DDR2 vs DDR3 tested head to head

[Capper]

WE HAVE run quite a few stories over the past months, covering the old DDR2 vs new DDR3 debate.

Beside the obvious-cum-obnoxious price difference affecting the ******, we also learned that the latencies still have a lot of room to improve and that, despite the low voltage, the initial DDR3 DIMMs are just a hot to touch as well-overclocked DDR2 ones would be.


Put aside all that, how about a side-by-side comparison with as many things identical as possible, just the RAMs different? As the Computex trip ended with some good Geil DDR3 samples in the bag, the last missing piece of the puzzle was in - time to do it.


The configurations truly was an apples-to-apples one: Intel Xeon 3220 quad-core desktop Xeon running a 3.2 GHz with FSB1600, Asus P5K mobo for DDR2 vs P5K3 for DDR3, both Deluxe, both with newest BIOSes and both practically identical save for the memory, as well as Geil DDR2 high speed kit vs Geil DDR3 "whatever we got in hand" kit. Geil's RAMs are, together with Corsair's, the fastest generally on latency runs - soon we'll be checking the new, promising Gskill and OCZ parts too.

DDR2 vs DDR3 tested head to head

[fps justin]

nice to see there is a slight improvement in bandwidth this early on in ddr3's life.

[Tyreal]

The real question for most of us here is.... How much dough are we going to have to shell out for it?

[Capper]

you shouldn't see much difference price wise....its going to be quite awhile until you see widespread adoption of DDR3 though

[Stormcrow]

Newegg already has DDR3 up for sale, at an outstanding 400 bucks a pop. Of course, the price will drop when DDR3 becomes more widespread and more manufacturers release their kits, but damn, lookit those Latency numbers.
Newegg.com - Buy Computer Parts, PC Components, Laptop Computers, Digital Cameras and more!
With high end kits like Dominators and Ballistix down to around 130, I don't see DDR3 being implemented until around spring of next year in the more mainstream market.

[[Dr. V]]

That's what we said when we saw 4-6 for latency on DDR2 after coming out of a world of DDR that had latencies around 1.5-3. Now we're so happy when something runs well on 4 latency on DDR2, rather than 1.5 on DDR.

Probably going to be a similar affair with DDR2 vs DDR3.

Latencies need to get higher. Look at the insane speeds on the RAM. These DDR3 kits will get up to 2000MHz stock, you'll see. And OCed we're looking at possibilities of around 2200-2300 potentially. A 4 CAS value just won't do.

[gvblake22]

ST!X is right, higher speeds will always mean higher latencies. It's just always a balancing act between high-speeds and higher latencies. There comes a point where it doesn't matter if you have CAS 9 latency, if the RAM is running at 2GHZ it should make up for the slower latencies. That is what next generation RAM is all about. The advantages are no longer about low latencies, that is really a secondary performance factor now. The primary factor is now purely speed (and to some extent efficiencies in the chip architecture). DDR could never EVER reach the sheer speeds that DDR2 can offer (latencies aside). Same holds true for DDR3, it will be able to scale to much higher speeds with higher densities and lower voltages than DDR2 ever can. Just the evolution of the technology. In the case of DDR3, I think it is going to take at least DDR3-1333 to DDR3-1600 speeds to best top of the line DDR2-800 memory widely available today.

[[Dr. V]]

The whole point is we're running things faster and cooler at all costs. It doesn't matter what the latency is - will you notice at 2GHz RAM? No...you won't, I guarantee you. BUT will you notice a 2GHz RAM speed over a 1066GHz RAM speed? At almost double, you will 10000000000% notice it. Will you be sad that the one running 1066MHz is at 4 CAS but the one running 2000MHz is at 9? Nope. Why? you'll notice the double speed difference, not the double+ latency difference.

The best comparison is 800MHz DDR2 vs 1600MHz DDR3 - those are the mainstream offerings for both types. Most DDR2-800 kits can run 4 CAS easily, unless it's a value set which will more than likely run at 5. 1600MHz DDR3 will probably run about 7-8 CAS. You have double for both (in most cases), and you will most definitely notice (at least) double the performance.

I dare any one of you to check the percentage of RAM usage on DDR2 vs DDR3 running the same applications.

[Jokerswild]

I can see that I'll be skipping over DDR2 and maybe DDR3 too so when do we get DDR4.

[Beetle Bailey]

Originally Posted by Jokerswild

I can see that I'll be skipping over DDR2 and maybe DDR3 too so when do we get DDR4.

Probably just in time for me to skip DDR3.
I just want to see some more "Real World" testing. I want to see more MB's, different Processors,(Both Intel and AMD) and using different configs with both types of offerings. Meaning the processors of course. I'm in the process of spending the most I've ever spent on a computer and now all this happens. I'll just be settling for what I'm doing for now I guess. I just want everything to be OK for at least a year. Bailey.