Conclusion
The pace of innovation in the computer market is sometimes astounding. Just four days ago we posted a performance review of the new Intel P35 chipset that introduced DDR3 memory. Our DDR3 test DIMMs for the launch were rated DDR3-1066 7-7-7-21. They would overclock to the new DDR3-1333 speed at 9-9-9-25 timings. We expected the quick introduction of DDR3-1333 modules at 9-9-9 timings, since that is one of the reasons for owning a P35 board. However, we did not expect true lower latency DDR3 for several weeks or months.
Kingston has certainly surprised us with the launch of low-latency DDR3 rated at DDR3-1375 even before the P35 boards officially launch at Computex on June 4th. Not only is this Kingston rated at the higher 1375 speed, but it has rated timings at 1333 that equal the best timings available at 1066 with our launch DDR3 memory. That is certainly rapid development, but it is easy to understand when put in perspective. At the high launch prices only early adopters will be tempted by DDR3. This is particularly true when you consider that fast, cheap DDR2 in the P35 motherboards actually performs better in the overlap speeds than the launch DDR3.
Memory makers introduce new products to sell them, and they are keenly aware that potential buyers need a real reason to buy DDR3, and that reason has to be more than just getting a new technology. The reasons people upgrade are faster speeds and better performance than any available on DDR2, and lower latency that allows performance just as good as or better than DDR2 in areas where speeds overlap.
Kingston has hit a home run in both areas, and Kingston KHX11000D3LLK2 achieves timings as low as 5-4-3-10 at DDR3-800 and 6-5-5-12 at 1066 - both at a very modest 1.7V to 1.75V. Performance at these overlap speeds is now roughly on par with the fastest DDR2 running in a new P35 board supporting DDR2. The P965 running the same low latency DDR2 is outperformed by any of the new Intel P35 chipsets running DDR2 or DDR3 memory. At the upper end the new Kingston can reach DDR3-1520 with stability and a magic DDR3-1500 at the tight timings (considering the speed) of 7-7-7.
This low-latency memory manages timings close to the theoretical limits of 5-3-3 at DDR3-800, and it is clear from the performance of this early low-latency DDR3 that buyers will not have to give up any performance in their migration to DDR3. Timings at other speeds are also the best seen to date with DDR3, but there will undoubtedly be even lower latency DDR2-1066 and DDR2-1333 in the future.
Kingston's DDR3-1333 with lower latency timings has given early adopters who will buy new and future technology at any price a reason to buy Kingston KHX11000D3LLK2. Lower latency and higher speeds are required for DDR3 to stand out, and Kingston delivers both.The caveat, of course, is "at any price". However, DDR3 won't really take hold in the market until prices for DDR3 are no longer a 2 to 3 times DDR2 premium. Until they drop to near parity with DDR2 there is no reason to buy a DDR3 P35 motherboard when you can buy a DDR2 P35 motherboard that performs just as well and memory that costs significantly less.
Intel themselves have created this dilemma by supporting both DDR3 or/and DDR2 on the P35 chipset. The P35 is faster than the current P965 and 975X and buyers would move to it for that reason. However, the ability to keep current fast DDR2 which will perform very well on the P35 gives reason to carefully consider whether to buy a P35 with DDR2 support or a P35 supporting DDR3. If that option were not available you might buy DDR3 for the higher P35 performance as well as the future memory technology.
It's refreshing, though, to have Intel consider the pricing and desirability of DDR3 on the new P35, if that is indeed what happened. We suspect though that a market driven by OEMs demanded DDR2 support for price, with DDR3 support ready for a switchover when the prices drop. Whatever the reason the dual support has the advantage of choice for best value or best future-proofing. Unfortunately there is also the downside of higher chipset power consumption since both DDR3 and DDR2 memory interfaces are active whether they are used or not. Hopefully Intel and manufacturers can find ways to correct this undesirable side effect with something as simple and universal as a future BIOS update.
Kingston deserves congratulations for being the first to market with low-latency high speed DDR3. Kingston KHX11000D3LLK2 does exactly what it promises and then some. It gives buyers not so concerned about price the DDR3 performance and higher speeds to choose DDR3 for the future. However, most buyers will wait a while for DDR3 prices to drop, as they surely will. Kingston is the first low-latency high-speed DDR3, but it is certainly not the last. It is good, however, to be first to market with a quality DDR3 product.
The pace of innovation in the computer market is sometimes astounding. Just four days ago we posted a performance review of the new Intel P35 chipset that introduced DDR3 memory. Our DDR3 test DIMMs for the launch were rated DDR3-1066 7-7-7-21. They would overclock to the new DDR3-1333 speed at 9-9-9-25 timings. We expected the quick introduction of DDR3-1333 modules at 9-9-9 timings, since that is one of the reasons for owning a P35 board. However, we did not expect true lower latency DDR3 for several weeks or months.
Kingston has certainly surprised us with the launch of low-latency DDR3 rated at DDR3-1375 even before the P35 boards officially launch at Computex on June 4th. Not only is this Kingston rated at the higher 1375 speed, but it has rated timings at 1333 that equal the best timings available at 1066 with our launch DDR3 memory. That is certainly rapid development, but it is easy to understand when put in perspective. At the high launch prices only early adopters will be tempted by DDR3. This is particularly true when you consider that fast, cheap DDR2 in the P35 motherboards actually performs better in the overlap speeds than the launch DDR3.
Memory makers introduce new products to sell them, and they are keenly aware that potential buyers need a real reason to buy DDR3, and that reason has to be more than just getting a new technology. The reasons people upgrade are faster speeds and better performance than any available on DDR2, and lower latency that allows performance just as good as or better than DDR2 in areas where speeds overlap.
Kingston has hit a home run in both areas, and Kingston KHX11000D3LLK2 achieves timings as low as 5-4-3-10 at DDR3-800 and 6-5-5-12 at 1066 - both at a very modest 1.7V to 1.75V. Performance at these overlap speeds is now roughly on par with the fastest DDR2 running in a new P35 board supporting DDR2. The P965 running the same low latency DDR2 is outperformed by any of the new Intel P35 chipsets running DDR2 or DDR3 memory. At the upper end the new Kingston can reach DDR3-1520 with stability and a magic DDR3-1500 at the tight timings (considering the speed) of 7-7-7.
This low-latency memory manages timings close to the theoretical limits of 5-3-3 at DDR3-800, and it is clear from the performance of this early low-latency DDR3 that buyers will not have to give up any performance in their migration to DDR3. Timings at other speeds are also the best seen to date with DDR3, but there will undoubtedly be even lower latency DDR2-1066 and DDR2-1333 in the future.
Kingston's DDR3-1333 with lower latency timings has given early adopters who will buy new and future technology at any price a reason to buy Kingston KHX11000D3LLK2. Lower latency and higher speeds are required for DDR3 to stand out, and Kingston delivers both.The caveat, of course, is "at any price". However, DDR3 won't really take hold in the market until prices for DDR3 are no longer a 2 to 3 times DDR2 premium. Until they drop to near parity with DDR2 there is no reason to buy a DDR3 P35 motherboard when you can buy a DDR2 P35 motherboard that performs just as well and memory that costs significantly less.
Intel themselves have created this dilemma by supporting both DDR3 or/and DDR2 on the P35 chipset. The P35 is faster than the current P965 and 975X and buyers would move to it for that reason. However, the ability to keep current fast DDR2 which will perform very well on the P35 gives reason to carefully consider whether to buy a P35 with DDR2 support or a P35 supporting DDR3. If that option were not available you might buy DDR3 for the higher P35 performance as well as the future memory technology.
It's refreshing, though, to have Intel consider the pricing and desirability of DDR3 on the new P35, if that is indeed what happened. We suspect though that a market driven by OEMs demanded DDR2 support for price, with DDR3 support ready for a switchover when the prices drop. Whatever the reason the dual support has the advantage of choice for best value or best future-proofing. Unfortunately there is also the downside of higher chipset power consumption since both DDR3 and DDR2 memory interfaces are active whether they are used or not. Hopefully Intel and manufacturers can find ways to correct this undesirable side effect with something as simple and universal as a future BIOS update.
Kingston deserves congratulations for being the first to market with low-latency high speed DDR3. Kingston KHX11000D3LLK2 does exactly what it promises and then some. It gives buyers not so concerned about price the DDR3 performance and higher speeds to choose DDR3 for the future. However, most buyers will wait a while for DDR3 prices to drop, as they surely will. Kingston is the first low-latency high-speed DDR3, but it is certainly not the last. It is good, however, to be first to market with a quality DDR3 product.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
42 Comments
View All Comments
goinginstyle - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
How did you arrive at the 1520 DDR3 memory speed? FSB increase from 8x333 or a memory ratio change. Do you have any overclocked DDR2 memory scores on the P965? It would be interesting to compare overclocked DDR2 to DDR3.Wesley Fink - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
You can look back at the Corsair Dominator memory review where we ran benchmarks at the highest overclock we could achieve. THe review is at http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=291...">http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.aspx?i=291.... THere are also overclocked test scores that can be compared in any of our more recent DDR2 reviewsWesley Fink - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
From the 1333 memory setting we overclocked to 380x8, or 3.04GHz. At that OC, with a base 1333 memory setting, the memory speed is 1520.One reader pointed out that 7x380 is also 2.66, which is our test frequency at other speeds. That is correct and it is an intriguing idea to also run all benchmarks at the 380x7 speed. We'll consider for a comparison in an upcoming review.
goinginstyle - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
So it is very possible that the improvements in scores came from the increase in cpu speed and not the memory or it is a combination of both? How close can you get to 1333 memory speed at 8x380 so we know how much improvement there is in cpu speed over the increase in memory speed.
That is what has been confusing to me. Why not run at 7x380 to keep the CPU at the same speed so we can see how much performance is gained in running the memory higher. The one flaw is the increase in FSB speed would alter the scores if the app responds to cpu throughput improvements. I would suppose that would be minimal in the game testing but it would throw off the sandra scores. Does high memory speeds at high latencies beat stock memory speeds at low latencies?
The article yesterday mentioned 1t command rates. Did you try 1t to see what happened with the Kingston memory? You used to report Everest scores and I was wondering if those scores are available or maybe Memtest if you use it. I think it would be interesting to see latency numbers in the article.
Wesley Fink - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
Our standard procedure has been to test to the highest available memory setting, in this case 1333, and then overclock as far as we can go using this base memory setting. It is just a fortunate accident that 1520 was top OC here (and it still wasn;t the fastest results - 1500 7-7-7 was faster)which is also 7x333 or the same 2.66 used in the other memory speed tests. It would not likely hit that exact number again in future DDR3 reviews.yuchai - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
the 1520 speed is probably achieved by a 380 x 7 = 2660 configuration, so processor speed remains constant while the RAM runs at 1520 speeds.That said I'm surprised at the big improvement from 1333 to 1520, especially compared to the relatively small difference between 1333 and 1066.
goinginstyle - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
If that is the case then how do we know how much the FSB increased the score or how much the memory affected the results. I still think it is important to show overclocked DDR2 if they are going to show overclocked DDR3.
Chunga29 - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
I wish that you were correct, but looking at the tables at least on says "8x380" - page 4. So it's not apples to apples. The text never talks about how fast the 1520 RAM speed is, likely because that's partly due to a 14% CPU overclock.While we're at it, where are the numbers for P965 with 1333 FSB? We've seen overclocking results on P965 with bus speeds as high as 2000+, so don't give us any excuses about it not being possible. Using ratios, you can come somewhat close to DDR2-800 and DDR2-1066, and if you're throwing in overclocked DDR3 scores anyway.... At least let us see what DDR2 can achieve on P965 with a decent effort. Sure, it's out of official spec, but then DDR2-800 with 3-3-3 timings isn't JEDEC spec either.
Wesley Fink - Friday, May 25, 2007 - link
The 7x380 and 8x380 results are in a comment below and will be added to the OC section in a table.As for the P965, it was not designed to run 1333 processors or DDR3 memory, so there is no 1333 CPU raio available or any memory ratio above 1066. While it is true you can run a 25% overclock at 1333 FSB, the memory is also overclocked 25% from whatever ratio you selected. Even if you OC and select to get close to 1333 you will be running different memory straps on the P35 and P65 which definitely impacts results. It is very difficult to fairly compare P965 to P35 at speeds above 1066.
At 1333 FSB the DDR2 memory is OC'ed from the 1066 base to 1333, and we don't have a single stick of DDR2 that is stable at 1333. An 800 speed base on P965 at 1333 would be DDR2-1000, which should be compared to what on the P35? Try to select OC vlues on your P965 board to see what we are talking about here.
You are correct that it is is not impossible to come up with something somewhat close in a P965 test, it is just everything on the P965 would be overclocked while P35 would be running in spec. We can always compare an overclcoked P965 to a spec part, but is that more like justification for a P965 purchase than a revealing comparison.
We will likely run some more P965 tests just to answer questions here, but we will only be including overlap speeds, where comparisons can be fairly made, in future reviews. There are also a multitude of P965 OC results in reviews out there for those that are interested.
Zaitsev - Thursday, May 24, 2007 - link
I noticed this as well. It just seems odd because the jump from 1066->1333 is 267MHz, while 1333->1520 is 187MHz. In Far Cry and Quake 4 that translated into 10.91 and 8 more frames per sec. respectively. Did I miss something in the article or can someone explain why a smaller increase in MHz yielded a larger improvement?Oh, I see now that the processor is overclocked.