Searching for the Memory Holy Grail - Part 2
by Wesley Fink on August 26, 2003 11:11 PM EST- Posted in
- Memory
OCZ 4000 Copper
Click the image to view a larger picture.
OCZ 4000 was supplied with copper-colored heatspreaders. OCZ names their memory by the heatspreader color, so we have names like OCZ 3700 Gold, 3500 Platinum, and 4000 Copper. Since the Platinum name is usually reserved for the lowest latency modules, we can hope that we’ll be seeing a low-latency DDR500 some time in the future. The 512 MB modules were supplied in a Dual-Channel kit. Like Geil, OCZ uses chip blanks, which are labeled with the OCZ ID and speed rating. OCZ has confirmed that Hynix blanks are used in producing OCZ 4000.
We do not know exactly how OCZ achieved such incredible overclocking with their PC4000 memory, but we were able to attain an overclock of DDR552 in our testing. At lower speeds, the performance of OCZ 4000 is very comparable to Corsair and Geil, which also use Hynix chips in their modules. We did a quick scan of other reviews of OCZ 4000 to see if our results were in-line, and we found others who were also finding high overclocks in the same range with OCZ 4000. This is the first memory that we have tested that passes 1100FSB.
| OCZ 4000 Copper — 2 x 512 MB Double-Bank | |||||
| Speed | Memory Timings & Voltage | Quake3 fps |
Sandra UNBuffered | Sandra Standard Buffered | Super PI 2M places (time in sec) |
| 400DDR 800FSB |
2.5-3-4-5 2.55V |
319.67 | INT 2620 FLT 2657 |
INT 4701 FLT 4742 |
132 |
| 500DDR 1000FSB |
2.5-3-4-6 2.65V |
400.10 | INT 3282 FLT 3324 |
INT 5965 FLT 5934 |
106 |
| 552DDR 1104FSB |
3-4-4-8 2.85V |
435.27 | INT 3513 FLT 3617 |
INT 6468 FLT 6505 |
97 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
77 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
I am tired of setting the memory timing and bench mark all the time. Is there a program there which can tell me what kind of results I would get? Say if I can increase my CPU by 5 MHz but have to set back my memory timing a bit, which way should I go?oldfart - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
Here are some reviews comparing tight timings Vs loose:http://www.hardtecs4u.com/reviews/2003/ddr400_roun... (need language translator)
http://www.octools.com/index.cgi?caller=articles/c...
http://www.3dxtreme.org/Corsair_xms3700_twinx_p1.s...
Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
I think this was an extremely helpful and thorough review. There was one comparison, though, that I would find most helpful and haven't found anywhere. I'm currently debating the importance of running synchronously, and thus found the section "Does memory speed really matter in the real world" extremely interesting. However, I would have greatly preferred one additional test -- running 1066FSB at 3:2 and 5:4 with memory with tight timings (2-2-2-5), since my real debate is whether to buy PC3200 or PC3500 with tight timings and run at 5:4 or 3:2, or PC4000 with loose timings and run at 1:1. While I expect that the synchronous memory would result in better performance, I'd really like to know how much better, since PC4000 memory is expensive!Thanks,
Steve
Dennis Travis - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
Great Review Wes. Keep Em coming. I am not "PAID" to say this either. I wanted to. I am getting nothing for it either. Just the satisfaction of telling Wes I loved his review.Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
Great review Wesley. Nah I'm not paid to say this, I just enjoyed the review!Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
I have tested Kingston HyperX RAM at 1:1 3-4-4-8 @ DDR500, and 5:4 2-2-2-5 @ DDR400 at the same FSBs on a P4P800, with MAM Enabled and Turbo performance mode in both cases. While the 1:1 gets about 3-5% better Sandra bandwidth scores (buffered and unbuffered), SuperPI completes about 1.5% sooner at the 5:4 settings.So real-world performance may be slightly better at 5:4, but you won't win any Sandra bragging rights with it.
--MeowChow
Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
oldfart - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Wow, looks I'm not the only guy who wants to see250 FSB
1:1 3-4-4-8
5:4 2-2-2-6
type of testing. I've seen several reviews that show the lower latency ram @ 5:4 to be faster.
Part 3??
Anonymous User - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Hey Wesley,Thanks for all the good info...
Any chance you could test Various FSB's
5:4 2-2-2-5 vs the same FSB at 1:1 2.5-4-4-7
It would be great to show the readers how the new PC4000 REALLY compares to older slower low latency RAM, Mushkin PC3500 level2 would be perfect for that.
Now that would be a seriously good Anandtech caliber review. :D
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
#32 and #40 -Mushkin did not have a product in our hands when the review was done. In fact I completed a review of Mushkin PC3500 Level II just a couple of days ago, and compared it's performance to ALL the memory in this review at DDR400. I also tested Adata DDR450, which did not meet our requirement of running at DDR500, but DID perform well at DDR400.
The reviews should be up here shortly. The Mushkin did VERY well at DDR400 to DDR450. Mushkin is also about to release DDR500 - but they did not have a product ready in time for our review. We WILL be testing it as soon as it is available if time allows.