Test Results: PQI 3200 Turbo

To be considered stable for test purposes, Quake3 benchmark, UT2003 Demo, Super PI, Aquamark 3, and RTCW had to complete without incident. Any of these, and in particular Super PI and Return to Castle Wolfenstein, will crash a less-than stable memory configuration.

Intel Test Results

PQI 3200 Turbo (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
400DDR800FSB 2-2-2-5
2.5V
337.5 INT 2845
FLT 2935
INT 4523
FLT 4515
129 71.7
433DDR866FSB 2-2-2-5
2.75V
364.8 INT 3172
FLT 3205
INT 4907
FLT 4902
120 77.6
466DDR933FSB 2-3-3-5
2.75V
381.5 INT 3236
FLT 3253
INT 5167
FLT 5165
113 81.5
500DDR1000FSB 2.5-3-3-5
2.75V
405.8 INT 3362
FLT 3395
INT 5557
FLT 5562
106 87.3
533DDR1066FSB 2.4-3-4-5
2.75V
423.0 INT 3599
FLT 3563
INT 5944
FLT 5903
100 91.1
556DR1122FSB 3-3-4-6
2.75V
443.0 INT 3643
FLT 3699
INT 6188
FLT 6183
96 95.3

PQI reached DDR556 on the Intel platform, which places it among the best DDR400 performers we have tested. The memory reached even higher overclocks on the AMD test bed.

AMD Results

PQI 3200 Turbo - 2 x 512Mb Double-Bank
CPU Ratio at 2.4GHz Memory Speed Memory Timings
& Voltage
Quake3
fps
Sandra UNBuffered Sandra Standard
Buffered
Super PI 2M places
(time in sec)
Wolfenstein - Radar - Enemy Territory fps
12x200 400 DDR 2-2-2-10
2.6V 1T
512.9 INT 2605
FLT 2796
INT 6091
FLT 6039
81 110.4
11x218 436 DDR 2-3-2-10
2.7V 1T
512.1 INT 2725
FLT 2906
INT 6446
FLT 6368
81 110.1
10x240 480 DDR 3-3-3-10
2.7V 1T
513.0 INT 2849
FLT 2977
INT 6627
FLT 6545
80 110.6
9x267 533 DDR 3-4-3-10
2.75V 1T
517.2 INT 2930
FLT 3159
INT 6910
FLT 6821
80 111.5
8x298(2.38GHz) Highest Mem Speed
596 DDR
3-4-3-10
2.8V 2T
514.7 INT 2916
FLT 3099
INT 6765
FLT 6685
80 110.7
9x285(2.57GHz) HIGHEST
Performance
570 DDR
3-4-3-10
2.75V 1T
551.4 INT 3172
FLT 3413
INT 7402
FLT 7282
74 119.1

The PQI 3200 Turbo is also based on the latest Samsung TCCD chips. The latest TCCD chips appear to perform much better on Athlon 64 than the first TCCD samples tested in =F-A-S-T= DDR Memory: 2-2-2 Roars on the Scene.

PQI reaches DDR596 at the highest memory speed, very close to DDR600. Highest performance was achieved at a Command Rate of 1T at DDR570.

Test Results: G. Skill TCCD Performance Comparisons
POST A COMMENT

10 Comments

View All Comments

  • adamofwales - Thursday, November 11, 2004 - link

    I am considering purchasing a matched pair 1024MB total, of the PQI Turbo 2700, 2-2-2-5 timings, (PQI2700-1024DAL) and I was wondering, do you think that it will overclock as well as the 3200 with the same timings? I read somewhere that the PQI 2700 Turbo 2-2-2-5 512x2 will run at 2-3-2-5 at 3200 speeds.

    What do you think?
    Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Saturday, October 16, 2004 - link

    #3 - We have NEVER implied you need an FX53 to review memory. We have , however, stated the need for a standardized memory test bed and the FX53 is the CPU we have chosen. The trends over spped would apply to any Athlon CPU since they are all unlocked below the stock speed.

    Others - We are planning a Value RAM roundup in the near future - after the huge number of new equipment launches for the rest of October. Since every memory vendor now has a Samsung TCCD memory it should be clear that TCCD is now at the top in almost everyone's mind. Samsung TCCD chips are also expensive, which is why we have reviewed alternative brands based on those chips.
    Reply
  • MadAd - Thursday, October 14, 2004 - link

    yup, i have to agree

    Its difficult to complain at the tremendous quality of memory reviews here at AT but I too believe it would be useful to have a catchup on how the other half of the memory market is shaping up.

    If it was a case of 'this months exculsive is next months mainstream is a 6 months time bargain' like gpu/cpu/etc then it wouldnt matter so much, but its not, leaving a gap in the product review landscape.

    Infact, what is value ram at all these days? Lower speed binned chips from a recent stepping silicon (like gpu) or seperatly RND'ed low cost engineering or even lower purity processes?

    You see, theres an article in the making already :)
    Reply
  • CalvinHobbes - Tuesday, October 12, 2004 - link

    I'd love to see a comparison of cheaper memory as well. I'm in the market for some new ram and I just want to know if I can spend $170 for 1GB or is it really worth while to spend the $245+ for the 2-2-2 stuff. Reply
  • Zebo - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link

    Sup Concillian;):P

    It's almost like AT only reviewing FX's and EE's on the processor side.

    I really feel AT is doing a diservice to the community by continually pimping this overpriced RAM in every review. Even for overclcokers this holds true, since much budget ram scales the same as the boutique ram when pushed..albeit with mybe a little looser timings and a little slower.

    But sure as heck ain't 100% slower to justify boutiques ram 100% price premium. Especially when most users are on fixed budget and thier money is better spent on a better video card, more HD space or something else.

    But comming to AT, as a builder, you'd think this overpriced RAM is your only choice since that's all they like present and are getting your budget jammed on the front end for almost nothing in return.:(
    Reply
  • Zebo - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link

    Would you guys *PLEASE* test some budget ram like crucial 8T to show what a ripoff this boutique stuff is price/performance wise? Reply
  • Concillian - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link

    It is very interesting to see the very high performance results of the best memory out there. However, I feel it would be useful to compare this to some of the common forms of value memory.

    As a consumer about to go spend hard earned dollars on a new motherboard/CPU/RAM, the question I ask myself is:

    Is it worth it to spend the bucks on super fast memory, or do I spend about HALF and get decent PC3200 CAS 2.5 value memory from the likes of OCZ, Mushkin, or Corsair and use a memory divider when overclocking an A64.

    In reality, the typical memory showcased here on Anandtech is very expensive, roughly twice the price of typical value memory.

    When you can get an A64 2800+ and motherboard for around $200, I can't be the only one questioning whether $250-$300 just on a gig of memory to overclock a $200 mobo/CPU combo, when closer to $150 may work almost as well. I can't help but wonder if the extra ~$150 (or a nearly 40% increase in cost of the total package mobo + CPU + 1gig RAM in this case) is really worth the system performance.
    Reply
  • Uff - Monday, October 11, 2004 - link

    This is the second memory test that claims that you need an FX-53 to test memory speed because it's completely multiplier unlocked. I don't see you going above the multiplier 12 anywhere in these tests, thus you could do the exact same thing with 3400+ (2.4GHz version), 3700+ or 3800+, as all the AMD CPUs are multiplier unlocked downwards.

    Secondly, do you have any further information on the Corsair 2-2-2 sticks? My own tests have shown they can barely run at 3-4-4-10@218MHz fsb and fail to reach 240MHz at any timings :(
    Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Sunday, October 10, 2004 - link

    The timings used at each speed are included in the Test Results tables on pages 6 and 7.

    There is only so much information you can include in a chart before it gets too confusing, but we always include timings and voltages for each speed in the Test Results tables.
    Reply
  • AkumaX - Sunday, October 10, 2004 - link

    nice article! were all different memory speeds (actual: 200, 233, 250, 275) at 2-2-2-5|10 also? Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now