Crucial Ballistix DDR2: The New DDR2 Standard?
by Steve Carmel & Wesley Fink on February 21, 2006 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Crucial DDR2 PC2-6400 (DDR2-800)
A default screen shot using CPU-Z shows the Crucial PC2-6400 running at 1066 MHz bus speed at stock settings on the Presler 955 EE processor. Please note the default memory timings of 4-4-4-12.
SiSoftware Sandra Professional 2005 screenshots were taken at the default settings, both buffered and unbuffered in order for comparative purposes.
Default Sisoft Sandra Buffered:
Using Everest's Ultimate Edition 2006 to peer at the programmed SPD timings on these modules provided a brief glimpse at some information that can be seen in the image below. This version of Everest did not recognize the newer 975X chipset well, but some results will be given as a reference later in this review.
A default screen shot using CPU-Z shows the Crucial PC2-6400 running at 1066 MHz bus speed at stock settings on the Presler 955 EE processor. Please note the default memory timings of 4-4-4-12.
Click to enlarge.
SiSoftware Sandra Professional 2005 screenshots were taken at the default settings, both buffered and unbuffered in order for comparative purposes.
Default Sisoft Sandra Buffered:
Using Everest's Ultimate Edition 2006 to peer at the programmed SPD timings on these modules provided a brief glimpse at some information that can be seen in the image below. This version of Everest did not recognize the newer 975X chipset well, but some results will be given as a reference later in this review.
Click to enlarge.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
27 Comments
View All Comments
leexgx - Saturday, February 25, 2006 - link
you Must understand the CPU that tomshardware got was an Test CPU, thay realy should of not done an benchmark as the CPU it self was not fully working and the DDR2 ram that was used was could only work at DDR2 666 and the timeings was stuck at 4-4-4-12 and may have been limted by the broken DDR2 contorler in it as well (you realy should look at it and not trust the resluts at all and thay have told you that its not to be trusted as well as its not an retail product as toms' stats)basicly at the time when P4 came to use DDR2 the timeing speed of DDR2 was silly DDR1 would out perform DDR2 this is why amd have not gone to DDR2 as ram speeds are now to the point where it will not be an bottle neck (and Ram price between DDR1 and 2 are not that must £10-£40 $40-$80 depending on size)
testing the Ram performance in am P4/P5 system is not usefull any way as it can not use it (get some intresting resluts when AM2 fully comes ot)
(the date is 06/06/06 when it comes out)
my self i am going to stick my AMD X2 3800+ 939 and mobo and 2Gb of ram in me server (board is dieing caps are leaking on this P4 mobo) and get AM2 when 65mm fabs come out for AM2 and fast ram by then (and some good mobos)
all that will probly be end of year i can wait my 3800+ X2 is running at 2.4ghz (basicly 4600+X2 as the ram is running at DDr480 as well)and its happy and cool keeps me happy
Jedi2155 - Sunday, February 26, 2006 - link
DDR1 outperforming DDR2 wasn't the main reason AMD didn't go to DDR2 right away. The main reason (if you read AMD's lawsuit against Intel's marketing practices) was because Intel created separate consortium to design DDR2 with the memory manufacturer's with the full intent of keeping AMD out of the loop. Thus AMD was a year or 2 behind Intel in developing the memory controller for DDR2 (as they couldn't see the specs till it was finished) nor did they have any input in the design of the specification.And thus DDR2 sucks more than it should had AMD been involved :)
DigitalFreak - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link
The AM2 platform launches on June 6, 2006 (6/6/6). Those aren't memory timings.Spacecomber - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
I'll admit that I mostly skimmed through this article, but since much of the data seemed to be in the form of screenshots that are too small to be easily legible without cliking on them to get the enlarged version, I found it hard to get a quick glimpse of what this article might have to offer.I would much prefer results to be presented in traditional graphs and tables, instead.
Olaf van der Spek - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
What is the information about the AMD CPU doing in this test?Too much copy/paste?
JustAnAverageGuy - Wednesday, February 22, 2006 - link
Yeah, that does seem out of place.Authors also need to go back and recheck their MB\GB , MHz\GHz labels. I sure don't want any 4.5MB\sec RAM.
96redformula - Tuesday, February 21, 2006 - link
My faith in crucial is gone.