Searching for the Memory Holy Grail - Part 2
by Wesley Fink on August 26, 2003 11:11 PM EST- Posted in
- Memory
The Candidates
With what we know now about 875/875 memory configurations, the ideal test of the fastest memory available would be four double-bank modules. However, not all memory manufacturers had DS DDR500 modules available. Therefore, to be fair in our memory comparison, we asked memory vendors, at the very minimum, to supply 2 DS DIMMs or 4 SS modules of their fastest memory for evaluation. Over several weeks, we received PC4000/DDR500 samples from Corsair, Geil, Kingston, OCZ and Adata. OCZ 3700 Gold was also included in the roundup, since it is known to perform at DDR500.
| DDR500 Memory Specifications | ||||||
| Adata PC4000 | Corsair XMS 4000 | Geil Platinum 4000 | Kingston HyperX 4000 | OCZ 4000 Copper | OCZ 3700 Gold | |
| Number of DIMMs & Banks | 2 DS | 2 DS | 2 DS | 4 SS | 2 DS | 2 DS |
| DIMM Size Total Memory | 512 MB 1 GB |
512 MB 1 GB |
512 MB 1 GB |
256 MB 1 GB |
512 MB 1 GB |
256 MB 512 MB |
| Rated Timings | 3-4-4-8 | 3-4-4-8 | 2.5-4-4-7 | 3-4-4-8 | 3-4-4-7 | 2.5-3-3-7 @DDR466 |
| Rated Voltage | ? | 2.75V | 2.6-2.95V | 2.65V | 2.7V | 2.65V @DDR466 |
With each set of DDR500 memory, we tested at the following settings:
1. 800FSB/DDR400 – the highest stock speed supported on 875/865 motherboards.To test overclocked stability, we used a run of the very demanding Gun Metal 2 — Benchmark 2, which pushes systems with its demanding DX9 routines. To be considered stable for test purposes, Gun Metal, our Quake3 benchmark, UT2003 Demo, and Super PI had to complete without incident. Any of these four, and in particular Super PI and Gun Metal, will crash a less-than stable memory configuration.
2. 1000FSB/DDR500 – the specified rating of the memory modules that we were testing.
3. Highest Stable Overclock – the highest settings that we could achieve with the memory being tested.
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.