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 - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Interesting review....I've been waiting for this one. As for the criticism, I would say don't just look at this one review. There seem to be plenty of reviews from other sites listed in the memory news section here. Why not check out what other sites have to say about the memory listed in this review...unless you think they are all shills for a particular product. IMO I think Wesley and AT are on the level...but if you have doubts there are other reviews out there. I'm still dissapointed tho...It seems that most of the 500mhz modules are just overclocked 400mhz modules with poor timings...I wonder if there are going to be true 500mhz modules with better timings in the works or is this the last stop before we see DDR2.artifex - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Ok, I stopped being lazy. It's me!Anonymous User - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
hey 43/44, you must be a stringer for Mushkin, because you're cheering at the end (Mush! Mush!)Just kidding. I usually post as "artifex" but am too lazy to find my password right now. You'll see I've mentioned them before. Also comments about Anandtech being the site (along with SharkyExtreme) that I rely on heavily...
I bought my first ever Asus mobo (a7n8x deluxe) a couple months ago because of the reviews here (my first and last Soyo had just died from some bad capacitors, I won't trust them again) so what I want now is to see a shootout of the best memory for dual-channel nforce2 boards (especially mine :) )
Speaking of, I'm running one of the new weird 333FSB 2600+ XPs that's still a Tbred B, and I'm wondering, would I really benefit from memory that's pc3200 (probably not) or even pc2700, or are my current 2 512mb sticks of 2-3-3 pc2100 memory fine?
p.s. ironically, I also bought the Soyo based on reviews, but reviews don't make up for long-term experience with hardware (when cheap components fail). It'd be cool to see a follow up article or two, even just anecdotal, from the reviewers about how their own personal systems are working a year or so after they assemble them... and see if that changes their views about the vendors.
retrospooty - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Cool, Muskin rocks...I would REALLY like to see some Mushkin PC3500 at 5:4 2-2-2 against all those other PC4000 at 1:1 3-4-4-8... I know the PC3500 would win, I would just like to see it in print. !
Anonymous User - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Good points #42. I should have included similar in my last comment as I feel exactly the same. A quick explanation (by name) of which major manufacturers did not make the deadline or will be reviewed later would satisfy my curiousity on why large manufacturers weren't present. I cannot wait to see what the Mushkin stuff rates at and THEN I will choose between them, OCZ, Geil, and Corsair. Just in case I did not make it clear before, I do feel that when AnandTech does put out new articles they are often very good. The basis of the general readers scrutiny comes from how things look overall with the manufacturers listed on the same page as their reviews. Since the use of META data has become so prevailent in page content, it is easy to believe that all advertisements for memory would show up on a memory review. One would think that was a good idea, right?! As to the integrity of AnandTech, I still think you guys are unbiased and professional. Just remember to foster that perception in bold stroke so the goobs who cannot fathom the idea that any one company can be in it's prime and actually BE producing the best product on several reviews. That said, I still want you guys to make more content and faster. Come on! Get to work! Make it 60... No. 80 hours a week each!! Mush! Mush!Cheers,
Wiley
Anonymous User - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
cool. thanks for saying that about Mushkin.I hadn't seen much of them in Anandtech reviews or advertising on the site lately, so I was wondering.
I used to be a big Crucial.com fan until they started slipping (recommending wrong types and amounts of memory, customer service, etc), and then went with Mushkin when the chance presented itself, based entirely on seeing their name associated with good things here in the past. My first set of sticks from them actually gave errors about a year into use, and I had bought them at Fry's (stupid, I know), but Mushkin overnighted me replacements anyway, so I'm definitely loyal to them now (the cost of overnight probably ate the marginal extra I paid over Corsair, which I also considered).
I know this is long winded, and probably sounds like astroturfing, but I want the editors to remember that we really do buy stuff based on what you say, and when it looks like "favorite" brands are disappearing without any comment, it makes us wonder. Hey, even if you guys get into a fight with a vendor and they stop lending you review stuff, that's a legitimate reason... just tell us.
KristopherKubicki - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Tom Duong from Mushkin had contacted AnandTech several weeks before this review to let us know that their memory sample would not make to us in time for the review. We do have some other articles with Mushkin coming up.Cheers,
Kristopher
Anonymous User - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Personally, I would just like some parity for these reviews. Every time I read these I wodner why Mushkin is never listed. I realize that teh manufacturer needs to provide product for testing and by a deadline. However, it just seems silly that a company the rates its DDR400 memory at Cas2-2-2 (Black Level II) has not been listed here. Can't AnandTech sport for the 400 bucks to GET memory when a reviewer cannot send it or does not do so in a timely manner. I always had the impression that sites like this were produced with the best interest of the end reader in mind. Anytime a single manufacturer is lauded repeatedly for their product and that product happens to be promoted profusely in advertising on the reviewers site, there will be questions regarding favoritism. I'm not saying you fudge your numbers to keep people at OCZ happy, there is too much data to support your conclusions regarding the quality of OCZ memory. But it does make you wonder. The lask of Mushkin in the original DDR400 porion of your latest memory benchmarks on this site being a perfect example. Who is to say that the Mushkin stuff was not left out just to leave a better window of opportunity for somone like OCZ to succeed i your tests? I hope that is not the case but again, I have to wonder why I never see them here. Get on them and get some of their product to test too! I have to agree with many here that teh content at AnandTech is slipping. The updates are way to far apart, there are few articles when an update DOES occur, and the content is subject to scrutiny for bias. In all fairness, any of the ideas I have posited could be true or false. However, with this sites reputation being the MAIN provider of it's marketability, AD sales potential, and reader support, don't you think that making sure there is NEVER a question of integrity would be a good business practice? And update the site more often! I used to read this site everyday. Now I just come here once a week tops.Cheers,
Wiley
Anonymous User - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Mushkin did not have PC4000 ready in time for the review.Im sure Wes will review it as soon as he recieves samples.Wesley has got to be the most unbiased reviewer i know.He upset a few at abxzone and im sure he will do the same here.
Just because OCZ has been doing well is NOT because they paid for a good review....its because the modules are the best at the moment..nothing more.
OCZ have worked hard these past 12 months or more,they are gaining market share and more sites are starting to use their ram for board reviews etc..the only people this will upset is Corsair who have had a strong hold on review sites for a long while.
So all you "employee's" coming here to bash OCZ--- please give it a rest.If you have an issue with OCZ product contact me. oczguy2@ocztechnology.com
Please remember this thread is about Wes's review after all, not bashing OCZ so please lets all get back on topic.
Thanks.
bigtoe
Anonymous User - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
The differece is small on synthetic tests like Sandra mem tests, but large on real stuff like games,and 3dmark real apps.the same thory hold true at any speed, try it at 250, 230 or even 200
5:4 at 2-2-2 is faster than 1:1 at 3-4-4 period
Try it.