Intel Performance Test Configuration
For consistency, we first tested on our standard Intel Pentium 4 Memory testbed. The hardware for evaluating OCZ 3700EB is the same used in our earlier reviews of DDR400 and faster Memory.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
All test conditions were as close as possible to those used in our earlier memory reviews.
| INTEL 875P Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | Intel Pentium 4 2.4GHz (800MHz FSB) |
| RAM: | 2 x 512MB OCZ 3700EB (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ 3500EB (DS) 2 x 512MB Mushkin 2-2-2 Special (DS) 2 x 512MB PMI4200 Gold (DDR533 DS) 4 x 256MB Samsung PC3700 (DDR466 SS) 2 x 512MB Kingmax DDR500 Hardcore Series (DS) 2 x 512MB Kingmax DDR466 Hardcore Series (DS) 2 x 512MB Corsair XMS4400v1.1 TwinX (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ PC4400 DC Kit (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ PC3700 Gold Rev. 2 (DS) 2 x 512MB OCZ 4200EL(DS) 2 x 512MB Mushkin PC4000 High Performance (DS) 2 x 512MB Corsair TwinX4000 PRO (DS) 2 x 512MB Mushkin Level II PC3500 (DS) 2 x 256MB Adata DDR450 (SS) 2 x 512MB Adata PC4000 (DS) 2 x 512MB Corsair PC4000 (DS) 2 x 512MB Geil PC4000 (DS) 4 x 256MB Kingston PC4000 (SS) 2 x 256MB Kingston PC4000 (SS) 2 x 512MB OCZ PC4000 (DS) 4 x 256MB OCZ PC3700 GOLD (DS) |
| Hard Drives | 2 Western Digital Raptor Serial ATA 36.7GB 10,000 rpm drives in an Intel ICH5R RAID configuration |
| PCI/AGP Speed | Fixed at 33/66 |
| Bus Master Drivers: | 875P Intel INF Update v5.00.1012, SATA RAID drivers installed, but IAA NOT installed |
| Video Card(s): | ATI 9800 PRO 128MB, 128MB aperture, 1024x768x32 |
| Video Drivers: | ATI Catalyst 4.5 |
| Power Supply: | Vantec Stealth 470 Watt Aluminum |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Motherboards: | Asus P4C800-E (875) with 1016 Release BIOS |
OCZ tests for 3-2-3 compatibility on nVidia nForce2/nForce3, VIA K8T800/Pro, Intel 865/875, and SiS 655TX chipsets. While we have found the fastest performance on Intel 865/875 to be achieved at Cycle Time or tRAS of 5, we have found that the best performance on nForce family chipsets is often achieved with a tRAS of 8 or even as high as 12.
Test Settings
We ran our standard suite of memory performance benchmarks. The following settings were tested with OCZ 3700EB:- 800FSB/DDR400 - the highest stock speed supported on 875/865 and K8T800/nF3/SiS755 motherboards.
- 866FSB/DDR433 - a common rating and overclock for high-speed memory.
- 933FSB/DDR466 - the rated speed of OCZ 3700EB.
- 1000FSB/DDR500 - a standard speed rating that we have used in testing the highest speed memory available.
- Highest Stable Overclock - the highest settings we could achieve with this memory and other memory that we have tested.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
12 Comments
View All Comments
nycxandy - Monday, June 21, 2004 - link
"OCZ is breaking new ground with their latest Enhanced Bandwidth series, and 3700EB extends the EB performance envelope. While rated at DDR466, we were able to reach a stable DDR524 on our Intel test bed and an even more remarkable DDR550 on our AMD nForce3-250 test platform."Does the 3500EB reach a speed higher than 510 (on the Intel platform) when paired with a nF3 or K8T chipset?
rustybx - Tuesday, June 8, 2004 - link
OCZ 4200EL was ~8% better than OCZ 3700EB on the Intel platform. Should the same be true for AMD?4200EL and 3700EB are nearly identical in price. Which will be faster on an MSI K8N (nForce3-250GB)?
Pumpkinierre - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
Good review and good to see the a64 well featured. Your o'clock/FSB results have two that are at the same HT and latency settings. So tentatively a comparison can be made. An increase of 30MHz (at the same CPU speed)on the A64 FSB shows a 262pt (12%) sandra fp (unbuffered) improvement. Unfortunately, this doesnt translate to the games (Q3 the best at 3%- 13.3fps) but your 1024x32bit setting may have been a bit harsh (I know...you get criticised if you run it at 640x480 but it is a memory test not a gpu). Intel shows better: For a 16MHz increase (DDR466 to DDR500) they get Sandra unbuf. fp increase of 258pt (8%) and a Q3 increase of 25.6 fps (7%) although this last result is also affected by cpu speed increase because the P4 is multiplier locked. You failed to include the UT and aquamark results for the Intel tests.So it is not as good as I hoped for the a64 but the memory bandwidth % increase is hopeful. If this doubles with dual bank memory and your tests are gpu restricted then this tweaking avenue may still be worth pursuing.
TrogdorJW - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
I would really like to see what sort of performance you were able to get from the Athlon 64 when using two sticks of RAM. I know that it's not a dual-channel motherboard, but in my experience, it is much more difficult to get the RAM to run at DDR400 with two DIMMs in an Athlon 64 board. If that's the case, it is imperative that we hear about it. No sense in considering OCZ or any other high-end (expensive) RAM if we're still going to be forced into running DDR333 by the motherboard.The flip side is also true: if OCZ EB RAM runs flawlessly with current Athlon 64 boards at DDR400 and even overclocked settings, I would love to hear it. I am looking at building an A64 3000+ system for a friend in the near future, and I want to know the best memory to get for A64 compatibility. Any advice would be appreciated!
ska - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
could you guys color differently the benchmarks of the curently reviewed piece of hardware? it's really great that there's so many benchmarks to compare from but after like 5 or 6 it's hard to figure out where the current motherboard/processor/RAM/video card stacks up to the rest of the benchmarks.bigtoe33 - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
If you are looking for the beta bios have a look here, http://www.bleedinedge.com/forum/showthread.php?t=...Wesley Fink - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
#5 -As specified in the Atlon 64 Test Configuration on p. 11, Chaintech supplied a Beta BIOS dated 5/07/04 with multipliers in the BIOS. We will provide more information on ratios in our review of the Chaintech which will appear next week. We are working on an nF3-250 roundup of Epox, Chaintech, Gigabyte, and MSI which should post next week.
Rich5 - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
How were you able to adjust the multiplier on the Chaintech VNF3-250 motherboard? I know that it's not (yet) adjustible in the bios - did you use the Clock Gen utility from wcpuid.com? From what I could see at their website, it only appeared that they had versions for motherboards with the nforce 3 150 chipset (and nothing specifically for Chaintech boards).Wesley Fink - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
#1 -When the dust settles we will upgrade our standard test video card, but it is too early to make that decision. We use a standard video card so results are comparable to past reviews. We do not change our test hardware just because soemthing new is out this week.
We have an X800 PRO in the motherboard test lab, but we are not ready to decide which card is our future standard yet.
Illissius - Wednesday, May 19, 2004 - link
I've seen such benchmarks, can't remember where though (possibly xbitlabs). IIRC it was in the context of a K8T800 Pro review. At any rate, performance is equivalent at 5x (1GHz) and 4x (800MHz), takes a (small) hit in some applications at 3x (600MHz), and only really starts becoming a major bottleneck at 2x (400MHz).