DDR2 533 (1:1) Performance

The DDR2-533 memory speed is important with a 1066 FSB CPU because it represents 1:1 memory performance. On Intel platforms the memory controller is still a part of the chipset and not on-processor as it is on the AM2. As a result you would generally expect the fastest relative memory performance possible on an Intel board by running the memory at a 1:1 ratio.

DDR2-533 (3.47 GHz) Calculation Performance

DDR2-533 (3.47 GHz) Standard (Buffered) Memory Test

DDR2-533 (3.47 GHz) Unbuffered Memory Test

DDR2-533 (3.47 GHz) - Far Cry

DDR2-533 (3.47 GHz) - Half-Life 2

DDR2-533 (3.47 GHz) - Quake 4


The OCZ EL PC2-8000 is able to run the important 1:1 memory ratio at the fastest settings possible on the Asus board. The ability to run 3-2-2 timings at this speed is reflected in chart-topping DDR2-533 performance. The Crucial and Buffalo DDR2-1000 are nearly as fast at 3-2-3 timings at DDR2-533.

DDR2 400 (4:3) Performance DDR2 667 (4:5) Performance
Comments Locked

24 Comments

View All Comments

  • JarredWalton - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    We're working on more memory reviews, and Corsair's offering will be reviewed soon.
  • araczynski - Monday, July 10, 2006 - link

    didn't know that was an option, but that's ok, with the adblock solution i get to kill many birds with one stone.
  • araczynski - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    ...i'm getting fed up with the damn intellitext ads all over the place, anyone know of a surefire way to block that crap?

    TIA
  • araczynski - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    NM, found adblock for firefox, brilliant!
  • JarredWalton - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    Another option is to simply http://www.anandtech.com/siteinfo.aspx?intelli=y">turn it off in your site preferences. :)
  • lopri - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    Excellent review in that it shed light on DDR2 testing methodology on Intel platform. I should admit that I'd been quite ignorant about DDR2 scaling to this date. This article exaplains alot about the way Intel platform works and how dividers are used - in plain English. It seems, in a sense, it's easier to test memory on Intel platform, especially once Conroe arrives, with so many dividers available at any given CPU clock.

    Thanks for an excellent review. BTW, when can we expect the P5W-DH review and/or DFI 975X Infinity review?

    lop

    *nitpick1 : On page 5, there is a typo. ;)
    quote:

    With ratios, memory speed remains constant at 3.46GHz and memory speed is varied by choosing different ratios


  • Wesley Fink - Friday, July 7, 2006 - link

    Thanks, Lopri. The typo is now corrected.

    Now that AMD has moved to DDR2 with AM2, memory dividers and memory speeds work exactly the same, with standard supported speeds to DDR2-800.

    The P5W-DH review will post next week.
  • semo - Saturday, July 8, 2006 - link

    why don't you make a dedicated error reporting section for each article?
    last page fifth paragraph:
    quote:

    DDR2 Memory on the Intel platform, however, is by definition Double Data Rate, so a 266 base setting is 533 (2x266).
    shoudln't that be "amd platform"
  • Wesley Fink - Saturday, July 8, 2006 - link

    We were talking about how Intel handles memory speed which is why AMD was not also mentioned. DDR-533 is DDR-533 on BOTH the Intel and AMD platform. However, the CPU clock speed on the AMD platform is 400, while the bus speed on the Intel is 1066. AMD double pumps 200 on the clock to achieve 400, while the latest Intel processors quad pump 266 to achieve 1066. The BASE speed is still 200 AMD and 266 Intel.

    1:1 on the AMD is therefore DDR2-400, but Hyper Transport and the on-chip memory controller on AM2 means the memory speed or ratios don't really matter. There is no penalty for running AM2 at ratios, but there is a very slight penalty for running Intel at other than 1:1 (DDR2-533) - in the range of 1% to 5% memory bandwidth reduction.

    The AM2 has massive DDR2 memory bandwidth, but it is not memory-starved and really can't use the extra bandwidth in the current CPU design. It might matter more in future AMD designs.
  • semo - Sunday, July 9, 2006 - link

    ok thanks i think i get it now. and it's a shame amd can't take advantage of the advances ddr2 has made (apart from the reduction in penalty going from ddr to ddr2)

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now