Pre-Laser Performance

Serial Presence Detect (SPD) timings for the unbinned, unlasered DIMMs were at the common settings that we see for Samsung DDR400, namely 3-8-3-3. To get a better idea of the performance capabilities that could be compared to a finished product, we tested maximum speed at SPD as well as maximum speed at the OCZ 3700 GOLD SPD ratings. We also tested for SPD minimum voltage at DDR466 to try to determine what impact, if any, the lasering and binning process had in comparison to the retail performance of OCZ 3700 Gold.


OCZ Raw 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 Maximum SPD
3-8-4-4
2.7V 2894 INT
2916 FLT
466 2.5-7-3-3 2.8V 3042 INT
3084 FLT
476 3-8-4-4 2.8V 2864 INT
2992 FLT


The Revision E chips appear to perform better than the earlier Revision D. Compare the Revision D chips’ maximum speed of DDR460 at 3-8-4-4, memory voltage of 2.8V, to what we are now reaching: DDR476 with Revision E. Perhaps more significantly, at 2.5-7-3-3 timings, we increase to DDR466 (at 2.8V) compared to the DDR450 maximum speed at these same timings with Revision D chips.

Testing the Process Post-Laser Performance
Comments Locked

68 Comments

View All Comments

  • Anonymous User - Friday, August 8, 2003 - link

    MS ,
    I think the point of the article was to prove that the lasering process works ? I could be wrong but it appears the results confirm it
  • Anonymous User - Friday, August 8, 2003 - link

    Not a word in this review about OCZ having the worst reputation in the industry? Not a word about them never standing behind their products. Not a word about them closing down their parent company every time the claims and fraud investigations start getting big, and then re-opening again somewhere else a couple of months later.

    Once a criminal enterprise, always a criminal enterprise. OCZ is a fraud, no matter what special review chips they send to sites like this one.
  • MS - Friday, August 8, 2003 - link

    I removed the top layer from some chips and tested the same DIMM before and after and there was no difference whatsoever. Therefore, I am stil sceptic about the entire issue of going topless for better performance.
  • Mday - Friday, August 8, 2003 - link

    always good to see a place turn around, but there are always lingering doubts...
  • Evan Lieb - Friday, August 8, 2003 - link

    Yeah, they've changed quite a bit Kris. Their product's performance and their customer support today makes them a much more reputable memory contender than they were 1 or 2 years ago.
  • Anonymous User - Friday, August 8, 2003 - link

    Why won't you be including Mushkin, this time?
    You used to be really big on them.
  • KristopherKubicki - Friday, August 8, 2003 - link

    I visted with them a month or two ago, they seem a lot less like the company I visited 18 months ago.
  • AgaBooga - Thursday, August 7, 2003 - link

    I think if OCZ continues this kind of introduction of products they may turn the company around from its past. Also, I liked how they co-operated and gave the chips you guys asked for without trouble. Doing that, they show their confidence in their laser process.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now