Final Words


Geil PC3200 Ultra X competes in every way with the fastest DDR memory we have ever tested. At DDR400, it is the fastest memory we have tested. In the 433 to 500 range it is competitive with the best memory we have tested. Finally, in the all important bandwidth area, the Geil Ultra X establishes a new record by reaching the speed of DDR561, which can only be considered an astounding range for a memory rated at DDR400. The Ultra X is one of the best memories ever tested at AnandTech and can be recommended to anyone looking for a fast DDR400 memory, which has the added advantage of such a wide bandwidth that it can also power a system overclocked to DDR550 with ease.

It is interesting that the fastest DDR memory we have tested is hitting the market just as Intel attempts to move its platforms to DDR2. We have already seen that DDR2-533 performs about the same as fast DDR400 to DDR433, so these new fast DDR modules keep DDR very much in the memory competition. These latest DDR400 2-2-2 memories are not just replacements for discontinued Winbond chips, as they provide performance and range that were only dreamed of when Winbond was king of high-speed memory. For the first time you can really choose from several DDR memories that do just about everything well - from the lowest latency at DDR400 to a broad bandwidth that will satisfy most users to beyond where their processors allow them to go. The only thing we might wish for is memory that will also do DDR500 at 2-2-2. The Geil won't do this, but the DDR500 timings it will do are much better than many DDR500-rated modules can actually achieve.

Our recommendations do not really change from our DDR400 2-2-2 roundup, but we do need to add Geil Ultra X to the highly recommended. Crucial Ballistix stills achieves the fastest timings we have seen across the bandwidth, but Geil Ultra X joins OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2 as a memory with the broadest bandwidth yet seen with any memory - particularly a memory rated at DDR400. Geil even surpasses the excellent OCZ Platinum Rev.2 by a few MHz at the top, but performance is close enough they should be considered basically equivalent, which is very high praise for Geil Ultra X.

The nice thing about the wealth of excellent choices in DDR400 2-2-2 memory is that the buyer finally gets to look at value in their DDR400 2-2-2 purchase. Since all of the DDR400 2-2-2 we recently tested goes to DDR500 you can shop for price among the seven available memories with assurance you will get the fastest DDR400 timings possible, with bandwidth to at least DDR500. If you want the widest bandwidth possible then you can choose between the Geil PC3200 Ultra X tested here and the equally excellent OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2.

In the more difficult area of memory for the Athlon 64, the Geil brings nothing new to the table. We found it behaved like Samsung memory tested in our roundup on the Athlon 64 platform, which means it tops out MUCH lower on the A64 than the Intel platform. Consider the A64 limit to be around DDR466 with this Geil Ultra X. That means for Athlon 64 systems, your best choices are still Crucial Ballistix or other Micron-based memory like OCZ 3500EB or 3700EB. The Micron-chip memory performs the same in our tests on either Intel or Athlon 64. If you prefer Samsung chips for your A64, then OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2 was the only Samsung dimm to reach DDR500, which was still far short of the DDR557 it reached on the Intel 875 platform.
Highest Memory Speed Performance
Comments Locked

19 Comments

View All Comments

  • qquizz - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    excellent read thanks Anandtech for the useful info
  • Avalon - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    Forgot to mention it was tested on an A64 rig. If you've got an AXP rig, lower latency might mean more. I should go test it out...
    Anyway, great article Wes! It's good to see Geil come out near the top. They make some great memory and are very under-recognized sometimes.
  • Avalon - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    I forget where I saw it, but I did see latency compared in a Doom 3 article. Low CAS 2 latency benefitted over CAS 2.5 by giving you roughly 2-3% more framerates. Which added up to about 1 frame. Since I can't quite remember where I found it, take this with a large boulder of salt :P
  • ciwell - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    I am wondering the same thing as #5. It would be very interesting to see a comparison between the Value RAMs and these.

    Anyways, great article.
  • Visual - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    This isn't really in the goals of this article, but I'm wondering, is the extra-low latency worth it at DDR400?

    Could you include a slow(Value RAM) memory from Kingston, Corsair or other, running at CAS 2.5 and 3 for comparison?

    I really wanna know if the extra $100 or so for a low-latency ram would give me noticeable difference.
  • pookie69 - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    Mr Fink!!!! Another GREAT READ!!!! I so LOVE these memory articles of yours. SO informative and give much food for thought.

    Thanks and keep up the gd work! ;)
  • Wesley Fink - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    #1 - Corrected. We are missing our Web Editor who is taking a well-deserved vacation.

    #2 - You make an interesting point. I was leaning toward Samsung TCCD chips, particularly based on the poorer overclocks on Athlon 64, but I agree there are some timings at certain speeds that don't really fit. Hynix also exhibits poorer A64 overclocks compared to Intel, so it is a possibility.
  • Zebo - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    Nice work Wes. To bad we don't know what chips they have...I'm leaning twards hand picked Hynix that can do 2-2-2 @ 200 by the way it mirrors it's brothers at higher bandwidth...in addtion to it's bandwidth.
  • KingofCamelot - Friday, August 20, 2004 - link

    Just a couple of things you might want to fix, on the bottom of page 2 it has the title "OCZ PC3200 Platinum Revision 2 Specifications" which should be "Geil PC3200 Ultra X Memory Specifications". Also on page 4 at 557DDR speed the Quake3 fps is missing a decimal and is listed as 43486 instead of 434.86 fps. Other than that great review, awesome looking ram man!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now