Corsair Dominator PC2-10000: Fastest DDR2
by Wesley Fink on January 31, 2007 2:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Memory Test Configuration
Recent memory testing has used the ASUS P5D-DH Deluxe, which is based on the Intel 975X chipset. We did all initial testing on that platform, to provide results that can be conveniently compared to earlier test results. However, with the evolution of the Intel P965 chipset and the NVIDIA 680i, it is clear that higher memory speeds can be achieved with different memory "straps" used for the highest ratio settings on those chipsets. The P5W-DH Deluxe is very demanding of memory at high speeds and the "looser" base ratios used at the top of most P965 and 680i boards allow higher memory overclocks with some memory modules.
This is another way of saying that some recently released memory is tweaked for and performs best on the Intel P965 platform. This is truer today as the P965 has slowly matured into a chipset providing much better memory compatibility, performance, and flexibility than was seen on early P965 motherboards.
Recently the NVIDIA 680i chipset has demonstrated an even greater range of performance at the top of memory overclocking, with extremely flexible options for squeezing the most performance from almost any memory. A cross-section of Enthusiast memory manufacturers was also asked which motherboard performed best with their top DDR2 memory. In all cases the answer that came back was the NVIDIA 680i motherboard.
For these reasons, we recently revised test procedures in DDR2 memory reviews. In the new procedure standard memory performance and overclocking are first tested on the ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe. This allows valid comparisons to earlier reviews of DDR2 memory on the Core 2 Duo platform. We then run overclocking tests only on the NVIDIA 680i test platform, using the same X6800 Core 2 Duo processor.
The Intel platform was used because the first generation of AM2 on-processor memory controller does not support any memory timings below 3, or memory speeds above DDR2-800. Both these features are supported on the ASUS 975X motherboard. Timings of 2 are available for RAS-to-CAS and RAS Precharge, and DDR2-1067 is an available memory ratio. In addition it was clearly illustrated in Conroe vs. AM2: Memory & Performance that DDR2 memory performance, in timings and required voltage, are equivalent on the AM2 and Core 2 Duo platforms.
The memory test bench uses the following components:
We will continue this test procedure until we can fully evaluate the NVIDIA 680i and recent Intel P965 boards as a potential replacement for the Intel 975X as our memory test platform. Our testing has shown different straps at high memory speeds can yield memory bandwidth results that may vary as much as 20% at the same memory speed - particularly in the standard buffered Sandra 2007 memory bandwidth test. Variations in Unbuffered Sandra tests, Super Pi, and real-world game tests are much smaller with different straps at the same memory speed, however, with small variations near the accuracy limits of our test procedures.
Test results have also shown with some memory the P965 and/or NVIDIA 680i performed much better than the 975X in memory speed, but where the P965/680i performance was still the same or less than the 975X. The ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe appears the more demanding platform in terms of memory straps, but it also often yields better performance at the same memory speed. Testing will continue to look more closely at the impact of memory straps on performance and memory test platforms will be revised with the move to Vista.
Value DDR2-800 kits from both G.Skill and Super Talent were recently reviewed. Since those two memories are really a different category than top-line DDR2, results for those two memories are not included in comparisons in this review. For comparisons of performance of those two memories you can refer to the linked reviews.
Recent memory testing has used the ASUS P5D-DH Deluxe, which is based on the Intel 975X chipset. We did all initial testing on that platform, to provide results that can be conveniently compared to earlier test results. However, with the evolution of the Intel P965 chipset and the NVIDIA 680i, it is clear that higher memory speeds can be achieved with different memory "straps" used for the highest ratio settings on those chipsets. The P5W-DH Deluxe is very demanding of memory at high speeds and the "looser" base ratios used at the top of most P965 and 680i boards allow higher memory overclocks with some memory modules.
This is another way of saying that some recently released memory is tweaked for and performs best on the Intel P965 platform. This is truer today as the P965 has slowly matured into a chipset providing much better memory compatibility, performance, and flexibility than was seen on early P965 motherboards.
Recently the NVIDIA 680i chipset has demonstrated an even greater range of performance at the top of memory overclocking, with extremely flexible options for squeezing the most performance from almost any memory. A cross-section of Enthusiast memory manufacturers was also asked which motherboard performed best with their top DDR2 memory. In all cases the answer that came back was the NVIDIA 680i motherboard.
For these reasons, we recently revised test procedures in DDR2 memory reviews. In the new procedure standard memory performance and overclocking are first tested on the ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe. This allows valid comparisons to earlier reviews of DDR2 memory on the Core 2 Duo platform. We then run overclocking tests only on the NVIDIA 680i test platform, using the same X6800 Core 2 Duo processor.
The Intel platform was used because the first generation of AM2 on-processor memory controller does not support any memory timings below 3, or memory speeds above DDR2-800. Both these features are supported on the ASUS 975X motherboard. Timings of 2 are available for RAS-to-CAS and RAS Precharge, and DDR2-1067 is an available memory ratio. In addition it was clearly illustrated in Conroe vs. AM2: Memory & Performance that DDR2 memory performance, in timings and required voltage, are equivalent on the AM2 and Core 2 Duo platforms.
The memory test bench uses the following components:
| Memory Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor: | Intel Core 2 Duo X6800 (x2, 2.93GHz, 4MB Unified Cache) |
| RAM: | 2x1GB Corsair Dominator PC2-10000C5DF 2x1GB Corsair Dominator PC2-8888C4D 2x1GB OCZ PC2-9200 Flex XLC (DDR2-1150) 2x1GB Patriot DDR2-1066 2x1GB Super Talent DDR2-1000 2x1GB Team DDR2-1000 2 x1GB Corsair CM2X1024-6400C3 2x1GB OCZ Ti Alpha PC2-8000 VX2 |
| Motherboards: | ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe (Intel 975X) EVGA NVIDIA nForce 680I SLI |
| Hard Drive: | Hitachi 250GB SATA2 enabled (16MB Buffer) |
| Video Card: | 1 x EVGA 7900GTX - All Standard Tests |
| Video Drivers: | NVIDIA 91.47 |
| CPU Cooling: | Tuniq Tower 120 |
| Power Supply: | OCZ PowerStream 520W |
| Operating System: | Windows XP Professional SP2 |
We will continue this test procedure until we can fully evaluate the NVIDIA 680i and recent Intel P965 boards as a potential replacement for the Intel 975X as our memory test platform. Our testing has shown different straps at high memory speeds can yield memory bandwidth results that may vary as much as 20% at the same memory speed - particularly in the standard buffered Sandra 2007 memory bandwidth test. Variations in Unbuffered Sandra tests, Super Pi, and real-world game tests are much smaller with different straps at the same memory speed, however, with small variations near the accuracy limits of our test procedures.
Test results have also shown with some memory the P965 and/or NVIDIA 680i performed much better than the 975X in memory speed, but where the P965/680i performance was still the same or less than the 975X. The ASUS P5W-DH Deluxe appears the more demanding platform in terms of memory straps, but it also often yields better performance at the same memory speed. Testing will continue to look more closely at the impact of memory straps on performance and memory test platforms will be revised with the move to Vista.
Value DDR2-800 kits from both G.Skill and Super Talent were recently reviewed. Since those two memories are really a different category than top-line DDR2, results for those two memories are not included in comparisons in this review. For comparisons of performance of those two memories you can refer to the linked reviews.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
22 Comments
View All Comments
OBWan - Wednesday, November 14, 2007 - link
It appears that the "highest memory speed" chart on page 7 is not an objective comparison. Besides the top 3 bars that were tested with the overclock-friendly 680i platform, all the rest were tested with old chipsets e.g. 975X. The old chipsets actually hindered the max overclocking potential of those other DDR2's while at the time of their reviews, the editors believed those DDR2's had reached their speed limit, which was an unsighted mistake. So please delete this biased comparison chart and re-do all the tests with the same 680i platform. The readers in this forum deserve not to be cheated.yacoub - Thursday, February 1, 2007 - link
If those timings relax much more, they'll be asleep.5-5-5-18? hehe =)
phil verhey - Thursday, February 1, 2007 - link
i had buffalo pc2-10000 3.5 months ago.. and i still overclocked it to 1300mhz at 5-5-5-18 .. talk about an either ignorant, or biased article.Wesley Fink - Friday, February 2, 2007 - link
The Buffalo 10000 was announced in Japan a couple of months ago, and it was widely reported that DDR2-1200 and DDR2-1250 were "coming". We have reviewed Buffalo memory in the past and we have yet to receive Buffalo PC2-10000 samples for review. We also have not seen a single review of Buffalo PC2-10000. PC2-10000 is also not listed on the Buffalo website - the highest rated Firestix there are PC2-8500.The Corsair PC2-10000 is a production product with warranted PC2-10000 performance. We ALSO reached DDR2-1300 and DDR2-1315 several months ago, with OCZ and Corsair, but neither product wass rated or warranted at PC2-10000.
I have no doubt the Buffalo PC2-10000 is likely a good product. It is just we have neither seen or received for testing Buffalo PC2-10000 - we have only seen press announcements.
VooDooAddict - Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - link
I'd like you to also show a zero based benchmark graph. I understand that you mention it in the article ... but too many people will just look at the graphs. Budget focused people also should see how little going down to 667 or even 533 effects the performance (I try to steer people to 800 just for a little more future proofing of their memory investment).I'm sick of people requesting this absurdly expensive RAM. I've got not problem people requesting the RAM for over clocking, the good looking cooler mods, or the brand name... but people are still requesting this stuff because they expect much better performance.
I can make my own Zero based graph based on your numbers to show people ... but I'm much rather direct them to the original source.
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - link
The explanation is bold and tells readers why we show a limited range. It is difficult enough to pick out memory variations in a reduced range chart, and it would be almost impossible in a zero-based chart. We also clearly state results on a zero-based chart would show little variation in performance at different speeds.In the conclusion I was also very clear:
"There is also the reality that Core 2 Duo and AM2 really don't need the highest memory speeds to perform best. What they need is low latency DDR2-800 or possibly 4-4-3 DDR2-1067 to get the best performance possible. The unfortunate reality that we see again and again in memory tests is that the super high memory speeds are great for bragging rights and flexible overclocking, but they really don't do much for increasing actual real world performance on either the C2D or AM2 platforms.
Memory companies seem obsessed right now with higher and higher DDR2 memory speeds... We wish memory companies would become just as obsessed with producing a moderately priced 2 GB DDR2-800 kit that can perform day in and day out at 3-3-3 timings. It would be a bonus if it also overclocked to DDR2-1067 with 4-4-4 timings. With Vista performing best with 2GB of memory many will be upgrading memory as they move to the new OS. Whoever finally produces a reasonably-priced low latency DDR2-800 2GB kit will sell all they can produce."
We are reviewing super high-end memory that is a good choice for some buyers, like overclocking enthusiasts, but they are a waste of money for the average buyer. We definitely agree once you get above 800 on C2D or AM2 there is very little gain in performance. Your money is better spent on a faster processor or an upgraded video card.
Live - Thursday, February 1, 2007 - link
If there is no real world difference then why do you state in your buying guides that it is important to keep a 1:1 ratio?From the January 2007 Buyer's Guide: Midrange Menagerie
This is not the only example. You seem to do this in all your memory reviews I have read lately as well. Granted they have been of high end memory and it seems unreasonable to spend that much on memory if you weren’t looking for the absolute maximum speeds. I still don’t understand tough why a 1:1 ratio is good for overclocking. It would seems to me that by lowering your memory ratio you could reach higher CPU overclocks cheaper which is what really matters, no? I mean most overclock as a way to save money not get the WR in superPI.
The thing is for us that don't work with this everyday it’s hard to keep up and not fall for the aggressive marketing. I would appreciate it if you could devote a little more time to steer us right without breaking the bank. I know it’s probably not as fun but it would be much appreciated by us readers.
Neosis - Sunday, February 4, 2007 - link
I think additional latencies shall arise at chipset level. Generally following stages take place while requesting data from memory:1- Data Request from CPU thru. the FSB
2- Chipset transfer the request to memory from FSB
3- Memory responds to the request
4- Chipset then trasfer the request from the memory thru. FSB
5- Finally the requested data travels across the FSB to the CPU
In stage two and four, running the memory asynchronous to the FSB will increase latency. Since conroe has short pipeline like Amd, memory latency is more important than the memory bandwidth.
tayhimself - Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - link
Sorry but that is a piss poor excuse. Its like published scientific studies saying, "we use this statistical analysis because its the only one that shows a significant difference". Who the hell would buy drugs based on that premise. Piss poor AT!!thudo - Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - link
Conroe E6700 @ 3.66Ghz (1.53V) || Scythe Mine CPU Cooler + ArcticSilver5 Thermal Paste || OCZ 2gb PC8000 DC EL GEEK RAM || Asus P5W DH Mobo (1301 Bios) || EVGA 8800GTX ACS3 Cooling Edition (659/1013) || 2x10k Rpm WD SATA2 Raptor HDDs || Thermaltake Armour Full Tower w/side 250mm Mobo Case Fan || OCZ GamerX 700W PSU || WinXP+ SP2 + DX9c + All Updates || Latest Nvidia Forceware (97.x) || 3dmark2006 Score: 12,426 || SiSandra Int Buff'd iSSE2 : 7561 MB/s // Float Buff'd iSSE2 : 7562 MB/sStill surprised my box beats out the latest ram with the Overclock. Can only imagine having the new ram overclocked on the beat! :O