Athlon 64 Memory: Rewriting the Rules
by Wesley Fink on October 1, 2004 12:45 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Test Results: Geil PC3200 Ultra X
To be considered stable for test purposes, Quake3 benchmark, UT2003 Demo, Super PI, Aquamark 3, and Comanche 4 had to complete without incident. Any of these, and in particular Super PI, will crash a less-than stable memory configuration.| Geil PC3200 Ultra X - 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 |
513.0 | INT 2598 FLT 2709 |
INT 6074 FLT 6033 |
81 | 110.3 |
| 11x218 | 438 DDR | 2-3-2-10 2.75V 1T |
511.2 | INT 2728 FLT 2920 |
INT 6446 FLT 6383 |
80 | 110.2 |
| 10x240 | 480 DDR | 2.5-3-3-10 2.8V 1T |
510.9 | INT 2863 FLT 3009 |
INT 6655 FLT 6560 |
80 | 111.2 |
| 9x267 | 533 DDR | 2.5-4-3-10 2.85V 1T |
523.1 | INT 2972 FLT 3201 |
INT 6902 FLT 6847 |
79 | 112.1 |
| 8x300(2.4GHz) | Highest Mem Speed 600 DDR |
3-4-3-10 2.85V 2T |
518.7 | INT 2842 FLT 3121 |
INT 6799 FLT 6715 |
79 | 111.3 |
| 9x275(2.48GHz) | HIGHEST Performance 550 DDR |
2.5-4-3-10 2.85V 1T |
537.5 | INT 3108 FLT 3319 |
INT 7129 FLT 7034 |
77 | 115.5 |
We were impressed when the Geil Ultra X had reached DDR561 in our earlier tests on the Intel 478 platform. We will have to search for a new adjective after the Ultra X hit DDR600 in Dual-Channel mode on the Athlon 64 Socket 939. Even though the speed is impressive, it is still worth noting that the best memory performance with the Geil was achieved at the lower DDR550 with a Command Rate of 1T. DDR550, 1T, 2.5-4-3-10 also allowed the Geil to reach over 7000 in the SiSoft Sandra Standard Buffered memory test.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
47 Comments
View All Comments
Zebo - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link
http://www.ocforums.com/showthread.php?t=328636mkruer - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link
If you get the chance, can you please test with 2GB of PC3200? I’m sure most would love to see what type of performance hit there will be with the larger modules vs. the smaller ones. Looking at the benches so far, it looks like even buying the cheap 1GB PC3200 modules will have negligible impact on the performance as long as the times are kept relatively low (under 3cls.) And one more big IF you could test 4x512 PC3200 with lower clock timings (2-2-2-5) vs 2x1024 PC 3200 with timings of (3-3-3-8) I’m sure that for the average user they would rather blow $400 for 2GB of slow memory then $400 for 1GB of fast memory.Zebo - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link
spensive!:(p/p is horrendous for this stuff. It's too bad you don't include micron/crucial 8t in there which can also clock to 260 for half the price.
Kishkumen - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link
I've loved all of these recent memory articles. For a while now, the current state of memory in general has been the fuzziest for me. Now I'm starting to get a clearer picture of where things are at and which direction to go. I'm still nursing along my old P4 Northwood, but the A64 plunge is imminent. Nice to see that memory development is keeping up at a strong pace what with 600 MHz speeds now a strong reality.RaistlinZ - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link
Thank you for the great article! From your tests it looks like the OCZ 3200 Rev.2 is the best of the best. It performed near the top in every test and edged out the Crucial Ballistix at the highest speeds.I guess my choice for a memory upgrade is clear now. :)
klah - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link
Seems you cut something off at the end of page 9"We have asked AMD to provide some insight into why we are "...
skiboysteve - Friday, October 1, 2004 - link
excellent article, ill keep this in mind when I upgrade... im still pluggin on a TbredB @ 2.2 w/ a modded 9500nonpro