Rendering Performance
In all of our graphs to follow, the bars are arranged from the fastest MT/s speed down, so 8800MT/s is on top, with 7200MT/s on the bottom, and this arrangement is locked in independent of the performance shown; they are not arranged by result, but rather the DDR5 memory speed.
Cinebench 2026
In Cinebench 2026, there are some slight differences, and we once again see the 7600MT/s UDIMM at CL38 remain the top performer at 1% above the 7200MT/s performance and 1% above the 8400MT/s and 8800MT/s CUDIMM performance. In fact, the 8400MT/s and 8800MT/s CUDIMM are just slightly behind the 7200MT/s UDIMM due to the higher timings.
Corona Benchmark
In the Corona 1.3 Benchmark, the 7600MT/s UDIMM at CL38 is again providing the fastest result with the most Rays a Second, and is 2% faster than with the 8800MT/s CUDIMM at CL43. Improving upon the 7200MT/s performance, the 7600MT/s provides 1% more performance.
7-Zip
In 7-Zip’s compression test, we actually saw a pretty good result with the 7600MT/s UDIMM at CL38. It was 2% faster than the 7200MT/s speed, and just as fast compared to the 8400MT/s and 8800MT/s CUDIMM, which matched 7200MT/s performance.
There was one instance where the higher bandwidth of the 8800MT/s CUDIMM at CL42 shone in our testing, and that was here in the 7-Zip Decompression test. The 8800MT/s CUDIMM yielded the highest result at 201.6, which was 1% faster than the lowest result and was the fastest. Otherwise, the 7600MT/s UDIMM at CL38 is right on its heels, and honestly can be considered similar performance.
Blender Benchmark
In Blender, we see much of the same; there is an advantage with the 7600MT/s UDIMM at CL38 over the 7200MT/s UDIMM at CL38 by 1%. However, the 8400MT/s and 8800MT/s CUDIMM at CL40 and CL42 are slower than the 7200MT/s at CL38.
The same pattern is experienced in the Junkshop scene in Blender; the 7600MT/s UDIMM CL38 memory is 1% faster than the 7200MT/s UDIMM CL38. However, 8400MT/s and 8800MT/s CUDIMM CL40 and CL48 memory is slower than 7200MT/s CL38.
In the Classroom scene, the groupings are tighter, but the same pattern remains true.
HandBrake
There is an actual difference in video transcoding time between the memory speeds. The slowest time to render was actually the 8800MT/s at CL42, taking 7.23 minutes to render. The 8400MT/s or 7200MT/s with lower timings was next. However, the 7600MT/s with CL38 took the cake and rendered in the least amount of time at 7.18 minutes.
V-Ray 6 Benchmark
In V-Ray 6, once again, the 7600MT/s UDIMM at CL38 was the fastest and improved upon 7200MT/s by 1.1%, while the 8400MT/s and 8800MT/s CUDIMM with higher timings lagged behind.