OCZ 3700 GOLD: Building High-Performance Memory
by Wesley Fink on August 7, 2003 8:34 PM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Post-Laser Performance
The lasering process includes the removal of a small amount of surface from the Samsung chips, and OCZ remarking the chips.
The OCZ remark indicates a performance rating of 4.3ns, which is quite an improvement from the original Samsung rating.
We have already seen the Samsung chips perform well beyond their rated performance and timings, so what effect does the Laser process have on performance and timings? Is the claimed 4.3ns rating after laser treatment justified?
To offer a better comparison to the finished product, we looked at the HIGHEST overclock at SPD timings, the required voltage at OCZ 3700 GOLD rating of 2.5-7-3-3 and DDR466, and the lowest voltage required for SPD 3-8-4-4 rating at DDR466.
| OCZ Lasered Samsung DS Performance Intel 875 Chipset, Dual-Channel, Maximum Overclock |
|||
| DDR Memory Speed | Memory Timings | Memory Voltage (vDIMM) |
UNBuffered Sandra 2003 Memory Test (MB/Second) |
| 466 | 3-8-4-4 | Minimum SPD voltage 2.5V |
2877 INT 2923 FLT |
| 466 | 2.5-7-3-3 | Minimum GOLD-Spec Voltage 2.65V |
3003 INT 3102 FLT |
| 500 | Maximum SPD 3-8-4-4 |
2.8V | 3064 INT 3158 FLT |
As OCZ claims, the laser process seems to have a significant effect on performance in two areas. First, it allows the memory chips to achieve a higher overclock. In our tests, the maximum overclock went from 476 to DDR500 – just with the laser process. Second, and more important, lasering appears to allow the use of lower voltages at the same memory speeds. In our test at DDR466 and 2.5-7-3-3, the laser process reduced the required memory voltage (vDIMM) for stable performance from 2.8V to 2.65V. This is a significant improvement in specifications.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
68 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
This coments sections is full of trash, what does any of this have to do with the articleMS - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
Kristopher,Then that is Corsair, even though they always fervently denied any such practice. Whenever I talked to Robert Pearce, he claimed that it is basically a random choice of module that goes out. I know for a fact that this is how things have been and still are handled at Mushkin, they don't even have the manpower and setup to cherry pick anything.
Anonymous User - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
All I can understand (& know already) is thatyou guys just have to know where to buy the same
stuff they sell you for at least half the price.
I bought modules using the same chips rated as ddr33 - & at oem ddr33 price.
Laser This :).
Ill Just use 2.8 & skip your lasering & Rebadging.
wixt0r - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
Geez, such an uproar over this OCZ stuff. The memory works!KristopherKubicki - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
MS:I can send you some more evidence if you want? That is pretty much Nicole's job at Corsair to make sure reviewers get the best samples for reviews ;)
Kristopher
MS - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
Kristopher, I can assure you that neither Corsair nor Mushkin cherry pick any of their review samples.Wesley, I don't mean to say that OCZ quality is bad at all. All I say is that the "EL" process serves a purpose that is different from what OCZ claims. [grin]
Anonymous User - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
After reading the article I was wondering if the el ddr process and lasering was so effective then why don't more people do this? Even why Samsung does explore this route. Then I realized what I missed. they are removing 7mill from the surface of the chip. In the chip world size does matter and when you move from nanometer to millimeter thats HUGE. This approach is very risky. I know to well that some mothboards are finiky with memory and I wonder how well today's boards will work with this aggressive approach.Wesley Fink - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
Michael - Your review at Lost Circuits and the less stellar performance of the TCB3 modules I had gave me the idea for the article I did here. There is one VERY important piece of info that you do not share here. You bought retail GOLD, and as you stated in your review conclusion, it DID indeed meet specifications and beyond. We can debate the effectiveness of methods all day, but, in the end, performance and reliability is why we buy memory - whatever the brand.Anyone who doubts that MS found the retail memory met spec can check his review of the OCZ3700 GOLD at Lost Circuits.
KristopherKubicki - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
#29 Someone mentioned it earlier. The memory companies are all "nice" but they all have their misgivings. Do you think Mushkin hands you a stick they found laying on the ground in the fab? Any manufacturer gives you creame of the crop products for a review. Thats just common practice.Kristopher
Anonymous User - Saturday, August 9, 2003 - link
#28-that is exactly my problem with this article. Are just supposed to believe that the chips all came out of one pile, and half were lasered and half weren't? I'm sorry, but OCZ hasn't earned any sort of right to be taken at their word. Mushkin or Corsair MAYBE, but certainly not a company with a well established history of buying reviews.