Any chance you can run a test showing DDR2 @ 800 vs DDR3 @ 800 using the same timings pls? Even 1066 would be good if thats do-able, just for a quick like for like comparo.
Also, can you confirm the DDR3 was running at 760FSB please? Just a little confused as you mention 760 DDR in there too.
From those tests though, as you've said it doesn't look like a huge leap at the moment. Guess we'll see reduced timings and increased speeds as the technology progresses and refinements are made.
It's not 760FSB, it's on a 1:2 divider, so it's 380FSB*2.
The lowest timings we'll see are probably CAS6. I'd have to set the DDR2 timings more relaxed because the DDR3 won't do DDR2 speeds, but at the same speed DDR3 will out perform DDR2 due to a better prefetch and burst rate.
I'll see if I've got time in the week, but I've moved onto other stuff now and the boards are disassembled.
It doesn't get better than DDR2 on an Intel system.
But am I wrong saying AMD use more bandwidth?
If not, than wouldn't DDR3 @ 1600 make a real big memory performance increse when they relese a chip that support it. Even tough the latencies are a bit high.
He used the P5K3 Deluxe and P5K Deluxe.
On pages 5 and 6, shouldn't the charts say "Frames per second (higher is better)" instead of "Time in seconds (lower is better)" ?
Great article, but ridiculous price for basically 0 performance gain.
For the price of the P5K3 deluxe and the cheaper, slower DDR3-1066MHz C7 modules, you can buy a P5K Deluxe plus 3 (yes, 3!) sets of Crucial PC8000-C5 Ballistix (nearly the same as the Corsair PC8000C5 Dominator, but £50 cheaper). Madness.
Originally Posted by samkiller42 What motherboard did you use for the tests can i ask? Sam
It seems so obvious now someone points it out. I was concentrating on getting all the numbers for the memory right I forgot to put the test setup in. It's now back on page 2, in full.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRG He used the P5K3 Deluxe and P5K Deluxe.
On pages 5 and 6, shouldn't the charts say "Frames per second (higher is better)" instead of "Time in seconds (lower is better)" ?
Done! Forgot to change it from one graph to the next :o ;)
Originally Posted by Henk Interesting article, I wonder how long before DDR3 will be as affordable as DDR2 is now...
Also, this just doesn't seem right:
Well, they *do* look great. They *do* perform as you'd expect: higher latency at same speeds = slower, higher frequency than DDR2 = still pretty quick. Scales well: 1520MHz from 1333MHz modules is pretty damn good imo.
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi Well, they *do* look great. They *do* perform as you'd expect: higher latency at same speeds = slower, higher frequency than DDR2 = still pretty quick. Scales well: 1520MHz from 1333MHz modules is pretty damn good imo.
Yes, I agree with that. It was just the wording "really very well" that caught my attention, it didn't look right I guess I'm a bit too picky sometimes
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi Well, they *do* look great. They *do* perform as you'd expect: higher latency at same speeds = slower, higher frequency than DDR2 = still pretty quick. Scales well: 1520MHz from 1333MHz modules is pretty damn good imo.
I was wondering, what you would be able to bring the DDR3 1520MHz up to after overclocking it with the Asus P5K3 mother board, I know that you can do like 90% overclocking but can the RAM handle that or does it get to hot and give up? Also do you think we will see DDR4 in PCs before 2020? DDR2 held on for a long time and I still have DDR2 400MHz, thats only about 3x less then what is now out with DDR3 and I got it like only 2 or 3 years ago. Video cards use DDR4 and they are at 2200MHz now, so were does DDR3 stop and DDR4 start, like what speeds?
I know about the timeline for development but where are the speed list :? What is the highest speed that DDR3 is able to do? I know what the lowest is, It's 800MHz. Also what is the slowest and highest speed for DDR4 :? At what point will PC need to move to DDR4 because DDR3 isn't fast enough for them, not years but what speed does DDR3 max out at :?
Comments 1 to 25 of 27
Sam
Funny thing is, I have no doubt that they'd raise the price for a 1337MHz module just for the idiots that would buy it.
Is there anyone here able to justify paying that much for RAM?
H.B.
Also, can you confirm the DDR3 was running at 760FSB please? Just a little confused as you mention 760 DDR in there too.
From those tests though, as you've said it doesn't look like a huge leap at the moment. Guess we'll see reduced timings and increased speeds as the technology progresses and refinements are made.
http://www.bit-tech.net/content_images/corsair_cm3x1024_1333c9dhx/790-99924.jpg
It's not 760FSB, it's on a 1:2 divider, so it's 380FSB*2.
The lowest timings we'll see are probably CAS6. I'd have to set the DDR2 timings more relaxed because the DDR3 won't do DDR2 speeds, but at the same speed DDR3 will out perform DDR2 due to a better prefetch and burst rate.
I'll see if I've got time in the week, but I've moved onto other stuff now and the boards are disassembled.
But am I wrong saying AMD use more bandwidth?
If not, than wouldn't DDR3 @ 1600 make a real big memory performance increse when they relese a chip that support it. Even tough the latencies are a bit high.
Sam
On pages 5 and 6, shouldn't the charts say "Frames per second (higher is better)" instead of "Time in seconds (lower is better)" ?
For the price of the P5K3 deluxe and the cheaper, slower DDR3-1066MHz C7 modules, you can buy a P5K Deluxe plus 3 (yes, 3!) sets of Crucial PC8000-C5 Ballistix (nearly the same as the Corsair PC8000C5 Dominator, but £50 cheaper). Madness.
It seems so obvious now someone points it out. I was concentrating on getting all the numbers for the memory right I forgot to put the test setup in. It's now back on page 2, in full.
Done! Forgot to change it from one graph to the next :o ;)
Also, this just doesn't seem right:
Well, they *do* look great. They *do* perform as you'd expect: higher latency at same speeds = slower, higher frequency than DDR2 = still pretty quick. Scales well: 1520MHz from 1333MHz modules is pretty damn good imo.
Yes, I agree with that. It was just the wording "really very well" that caught my attention, it didn't look right I guess I'm a bit too picky sometimes
As soon as your research department is done with current tech, they research the next one.