Corsair and OCZ: New Standards in Fast DDR2
by Wesley Fink on August 4, 2006 5:50 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Memory Test Configuration
In Conroe vs. AM2: Memory & Performance it was demonstrated that DDR2 memory performance, in timings and voltage, are equivalent on the AM2 and Core 2 Duo platforms. The first generation of AM2 on-processor memory controller does not support any memory timings below 3, while the Intel platform supports settings of 2 for RAS-to-CAS and RAS Precharge. In addition AM2 boards do not officially support DDR2-1067 as a memory speed option, which makes testing some of the newest DDR2 memories rated at DDR2-1067 very difficult. For all of these reasons, the Intel platform will be the test platform for DDR2 memory testing. Specifically, Core 2 Extreme, which has available memory ratios both up and down, is the platform of choice. When updates are made in the AM2 and Core 2 Duo markets the platform will be examined again.
The ASUS P5W-DH is the latest 975X board in the ASUS family and it fully supports the Core 2 processors. The P5W-DH Deluxe therefore replaces the P5W-D2-E premium used in past DDR2 reviews. A review of the updated ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe is available in the Conroe Buyers Guide on page three. The P5W-DH features similar memory options to the earlier versions, but since most of the Core 2 Duo/Extreme processors run at a quad-pumped FSB of 1067, the available options are particularly useful for benchmarking when a Core 2 chip powers the system.
Our memory test bench uses the following components:
We retested several recently reviewed memories on the P5W-DH since it is an updated board. It still uses the 975X chipset so memory bandwidth and timings did not change with the move to the ASUS P5W-DH. We did find, however, that game benchmarks using the same Presler 955 chip from past testing were 1 to 2 FPS faster on the newer board. It is also almost useless to compare benchmarks with Conroe to older results with Presler - since Core 2 Duo is as much as 35% to 40% faster than Presler. Therefore, the only results shown here are the two new memories tested on the X6800 platform. Previously reported timings and voltages are still useful and can be compared to new results, but performance results on Core 2 begin with this review
In Conroe vs. AM2: Memory & Performance it was demonstrated that DDR2 memory performance, in timings and voltage, are equivalent on the AM2 and Core 2 Duo platforms. The first generation of AM2 on-processor memory controller does not support any memory timings below 3, while the Intel platform supports settings of 2 for RAS-to-CAS and RAS Precharge. In addition AM2 boards do not officially support DDR2-1067 as a memory speed option, which makes testing some of the newest DDR2 memories rated at DDR2-1067 very difficult. For all of these reasons, the Intel platform will be the test platform for DDR2 memory testing. Specifically, Core 2 Extreme, which has available memory ratios both up and down, is the platform of choice. When updates are made in the AM2 and Core 2 Duo markets the platform will be examined again.
The ASUS P5W-DH is the latest 975X board in the ASUS family and it fully supports the Core 2 processors. The P5W-DH Deluxe therefore replaces the P5W-D2-E premium used in past DDR2 reviews. A review of the updated ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe is available in the Conroe Buyers Guide on page three. The P5W-DH features similar memory options to the earlier versions, but since most of the Core 2 Duo/Extreme processors run at a quad-pumped FSB of 1067, the available options are particularly useful for benchmarking when a Core 2 chip powers the system.
| Memory Configuration Options/ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe Motherboard | ||||||||
| Auto | DDR2-400 | DDR2-533 | DDR2-667 | DDR2-711* | DDR2-800* | DDR2-889* | DDR2-1067* | |
| FSB-1067 | X | X | X | X | X | X | X | X |
| FSB-800 | X | X | X | X | X | |||
| FSB-533 | X | X | X | |||||
Our memory test bench uses the following components:
| Memory Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor | Intel Core 2 Duo X6800 (Dual core, 2.93GHz, 4MB Unified Cache) |
| RAM | 2 x 1GB Corsair CM2X1024-6400C3 2x1GB OCZ Ti Alpha PC2-8000 VX2 |
| Hard Drive(s) | Hitachi 250GB SATA2 enabled (16MB Buffer) |
| System Platform Drivers | Intel - 8.0.1.1002 |
| Video Card | 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Standard Tests |
| Video Drivers | NVIDIA 91.31 |
| CPU Cooling | Tuniq Tower 120 |
| Power Supply | OCZ PowerStream 520W |
| Motherboard | Asus P5W-DH Deluxe (Intel 975X) |
| Operating System | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
| BIOS | AMI 903 (August 1, 2006) |
We retested several recently reviewed memories on the P5W-DH since it is an updated board. It still uses the 975X chipset so memory bandwidth and timings did not change with the move to the ASUS P5W-DH. We did find, however, that game benchmarks using the same Presler 955 chip from past testing were 1 to 2 FPS faster on the newer board. It is also almost useless to compare benchmarks with Conroe to older results with Presler - since Core 2 Duo is as much as 35% to 40% faster than Presler. Therefore, the only results shown here are the two new memories tested on the X6800 platform. Previously reported timings and voltages are still useful and can be compared to new results, but performance results on Core 2 begin with this review
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
18 Comments
View All Comments
epsilonparadox - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
That also is your opinion. To me an elitist is someone who demands a higher standard that the common folk. An elitist to me in the computer industry is someone who buys items that he/she knows will raise the level of standards among his peers. The items this person purchases doesn't necessarily have to be the most expensive but usually demands a higher premium because of the proven value.yacoub - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
Alas, labeling one an "elitist" has a distinctly negative connotation to it, and that is not an opinion, that is simply how it is (fact, if you will).So by discussing the term elitist, you further the point that those who seek the best bang for the buck are certainly not elitists in the commonly accepted sense. Not to mention your comment regarding a price premium also goes against the core ideology of the overclocker - ie, those who look for what is most cost-effective and NOT premiumly priced. Generally speaking they are items that (at least initially) are lesser-known and often rather cheap because their real potential is commonly unknown. If anything the nature of the overclocker is the opposite of your elitist, in that they are interested in taking common things and making them into superstars, instead of just buying premium-priced items that supposedly have better performance according to the manufacturer's marketing department.
rjm55 - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
I want, therefore I have.araczynski - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
thanks for a good read, i agree that the overclocking scale is looks like its designed by some marketing group, stop using that kind of junk.when shown in real scale those small differences are nothing.
jmke - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
Would be cool to see the charts start at scale 0, which would show the rather small impact of overclocking/getting higher rated memory modules. With a scale starting close to the min. score, the increase shown in the chart is not quite realistically represented ;)Did you run into weird results with: DDR2 PC4200 low timings vs DDR2 PC5300 medium/high timings ?
Spacecomber - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
Your comment beat me too it. I also was going to chide Anandtech for producing charts that dont have a scale starting from 0. You should stick to tables, if all you are trying to do is show the number of points difference between one speed to the next.Wesley Fink - Friday, August 4, 2006 - link
Tables are already included as a summary of results for each tested memory. The Corsir table is on page 4 and the OCZ on page 5. The charts are there to show the impact of memory speed scaling on performance, which is not well-illustrated in the table or in our common bar charts. We added a paragraph explaining that scales are reduced to better show the small differences in performance between these two memories.You are both right that charts using zero-based scales will make the differences appear smaller than the reduced scale charts, but we were trying to compare the small differences in the Corsair and OCZ. We do prefer zero-based charts and an explanation was definitely needed.
Googer - Saturday, August 5, 2006 - link
With the performance of these DIMMs being about the same it really comes down to price, warranty, and reliablity as the deciding factors when you are shopping for RAM.