Performance Comparisons

Performance of the three 1GB memories were compared to all of the memory recently tested on the DFI nF4 AMD Athlon 64 platform. Results are also generally comparable to earlier results on the nForce3 testbed using the AGP version of the same NVIDIA 6800 video card. The performance differences will be that the NVIDIA 78.01 driver is a bit faster than the 61.77 and 71.84 drivers used in earlier memory reviews.

We no longer test DDR on an Intel platform because all of the current Intel chipsets use DDR2 memory. However, the performance results that we found on the AMD Athlon 64 platform can be broadly compared to previous DDR benchmark results on the Intel 875 memory test bed. More results are available in recent DDR memory reviews at:

Mushkin Redline XP4000: Winbond with Voltage Be Damned
Value RAM Roundup: Computing On a Budget
Patriot DDR400 2-2-2/DDR533 3-4-4: Performance AND Value
OCZ VX Revisited: DDR Updates on DFI nForce4
OCZ VX Memory + DFI nForce4 = DDR533 at 2-2-2
Corsair 4400C25: Taking Samsung TCCD to New Heights
PQI & G. Skill: New Choices in 2-2-2 Memory
Athlon 64 Memory: Rewriting the Rules
OCZ 3700 Gold Rev. 3: DDR500 Value for Athlon 64 & Intel 478
Geil PC3200 Ultra X: High Speed & Record Bandwidth
= F-A-S-T= DDR Memory: 2-2-2 Roars on the Scene
Buffalo FireStix: Red Hot Name for a New High-End Memory
New DDR Highs: Shikatronics, OCZ, and the Fastest Memory Yet
The Return of 2-2-2: Corsair 3200XL & Samsung PC4000
OCZ 3700EB: Making Hay with Athlon 64
OCZ 3500EB: The Importance of Balanced Memory Timings
Mushkin PC3200 2-2-2 Special: Last of a Legend
PMI DDR533: A New Name in High-Performance Memory
Samsung PC3700: DDR466 Memory for the Masses
Kingmax Hardcore Memory: Tiny BGA Reaches For Top Speed
New Memory Highs: Corsair and OCZ Introduce DDR550
OCZ PC3700 Gold Rev. 2: The Universal Soldier
OCZ 4200EL: Tops in Memory Performance
Mushkin PC4000 High Performance: DDR500 PLUS
Corsair TwinX1024-4000 PRO: Improving DDR500 Performance
Mushkin & Adata: 2 for the Fast-Timings Lane
Searching for the Memory Holy Grail - Part 2

Corsair CMX1024-3500LL PRO, Gigaram 2GB Dual Channel PC-4200, and OCZ PC4000 1024MB EB Platinum were compared at 200x12 (2.4Ghz, DDR400), 218x11 (2.4Ghz, DDR438), 240x10 (2.4Ghz, DDR480), 266x9 (2.4Ghz, DDR533) and the Highest Memory Performance Settings that we could reach. With a constant CPU speed, memory comparisons (except for top performance) show the true impact of faster speed and slower memory timings on memory performance.

OCZ PC4000 1024MB EB Platinum Edition DDR400/2.4GHz Performance
Comments Locked

40 Comments

View All Comments

  • 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.
  • 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.
  • ElFenix - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

    just to see how much the difference is when going from 1 gig to 2 gigs
  • 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.
  • 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
  • Margalus - Wednesday, October 12, 2005 - link

    2Gb make a good difference in WoW also.
  • 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.
  • Phantronius - Tuesday, October 11, 2005 - link

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

    Well good for you

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now