OCZ 3700 Gold Rev. 3: DDR500 Value for Athlon 64 & Intel 478
by Wesley Fink on September 22, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
AMD Performance Test Configuration
This memory test is the first benchmarking on the new Athlon 64 memory test bed. Since we have found DDR memory to perform very differently on the memory controller with Athlon 64 chips, we will be including Athlon 64 benchmarks in all future memory reviews.The A64 test bed includes components that have been proven in Socket 939 Athlon 64 benchmarking, such as the Gold Editors Choice MSI K8N Neo2, the completely unlocked Socket 939 FX53, and the OCZ Power Stream 520 Power Supply. Since the Athlon 64 tests represent a new series of DDR testing, we have chosen the current generation nVidia 6800 Ultra video card for benchmarking. We have found the 6800 Ultra to be a particularly good match to nVidia nForce3 Ultra motherboards.
All other basic test conditions attempted to mirror those used in our earlier Intel memory reviews. However, test results are not directly comparable to tests performed on the Intel test bed.
| AMD nForce3 Ultra Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | AMD FX53 Athlon 64 (2.4GHz, Socket 939, Dual Channel, 1000HT) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3700 Gold Rev. 3 (DS) |
| Hard Drives | Seagate 120GB PATA (IDE) 7200RPM 8MB Cache |
| PCI/AGP Speed | Fixed at 33/66 |
| Bus Master Drivers: | nVidia nForce Platform Driver 4.24 (5-10-2004) |
| Video Card(s): | nVidia 6800 Ultra 256MB, 256MB aperture, 1024x768x32 |
| Video Drivers: | nVidia Forceware 61.77 |
| Power Supply: | OCZ Power Stream 520W |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Motherboards: | MSI K8N Neo2 |
We have found the fastest performance on AMD Athlon 64 chipsets (nForce3, VIA K8T800 PRO) to be achieved at Cycle Time or tRAS of 10. Athlon 64 platform benchmarks were therefore run with the tRAS timing of 10 for all A64 benchmarks.
Test Settings
The FX53 is completely unlocked, something not currently available with Intel processors. This allowed a different approach to memory testing which truly measures performance differences in memory speed alone. All tests were run with CPU speed as close to the specified 2.4GHz of the FX53 as possible, with CPU speed/Memory Speed increased at lower multipliers to achieve 2.4Ghz. This approach allows the true measurement of the impact of higher memory speed and timings on performance, since CPU speed is fixed.The following settings were tested with the OCZ 3700 Gold Rev 3 on Athlon 64:
- 12x200/DDR400 - the highest stock memory speed supported on 875/865 and K8T800/nF3/SiS755 motherboards
- 11x218/DDR436 - a ratio near the standard DDR533 speed
- 10x240/DDR480 - a memory speed near the rating of OCZ 3700 Gold Rev 3
- 9x267/DDR533 - a standard memory speed used in testing other high-speed memory
- 8x300/DDR600 - a standard for future memory speed testing. Few if any current memories will reach this speed
- Highest Stable Overclock - the highest settings we could achieve with this memory and other memory we have tested
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
11 Comments
View All Comments
Rags - Thursday, September 30, 2004 - link
I was debating between this and the Crucial Ballistix 3200 for my new machine. Which you guys think I should go with? Hope the October high end buyer's guide comes out soon...KrazyDawg - Sunday, September 26, 2004 - link
Can someone recommend me a cheap pair of 1GB RAM capable of running at 250? The charts on here aren't clear as to exactly what module I should purchase. If I were to cross reference it with newegg, you would see different names and prices and that doesn't help me. The deal time search engine on here only shows some memory prices and they're only for 512MB.Pumpkinierre - Saturday, September 25, 2004 - link
Why does the dual channel a64 have a lower unbuffered Sandra score than the intel when its buffered score is clearly much higher (up to 40% higher). SSE2 implementation on K8 was supposed to be not all that good from early reviews, so you'd expect a worse buffered result. Maybe the real world meaning of these tests should be revisited for the different cpus.Anemone - Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - link
Well the Ballistix 4000 is cheaper so that makes it a "better buy" in terms of price. It certainly clocks fairly high in the tests, and at rather tight timings. The 3700 EB while rated 3700 vs the 4000 seems to clock quite high but at looser timings. I have, maybe just due to people talking about the newer 4000, been reading more high clock success stories (A64's) with the 4000 than I have read about the 3700EB. Maybe OCZ will grace us with 4000EB or 4200EB? Maybe but probably they would have if they could have.Anand will clear us all up soon with some kind of a grand review of memories on the A64 I hope. This article did have that new A64 testbed up and running so there is hope!
Right now a tie between the 4000 cheaper but slightly lower clocks but always seems to clock that well vs the 3700EB which is more expensive and seems to "usually" get a higher possible clock at looser timings than the 4000.
Thus, a tie.
saechaka - Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - link
so which would be the better buy right now for an abit AI7 the crucial ballistix or ocx 3700 eb? thanksOCedHrt - Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - link
Oops! Wow blank post. Anyways, doesn't the Crucial Ballistix already cost less? Crucial sells their 512 PC4000 stick at 144.99.OCedHrt - Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - link
ciwell - Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - link
Wondering the same thing as #2...Can't wait for a "Value" RAM Roundup.
Anemone - Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - link
It has become rather important since am building a system now to see that Athlon 64 memory review you've mentioned was coming :)3700EB is the old standby but it seems that like this 3700, and the Ballistix 4000, there are some memories out lately that do particularly well at 500-550 speeds on the A64's.
As always this article was a very good read and I learned yet another memory of interest.
Now I'd like to see them all layed out and compared so I can refine my choices to go with a nice FX-55 :)
Ty!
mkruer - Wednesday, September 22, 2004 - link
I want to know if its better to get one gig of "cheep" 2.5,3,3,7 DDR400 (2x512) ram vs a smaller (2x256) of high prefromance DDR533 with ram.