=<em>F-A-S-T</em>= DDR Memory: 2-2-2 Roars on the Scene
by Wesley Fink on August 5, 2004 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Test Results: Kingston HyperX PC3200 Low-Latency
To be considered stable for test purposes, Quake3 benchmark, UT2003 Demo, Super PI, Aquamark 3, and Comanche 4 had to complete without incident. Any of these, and in particular Super PI, will crash a less-than stable memory configuration. Return to Castle Wolfenstein - Enemy Territory is proving to be a sensitive benchmark for memory testing. We have included results for RCW-ET using the Radar benchmark.| Kingston HyperX PC3200 LL (DDR400) - 2 x 512Mb Double-Bank | ||||||
| Speed | Memory Timings & Voltage | Quake3 fps | Sandra UNBuffered | Sandra Standard Buffered | Super PI 2M places (time in sec) |
Wolfenstein - Radar - Enemy Territory fps |
| 400DDR 800FSB |
2-2-2-5 2.5V |
330.5 | INT 2876 FLT 2929 |
INT 4552 FLT 4515 |
129 | 70.5 |
| 433DDR 866FSB |
2-2-2-5 2.75V |
358.0 | INT 3159 FLT 3179 |
INT 4904 FLT 4917 |
119 | 76.7 |
| 466DDR 933FSB |
2-3-3-6 2.75V |
374.5 | INT 3158 FLT 3197 |
INT 5193 FLT 5188 |
113 | 81.0 |
| 500DDR 1000FSB |
2.5-3-36 2.75V |
400.2 | INT 3359 FLT 3363 |
INT 5545 FLT 5549 |
106 | 86.8 |
| 508DDR 1028FSB |
3-3-4-7 2.85V |
397.2 | INT 3323 FLT 3310 |
INT 5649 FLT 5554 |
107 | 86.0 |
Kingston HyperX certainly lived up to its name in our tests of 2-2-2 DDR400. Performance was very comparable across the board to all of the top DDR400 based on the same Samsung chips. If Kingston were the only memory that we were testing, we could easily conclude it is one of the fastest DDR400 memories that we have tested, with incredible headroom to DDR508. It is clearly the equal of the Corsair 3200XL that we tested, which is certainly not faint praise.
The four DDR400 memories based on Samsung chips were almost the same in performance except for the OCZ, which showed remarkable headroom compared to the others. In the range from DDR400 to DDR500, all of the Samsung DDR400 modules perform very similarly.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
47 Comments
View All Comments
Anemone - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Would love to see OCZ do further expansion on the EL or EB area of DDR2. I'm sure it's at lower limits (the timings of DDR2 stink really), but if anyone could push them as low as possible I'd expect OCZ to do it.Anemone - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Yeah OCZ seems to have their stuff where it counts.I'll note this highlights an issue that's caught my eye, and that is in the furor over the AMD64 chips, its less visible just sometimes how much "special stuff", ie choice memory modules, it takes to keep the AMD platforms running at top speed. On the Intel side of the fence you can plug just about anything in and get some speed, but in many cases that's still a guessing game for the AMD stuff. Given how that plays out a year or two down the line when you want to buy just an upgrade part or two, I'm kind of a fan of the "just buy the latest Superbytes mem module XXX and plug and go" kind of usefulness, which I see 'more' on the Intel side of things, and I do mean 'more' not 'only'.
Also want to mention that lately tending to see more enthusiasts aiming for as much as 2gb of memory, and when you get there, the AMD controllers seem to not fly as much as with lower amounts, losing as much as 10% of their performance.
Blah, no easy choices here imo.
ceefka - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Great review. For those of us who want to build a 939, we'd love to see the next article. We apparently have a lot of RAM to choose from.Now on the theoretical side: How would the best DDR2 perform? What would the differences be? Can these results justify AMD's choice to ignore DDR2?
Bozo Galora - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Another very timely review.You are now answering questions for me in advance - lol.
Color changes for reviewed items better, but as a nitpick, it might be cool to continue colors to the names of mem also, not just the bar??? Dark green needs to be a lighter color - like pink. 2 greens not friendly.
Anyway thanx fella.
cnq - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
Wesley,Can you comment on the 2.5-2-2 timings past DDR500 of the Crucial? It seems slightly fishy, considering that you used their PC3200, which is lower-binned than their PC4000...and even the 4000 is only rated at 2.5-3-3 at DDR500.
Is it possible that Crucial sent you a cherry-picked sample for review?
Anyone else out there own a set of the Ballistix care to comment?
JustAnAverageGuy - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
catchy title=F-A-S-T=
A bit unprofessional maybe, but catchy :)
shady06 - Thursday, August 5, 2004 - link
OCZ = smokin