Archives
Contact
Contests
Downloads
Forums
History
Links
Reviews
Home

Performance

     For our performance tests as mentioned earlier, we wanted to provide you enough benchmarks to give a good idea of what to expect. We used a few different configurations and added DOOM III to see what kind of advantage we could get from overclocking our test bench setup which consists of the following components:

• Asus P4C800-E

• Intel Pentium 4 3.0Ghz Prescott

• Visiontek x800 Pro 256mb

• ThermalTake 480W PSU

• Danger Den Watercooled CPU, GPU, and Northbridge

     Of course we aren't using to fancy a setup here, but with a little bit of pushing, our components can represent to us the best in bang for your buck especially with the Doom III debut which as you'll find, cripples your system. What was different about our Crucial memory was the fact that it simply did not care what latency settings we used. We easily used the low numbers of CL 2-2-2-5 at 200fsb, and of course it operated flawlessly at default speed, furthermore on its default settings of DDR500 (250FSB), and using higher latencies of 2.5-4-4-8. Sounds familiar doesn't it? Yup, it wasn't too long ago when we tested some OCZ PC-4200 vs. Corsair's PC 3200XL which exhibited those same characteristics. For now, we decided against comparing the Crucial Ballistix to the other two for a couple reasons; We reinstalled Windows XP Pro, and the addition of XP's Service Pack 2. SP2, BTW has an annoying firewall, but functions quite well thus far as a good update. These factors might cause the numbers to be somewhat inconsistent, but nonetheless if you wish to compare the Ballistix to the others feel free to check out that memory review here. For this review we are going to take the Crucial on a solo ride, especially since the OCZ and Corsair were 1gb Twin Packs, whereas our Crucial came in 2x256mb sticks which can run a tad bit quicker, since it doesn't bottleneck the memory controller as much.

     For our first batch of tests we used SiSoft's Sandra 2004 SP1 so we could get a good idea of the kind of bandwidth we are pushing through our system with the Ballistix memory...

200FSB 1:1 2-2-2-5 2.65v

The Crucial Ballistix is more than impressive at our Prescott's default speed when set at low latencies..

250FSB 1:1 2.5-4-4-8 2.75v

Gaming Benchmarks

On average, running DDR500 has a 22% performance advantage over DDR400 in our gaming benchmarks...

Synthetic Gaming

     A 13% advantage in 3DMark 2001SE and 6.7% on 3Dmark 2003 isn't too great of an advantage compared to our gaming benchmarks, but it's still an margin...

Concluding Words

     Overall Crucial is back in the forefront of overclocking. Sure we didn't run our ram too far up the scale over its specified speed, but DDR500 at below spec voltage and DDR400 at low latencies is a good thing since some of the ram that we've tested previous to our last review wasn't as versatile. Only our previous review of the 3200XL from Corsair showed signs of being as capable as the Crucial at low speed low latency settings, while still having the ability to running high speed with looser timings. At DDR400, Crucial has made their mark with a approx 150mbs advantage at the same timings compared to their competition. Of course, running the default timings at DDR500 proved to not too difficult for the Ballistix memory, although we did witness a little instability running past that spec, but that has more to do with our CPU FSB max of 250 than anything else since we were able to tighten the timings a little bit to 2.5-3-3-6-1T at 2.85v which tells us that the Ballistix has approximately around 15 more MHz left on it, but again that's just an estimate, and if we had the ability to go beyond the DDR500 level we surely would love to show you. Other than that small issue, we can conclude that the new Ballistix lineup from Crucial represents a new chapter form the company, and that's always good news news for us overclockers.... ClubOC recommends the Ballistix...