POST A COMMENT

40 Comments

Back to Article

  • woodspire - Thursday, June 29, 2006 - link

    What happen if instead of using 4x 512 memory you use 2 x 512 and 2 x 1024. Same speed (PC-3200), same timing, and even same brand.

    Still acheving dual channel ?
    Reply
  • qquizz - Saturday, December 10, 2005 - link

    Sounds great and all but a query at Pricewatch brought up a blank.
    Where can you buy the OCZ PC4000 EB Platinum Edition
    Reply
  • Hurricanesan - Friday, November 11, 2005 - link

    I'm looking for 2Gb memories for my new computer.
    I had an hard time choosing between the Corsair 3500LLPro and the OCZ 1024MB EB Platinum.
    This morning, I've noticed this test. Since the OCZ was able to go up to 500Mhz and I plan using an A8N32-SLI, the choice looked easy.
    But a friend of mine pointed out an old story in which OCZ was giving very good sample to the press and lesser products in the shops. I've looked about that story and now it seems to me that OCZ is really unstable in its production and not very clean ... or used to be.

    I would really not like to buy those memories and find that they can't stand their specification.

    Since right now it seems that both the Corsair and the OCZ are not available in stores less that 2 hours plane from me, I have a week to make up my mind.

    If anyone can help me balance one way or the other, please post.

    Reply
  • KriegsMaschine - Tuesday, November 29, 2005 - link

    OCZ is the best brand I'd say. I currently have Corsair Twinx C2Pro "2x512 ddr400 Cas 2.5" and it's good... but WAY TOO expensive for it's quality. You pay too much for the brand like you would by getting a cloth from a designer. OCZ have the best performance while having reasonable prices and quality stuff for Value, Mainstream and High-End. Their tech support is very good too, as all their products. My next PSU will be OCZ ModStream 450watts.

    Nice article. I was thinking these days about going from 2x512 to 4x512 with my Athlon64 since it's less expensive than 2x1Gb and generaly have better timing but after reading that 1T Command was impossible with 4 DIMMS... I changed idea!


    What would had been nice for the review would had been some more real game benchmarks. I mean not old stuff like Quake 3 because who care to have +20fps when you already got 550! Some newer stuff such as UT2003, FEAR, BF2, FarCry, HL2 would had been a better choice. To me those SuperPi, SandraMark... means almost nothing. All I want when getting such expensive rams is more FPS in games. Comparing 2x1Gb in 1T Command vs 2x1Gb in 2T Command would had been better too because don't you think 2x512Mb vs 2x1Gb is unfair? 0_o
    Reply
  • Shimmishim - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    what the heck? no 2x1 crucial ballistix? wow. i have a set that can do 290 mhz 1:1 with 3-3-3-7 timings and only 2.8 volts. Reply
  • leexgx - Saturday, November 05, 2005 - link

    do not think it was out then (or it was not sent to anandtech)

    i just got the Crucial 2GB DDR PC4000 Ballistix from overclockers and its less then £200 for this week only (norm £240) (got the A8N-SLI premium as well)

    i good to see that Ballistix stuff can do that

    i probley just set me X2 3800+ at 250 so me ram is doing the same (got it at 241 now on the cpu it norm runs at 200 so its an 410mhz oc {4600+ x2})
    Reply
  • ricleo2 - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    After some recommendations from the forum here, I just got 2 sticks of GSKILL PC4000 at one gig apiece to replace my OCZ 2 sticks at 512 Megs apiece in my MSI K8N SLI PLATINUM. After comparing benchmarking results, before and after, it was not even close. RMA already approved from NEWEGG. Reply
  • phidjit - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    It's 1024, with 2-3-2-5 timings and runs at DDR433, it seems like it would have been a better comparison to the Corsair "CMX1024-3500LL PRO" (also 1024, DDR443, but 2-3-2-6 timings).

    Anyone seen benchmarks for the gigaram mach10000?

    It looks like it could be a bargin.

    phidjit
    Reply
  • qquizz - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    These are the type of articles I come to AT to get. Thanks Wes. Reply
  • znir - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    Thanks for the information in the review. however, i think it would be good to see result of 4x512MB high performance sticks like the OCZ PC4000 VX. Reply
  • walmartshopper - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    Thanks for the review. I've been toying around with 4 sticks of Ballistix pc3200, only to get them running at 480mhz with 2.5-3-3-8 2T timings (I got 530mhz with 2 sticks at 1T). It's not too bad, but after reading this, I decided to replace them with the 2x1024 OCZ pc4000. I actually have 5 sticks of Ballistix, and I'm hoping to sell them for 50$ each. Anyone interested? Reply
  • AkumaX - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    I think on Page 2 when you were comparing 2T vs 1T you also meant 2x1024mb vs 4x512mb, rather than 2x512mb vs 4x512mb right? Reply
  • cryptonomicon - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    no, he's comparing the same ram to show how the memory controller goes to crap after you load up more than two dimms. the sticks were both 512x2 plat rev II Reply
  • TheInvincibleMustard - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    Nice, well-written article, Wesley. It seems slightly ironic to me, though, that this review comes out just as I'm expecting a 2GB kit from G.Skill via NewEgg to arrive tomorrow to replace my el-cheapo 2x512 (3-3-3-7 at DDR400? ick)

    Minor nit: pg 8
    "The performance differences will be that the NVIDIA 71.84 driver is a bit faster than the 61.77 and 71.84 drivers used in earlier memory reviews."
    Umm ... unless the driver is somehow faster than itself, I'm hoping that's a typo of sorts.

    -TIM
    Reply
  • n7 - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    I'm glad to see a review on 2x1024 MB; it was past due.

    I realize there aren't many DDR433 & up 2x1024MB RAM manufacturers, but i would have liked to have seen Crucial, Mushkin, Patriot, Geil, since they all make good DDR400 kits, & at least in Mushkin & Crucial's case, they also make DDR433 & up kits.

    To make it simple, i'd like to see a review with a few more companies involved :)
    Reply
  • rqle - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Isnt it a little unfair to say one brand highest speed obtain @ 2-3-2-7 is lower then some other brand higest speed obtain is higher cause of 3-4-3-7? I mean, if you set corsair at a more lax timing AND higher voltage wouldnt it do better? Some one fill me in. Cause i remember back in the old days, memory i bought that can do 2-2-3-6 at 2.5v that was rated at 400DDR would overclock and do much better the same timing and voltage of some-old brand 533DDR+. Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    From p. 5 of the review:

    "Increasing voltage beyond 2.7V did not allow us to go any higher in overclocking, nor did more relaxed timings allow us to push higher. The limit is DDR492 - very close to DDR500."

    We tried to go higher but DDR492 is the limit with the 1GB Corsair dimms we tested. As we stated in the review it is likely Corsair is using a different Infineon chip than OCZ and Gigaram, or they are binning for best performance in the DDR400 to DDR500 range. Gigaram and OCZ are probably also using different Inineon memory chips - or they are at the least using different binning methodologies.
    Reply
  • ozzimark - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    wow.. wesley, long needed article. however, some silly mistakes that i think i see :D
    first.. the gigaram oc'ing chart. max speed is put at 2-4-3-7.. are you sure it's not 3-4-3-7?
    also, the second speed is curiously 2-2.5-2.. where 2.5-3-2 is exepcted

    second, i know the difficulties of getting review samples, but where is the biggest name in 1gb sticks right now, crucial ballistix? i have seen many of these sticks do 280-300mhz.

    last, i remember the value ram overclocking article you guys had a while back. plan on going the same for 1gb sticks?
    Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    I went back to my test logs and corrected the misplaced values. DD436 is 2-3-2-7 and DDR556 is 3-4-3-7. The second value in all reported strings is RAS to CAS Delay in case anyone is confused by the notation.

    We hope to do a review of the Crucial Ballistix 1GB dimms in the near future. We haven't decided whether to do a Value 1GB roundup yet, but we will consider your suggestion.
    Reply
  • Ender17 - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    ;) Reply
  • Slaimus - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Does 4 single sided 512MB sticks behave the same as 2 double sided 1GB sticks? Reply
  • eastvillager - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Why would you buy these when the 2-3-2-5 sticks are readily available? Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    If you read the review you will see that ALL THREE of the 1GB dimms ran at 2-3-2 at DDR400 to DDR440 or so. They will all run 2-3-2-5, but we have shown in previous tests the the nForce 4 is fastest running a tRAS of 6 or 7. We ran 2-3-2-7 because it is faster than 2-3-2-5 on the nForce4. Try it for yourslef with memtest86 and differnet tRAS. Reply
  • Sunrise089 - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Possible minor typos aside, this article is a great change of pace from some of the recent technical write-ups here on Anandtech(cough:R520:cough). The quality of writing as well as the attempt to put the parts in perspective and give the big picture is much appreciated. With so many sites out there, I can go anywhere for simple RAM benchmarks, but for me it is much harder to find informed discussions about why the part being reviewed is a good idea/choice or not. I really felt this side of the story was lacking in the X1800 reviews and am glad to see it here. Reply
  • Houdani - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Page 3:
    quote:

    our overclocking clock frequency went up to DDR500 - 30 points higher.

    I think you meant DDR550.

    Page 4:
    In your table of memory, you list the 3 new sticks as 2x512. I think you meant 2x1024.
    Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Corrected. Thanks for bringing these to us. It's funny that they looked just fine at 3AM :-) Reply
  • Doormat - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Whether its worth it or not to invest heavily (these pieces arent cheap) in DDR1 tech if you've already got a pair of fast running 2x512MB sticks. You'll just have to buy DDR2 sticks in a year if you want the fastest stuff (an A64 M2-socket based chip). Reply
  • emilyek - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Lame. Why not a big review on the many available 2 and 2.5 cas DDR 400 sticks? The Geil, Patriot, OCZ, Gskill, and Corsair already top out at about 1k FSB when loosed up, and the timings on these RAMS sucks anyway. Reply
  • DrMrLordX - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    They've said it before, and I'll say it again: you just can't add every available DIMM variety to RAM tests. There's too much on the market, and many of the budget RAM types have wildly variable quality and performance. Reply
  • RockSolid - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    The RamGuy link on Page 5 is incorrect. Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    The published "ram guy" link is the one printed on the Corsair retail package. We also tried the link and it connects to the Corsair Help Forums.

    If you have another link please list it in the Comments.
    Reply
  • Madellga - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    I am using this OCZ kit (EL, not the one in the review) since August on a San Diego / DFI combo. It goes to 230@2.5-3-2 with 2.7V and 1T.

    I tried also 4 sticks (a friend bought it also) and we made to 220@2.5-3-2 with 2.7V and 2T.

    I didn't try above 230, as the OCZ Guy pointed the 230 to be the limit. I am using 180/200 or 166/200 to overclock the San Diego, leaving the memory between 220-230.

    It is rock solid, it can Prime all night without mistakes.

    I prefer to have more memory even if a bit slower - it is much worse to have Windows writting to the swap file.
    Reply
  • ElFenix - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    just to see how much the difference is when going from 1 gig to 2 gigs Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    We tested many applications with 1GB vs. 2GB of ram. BF2 greatly benefited, but nothing else we've tested so far really improved much with 2GB. That will likely change with the release of newer, more demanding apps and games that take advantage of the new dual-core processors.

    One High-Performance memory company told us that after they saw what 2GB did for BF2 they ran 1 vs 2 on every game they could get their hands on. The goal was to publish benchmarks to show the advantage of buyers using 2GB instead of 1GB - and sell more memory. They privately told us they also found no real performance improvement in anything other than BF2.

    We do expect 2GB/4GB will make a difference in multithreaded and true 64-bit apps in the future. Of course multi-tasking also normally benefits from more memory.
    Reply
  • Johnmcl7 - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    The only other game I've seen people recommending 2GB for is the FEAR demo but of course it's not final yet.

    Good read though, I thought the discussion on the A64 and the various ram issues was particiularly useful.

    John
    Reply
  • Margalus - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    2Gb make a good difference in WoW also. Reply
  • Vesperan - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    Wesley,
    the memory combinations on the 'Why 1GB Dimms?' page could be shown as a 2x2 matrix (with 2/4 dimms on one axis and 1T/2T on other). Performance at each combination could be shown - except of course for 4 dimms at 1T. Currently the article contrasts the 2 dimms and 1T combination with 4 dimms and 2T, could it be possible for you to add 2 dimms at 2T?

    I would just like see the effect of 1T to 2T, or 2 dimms to 4 dimms ceterus paribus - that is, all else being equal. While I dont think the missing combination (2 dimms at 2T) will undermine your arguments made, I would like to see how it fits into the overall picture.
    Reply
  • Phantronius - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    I did, BF2 runs so much better as a result Reply
  • Phantronius - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    1st!!! Honestly, since i've given up overclocking, I threw in 2 1gig Platnium Corsair XMS modules in my new Athlon 64 setup and it works fine and stable, couldn't give a shit if my "timings" are as *looot* as they could be. Reply
  • DigitalFreak - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    Well good for you Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now