Searching for the Memory Holy Grail - Part 2
by Wesley Fink on August 26, 2003 11:11 PM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Kingston HyperX 4000
Click the image to view a larger picture.
Kingston is one of the largest memory manufacturers, and they use the HyperX name for their highest performing memory modules. The trademark bright blue aluminum heatsinks immediately identify the memory as Kingston HyperX. HyperX 4000 is supplied in a Dual-Channel kit. The modules that were sent are the only single-sided DDR500 modules that we received, and as requested, Kingston supplied two pairs of modules for testing. Kingston uses Samsung TCCC chips, which are binned for performance — the highest performers going into HyperX 4000 modules.
The Kingston modules performed well when 4 SS DIMMs were used for testing. This was expected. As you can see below, 2 SS DIMMs did not perform quite as well, which is consistent with the information in Intel White Papers. The Intel 875P Chipset Memory Configuration Guide White Paper is available at ftp://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/applnots/25273001.pdf, and the Intel 865P Chipset Memory Configuration Guide White Paper at ftp://download.intel.com/design/chipsets/applnots/25303601.pdf.
We were very surprised when we compared overclocking of 2 SS DIMMs versus 4 SS Kingston modules. We tried both pairs of SS memory, but could not overclock any higher than DD514. However, with all four of the same DIMMs, we reached a DDR535 overclock.
Early revisions of HyperX 4000 from Kingston met their specifications of DDR500 and did run at rated speed. However, they were very poor overclockers, regardless of configuration. Later revisions supplied by Kingston overclocked much better, and were used for Kingston testing in this roundup.
| Kingston HyperX 4000 — 4 x 256 MB Single-Bank | |||||
| Speed | Memory Timings & Voltage | Quake3 fps |
Sandra UNBuffered | Sandra Standard Buffered | Super PI 2M places (time in sec) |
| 400DDR 800FSB |
2.5-3-3-6 2.55V |
324.30 | INT 2589 FLT 2671 |
INT 4808 FLT 4745 |
131 |
| 500DDR 1000FSB |
3-4-4-7 2.65V |
394.57 | INT 3218 FLT 3195 |
INT 5841 FLT 5905 |
107 |
| 535DDR 1070FSB |
3-4-4-8 2.85V |
421.33 | INT 3459 FLT 3344 |
INT 6093 FLT 6111 |
100 |
| Kingston HyperX 4000 — 2 x 256 MB Single-Bank | |||||
| Speed | Memory Timings & Voltage | Quake3 fps |
Sandra UNBuffered | Sandra Standard Buffered | Super PI 2M places (time in sec) |
| 400DDR 800FSB |
2.5-3-3-6 2.55V |
320.13 | INT 2514 FLT 2500 |
INT 4735 FLT 4757 |
132 |
| 500DDR 1000FSB |
3-4-4-7 2.65V |
386.30 | INT 2821 FLT 2786 |
INT 5830 FLT 5748 |
109 |
| 514DDR 1028FSB |
3-4-4-8 2.85V |
396.77 | INT 2835 FLT 2864 |
INT 5923 FLT 6010 |
106 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
77 Comments
View All Comments
dshodson - Friday, September 5, 2003 - link
So what is the best memory to put in my new dell server coming in a week which has the 875 chip. I heard u cant really overclock this system although i havent received mine yet.Anonymous User - Tuesday, September 2, 2003 - link
Sorry about the typos ( its 11:36 PM here )Thanks
OCZGUY
Anonymous User - Tuesday, September 2, 2003 - link
Uberclocker ,If your having a problem with a OCZ part , email me directly , Most problems are related it simple setup issues , and your problem is verry likely fixed in a few simple steps , or with a bios update
My email is oczguy@ocztechnology.com
I will not like answer your email until tomorow ( tuesday ) as today is a holiday and I am not in the office today
Thanks
OCZGUY
Anonymous User - Monday, September 1, 2003 - link
Hello, I have followd your recommendation and bought an OCZ 4000 in Germany, this weekend. Unfortunately it has not performed to its specification. Can you tell me if there is a special part number I should look for to get their special 'reviewers golden sample' ?UberClocker
Anonymous User - Saturday, August 30, 2003 - link
I think if you have a cpu that will do 250 FSB and you purchase memory based on this article and you get within 98% of the results posted in this article, you owe Wesley $10.00. If 20% of the people with favorable results donated, there would be no more need to advertise. Now for the people who did not purchase ram based on this article and are bitching about it being bias, what are you bitching for?. This article has not cost you a cent.Thanks Wesley, you saved me a $100 on ram. I almost got caught up in all the hype about 4000 and 4200.
Fossil
Anonymous User - Saturday, August 30, 2003 - link
This article goes part way to answering the question of what memory configuration is fastest but I was disappointed that there was no variation in ratio.I would like to see a review that tests agressive timings against high frequency to see what produces the best results.
Also a test of all P4C chips running @ 3.6Ghz to see whether there's any benefit in buying the fastest chip.
With most motherboards easily hitting 1Ghz are we likely to be seeing a P4D which supports a 1066Mhz FSB?
Anonymous User - Friday, August 29, 2003 - link
I think the way to do these reviews is to tell the manufacturer you'd like to include them in a review, purchase the memory from a store you trust, and then get re-imbursed by the manufacturer. That way, there'd be no selected modules and you would know what you were going to put into the review (4 ss vs 2 ds).So, when do we get that part 2 of the 865/875 mobo roundup ?
retrospooty - Friday, August 29, 2003 - link
Wesley,I have run these tests myself on an IC7G at 200 , 230 250 and 280 FSB and found that 5:4 2-2-2 always beats 1:1 at 2.5-4-4, even 2.5 4-3 ... However SOME motherboards arent as efficient at 5:4 with some types of ram as others... If you try the same test on several different mobo's I think you will find that 5:4 2-2-2 is quite a bit faster in non-synthetic mem test benchmarks.
Oldfart # 64, you are right about the reviewers and using the synthetic tests to boost sales. good point.
Anonymous User - Friday, August 29, 2003 - link
If your not going to overclock, get low latency pc 3200 or 3500, the PC4000 wont help you at alleven IF you ARE going to overclock, the PC4000 will not likely get you better performance.
Anonymous User - Friday, August 29, 2003 - link
#67 I'm not an expert by any means but here is how I understand this discussion:If you are planning to use one of the faster processors such as the 3.0C you won't be able to achieve a big overclock because the multiplier for that processor is 15. If you want to use a higher speed processor such as the 2.8C or the 3.0c, you really dont need to spend the money on faster memory such as the PC4000 because you probably won't be able to overclock to a point that you will be able to reach a front side bus speed of 250mhz which is the lowest rated speed (x2=ddr500) of the memory module. So as the article has explained,you would be better off with
slower ram that has faster timings. However, if you have a slower processor such as the 2.4C or the 2.6C, you should be able to achieve a higher overclock because these processors have lower multipliers. In this case you would need faster ram such as the PC4000, because with these processors many have been able to set their front side bus up to and beyond 250mhz. In most scenarios with fast processors/slower ram vs slower processors/faster ram, IMHO, the performance difference may be fairly equal. What is really happening is a cost/benefit consideration. As always be careful!!! Overclocking can damage your system...you do it at your own risk!