarks are showing similar results at all settings. These benchmarks show higher differences in CPU and physics tests, but it’s a low percentage of the total score. If we translate scores into FPS, we can say that the DDR4-3600 gives about 2FPS more than the DDR4-3200.
All our scores are high, so we can go the easy way and use the XMP profile or play with additional settings manually and get about the same results. The choice is yours, but I assume that most gamers rather enable XMP and save all the time to play their favorite games.
More demanding 3D tests at the display resolution up to 8K are not much different. In Final Fantasy XV and Superposition benchmarks, results are slightly better at higher memory frequency but nothing that profoundly affects our gaming experience. The XMP profile is again fast enough for everything.
Results in newer games like Shadow of the Tomb Raider or Far Cry 5 are about where they should be. We can see up to 3FPS differences between settings. At around 100FPS average, it doesn’t matter much but still says that the DDR4-3600 performs better in games.
Even though the XMP settings don’t look really fast, they provide optimal performance and are about as fast as tuned settings on the Vulcan Z memory kit. Simultaneously, the XMP provides us with a stable profile and saves our time as we don’t really have to overclock and test the stability of our memory kit. It seems like a perfect option if we are searching for a fast and reliable memory kit.