=<em>F-A-S-T</em>= DDR Memory: 2-2-2 Roars on the Scene
by Wesley Fink on August 5, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Performance Test Configuration
We tested all 5 of the DDR400 2-2-2 memories in our standard Intel Pentium 4 Memory testbed. The hardware for evaluating these new memories is the same used in our earlier reviews of DDR400 and faster Memory.Buffalo FireStix: Red Hot Name for a New High-End Memory
New DDR Highs: Shikatronics, OCZ, and the Fastest Memory Yet
The Return of 2-2-2: Corsair 3200XL & Samsung PC4000
OCZ 3700EB: Making Hay with Athlon 64
OCZ 3500EB: The Importance of Balanced Memory Timings
Mushkin PC3200 2-2-2 Special: Last of a Legend
PMI DDR533: A New Name in High-Performance Memory
Samsung PC3700: DDR466 Memory for the Masses
Kingmax Hardcore Memory: Tiny BGA Reaches For Top Speed
New Memory Highs: Corsair and OCZ Introduce DDR550
OCZ PC3700 Gold Rev. 2: The Universal Soldier
OCZ 4200EL: Tops in Memory Performance
Mushkin PC4000 High Performance: DDR500 PLUS
Corsair TwinX1024-4000 PRO: Improving DDR500 Performance
Mushkin & Adata: 2 for the Fast-Timings Lane
Searching for the Memory Holy Grail - Part 2
All test conditions were as close as possible to those used in our earlier memory reviews. We have also eliminated from our charts any memory that has been discontinued, including Winbond BH5 versions from several vendors and earlier versions of several current memory products.
| INTEL 875P Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | Intel Pentium 4 2.4GHz (800MHz FSB) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB Crucial Ballistix PC3200 (DS) 2 x 512MB Kingston HyperX PC3200 L-L (DS) 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC3200 Level II V2 (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2 (DS) 2 x 512MB Corsair 3200XL PRO (DS) 2 x 256MB Samsung PC4000 (SS) 2 x 512MB Buffalo FireStix PC4000 (DS) 2 x 512MB Shika XRAM PC4400 (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ PC4400 EL Gold (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ 3700EB (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ 3500EB (DS) 2 x 512MB Mushkin 2-2-2 Special (DS) 2 x 512MB PMI4200 Gold (DDR533 DS) 4 x 256MB Samsung PC3700 (DDR466 SS) 2 x 512MB Kingmax DDR500 Hardcore Series (DS) 2 x 512MB Kingmax DDR466 Hardcore Series (DS) 2 x 512MB Corsair XMS4400v1.1 TwinX (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ PC4400 DC Kit (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3700 Gold Rev. 2 (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ 4200EL(DS) 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC4000 High Performance (DS) 2 x 512MB Corsair TwinX4000 PRO (DS) 2 x 256MB Adata DDR450 (SS) 2 x 512MB Adata PC4000 (DS) 2 x 512MB Corsair PC4000 (DS) 2 x 512MB Geil PC4000 (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ PC4000 (DS) |
| Hard Drives: | 2 Western Digital Raptor Serial ATA 36.7GB 10,000RPM drives in an Intel ICH5R RAID configuration |
| PCI/AGP Speed: | Fixed at 33/66 |
| Bus Master Drivers: | 875P Intel INF Update v5.00.1012, SATA RAID drivers installed, but IAA not installed |
| Video Card(s): | ATI 9800 PRO 128MB, 128MB aperture, 1024x768x32 |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 4.7 |
| Power Supply: | Vantec Stealth 470Watt Aluminum |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Motherboards: | Asus P4C800-E (875) with 1016 Release BIOS |
We have found the fastest performance on Intel 865/875 to be achieved at Cycle Time or tRAS of 5, or the fastest tRAS setting that is stable with the tested memory. Intel platform benchmarks were run with the fastest stable tRAS timings that we could achieve with the memory being tested.
Test Settings
We ran our standard suite of memory performance benchmarks. The following settings were tested with all of the DDR400 2-2-2 memories:- 800FSB/DDR400 - the highest stock speed supported on 875/865 and K8T800/nF3/SiS755 motherboards.
- 866FSB/DDR433 - a speed rating that we have used in testing other low-latency DDR400 memory.
- 933FSB/DDR466 - another speed rating that we have used in testing low-latency memory
- 1000FSB/DDR500 - a standard memory speed used in testing high-speed memory
- Highest Stable Overclock - the highest settings we could achieve with this memory and other memory that we have tested.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
47 Comments
View All Comments
Anemone - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Would love to see OCZ do further expansion on the EL or EB area of DDR2. I'm sure it's at lower limits (the timings of DDR2 stink really), but if anyone could push them as low as possible I'd expect OCZ to do it.Anemone - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Yeah OCZ seems to have their stuff where it counts.I'll note this highlights an issue that's caught my eye, and that is in the furor over the AMD64 chips, its less visible just sometimes how much "special stuff", ie choice memory modules, it takes to keep the AMD platforms running at top speed. On the Intel side of the fence you can plug just about anything in and get some speed, but in many cases that's still a guessing game for the AMD stuff. Given how that plays out a year or two down the line when you want to buy just an upgrade part or two, I'm kind of a fan of the "just buy the latest Superbytes mem module XXX and plug and go" kind of usefulness, which I see 'more' on the Intel side of things, and I do mean 'more' not 'only'.
Also want to mention that lately tending to see more enthusiasts aiming for as much as 2gb of memory, and when you get there, the AMD controllers seem to not fly as much as with lower amounts, losing as much as 10% of their performance.
Blah, no easy choices here imo.
ceefka - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Great review. For those of us who want to build a 939, we'd love to see the next article. We apparently have a lot of RAM to choose from.Now on the theoretical side: How would the best DDR2 perform? What would the differences be? Can these results justify AMD's choice to ignore DDR2?
Bozo Galora - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Another very timely review.You are now answering questions for me in advance - lol.
Color changes for reviewed items better, but as a nitpick, it might be cool to continue colors to the names of mem also, not just the bar??? Dark green needs to be a lighter color - like pink. 2 greens not friendly.
Anyway thanx fella.
cnq - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Wesley,Can you comment on the 2.5-2-2 timings past DDR500 of the Crucial? It seems slightly fishy, considering that you used their PC3200, which is lower-binned than their PC4000...and even the 4000 is only rated at 2.5-3-3 at DDR500.
Is it possible that Crucial sent you a cherry-picked sample for review?
Anyone else out there own a set of the Ballistix care to comment?
JustAnAverageGuy - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
catchy title=F-A-S-T=
A bit unprofessional maybe, but catchy :)
shady06 - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
OCZ = smokin