POST A COMMENT

41 Comments

Back to Article

  • jermaink - Tuesday, July 12, 2005 - link

    I'm just wondering what cooling was used for this RAM at the high voltages. I'm thinking of getting some, and I'm wondering if using a Zalman FB123 in 'silent mode' would be sufficient. Reply
  • melgross - Monday, May 30, 2005 - link

    Well, here's something interesting for the DDR2 is too expensive crowd:

    http://www.eet.com/news/semi/showArticle.jhtml;jse...
    Reply
  • Spajky - Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - link

    @ fitten (#18): >there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't< TRUE !
    I have a very special way of testing OC-ed hardware if is stable, check my site ...

    @ Barkuti (#22): >A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice< I Agree, by maybe adding another test program for testing them, see my proposal downthere ...

    Using Sandra mem.bench: the problem is that 95% of people do not understand properly, what are those results Sandra gives them & do not know how much impact have on real life PC performance. So for ordinary user, Sandra mem.benchmark tells a s**t!

    My (research) article "about BENCH´ING MEMORY -real life"
    with WinRAR´s built_in benchmark & hardware test" - on my site:
    some tests/benchmarks & explanation HOW IT WORKS, is here directly:

    http://freeweb.siol.net/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm

    [especially the yellow column is interesting!]
    /sorry, I didn´t make any graphs/
    Reply
  • Spajky - Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - link

    @ fitten (#18): >there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't< TRUE !
    I have a very special way of testing OC-ed hardware if is stable, check my site ...

    @ Barkuti (#22): >A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice< I Agree, by maybe adding another test program for testing them, see my proposal downthere ...

    Using Sandra mem.bench: the problem is that 95% of people do not understand properly, what are those results Sandra gives them & do not know how much impact have on real life PC performance. So for ordinary user, Sandra mem.benchmark tells a s**t!

    My (research) article "about BENCH´ING MEMORY -real life"
    with WinRAR´s built_in benchmark & hardware test" - on my site:
    some tests/benchmarks & explanation HOW IT WORKS, is here directly:

    http://freeweb.siol.net/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm

    [especially the yellow column is interesting!]
    /sorry, I didn´t make any graphs/
    Reply
  • Spajky - Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - link

    @ fitten (#18): >there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't< TRUE !
    I have a very special way of testing OC-ed hardware if is stable, check my site ...

    @ Barkuti (#22): >A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice< I Agree, by maybe adding another test program for testing them, see my proposal downthere ...

    Using Sandra mem.bench: the problem is that 95% of people do not understand properly, what are those results Sandra gives them & do not know how much impact have on real life PC performance. So for ordinary user, Sandra mem.benchmark tells a s**t!

    My (research) article "about BENCH´ING MEMORY -real life"
    with WinRAR´s built_in benchmark & hardware test" - on my site:
    some tests/benchmarks & explanation HOW IT WORKS, is here directly:

    http://freeweb.siol.net/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm

    [especially the yellow column is interesting!]
    /sorry, I didn´t make any graphs/
    Reply
  • Spajky - Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - link

    @ fitten (#18): >there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't< TRUE !
    I have a very special way of testing OC-ed hardware if is stable, check my site ...

    @ Barkuti (#22): >A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice< I Agree, by maybe adding another test program for testing them, see my proposal downthere ...

    Using Sandra mem.bench: the problem is that 95% of people do not understand properly, what are those results Sandra gives them & do not know how much impact have on real life PC performance. So for ordinary user, Sandra mem.benchmark tells a s**t!

    My (research) article "about BENCH´ING MEMORY -real life"
    with WinRAR´s built_in benchmark & hardware test" - on my site:
    some tests/benchmarks & explanation HOW IT WORKS, is here directly:

    http://freeweb.siol.net/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm

    [especially the yellow column is interesting!]
    /sorry, I didn´t make any graphs/
    --
    Regards , SPAJKY ®
    mail addr. @ my site @ http://www.spajky.vze.com
    3rd Ann.: - "Tualatin OC-ed / BX-Slot1 / inaudible setup!"
    Reply
  • Spajky - Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - link

    @ fitten (#18): >there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't< TRUE !
    I have a very special way of testing OC-ed hardware if is stable, check my site ...

    @ Barkuti (#22): >A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice< I Agree, by maybe adding another test program for testing them, see my proposal downthere ...

    Using Sandra mem.bench: the problem is that 95% of people do not understand properly, what are those results Sandra gives them & do not know how much impact have on real life PC performance. So for ordinary user, Sandra mem.benchmark tells a s**t!

    My (research) article "about BENCH´ING MEMORY -real life"
    with WinRAR´s built_in benchmark & hardware test" - on my site:
    some tests/benchmarks & explanation HOW IT WORKS, is here directly:

    http://freeweb.siol.net/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm

    [especially the yellow column is interesting!]
    /sorry, I didn´t make any graphs/
    Reply
  • Spajky - Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - link

    @ fitten (#18): >there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't< TRUE !
    I have a very special way of testing OC-ed hardware if is stable, check my site ...

    @ Barkuti (#22): >A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice< I Agree, by maybe adding another test program for testing them, see my proposal downthere ...

    Using Sandra mem.bench: the problem is that 95% of people do not understand properly, what are those results Sandra gives them & do not know how much impact have on real life PC performance. So for ordinary user, Sandra mem.benchmark tells a s**t!

    My (research) article "about BENCH´ING MEMORY -real life"
    with WinRAR´s built_in benchmark & hardware test" - on my site:
    some tests/benchmarks & explanation HOW IT WORKS, is here directly:

    http://freeweb.siol.net/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm

    [especially the yellow column is interesting!]
    /sorry, I didn´t make any graphs/
    Reply
  • Spajky - Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - link

    @ fitten (#18): >there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't< TRUE !
    I have a very special way of testing OC-ed hardware if is stable, check my site ...

    @ Barkuti (#22): >A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice< I Agree, by maybe adding another test program for testing them, see my proposal downthere ...

    Using Sandra mem.bench: the problem is that 95% of people do not understand properly, what are those results Sandra gives them & do not know how much impact have on real life PC performance. So for ordinary user, Sandra mem.benchmark tells a s**t!

    My (research) article "about BENCH´ING MEMORY -real life"
    with WinRAR´s built_in benchmark & hardware test" - on my site:
    some tests/benchmarks & explanation HOW IT WORKS, is here directly:

    http://freeweb.siol.net/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm

    [especially the yellow column is interesting!]
    /sorry, I didn´t make any graphs/
    Reply
  • Spajky - Tuesday, May 24, 2005 - link

    @ fitten (#18): >there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't< TRUE !
    I have a very special way of testing OC-ed hardware if is stable, check my site ...

    @ Barkuti (#22): >A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice< I Agree, by maybe adding another test program for testing them, see my proposal downthere ...

    Using Sandra mem.bench: the problem is that 95% of people do not understand properly, what are those results Sandra gives them & do not know how much impact have on real life PC performance. So for ordinary user, Sandra mem.benchmark tells a s**t!

    My (research) article "about BENCH´ING MEMORY -real life"
    with WinRAR´s built_in benchmark & hardware test" - on my site:
    some tests/benchmarks & explanation HOW IT WORKS, is here directly:

    http://freeweb.siol.net/jerman55/HP/benchMem.htm

    [especially the yellow column is interesting!]
    /sorry, I didn´t make any graphs/
    Reply
  • Joepublic2 - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link

    #30, I don't know. You could probably get an anwser if you asked at http://mersenneforum.org/. Reply
  • fitten - Tuesday, May 17, 2005 - link

    #29 Is it exhaustive? Does it check for the 'bad' values for sin, cos, tan, atan, div, sqrt, etc? Or does it just check against the operations and data required for Prime95 to do its thing? Reply
  • Joepublic2 - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    #28, prime95 explicitly tests for rounding errors of the nature you described. It ensures that all 80 bits of the floating point value that are returned are equal to the precalculated value in the program's database. Reply
  • fitten - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    #20 and #26, yes, those programs can give you *some* sense of security but neither are exhaustive tests. As #26 says, even parts running at their rated/spec'd speed can have problems that just weren't detected by the manufacturor (but this is really rare). You don't necessarily need registered modules, btw... just ECC ones. Registered modules deal with other problems (having enough drive on the bus to operate the modules properly, for example).

    As far as returning bad results, some errors can be purely data related. An oversimplified example is that the CPU adds 2+2 and gets 5 (not that this particular example will happen, but there are circuit timings inside the CPU that are data related). Odds are, if you are playing a game, the screen gets a pixel the wrong color or some geometry isn't quite right for a frame but both are too fast to notice. Just remember that 'distance' is the operating parameter of the CPU clock speed. The longest path through the CPU (in a clock driven circuit - which most CPUs are) determines the maximum clock speed. Only one path through one pipeline stage in the whole CPU has to be too long to run at your overclocked speed for the thing to be unstable when that one data+execution occurs.

    Anyway, to each his own. Overclock if it gives you pleasure, just don't recommend it as something for someone else to do without giving plenty of disclaimers about it. As I said before, I used to overclock everything but then I decided it really wasn't worth it. Bragging rights just became a non-issue for me and if I needed a faster CPU that bad, I could just buy it and not have to worry about it (nearly as much).
    Reply
  • Zebo - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    I wonder if they'll sued by redline? I used to have redline bikes as a kid.
    http://www.redlinebicycles.com/
    Reply
  • PrinceGaz - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    #17- if stability is paramount to you, then you should be using a system with registered parity memory modules as they pretty much guarantee you won't get any errors from them. That's why they are almost invariably used by businesses in mission-critical servers. Anyone who uses unbuffered non-parity modules runs the risk of data corruption very occasionally even if they don't overclock.

    Myself, I've used unbuffered non-parity modules for many years because they're cheaper and faster and as far as I know they have never caused me any problems, apart from an incident last year when a memory stick went bad and corrupted lots of important data before the system crashed with a by then all but unrecoverable hard-drive. I hope it won't happen again as it was a nightmare at the time, and I wasn't even overvolting the module (a stick of Crucial/Micron) which went bad.

    The only way to be truly safe is with registered parity modules.
    Reply
  • Zebo - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    Ballistix is better than TCCD under 255Mhz.. TCCD above that. IMO both are more desirable in that they run low volts any mobo can push.

    If you want to talk about discount UTT this is where its at: http://shop2.outpost.com/product/4292564

    Only $60 a stick. See here for performance.
    http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php...
    Reply
  • xsilver - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    zebo's comments are VERY pertinent, also consider
    ocz value vx (OCZ4001024WV3DC-K) can still be tempting, considering almost half the price -- the dfi is also a must as most people haven't tested limits of it using max voltage levels of other boards (2.8v?)

    also are ballistix cheaper than any available TCCD's ?? -- are ballistix > TCCD or TCCD > Ballistix ??
    Reply
  • Zebo - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    In all fairness Barkuti, he is testing the memory max capabilites at the highend which is impossible to do w/o some processor variance due to memory variations. i.e. all memory clocks to different levels.

    But in general I agree it paints a picture of highend ram as a "have to have" to realize these performance increases when in fact processor speed is playing a more signifigant part.
    Reply
  • Barkuti - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    Nice memory review Wesley. However, there's something "flawed" on it, like in all past memory reviews.

    Your measurements for highest CPU/memory performance aren't done right, because you should try to minimize CPU/LDT clockspeed differences between the tested memory platforms - I mean, use the damn memory dividers. There's still a lot of misinformed people about the issue, but you should all know, THERE'S NO PERFORMANCE PENALTY FOR USING MEMORY DIVIDERS ON Athlon 64.

    For example, on your past "OCZ VX Revisited: DDR Updates on DFI nForce4" memory review, you settled for 318 MHz on OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev. 2 modules. At 9x multiplier ratio (1:1 LDT/MEM), that translates into approximately 2862 MHz CPU clockspeed. That was compared to 10x267 MHz for the 4000 VX Gold, which translates into a much lower value of 2670 MHz CPU clockspeed. Despite the incredible disadvantage the VX memory still got a superb result.
    But if you had used some dividers to equalize CPU clockspeed, you could have set, assuming 2862 MHz as the absolute top clockspeed for the CPU, the same LDT frecuency and CPU multiplier for the VX modules, and a RAM divider of 5/6; that would have translated into 265 MHz RAM clockspeed, close enough to the max.
    The combination of increases in CPU and LDT clockspeeds would have rendered a noticeable increase in top performance for the VX platform, leaving TCCD memory in the dust.

    A retest for the not that high clockspeed modules would be nice.

    Cheers
    Reply
  • devonz - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    Ok, maybe I'm missing something, but there seems to be no mention of active cooling being necessary for the OCZ VX modules. Is that correct and why would there be such a difference between the two if they are basically the same chips at the same voltage? Reply
  • Joepublic2 - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    #18, thats why you use memtest86+, prime95 and some type of looping 3d-demo (or the games you play) to confirm stability. My processor has 25% increase over its nominal clock frequency at the default voltage (overvolting is what wears out dialectrics and causes electromitigration, increasing the frequency alone doesn't put any additional stress on the silicon). My motherboard has a 30% increase over the nominal frequence at the default voltage. And my graphics card has a 16% increase on the core and a %10 increase on the memory, but I don't push it because it already runs so damn hot. And yes, I can notice a difference, although admitably only when archiving, extracting and encrypting very large files and when playing demanding 3d games (the only taxing things that I do with my computer). If I did any scientific calculations, CAD/CAM or rendering, it would make a perceptible difference as well. I haven't ever had a program crash, return a bad result, or had the computer crash, either. Reply
  • Tujan - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    Buffered,Non-Buffered Ram ?

    Is this two physically different ram modules.? Certainly would want the Buffered results seen if where to have a choice bearing on performance.

    Say you purchase 'Redline ''Buffered''""...or Redline ''unbuffered'"" .

    What they do here,physically remove the 'unbuffered modules,and replace with 'buffered modules.

    The NF4 supports 'buffered,or unbuffered memories ? This is a specific setting to make sure within the BIOS ?
    Reply
  • fitten - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    #17, there is no such thing as "super stable". It's either stable or it isn't. Having "one memory related crash per week" is not a stable system. Besides, with overclocking, the best result you can get is a hard crash because then you know for sure you've pushed something too far.

    (Before anyone starts yapping about Windows or the like crashes happening more than stability crashes, my Windows XP boxes - I have 3 that run 24/7 - have uptimes as long as the times between patches that require reboots - granted, that isn't as long as I'd like - or power outages - which we've had two in the past month that were down for longer than my UPSs could keep the machines running.)

    I used to overclock everything all the time, then I learned a few things about circuits, CPUs, and digital hardware in general and I also grew up. Stability for me is more important than any 10% overclock that I could ever get. Even if I could get a 100% overclock at the cost of stability, I wouldn't take it.
    Reply
  • JonB - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    On a moderately OC'd DDR motherboard at normal voltages, wouldn't these be super super stable? I know the price is extreme, but some applications (like video or sound editing) need stability first, then speed. If it could stop just one memory related crash per week, the extra money would be worth it. Reply
  • ksherman - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    is it possible to compare DDR1 to DDR2 in these tests? Ive always heard that they were slower because of the latency, but sometimes here on Anandtech, slower sometimes means 3-5% difference, which isnt much... Reply
  • erinlegault - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    I think the true test of extreme ram will be once we see some OC tests on the Athlon 64 X2. I'm sure two processors can make use of the higher memory bandwidth.

    Also, looking ahead. Does anybody feel that the active ram cooling of the Abit AN8 Fatal1ty SLI mobo is enough to cool this ram?
    Reply
  • JustAnAverageGuy - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    #12

    Welcome :)
    Reply
  • Brian23 - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    I agree with Zebo Reply
  • Wesley Fink - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    #1 & #3 - Our Editing engine is inserting spaces randomly. The original does not have these hiccups. Thanks for listing the locations of the extra spaces - they have been corrected. We are trying to find and correct the problem with the inserted spaces Reply
  • jmke - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    I agree with you completely Zebo; is an increase of 2-5FPS in an already OLD game like Wolfenstein worth $300 (memory + ddr booster/new motherboard)?

    I don't think so
    Reply
  • Zebo - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    My above comments excludes cyber-athletes participating in cyber olympics. Mainly geared twards average enthusiast at AT. Reply
  • Zebo - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    As usual almost no difference with increased bandwidth:

    At 2400Mhz same timings:
    DDR400 though DDR533 are virtually identical, less than 5% within one another on the largest game, wolf.

    It is'nt until you bump processor speeds (which I never liked this testing method for memory) do the numbers begin to change signifigantly with added bandwidth. Due to bandwitdh? nope, due to running 2.72Ghz A64 instead of 2400Mhz.

    Anyway I think these sticks are a waste of $ for the most part. Primarly due to the fact you must push signifigant volts though them and fan them and maybe destory them if not well learned. Noise and only DFI can provide this voltage eliminates lots of people. One is much better off IMO with low volts TCCD or some crucial 8T running 2-2-2 ~200Mhz at low volts all day without the noise of additional ram cooling.

    thumbs down to extreme modules.
    Reply
  • cryptonomicon - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    VX/REDLINE/UTT is nice and everything, but I don't get why people will buy it since BH and CH based models are much cheaper and perform very similarly with a bit less voltage, and can also run stock at 2.6v-- which makes them incredibly flexible. best ram ever. Reply
  • bersl2 - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    #5: http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid...

    The point of that thread is to show that in *real-world* situations, the measurable effect of 2T over 1T seems to be no more than 3%. Also keep in mind that at 2T, you can OC the RAM higher and tighten your other timings, and thus you can OC well with 4 sticks or more than 1G of RAM.
    Reply
  • flatblastard - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    Nice review....I couldn't help but notice that in most of the benchies that mattered, hi-po ddr400 2-2-2 was at the top of the charts. Especially OCZ Plat Rev 2 and Crucial Ballistix....kinda makes me wonder if DFI mobo with high voltage ram is just a big waste of time and money. Reply
  • Shinei - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    Which thread? As far as all AT benches have shown, 2T cripples performance on Athlon 64 testbeds...

    Anyway, great review, but I gotta wonder just what we're going to be doing to cool our cases in a few years--active cooling for the RAM, northbridge, CPU, and video card (the latter two of which account for 150+W)... Why do I get the feeling that I'm going to turn on my computer one day, and there'll just be a tiny mushroom cloud where the case used to be?
    Reply
  • Lonyo - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    Any hopes of some 2T command rate testing/overclocking potential-ing?
    A thread has shown 2T makes very little difference to performance, but may help overclocking a bit, so mabye we could see if this stuff can be pushed even further?
    Reply
  • JustAnAverageGuy - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    P1: "OCZ st arted it all with their VX series memory."

    P2: Redline is available as DDR433 (PC3500) p arts.

    For these reasons, Mushkin Redline memory was only tested on the DFI LANP arty nF4 SLI-DR Athlon 64 Socket 939 test bed.

    P3: The Mushkin Redline XP4000 was tested with the DFI LANP arty nF4 SLI-DR Athlon 64 Socket 939 motherboard.

    We have found the 6800 Ultra to be a p articularly good performance match to NVIDIA motherboards

    Don't worry though, all those macros are spelling error free ;)
    Reply
  • classy - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    Great performance, but the price is really high. Especially considering the fact the OCZ 3200 Gold is not far behind and is almost $100 cheaper. Reply
  • screech - Monday, May 16, 2005 - link

    typo 2nd word o.0 Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now