Corsair Dominator GT DDR3 Memory Hits 2533MHz, Sets World Record for DDR3 Frequency

[infrared]

How do you use the same cpu for comparison when you can only use a Core i7 for tri-channel DDR3? It won't do DDR2.

As far as your benchmarks vs "real world". I agree that some graphics benchmarks may skew results, but for memory bandwith, more is better. No exceptions.

Anyway, a couple of comparisons using Everests memory benchmark:

DDR2 1200 1:1 @ 5-5-5-10 Duel Channel

Ok, one of my runs. This is pretty much the fastest you will see for DDR2 1200, or not far off.

DDR3 1066 @ 9-9-9-24 Tripple Channel

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/01/26/intel-core-i7-memory-performance-review/3

Read: 13113mb/s
Write: 11967mb/s
Copy: 15670mb/s
Latency: 44.3ns

yea lol i remember lookin up a comparison of ddr2 vs ddr3, and only speeds of 1600mhz+ out did the ddr2 modules, and they only went up to ddr2 1066 was almost on par with ddr3 1333 and outdid ddr3 1066 simply because the timings were so much tighter on the ddr2 modules

Yes, but we are talking about DDR3 Tri channel vs DDR2 Dual Channel, there is simply no competition.

 

[n-ster]

My laptop is a DELL, my PC is a custom build. I need to change the sig.

But if you think that triple channel are making a diference you are really a n00b. Just check the "wire" for some real tests



HAHA! You're joking right??? DDR2-1200 and even DDR2-1066 can only be beaten by very expensive DDR3s. Again, check some test in real applications like games, video encoding, etc. Forgot about the bechmarks, your not playing benchies, right??



Show me one test to prove that! ONE!!! LOL! (using the same CPU and GPU, naturaly )

I lol at this guy that says others are noob but doesn't realize he is the one who is...

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

nub got pwnt

 

[sneekypeet]

Alright fellas this is a news post not a personal proving ground. The information is just a click away for anyone to read. No matter your thoughts, the points were made, now lets move on please.

 

[TAViX]

How do you use the same cpu for comparison when you can only use a Core i7 for tri-channel DDR3? It won't do DDR2.

As far as your benchmarks vs "real world". What a load of bollocks. I agree that some graphics benchmarks may skew results, but for memory bandwith, more is better. No exceptions.

Anyway, a couple of comparisons using Everests memory benchmark:

DDR2 1200 1:1 @ 5-5-5-10

Ok, one of my runs. This is pretty much the fastest you will see for DDR2 1200, or not far off.

http://img.techpowerup.org/090516/600fsb.png



DDR3 1066 @ 9-9-9-24

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/01/26/intel-core-i7-memory-performance-review/3

Read: 13113mb/s
Write: 11967mb/s
Copy: 15670mb/s
Latency: 44.3ns



Yes, but we are talking about DDR3 Tri channel vs DDR2 Dual Channel, there is simply no competition.

LOL!!! No competition, hahaha!!

Ok, you better chech those sites here to end the discussion about DDR2 and DDR3:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/memory/display/ddr3_8.html

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2159833,00.asp

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

^ erm mods said cool it

 

[sneekypeet]

Ok I will address this more appropriately, while I will allow the conversation to continue with links for proof to your thoughts, I wont allow it to get personal.

@ TAViX
Those reviews really dont apply well as they are dual channel runs on DDR3 not tri channel. Also the Ram in the first link sucks and is CAS 9. The point you have is slightly skewed even with your own proof.

 

[a_ump]

i was thking the same that a tight timing ddr2 1066 outperformed ddr3 1066, and it does but only in dual channel. Plus the problem with that review from xbitlabs is it was when ddr3 was rather new, timings and whatnot are much tighter compared to 2 years ago.

 

[TAViX]

^ erm mods said cool it

I'm not the one who flames others...

And besides, I was talking in the price/performance department only.

EDIT: What are the defaults of those mems anyways??

 

[mlee49]

your not playing benchies, right??

I play benchmarks all day. Thats my favorite

 

[[I.R.A]_FBi]

I play benchmarks all day. Thats my favorite

coop 3d mark later?

 

[cdawall]

There'd be hardly any gains in performance over 1600 though, either way congrats to Corsair.

not true i can run 1600 cas 6 and it wont touch these sticks in performance super pi could easily be dropped by 2 seconds and sciencemark would gain at least 200pts with that much of a mem clock difference

What voltage...oh yeah, enough to damage the cpu and bake a cake at the same time.

Find what chips they're using, get a set of sticks from gskill with same chips, crank V through the roof and you'll attain the same speed. Corsair, again, does nothing interesting except marketing.

not true have you ever heard binning? while not always the case most of the time these sticks will be ones specifically tested to work at X speed with X timings and X volts while the crucial values with D9JNL can hit very good speeds (my personal kit for example) i have seen binned kits clock higher on lower volts

That's what i thought! Wander if he could go higher with looser timings, or if he's frequency limited by the motherboard/cpu? He should have some more headroom for the base clock.

Pretty awesome though!

looser timings don't always mean a higher speed D9GKH didn't clock any higher on cas6 than cas5 and old school DDR BH5 clocked higher on cas2 than anything else.

lol. You would have to run DDR at 1785Mhz 5-6-5-15 to match the performance of these sticks.

how did you come up with that number?

How do you use the same cpu for comparison when you can only use a Core i7 for tri-channel DDR3? It won't do DDR2.

As far as your benchmarks vs "real world". I agree that some graphics benchmarks may skew results, but for memory bandwith, more is better. No exceptions.

Anyway, a couple of comparisons using Everests memory benchmark:

DDR2 1200 1:1 @ 5-5-5-10 Duel Channel

Ok, one of my runs. This is pretty much the fastest you will see for DDR2 1200, or not far off.

http://img.techpowerup.org/090516/600fsb.png



DDR3 1066 @ 9-9-9-24 Tripple Channel

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2009/01/26/intel-core-i7-memory-performance-review/3

Read: 13113mb/s
Write: 11967mb/s
Copy: 15670mb/s
Latency: 44.3ns



Yes, but we are talking about DDR3 Tri channel vs DDR2 Dual Channel, there is simply no competition.

even dual channel can smoke DDR2

LOL!!! No competition, hahaha!!

Ok, you better chech those sites here to end the discussion about DDR2 and DDR3:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/memory/display/ddr3_8.html

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2159833,00.asp

look up a quote and i managed to improve my sciencemark and wprime scores using DDR3 and a lower clocked CPU vs DDR2 (DDR1680 cas6 and 3.8ghz cpu vs DDR1140 cas5 and 4ghz cpu)

I'm not the one who flames others...

umm you have 14 posts here and with a post like that the number may stay that low while you enjoy a nice banner were your stars should be

 

[Wile E]

LOL!!! No competition, hahaha!!

Ok, you better chech those sites here to end the discussion about DDR2 and DDR3:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/memory/display/ddr3_8.html

http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2159833,00.asp

Both of those are completely useless reviews here. First off, they were done last year before the newest advancements in DDR3. Second, the ram in this news post is running at DDR3-2533 cas7. The highest speed DDR3 you showed in those tests is DDR3-1333 cas6. That's a HUGE difference. Lastly, neither of those tests show the benefits of Triple Channel, something that you can't do with DDR2 right now.

 

[Wile E]

how did you come up with that number?

Well, first off,there was a slight error on my part, as I used 2500Mhz as the basis, instead of 2533. But it's actually quite simple, and roughly accurate, from a raw bandwidth and latency potential standpoint, when not taking platform into consideration. Just divide the frequency by the CAS, and multiply by target CAS. So, (2533/7)*5 = 1809. It would take 1809Mhz CAS5 to equal 2533Mhz CAS7. I accidentally gave DDR2 the benefit of the doubt. lol.

 

[cdawall]

Well, first off,there was a slight error on my part, as I used 2500Mhz as the basis, instead of 2533. But it's actually quite simple, and roughly accurate, from a raw bandwidth and latency potential standpoint, when not taking platform into consideration. Just divide the frequency by the CAS, and multiply by target CAS. So, (2533/7)*5 = 1809. It would take 1809Mhz CAS5 to equal 2533Mhz CAS7. I accidentally gave DDR2 the benefit of the doubt. lol.

that is the same equation i use

 

[Wile E]

that is the same equation i use

Ends up fairly accurate in most cases, give or take a few Mhz, does it not? lol.

 

[cdawall]

Ends up fairly accurate in most cases, give or take a few Mhz, does it not? lol.

that it does its kinda nice to give a good guestamation

 

[TAViX]

umm you have 14 posts here and with a post like that the number may stay that low while you enjoy a nice banner were your stars should be

???? Stars????? Banners??? Having 45,000 posts will make me smarter or cooler? Or this is a forum where you need to have more than 10,000 posts in order not to be flamed or bullied??!

???

 

[cdawall]

???? Stars????? Banners??? Having 45,000 posts will make me smarter or cooler? Or this is a forum where you need to have more than 10,000 posts in order not to be flamed or bullied??!

???

no i was commenting on how if you keep attacking members and acting rude you are going to end up banned which happens to be a banner that would replace your stars. i am however sorry i did not make that clear enough for you, next time i will spell things out.

 

[erocker]

Warnings have been given in this thread already, and now it's time for infractions. This thread doesn't have anything to do with you (the user of this website) or your RAM arguments. All posts will stay on topic of this news post, no exceptions.

 

[TAViX]

no i was commenting on how if you keep attacking members and acting rude you are going to end up banned which happens to be a banner that would replace your stars. i am however sorry i did not make that clear enough for you, next time i will spell things out.

That's interesting. So if I express an oppinion diferent than others, it means that I atack others or I'm acting rude?? Or this just applies only to me and not to the others that were trashing me after I post my first comentary??

No matter. Sorry if I offended anyone,
have a nice day!

Edit:

Warnings have been given in this thread already, and now it's time for infractions. This thread doesn't have anything to do with you (the user of this website) or your RAM arguments. All posts will stay on topic of this news post, no exceptions.

Sorry again, I was overreacting, no need for warnings, we are all gentlemen here.

 

[n-ster]

???? Stars????? Banners??? Having 45,000 posts will make me smarter or cooler? Or this is a forum where you need to have more than 10,000 posts in order not to be flamed or bullied??!

???

Aren't you the guy that said someone was noob if he thought ddr3 > ddr2???

No, someone with 1 post can be more listened to then someone with 10k + posts... as long as it is done politely and with good arguments...

We hate bullying or flames, hence why we did not like the fact that you are saying someone is noob if he thinks something, when that something is completely viable, and you do not prove yourself beforehand etc...

btw, I am sry about calling you a noob (well saying you were not him...wtv) earlier, I got carried away...

btw, 3gb of ddr3 that do like 1600 cas 6~7 (OC) cost 50$ and 6gb 80$... for ddr2, it's 50$ for 4gb of ~1100 cas 5 (OC) and 100$ for 8gb... price is not much of a problem anymore!

Say you can run ddr2 1066 RAM at 1250 cas 6 2x channel... if you can have 3x channel 1600 cas 6 at a similar price... Higher speed, same cas more channels = better performing!

EDIT: (sorry mods)

 

[cdawall]

That's interesting. So if I express an oppinion diferent than others, it means that I atack others or I'm acting rude?? Or this just applies only to me and not to the others that were trashing me after I post my first comentary??

No matter. Sorry if I offended anyone,
have a nice day!

Edit:



Sorry again, no need for warnings, we are all gentlemen here.

this was your 1st post

At first I thought those are the default values of some new released memories. OC? Neh, you can keep them. An DDR2-1200Mhz mems with 5-5-5-12 timing leaves those mems to dust anyways...

and it was incorrect this was pointed out to you and you promptly pulled up 2 year old benchmarks with very poor DDR3 in them vs some of the best DDR2 which shows DDR2 in the lead (duh). now if you would like to continue that argument i can go pull some benchmarks that show the best DDR1 easily beating early DDR2.

now if you would like that i can go find DDR600 cas1.5 BH5 that just destroys DDR800 cas5 in every benchmark out there.

Warnings have been given in this thread already, and now it's time for infractions. This thread doesn't have anything to do with you (the user of this website) or your RAM arguments. All posts will stay on topic of this news post, no exceptions.

now to be back on topic this is a great feat one that was dont not only with an i7 and not p45 or X48 which means the cpu is very touchy about vdimm and probably is one of many that were killed trying to set the WR lol but it is also triple channel and not the single channel trick used on the older chipsets!

 

[n-ster]

Yea it is quite incredible at that speed on 3x channel! with 2gb modules!

I say though, a good (for a normal gamer for ex) ddr3 RAM is 1600 cl8 or below usually...

 

[Wile E]

now to be back on topic this is a great feat one that was dont not only with an i7 and not p45 or X48 which means the cpu is very touchy about vdimm and probably is one of many that were killed trying to set the WR lol but it is also triple channel and not the single channel trick used on the older chipsets!

That's one of the things that surprised me most. They didn't do this with a single 1GB stick, they did this with 3 2GB sticks. (Which is another argument against DDR2. 2GB sticks clock worth a crap).