ASUS P5E3 Deluxe Overclocking: DDR3 Takes Front Stage
by Kris Boughton on November 20, 2007 4:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
Overclocked Gaming Performance
Making use of a somewhat seasoned engine, Battlefield 2 proves once again that good graphics performance isn't always just about high-end graphics cards. Benchmarking at lower FSB levels, where our DDR3 performs more like equivalently binned DDR2, we find similar performance results. However, making use of the superior 2:1 memory divider and running our DDR3 at a full 1.8GHz and higher shows it's rewards. Whereas the ASUS Maximus Formula SE and DFI UT P35-T2R linger just below the 200 FPS mark, the ASUS P5E3 Deluxe proves it has the power to push through this ceiling even while operating at a lower overall CPU speed. Somewhat like Battlefield 2, Company of Heroes shows its ability to make efficient use of the additional bandwidth provided by the ASUS P5E3 Deluxe by quickly becoming GPU limited at around 3GHz on the CPU. Once again, the DDR3 board proves the more capable gaming machine.
Our third and final gaming performance test involves one of the most highly anticipated releases of all time - Crysis. Until now we were hesitant to provide any benchmarking results based on this engine as our testing policy here at AnandTech generally discourages the use of beta products or pre-release software when categorizing the performance of retail products. With Crysis, the results come from the use of separate CPU and GPU benchmark scripting routines included with the game.
Our Crysis results are both good and bad, depending on how you look at them. The bad news is that our system, consisting of an Intel Q6600 at 3.6GHz (9x400), DDR3 running at DDR-1600, 6-6-6-12 timings, and a single MSI 8800GTX Ultra @ 660/1150 only managed to squeak out an average of ~44 FPS at a rather low resolution of 1280x1024. The good news, of course, is that these numbers didn't seem to change too much even when we dropped the CPU back to the stock 9x266 setting, placing our DDR3 memory squarely in DDR2 territory at DDR-1066, 4-4-4-12. This should give hope to those out there that may not have the most robust hardware available. All Crysis really wants is some serious GPU power.
Making use of a somewhat seasoned engine, Battlefield 2 proves once again that good graphics performance isn't always just about high-end graphics cards. Benchmarking at lower FSB levels, where our DDR3 performs more like equivalently binned DDR2, we find similar performance results. However, making use of the superior 2:1 memory divider and running our DDR3 at a full 1.8GHz and higher shows it's rewards. Whereas the ASUS Maximus Formula SE and DFI UT P35-T2R linger just below the 200 FPS mark, the ASUS P5E3 Deluxe proves it has the power to push through this ceiling even while operating at a lower overall CPU speed. Somewhat like Battlefield 2, Company of Heroes shows its ability to make efficient use of the additional bandwidth provided by the ASUS P5E3 Deluxe by quickly becoming GPU limited at around 3GHz on the CPU. Once again, the DDR3 board proves the more capable gaming machine.
Our third and final gaming performance test involves one of the most highly anticipated releases of all time - Crysis. Until now we were hesitant to provide any benchmarking results based on this engine as our testing policy here at AnandTech generally discourages the use of beta products or pre-release software when categorizing the performance of retail products. With Crysis, the results come from the use of separate CPU and GPU benchmark scripting routines included with the game.
Our Crysis results are both good and bad, depending on how you look at them. The bad news is that our system, consisting of an Intel Q6600 at 3.6GHz (9x400), DDR3 running at DDR-1600, 6-6-6-12 timings, and a single MSI 8800GTX Ultra @ 660/1150 only managed to squeak out an average of ~44 FPS at a rather low resolution of 1280x1024. The good news, of course, is that these numbers didn't seem to change too much even when we dropped the CPU back to the stock 9x266 setting, placing our DDR3 memory squarely in DDR2 territory at DDR-1066, 4-4-4-12. This should give hope to those out there that may not have the most robust hardware available. All Crysis really wants is some serious GPU power.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
25 Comments
View All Comments
retrospooty - Friday, November 23, 2007 - link
I should have added that beyond the current Intel roadmap, they are looking at Rambus XDR for future CPU's. DDR and its minor generational bumps arent going to cut it for long. DDR4 and DDR5 arent much better, higher speeds and higher latencies all the way = very minor performance increases.I really wouldnt advise anyone, even the enthusiests to get DDR3 now, in 1 more year Nehalem will be out with 3 channel DDR and it will likely be faster, or lower latency and cheaper than current DDR3 is, and anyone who fancies themselves and "enthusiest" will be upgrading again at that point, because 3 channel DDR3 on top of Nehalems internal memory controller WILL give a notable performance increase.
jkostans - Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - link
Spending an extra $50-100 on a GPU is still way more effective than spending the $200-300 more for DDR3. The only games that struggle with framerate on a modern mid-high end system are mostly GPU and somewhat CPU dependent. You get about the least bang for your buck with memory, but at the bleeding edge of performance I guess money is not a barrier.TA152H - Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - link
Another way to look at it is, would you rather have 1 GB of DDR3 or 2 GB of DDR2? They cost roughly the same.I'd rather have the 1 GB, since I can add more memory later. If you end up with DDR2, your system is forever degraded by inferior memory. You can't add it later unless you get a new motherboard. Besides, faster memory makes everything run faster, more memory only makes things run faster if you have to page (pretty much, I know Microsoft steals memory for caching, but that's a mixed bag anyway). Also, more memory wants more power.
I can already hear the argument from people saying that you can get 1 GB of DDR2 as well, and still realize a cost saving. It's a valid point, but at 1 GB the cost difference isn't that great, and I think the performance, and future upgradeability still make DDR3 attractive for some people.
LoneWolf15 - Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - link
Another way to look at it is, would you rather have 4GB of high-performance DDR2 for $150 (or cheaper, my 4GB of Crucial Ballistix cost me $140 this summer and is cheaper yet now), or 2GB of DDR3 for $200?
The industry must really love folks like you, who buy into the marketing hype. DDR2 is far from inferior, or Intel wouldn't have been using it all this time, and saying your system will be "forever degraded" is ridiculous tripe.
DDR3 has more bandwidth, but isn't necessarily "faster" as it is higher latency. That $150 DDR2 I mentioned has a CAS latency of 4; the $200 2GB DDR3 has a CAS latency of 7. DDR3 will only be attractive once it gains market share, lowering its price. What with enough P35 boards and some X38 boards still supporting DDR2, there is no reason to switch.
TA152H - Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - link
DDR3 is faster, if you can't accept that much, you aren't worth arguing with. DDR2 is inferior, but it's cheaper.DDR2 was not inferior until DDR3 came out. Inferior is a relative term, there has to be something better. Is English not your first language?
natebsi - Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - link
Sheesh. Personal attack much?TA152H - Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - link
Actually, you don't think his rant was a personal attack? If you don't agree with some people, you are just listening to marketing hype, or don't understand this or that. Instead of realizing there are reasons for both DDR2 (cost and compatibility) and DDR3 (everything else), you get people who accuse you of not understanding anything, and just being part of some company's marketing machine. It's so uneducated and insulting, it warrants something of the same kind back.Anyone that thinks DDR3 is completely useless, even now, is an idiot. This type of person is not worth arguing with. They are both useful, right now, and the arguments should really be about the gray areas where they begin to overlap. I might think DDR3's area is a little bigger than most, but at least I recognize that there are many people that are better off with DDR2. By the same token, I expect people to have at least basic intelligence and recognize there are areas where DDR3 makes more sense, even now. Pure performance always has a place, especially when it costs only $500, or less, more.
aeternitas - Sunday, December 9, 2007 - link
Grats on being the article clown.yyrkoon - Thursday, November 22, 2007 - link
I think the point if entirely lost on you.First, you can for instance get the same overclocks from DDR2 memory(at least from what I've seen here, because even my Promos 800 sticks can hit 1:1 475Mhz FSB which is 10Mhz faster than what I saw in the benches here).
Secondly, a system with 4GB of DDR2 vs 1-2GB of DDR3 *will* be more responsive. You can argue about it all you want, until you're blue in the face, and the only thing you will prove is that you have no actual hands on experience. Yes, this is even on a system with a 32BIT OS.
Thirdly, remember all the discussion a while back about AMD systems not performing any better than the Intel C2D systems despite having faster memory capabilities?
Lastly, even the writer of this article said the differences between the DDR2, and DDR3 system was barely a whisper . . .
But, you're right, anyone claiming that DDR3 RIGHT NOW is useless is an idiot, because they obviously can not see the eManhood effect capabilities here in saying that they paid X amount more for DDR3 vs DDR2. Anyone who has bragged about their $3000 usd set of car rims being much better than the stock rims that came with the car can surely see this point.
Griswold - Tuesday, November 20, 2007 - link
Oh yea I bet DDR3 makes perfect sense in your basement "lab" where you run your benchmarks all day long. Instead of yapping like a chihuaha with a superiority complex, you could instead just provide some realworld applications that make DDR3 not look like a waste of money right here, right now with todays hardware.Future proofing my ass, get a clue.