Crucial® vs. HP® server memory
Is there a performance difference?
To answer this question, we compared the performance of Crucial server memory to HP SmartMemory – a popular alternative that’s often used in HP servers. Overall, we found little difference in performance and power consumption. Here’s what we tested, along with full results and analysis.
|Server||HP® ProLiant® DL380 Gen 9|
|Processor (2)||Intel® Xeon® E5-2600 v3 2.60 GHz|
|Operating System||Windows® Server 2012 R2|
|Software Used to Test Memory Performance||HP® iLO4, CPU-Z|
|Memory Test Configuration|
|Brands Compared||Crucial® server memory, HP® SmartMemory|
|Densities Tested||8GB, 16GB|
Memory Performance Results
|Crucial® Server Memory||HP® SmartMemory|
Configuration and performance analysis
In a fully populated triple channel 24-module configuration, there was no difference in memory performance. The only difference we found was in a dual channel configuration where HP SmartMemory achieved slightly higher performance (2133 vs. 1866 MT/s). However, with the sheer number of memory-intensive server applications that are often being used, memory must be fully populated at the triple channel level in order to achieve maximum system density. For IT professionals, this comes down to the classic bandwidth versus capacity tradeoff, but as servers trend towards higher installed memory capacities, dual channel configurations are often only necessary for certain types of workloads.
The bottom line
No one configuration is the right configuration. It’s all about configuring memory to the demands of your workload. Based on the applications you’re running, you’ll want to configure your channels accordingly to achieve optimal performance.