Performance Comparisons

The six DDR memories were compared at each of the 2.4Ghz settings, the Highest Memory Speed, and the Highest Memory Performance. Comparisons of memory on the Intel 478 platform can be found in memory reviews at:

OCZ 3700 Gold Rev. 3: DDR500 Value for Athlon 64 & Intel 478
Geil PC3200 Ultra X: High Speed & Record Bandwidth
=F-A-S-T= DDR Memory: 2-2-2 Roars on the Scene
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

Memory performance was compared at 200x12 (2.4Ghz, DDR400), 218x11 (2.4Ghz, DDR438), 240x10 (2.4Ghz, DDR480), 267x9 (2.4Ghz, DDR533), the Highest Memory Speed that could be reached, and the Highest Memory Performance Settings that we could reach. With a constant CPU speed, memory comparisons show the true impact of faster speed and slower memory timings on memory performance.

Results are compared for Quake 3, Return to Castle Wolfenstein- Enemy Territory, Sandra UNBufferred Memory Test, Sandra Standard Buffered Memory Test, and Super PI. SiSoft Sandra 2004 reports 2 results for each memory test - an Integer value and a Float value. Results reported in our charts are the result of averaging the INT and FLOAT scores, which are normally close in value. INT and FLOAT scores were added and divided by 2 for our reported score.

Test Results: PQI 3200 Turbo DDR400/2.4GHz Performance
Comments Locked

47 Comments

View All Comments

  • Wesley Fink - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    #22, #25 and others -

    The 465W power supply that was not up to the job had the following specifications:

    +3.3V - 38A
    +5V - 44A
    +12V - 20A
    -5V - 2A
    -12V - 1A
    +5Vsb - 2.2A

    I would never have had any reason to suspect issues with this expensive major brand PS based on those specs, but in fact it turned out to be the limiting factor in overclocking the memory.

    This issue requires more investigation as there are many possible reasons for my experience, but I felt an obligation to let readers know what we found in our testing. However, it is not fair to name brands without much more evidence.
  • Blappo - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    Hopefully the value memory roundup will also contain some generic memory as well. Knowing which premium memory is the faster is good, but I want to know how much of a difference memory makes on system performance. I don't want to spend 50% more for only 5% more performance. That money could be better spent somewhere else.

    I'm glad that AnandTech did this article since everywhere else they only benchmark memory on Intel systems.
  • Blappo - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    PrinceXizor - I agree completely. However, with higher wattage PSU most of the extra power comes on the 12V rail. I think that is why nVidia is recommending "monster" PSU for their high-end graphics cards because it is easier to tell people to buy a 480W PSU rather than a PSU that can deliver 22A (or whatever) on the 12V rail.
  • Spearhawk - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    15: 20A? You're kiding right? My oven are at 20A.
  • decptt - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    My Ballistix performance
    =============================================
    "Dec" copyright since Duron600@1000
    =============================================
    Athlon64 Mobile 3200+ Rev.SH7-CG
    AMA3200BEX5AR-ClawHammer L2:1MB
    10x250 vid:1.5v+113%(~1.70v)
    Idle@36C Load(Prime95)@43C
    [10x255 worked @~1.97v Loaded(Prime95)@55C]

    Crucial Ballistix PC3200 512MBx2 vcore:2.70v
    Ratio = 1:1 ; TCl:2.5-Trcd:3-Tras:5-Trp:3 1T
    ATI AIW 9600XT 128MB BUS:75 vcore:1.6v
    DFI Lanparty UT NF3-250 Rev.A00 Bios.9/14(Beta)
    LDT/FSB@ 4X
    Thermalright XP-90 +Panaflo-H1B-92(FBA09A12H)
    Seagate ST3120026A
    DVD model DD0401
    TruePower480

    Scroll(Tested@2.50GHz on Sep 30, 2004)
    SiSoft2004.10.9.133
    CPU::ALU 11513 FPU 3954 iSSE2 5156
    Media:: Int 23895 Float 2562
    Ram:: Int 3780 MB/s Float 3779 MB/s
    3DMark03V3.4.0--1751 :(
    PCMark2004v1.2.0--3688
    Super PI 1M 35s
    Super PI 2M 1M23s
    =============================================
  • quanta - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    Speaking of robust 12V rails, Enermax seems to be the only one make power supplies that can provide more +12V juice than most enthusists ever need, even for models without splitting +12V lines.
  • AlphaFox - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    where did the power supply talk come from??
  • PrinceXizor - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    Just a further comment on the PSU "recommendation". I really think that the major tech sites are doing a disservice to the community when they keep recommending higher and higher total wattage PSU's. That is NOT the issue! As has already been pointed out, the key component is to analyze what voltage rail is is not providing enough juice. Just as clock speed is a poor indicator of processor performance, total wattage is a poor indicator of PSU performance. Considering that a major computer rig will rarely if EVER draw more than 250W of actual power, the key metrics for a PSU are the actual amperages on the various rails, particularly the robustness of the 12V rails. (Some newer PSU's are providing dual 12V rails for just this reason). So, does an enthusiast overclocking their rig need a 500 Watt "monster" or do they need a robust 12V line and tight voltage variance on those lines (as you drive stuff out of spec, the transients in those lines become more critical).

    I guess the point of my long-winded post is this...tossing off a "recommendation" like was done in this article (well-intentioned I'm sure) without addressing the actual issues involved seems to me to be habit that should be avoided.

    P-X
  • rjm55 - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    As you pointed out, you can't do the kind of tests you did here with an Intel rig with a locked multiplier. It was good to see all the different memory speeds at the same CPU speed, which proved once and for all that higher memory speeds DO improve performance - even with slower timings at higher speed. Makes my mouth water thinking about how good DDR550 at 2.5-2-2 would be.

    I realize the performance differences weren't huge with just the memory overclocked, but most people will overclock the CPU AND the RAM and that will make a huge combined difference in performance. Tweaking is about squeezing the most from your gear, and you CAN get more out of memory at higher speeds.
  • eetnoyer - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link

    Try newegg.com

    http://www.newegg.com/app/viewProductDesc.asp?desc...

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now