OCZ Introduces DDR3-1800

by Wesley Fink on July 31, 2007 1:00 AM EST
OCZ PC3-14400 Platinum Edition

In the last several years, OCZ has developed a deserved reputation as a true innovator in the computer enthusiast market. They were the first of the memory companies to market high-end, high-quality power supplies, a product offering now available from other memory companies as well. OCZ cemented that relationship with the power supply market with their recent acquisition of PC Power and Cooling - a well-regarded player in the high-end PSU market. OCZ has also begun to market high-end video cards under their own brand name, something Crucial has done for several years.

In the end, if you're part of the computer enthusiast community, OCZ has been constantly introducing new and innovative products for that market, from ram cooling to CPU coolers to video cards to the very latest in memory technology. While most enthusiasts recognize OCZ as a memory company, many these days also recognize them for their power supplies, CPU coolers, or other products.

OCZ maintains an up-to-date website that provides specifics for their products. They are also represented on many forum sites, and they maintain dedicated forums for OCZ products on several websites. OCZ memory products come with a lifetime warranty.


Like several other manufacturers, OCZ has moved to the smaller dual-channel clear clamshell package for memory kits. The card in the memory package is now a 4-page glossy instruction sheet with information on the features and installation of the memory.


The DIMMs themselves are also easily recognized as OCZ with the large "Z" in the middle of the perforated XTC (Xtreme Thermal Convection) heatsink design. The XTC heatsinks are a familiar sight on high-end OCZ memory. OCZ tests and certifies the memory for DDR3-1800 8-8-8 performance on ASUS DDR3 boards. Like the other DDR3 DIMMs based on Micron Z9 memory, the OCZ DIMMs are single-sided 1GB parts. That means 2GB parts and 4GB kits are definitely a possibility in the future, when chip availability improves and the very high memory chip prices drop. Performance and timings would likely be somewhat below current specs in a 4GB kit.

OCZ PC3-14400 Platinum Edition
Memory Specifications
Number of DIMMs & Banks 2 SS
DIMM Size 1 GB
Total Memory 2 GB (2 x 1GB)
Rated Timings 8-8-8-27 at DDR3-1800
Rated Voltage 1.9V (Standard 1.5V)

DDR3 is lower voltage, higher speed and slower timings than DDR2. The chart below was published in our introduction to DDR3 and summarizes some of the differences in the official JEDEC DDR2 and DDR3 specifications.

JEDEC Memory Specifications
  DDR2 DDR3
Rated Speed 400-800 Mbps 800-1600 Mbps
Vdd/Vddq 1.8V +/- 0.1V 1.5V +/- 0.075V
Internal Banks 4 8
Termination Limited All DQ signals
Topology Conventional T Fly-by
Driver Control OCD Calibration Self Calibration with ZQ
Thermal Sensor No Yes (Optional)

JEDEC specs a starting point for enthusiast memory companies. However, since there was never a JEDEC standard for memory faster than DDR-400 then DDR memory running at faster speeds is really overclocked DDR-400. Similarly DDR2 memory faster than DDR2-800 is actually overclocked DDR2-800 since there is currently no official JEDEC spec for DDR2-1066. DDR speeds ran to DDR-400, DDR2 has official specs from 400 to 800, and DDR3 will extend this from 800 to 1600 based on the current JEDEC specification.

The OCZ PC3-14400 is the first DDR3 we have tested with a rated 1800 MHz or higher speed. It also offers somewhat lower specified latencies of 8-8-8 at 1.9V. The OCZ DDR3-1800 is available as single 1GB DIMMs or a 2GB kit providing a matched pair of 1GB DIMMs.

Index Memory Test Configuration
Comments Locked

25 Comments

View All Comments

  • MadBoris - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    "Far Cry sees a similar increase from 112.90 at 800 to 121.94 at DDR2-2000"
    I think you meant DDR3-2000. Although DDR2-2000, would be nice. ;)
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    Corrected.
  • Spoelie - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    ...populating only one channel? With dual channel bandwidth exceeding double the bandwidth of the fsb, I'm curious as to how a single channel with equal or more bandwidth than the fsb would perform.
  • Myrandex - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    Eh I hate it when people run dual channel boards in a single channel config. I remember a laptop review of the new Turion X2 and they were running it in single channel mode with onboard video. Heck where I work they do that all the time in the ATM systems that they manufacture. They pay for the dual channel chipset, yet they configure it to run in single channel mode.
  • YellowWing - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    Thanks for keeping the CPU clock constant this time. We get the chance to see what the memory is adding without having to factor out the CPU clock changes. I look forward to new straps for a completely even test environment.
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    You're welcome. All of your suggestions on making this a better memory test platform were very helpful. We need 1600 and 2000 memory straps right now with DDR3 boards. I sincerely doubt that it even occurred to JEDEC and motherboard makers that we would be caring about DDR3-2000 this early in the development of DDR3. The memory speed development of DDR2 seems almost glacial by comparison.
  • mostlyprudent - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    Although I did not participate in the discussion of the last article, I did follow it and want to tip my hat to Wes (and really all the AT authors) for being willing to engage readers in the comments and apply the feedback and critiques offered. This is why, IMHO, AT has continued to get better and better over the years.
  • qpwoei - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    As a critic of the last article, I'd like to chime in and say well done on this one as well. Unfortunately, I don't think you'll be seeing any > 1:1 ratios on external chipsets (ie: non-IMC) for a while, if ever. The design issues for making > 1:1 ratios really outweigh the benefits, especially in a system where the memory bandwidth is already twice the FSB bandwidth.
  • MadBoris - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    Hey wesley,

    I also wanted to say thanks for the more apples to apples comparison with DDR2. I think this is really of utmost importance to most folks before we start comparing DDR3 among other DDR3 modules. As exciting as DDR3 is as a technology we still want to see the real world performance improvement over DDR2 to justify for ourselves any price increase with new purchases, let alone the three fold price increase. If I get 3 to 4 percent less performance for 1/3 the price then that is a good purchasing decision for me. All new memory suffers from these teething pains, I just wanted them quantifiable.

    In further search for the real world comparison and the true advantages that DDR3 brings at it's current highest speeds comared to DDR2 at it's highest speeds(1066 in this case), I did have to flip back and forth between pages 4 and 7 several times. With page 4 using a 2.66 GHZ CPU clock frequency and page 7 using 3GHZ, a direct comparison in the benchmark numbers themselves wasn't possible due to the 10% CPU difference. Initially page 7 scores looked much better than page 4 until I factored in the 10% CPU difference. It took a few minutes to come to a method of distinguishing the real world advantage of DDR3 running at it's highest speeds, compared to DDR2 at it's higher speeds.

    basically, I came to the conclusion if 1333 is where DDR3 starts to get it's legs and surpass DDR2(as you state on page 4). Page 4 doesn't actually show the 1333 speeds of DDR2 in the chart (as none exists), but you can see there is a minor advantage in the two games emerging over the previous chart with 1066 DDR2. So then comparing DDR3 at 1333 to DDR3 at highest speeds on page 7 gives me a rough estimate of the "real world" performance of DDR3 at it's highest speed over what DDR2 has it's highest speeds (with an additional 1% tossed in as advantage over 1066 ddr2). All this extrapolation was necessary due to the 10% CPU difference. Not complaing, just stating a fact in trying to get to the real world benefits if I was going to by a platform today, and having to justify the cost/performance ratio.

    In the end, the real world benefit of DDR3 at it's highest speeds, compared to a P35 running DDR2 at it's highest speeds(both with fastest timings using 1333 as the cutoff where DDR2 is left behind) came out to about 3 - 5 percent real world gaming benefit in benchmarks of Far Cry and Quake 4. Obviously the synthetics showed much more, but they always do. All that of course is based on the reality that 1333 is where the performance shift takes place with the current fastest DDR2 and fastest DDR3, which is what I was after. To me, 3 - 5 percent definitely doesn't justify 3 times the cost of the memory yet, especially if a board supports both DDR2 and DDR3.

    Anyway, thanks for making an apples to apples comparison more possible in this review, even though not exact, I could extrapolate the necessary info I wanted. I'm sure as latency continues to lower on DDR3, than all this additional frequency will be worth something beyond the current meager benefits over DDR2 at 1066.
  • indeed - Tuesday, July 31, 2007 - link

    Is there any chance that we'll be seeing DDR2 1066 4GB packs with 2 modules any time soon?

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now