Performance Test Configuration

All seven Value RAM memories were tested on the DFI LANParty nF4 SLI-DR used in our most recent memory reviews. nForce4 is PCI Express, so we used the PCIe version of our standard nVidia 6800 Ultra for testing. Other components remain the same as used in the memory setup in Athlon 64 Memory: Rewriting the Rules. Performance was compared to the 5 top performing memories tested on this same platform in OCZ VX Revisited: DDR Updates on DFI nForce4 and Patriot DDR400 2-2-2/DDR533 3-4-4: Performance AND Value.

The A64 test bed includes components that have been proven in Socket 939 Athlon 64 benchmarking, such as the Socket 939 4000+ (same specifications as FX53), and the OCZ Power Stream 520 Power Supply. Since the Athlon 64 tests represent a new series of DDR testing, we are using the current generation nVidia 6800 Ultra video card for benchmarking. We have found the 6800 Ultra to be a particularly good performance match to nVidia motherboards.

All other basic test conditions attempted to mirror those used in our earlier Intel memory reviews. However, test results are not directly comparable to tests performed on the Intel test bed.

 AMD nForce4 Performance Test Configuration
Processor(s): AMD 4000+ (FX53) Athlon 64
(2.4GHz, Socket 939, 1 MB cache, Dual Channel, 1000HT)
RAM: Kingston KVR400X64C25/512 (DS) 2X512MB
Kingston KVR400X64C3AK2/1G (DS) 2X512MB
Mushkin PC3200 EM (DS) 2X512MB
OCZ PC3200 Value Series (VX) (DS) 2X512MB
OCZ PC3200 Gold (BH5) (DS) 2X512MB
OCZ PC3200 Premier (DS) 2X512MB
Transcend JM366D643A-50 (DS) 2X512MB

Patriot PC3200+XLBT (DS) 2X512MB
OCZ EL PC4000 VX Gold (DS) 2X512MB
Corsair TwinX1024-4400C25 (DS) 2X512MB
Crucial Ballistix (DS) 2X512MB
OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev 2 (DS) 2X512MB
Hard Drives: Seagate 120GB SATA 7200RPM 8MB Cache
PCI/AGP Speed: Fixed at 33/66
Bus Master Drivers: nVidia nForce Platform Driver 6.39
Video Card(s): nVidia 6800 Ultra 256MB PCIe, 256MB aperture, 1024x768x32
Video Drivers: nVidia Forceware 71.84 Release
Power Supply: OCZ Power Stream 520W
Operating System(s): Windows XP Professional SP1
Motherboard: DFI LANParty nF4 SLI-DR
BIOS: 3/10/2005 Release

In past benchmarking, we have found performance of the nForce4 and nForce3 chipsets to be virtually identical, and we have found AGP and PCIe performance to be virtually the same in the benchmarks that we use for memory testing. Therefore, you can also compare these results to TCCD benchmarks in recent memory reviews. The differences in results are that the nVidia 71.84 driver is a bit faster than the 61.77 used in earlier memory review. The DFI nForce4 platform is also a bit better at memory overclocking than the MSI K8N Neo2 used in past memory testing. The performance differences, however, are not large enough to negate performance comparisons.

With nForce3 motherboards, we achieved the fastest performance on AMD Athlon 64 chipsets (nForce3, VIA K8T800 PRO) at Cycle Time or tRAS of 10. However, the nForce4 appears to behave a bit differently with memory. Therefore, we ran a complete set of Memtest86 benchmarks with only tRAS varied to determine the best tRAS setting for these memories. We achieved the best bandwidth at tRAS settings ranging from 5 to 8, so a tRAS setting of 6 was used for testing wherever possible.

Test Settings

All AMD Athlon 64 processors are unlocked downward, and the FX CPUs are unlocked up and down. This feature allows a different approach to memory testing, which truly measures performance differences in memory speed alone. All tests were run with CPU speed as close to the specified 2.4GHz of the 4000+/FX53 as possible, with CPU speed/Memory Speed increased at lower multipliers to achieve 2.4Ghz. This approach allows the true measurement of the impact of higher memory speed and timings on performance, since CPU speed is fixed, removing CPU speed as a factor in memory performance.

The following settings were tested with the seven Value RAM memories on the DFI nF4 test bed:
  1. 2.4GHz-12x200/DDR400 - the highest stock memory speed supported on VIA 939/nF3-4/SiS755-FX motherboards.
  2. 2.4GHz-11x218/DDR436 - a ratio near the standard DDR433 speed
  3. 2.4GHz-10x240/DDR480 - a ratio near the standard rating of DDR466. Several of the Value Memories achieved stable performance at this speed and complete benchmarks were run at this speed with those memories.
  4. Highest Memory Performance - the highest memory bandwidth and game performance that we could achieve with the memory being tested. This is rarely the highest memory speed that we could achieve. It is normally a lower speed with 1T Command Rate and tighter memory timings.
Command Rate is not normally a factor in Intel DDR tests, but it is a major concern in Athlon 64 performance. A Command Rate of 1T is considerably faster on Athlon 64 than a 2T Command Rate. For this reason, all testing was at 1T Command Rate. Command Rate and voltage are reported for each memory speed setting.

We ran our standard suite of memory performance benchmarks - Quake 3, Return to Castle Wolfenstein-Enemy Territory-Radar, Super Pi 2M, and Sandra 2004 Standard and UnBuffered. We also included Everest Home Edition memory tests, free at www.lavalys.com, for read speed, write speed, and Latency.

The Memories Kingston KVR400X64C25/512
Comments Locked

102 Comments

View All Comments

  • wfn - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    err, what dvinnen said, i dont see atacom selling the value vx. they dont mention the actual part # anywhere on that page and the pics show 3-4-4-8 modules.
  • wfn - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

  • Wesley Fink - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    #28 - Corsair delined our request for Value RAM samples. We talk about this on page 2.

    'All the manufacturers supplied one or more samples for testing except Corsair. Corsair emailed us, stating that "Our policy is not to send Value Select parts for review for a variety of reasons. After a quick discussion here we decided to stick with that policy and sit this one out." '
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    Answering several emails: Value BH5 (OCZ PC3200 Gold) is available at Atacom for $194.95.

    http://www.atacom.com/program/print_html_new.cgi?c...
  • dannybin1742 - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    how come no corsair valueram was done? thats stuff is really cheap too, i use the pc3200 with my a64, runs like a champ and i got it for $92 from new egg (2 512 sticks)
  • Avalon - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    Value VX for the win, if you have the voltage and like overclocking...
  • ViRGE - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    It was a good article, but can I put in a request? 1GB modules are starting to get popular, even if they're not very OC-friendly at this point, enough so that it makes more sense at this point to pick up a pair of 1GB DIMMs than to fill a board with 512MB DIMMs. As such, can we get a roundup of the different major 1GB modules some time in the future?
  • bobsmith1492 - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    Well, it's not that big a deal getting the voltages on the DFI board; they're not that expensive.

    Anyway, is there any chance of a follow-up article, possibly with more ram types and maybe a few retail models?
  • xsilver - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    Wesley, This "review" was pretty bad due to a number of reasons
    1) you let the memory makers choose what ram you were going to review
    2) You tested memory at voltages that are way above most motherboard's capabilities 3.4 volts? only the DFI can do that .... This is a VALUE roundup.... WTF are you doing with a DFI and 6800 Ultra's?

    after what Anand said about the intergrity of anandtech I feel sorry for anand if he is reading this.....

    how about you actually get some of your own memory from corsair and stop letting them push you around? what about geil? kingmax? and others?
    and test memory at a SANE level of 2.7-2.8v

  • Teetu - Monday, April 11, 2005 - link

    I wish they would have done benchmarks with more modern games. I don't think quake 3 is the most practical bench anymore...

    At DDR400, you aren't going to see much difference between value and performance. I think if they did use doom 3, hl2, etc as benchmarks a lot of people would just get value ram (single digit fps increase with performance ram).

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now