Final Words

When OCZ EL PC2-8000 XTC was reviewed in early April the significance of the new Micron D memory chips was apparent. Here was the fastest DDR2 memory ever tested at AnandTech, and it also scaled easily to the new DDR2-800 speed to be supported by AM2 and Conroe, on to the DDR2-1067 future speed, and beyond to DDR2-1100. It reached those levels at the fastest memory timings we had seen with DDR2. This DDR2 memory was clearly the new DDR2 standard and we awarded the OCZ EL PC2-8000 XTC our Gold Editors Choice.

Of course this was before the launch of AM2 on the 23rd of May and the launch of the Core 2 Duo which is expected soon. AM2 was not really much of a performance boost, but Core 2 Duo is shaping up as one of the largest performance increases we have seen with a new processor in many years. Today, with AM2 and Conroe both using DDR2, everyone is interested in fast, low-latency DDR2. Memory based on the latest Micron D-die chips will meet the bill.

Buffalo FireStix PC2-8000C5 and Crucial Ballistix PC2-8000 are two new DDR2 memories based on Micron chips that are also rated at DDR2-1000. Performance of both is similar to OCZ EL PC2-8000 XTC. All three scale to around DDR2-1100 and provide excellent performance across the DDR2-667 to DDR2-1067 speeds that will appeal to new Core 2 Duo buyers. Neither one is quite as fast as OCZ EL PC2-8000 XTC but they are very close. Required timings for stable performance are generally the same to slightly slower than the OCZ.

If you want the top performer we have tested it is still the OCZ EL PC2-8000 XTC, but the Buffalo and Crucial are so close in performance that you can select among the 3 based on price. We also have two more Micron-based memories in for testing - both rated at DDR2-1066. In the near future we will see if the new Corsair PC2-8500 or Kingston HyperX PC2-8500 can challenge OCZ for the DDR2 memory throne. One thing is certain: with 5 top-performing memories that can easily reach DDR2-1067 you will have some real choices for memory in the Conroe/AM2 market.

We were able to test DDR2 memory using the DDR2-533, DDR2-667, DDR2-711, DDR2-800, DDR2-889, or DDR2-1067 memory straps available on the Asus P5W-DH motherboard. Since the Presler 955 Extreme Edition processor utilizes a 1066 MHz bus speed it allows us to use the 1:1 memory to FSB clock ratio when the front side bus speed is set to 266 MHz. Keep in mind that the Intel FSB is quad-pumped, which is why a setting of 266 yields a FSB of 1066 (4x266). DDR2 Memory on the Intel platform, however, is by definition Double Data Rate, so a 266 base setting is 533 (2x266).

To put current DDR2 performance into perspective, we were working with expensive DDR2-400 and DDR2-533 rated at 5-5-5-15 just 2 years ago. Today, using those same timings, we can reach DDR2-1100. Prices are also much cheaper for comparable speed grades. As we said in the introduction DDR2 has certainly been advancing despite the fact enthusiasts have largely ignored DDR2 memory. Enthusiasts are fortunate, however, that Intel and memory makers have not ignored DDR2 in the interim. Now that the top enthusiast platforms from both Intel and AMD will benefit from fast, low-latency DDR2 memory we have memories like these DDR2-1000 to DDR2-1066 rated 2GB kits to fuel our new Core 2 Duo and AM2 platforms.

Of the three DDR2 -1000 memories tested, it is clear that OCZ does provide value in their binning, PCB development and SPD programming. The OCZ remains top performer. Buffalo also did an excellent job, with their FireStix only slightly slower than OCZ. Crucial should have had the advantage in this round. As the retail arm of Micron, Crucial likely has preferred access to the excellent Micron DDR2 chips. However, while performance of the Crucial is very close to the other two, particularly in the DDR2-667 to DDR2-1000 range, Crucial Ballistix will likely benefit from more aggressive speed-binning or a bit more tweaking in the SPD.

Compared to any other DDR2 we have tested, however, these three DDR2-1000 memories (or the Corsair or Kingston DDR2-1066) are clearly at the top of the DDR2 market. Combining any of these excellent DDR2 performers with a new Conroe or AM2 would be a great purchase decision for enthusiasts, overclockers, and anyone else interested in realizing the full performance potential of their system.

Highest Memory Speed (Highest Ratio) Performance
Comments Locked

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • Wesley Fink - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link

    Crucial has advised AnandTech that "all of Crucial's memory products come with a lifetime warranty". We have updated the review to reflect this information on the Crucial warranty.
  • MacGuffin - Saturday, July 8, 2006 - link

    quote:

    DDR2 1067 (2:3) Performance


    It should read DDR2 1067 (1:2) Performance.
    This needs to be fixed on Page 10, along with the link on Page 9 that points to page 10, and the Article Index drop-down list.

    Excellent Review, nonetheless.
  • JarredWalton - Saturday, July 8, 2006 - link

    Fixed, thanks. :)
  • PLaYaHaTeD - Saturday, July 8, 2006 - link

    I thought since the front side bus of the 965 is 1066, it would be the 'Holy Grail' to have the memory running at 1066 as well. Wouldnt this make it synchronous again? What am i missing?
  • MacGuffin - Saturday, July 8, 2006 - link

    Synchronous Operation (meaning FSB:DRAM Ratio at 1:1)
    266MHz FSB -> 266MHz RAM Speed -> 533MHz DDR2

    The 1:2 Divider (which isn't synchronous) yields 1066MHz
    266MHz FSB -> 533MHz RAM Speed -> 1066MHz DDR2

    Am I right or have I gotten it wrong? I haven't used Intel since I got this Socket 754 I am typing on.
  • poohbear - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    hello, just wanna clarify if the a64 can actually use any of the extra bandwidth provided by ddr2 800+? is it only for bragging rights or is the a64 actually saturated for memory bandwidth & therefore this higher bandwidth provides performance improvements? thanks in advance.
  • Wesley Fink - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    The A64 does exhibit tremendous DDR2 bandwidth with the on-chip DDR2 memory controller, and memory bandwidth continues to improve as speed goes up. However, as we found in our testing of the AM2 in the DDR2 vs. DDR article, the AM2 design is not memory bandwidth starved, and the extra memory bandwidth makes almost no difference in real-world performance on the current AM2 platform. The improved memory bandwidth may make more of a difference in future AM2 designs.
  • lopri - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    I thought this issue was mentioned in the article but I couldn't find it when I re-read it. I know on intel system the memory running slower than 1:1 will result in small penalty, but how about memory running faster than FSB? I vaguely remember that I've heard somewhere it's better than 1:1 cause that way memory "pushes" or "rushes to" FSB. Another theory I've heard is that faster memory can make up for possible performance loss on FSB subsystem, leading to less CPU idle time. According to this review, regardless the ratio, the performance seems to increase linearly to memory speed increase.

    So the questions being:

    1. Is 1:1 the most ideal ratio without "waste"?
    2. Or a slightly higher memory speed than FSB (such as 4:5) better than 1:1, preventing possible CPU idle time and "pushing" the data at the same time?
    3. Or under the same CPU/FSB speed, the faster the memory the better the performance - indefinitely, taking advantage of faster memory speed?

    I would think No.3 doesn't make sense because of the very FSB. In the end the FSB has been what's limiting both CPU and memory on Intel system. How could the performance get benefit from 3:5? In an ideal world there should be waste of 2. (5 - 3 = 2) Is the performance even better with 1:2? I can't imagine the FSB system being only 50% efficient, but is that the case?
  • Gary Key - Saturday, July 8, 2006 - link

    Lopri,

    Please email me about this subject. Short story is 1:1 or 4:5 are your best ratios for the Intel platform at this time although this will change depending your choice of Conroe model. We will go over this in more detail shortly and I will respond here further once I complete some article testing.

    Thanks,
    Gary
  • Locust - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    Very good article, but I have a question. How come you guys did not review Corsair's PC8500 memory modules. I have been using 2GB kit(2x1GB) for over a month and getting timings comparable to OCZ's. DDR2 800 runs at 3-3-3-5 memory settings on same mobo.
    Best si DDR 1000 @ 4-4-3-8 @ 2.2 recommended voltage.

    Good to see more vendors offering these memory speeds, now let's just hope prices will get under $400 :-)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now