DDR3 is how much better than DDR2?

[Isaac MM]

ddr3 1600mhz is a lot better performance wise than ddr3 1066 or 1000mhz? for example with a qx9650 @ 4.0ghz?

[little_scrapper]

Will make no difference. You have to use synthetic benchmarks to even see the difference between them. And those benchmarks have no correlation to real world performance. Look here. And look close.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/high-end-ddr3-memory-hook,1758-11.html

Keep in mind that the DDR1600 was running at a CPU speed of 2.4Ghz and the DDR1800 was running at a cpu sped of 2.7 GHz and is why you get the 10% performance increase. Its not because of ram speed. As proof they tossed in a DDR1352 (also running at CPU speed of 2.7ghz) and the DDR1352 scored the same as the DDR1800.

And here: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ddr3-1333-speed-latency-shootout,1754-23.html

No difference and any speed really.

And heres more benchies:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/arms-race-ddr3-1800-ram,1676-9.html

Only reason to buy DDR3 is if your motherboard requires it. But that still doesnt mean its doing anything more for the system because it not. CPU and GPU power is where its at. DDR3 is still just +1 for the e-penis. Nothing more really. Again, you have to use synthetic benchmarks that have no correlation to real world apps, as the benchies prove, just to see a 10% difference. In the real world, the differences between slow DDR2 and fast DDR3 on overall system performance is about 5-6%. fast DDR2 will reduce that difference to 2-3% or to basically nothing when using super fast DDR2.

When DDR3 2000 starts running at DDR2 latencies then you will start to see some differences. But DDR667 @ 3-3-3-8 and DDR800 @ 4-4-4-12 and DDR1600 running at 7-7-7-20 all have a responce time(latency) of about 12nanoseconds. All about the same. DDR3 just has more potential bandwidth, its not faster. It has a faster clock yes, but qwith slower timings it all works out about the same and thus explains why DDR3 doesnt really beat DDR2 by any notable margins in benchies.

Sorry for the long explaination.

[jarman]

thanks for the long explanation. Nehalem is still gonna use a 3 channel onboard DDR3 controller though :o so ull have no choice eventually if u want 1 of those.

[Isaac MM]

I make his words mine...thanks for the long explanation.

What DDR2 would you recommend me to go with a QX9650? I will try to OC it to 4ghz. And if its not asking too much, what mobo(intel chipset)?

[little_scrapper]

Something like this wouldnt be bad for the price: http://microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0263429

Look around and find the deals. The price if DDR2 is hitting rock bottom. Just look for stix with good GMH or better chips on them. If you dont know what I mean start reading.

My Ballistix do DDR1000 4-4-4-12 without even upping voltage and I got them before Ballistix increased the rated voltage from 2.0 to 2.1. They will get close to 1200 but start having arrors at those speeds.

[SoulsCollective]

Only reason to buy DDR3 is if your motherboard requires it. But that still doesnt mean its doing anything more for the system because it not. CPU and GPU power is where its at. DDR3 is still just +1 for the e-penis. Nothing more really.Wrong. DDR3 gives us the ability to run very high FSB speeds without killing the RAM - which in turn allows for much better clocking of new high-FSB chips.

When DDR3 2000 starts running at DDR2 latencies then you will start to see some differences. But DDR667 @ 3-3-3-8 and DDR800 @ 4-4-4-12 and DDR1600 running at 7-7-7-20 all have a responce time(latency) of about 12nanoseconds. All about the same. DDR3 just has more potential bandwidth, its not faster. It has a faster clock yes, but qwith slower timings it all works out about the same and thus explains why DDR3 doesnt really beat DDR2 by any notable margins in benchies.
Access time is given by:

Given: xxxMhz a-b-c-d:
[(1/xxxE6) * (a+b+c+d)] * 1E9 = ZZZns
So, DDR-667 3-3-3-8 gives us 25.52ns, DDR-800 4-4-4-12 gives us 30ns and DDR-1600 7-7-7-20 gives us 25.62ns.

[alexio]

The only real-world program that does care is Winrar (and maybe other archivers).

[zanzabar]

Something like this wouldnt be bad for the price: http://microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0263429

Look around and find the deals. The price if DDR2 is hitting rock bottom. Just look for stix with good GMH or better chips on them. If you dont know what I mean start reading.

My Ballistix do DDR1000 4-4-4-12 without even upping voltage and I got them before Ballistix increased the rated voltage from 2.0 to 2.1. They will get close to 1200 but start having arrors at those speeds.

watch what u recommend u will never see 1066 gmh/gkx at 1.8V those are elpedia if they are 1.8V, and there is no more gmh balistex

the gmh/gkx have a vary vary low yield now so they arnt in production exept for special orders and u will only find them reliably in cell shock and team group were it is labeled as such

[philbrown23]

well about the only thing I noticed was that when I overclock my ram does not hit the wall like my ballistix ddr2 did. I had crucial tracers pc1066, and now I have ocz gold 1333 and my ddr3 will hit 1796 and my crucial would only get 1300 if I was lucky

[tbone8ty]

can u use ddr3 memorys on am2+ systems?

[HotGore]

can u use ddr3 memorys on am2+ systems?

No DDR2 still.

[zanzabar]

well about the only thing I noticed was that when I overclock my ram does not hit the wall like my ballistix ddr2 did. I had crucial tracers pc1066, and now I have ocz gold 1333 and my ddr3 will hit 1796 and my crucial would only get 1300 if I was lucky

but u have like cas8 with your ocz those ddr2 balistex are c5

[SoulsCollective]

but u have like cas8 with your ocz those ddr2 balistex are c5
If you read the post, I very much doubt they are running CAS-5 at DDR2-1200. Even if they were, DDR2-1200 CAS-5 gives 25ns access time, while DDR3-1729 CAS-8 gives 27.7ns - hardly a massive performance loss. If as I suspect is far more likely the DDR2 has had to be loosened to CAS-6 to hit DDR2-1200, that gives us 30ns as against the DDR3 - meaning the DDR3 is faster again. Furthermore, assuming a fairly standard divider of ~1:3, the DDR3 allows you to hit up to 580FSB, while the DDR2 is limited to 400FSB - not the best for OCing.

[zanzabar]

if u have a dfi then u could do the 400:1066 so then u can get 1200mhz with 500

i dont see any advantage or disadvantage, but getting some GTR or JNL before non micron catches up so u can get good ram now before u have to hunt for it

[SoulsCollective]

i dont see any advantage or disadvantage, but getting some GTR or JNL before non micron catches up so u can get good ram now before u have to hunt for itUm...what?

[little_scrapper]

Wrong. DDR3 gives us the ability to run very high FSB speeds without killing the RAM - which in turn allows for much better clocking of new high-FSB chips..
Yes but even if your running a FSB of 600, theoretically some DDR2 that can handle DDR1200 shouldnt be a problem. But my point was still valid in that its the CPU boost that is helping your performance, not the ram boost.


Access time is given by:

Given: xxxMhz a-b-c-d:
[(1/xxxE6) * (a+b+c+d)] * 1E9 = ZZZns
So, DDR-667 3-3-3-8 gives us 25.52ns, DDR-800 4-4-4-12 gives us 30ns and DDR-1600 7-7-7-20 gives us 25.62ns.

DDR-333 was rated at CAS 2; similar-market DDR2-667 was rated at CAS 4 and today's middle DDR3-1333 is often rated at CAS 8. Because cycle time is the inverse of clock speed (1/2 of DDR data rates), the DDR-333 reference clock cycled every six nanoseconds, DDR2-667 every three nanoseconds and DDR3-1333 every 1.5 nanoseconds. Latency is measured in clock cycles, and two 6ns cycles occur in the same time as four 3ns cycles or eight 1.5ns cycles. Which is specifically 12 nanoseconds.

[little_scrapper]

well about the only thing I noticed was that when I overclock my ram does not hit the wall like my ballistix ddr2 did. I had crucial tracers pc1066, and now I have ocz gold 1333 and my ddr3 will hit 1796 and my crucial would only get 1300 if I was lucky


If you are talking about 2 different rams on two different motherboards then your comparing apples to oranges and you cannot just say that the issue was ram. You would really need to run both rams on one motherboard to say for certain it was ram you walled on.

[little_scrapper]

I very much doubt they are running CAS-5 at DDR2-1200. Even if they were, DDR2-1200 CAS-5 gives 25ns access time, while DDR3-1729 CAS-8 gives 27.7ns - hardly a massive performance loss. If as I suspect is far more likely the DDR2 has had to be loosened to CAS-6 to hit DDR2-1200, that gives us 30ns as against the DDR3 - meaning the DDR3 is faster again. Furthermore, assuming a fairly standard divider of ~1:3, the DDR3 allows you to hit up to 580FSB, while the DDR2 is limited to 400FSB - not the best for OCing.

My Ballistix do 4-4-4-12 @ DDR1000 no problem and with some voltage they do DDR1100 at those timings. But I have to loosen up to cas5 when approching DDR1200, they will do DDR1200 at cas5 but I dont trust them. but this is all beside the point.

Why would you say that DDR2 is limited to FSB400? People do well over FSB500 with DDR2 all the time. At 1:1, FSB500 is only DDR1000

[xMrBunglex]

Um...what?

he's saying DDR3 memory will start to come with cheaper chips pretty soon. since all RAM IC's are covered by heat spreaders now, you often don't know what IC's you're getting until after you've already bought it.

[gosh]

The need for an IMC and why the FSB is dead (http://www.nehalemnews.com/2008/05/editorial-need-for-imc-and-why-fsb-is.html)

[zanzabar]

Um...what?

gtr and jnl are the good chips from micron right now that clock nicely and take voltage