Patriot Viper III Review: 2x4 GB at DDR3-2400 C10-12-12 1.65 V
by Ian Cutress on November 18, 2013 1:00 PM ESTOverclocking
When it comes to memory overclocking, there are several ways to approach the issue. Typically memory overclocking is rarely required - only those attempting to run benchmarks need worry about pushing the memory to its uppermost limits. It also depends highly on the memory kits being used - memory is similar to processors in the fact that the ICs are binned to a rated speed. The higher the bin, the better the speed - however if there is a demand for lower speed memory, then the higher bin parts may be declocked to increase supply of the lower clocked component. Similarly, for the high end frequency kits, less than 1% of all ICs tested may actually hit the speed of the kit, hence the price for these kits increase exponentially.
With this in mind, there are several ways a user can approach overclocking memory. The art of overclocking memory can be as complex or as simple as the user would like - typically the dark side of memory overclocking requires deep in-depth knowledge of how memory works at a fundamental level. For the purposes of this review, we are taking overclocking in three different scenarios:
a) From XMP, adjust Command Rate from 2T to 1T
b) From XMP, increase Memory Speed strap (e.g. 1333 MHz -> 1400 -> 1600)
c) From XMP, test a range of sub-timings (e.g. 10-12-12 to 13-15-15 to 8-10-10) and find the best MHz theses are rated.
There is plenty of scope to overclock beyond this, such as adjusting voltages or the voltage of the memory controller – for the purposes of this test we raise the memory voltage to the ‘next stage’ above its rated voltage (1.35V to 1.5V, 1.5V to 1.65V, 1.65V to 1.72V). As long as a user is confident with adjusting these settings, then there is a good chance that the results here will be surpassed. There is also the fact that individual sticks of memory may perform better than the rest of the kit, or that one of the modules could be a complete dud and hold the rest of the kit back. For the purpose of this review we are seeing if the memory out of the box, and the performance of the kit as a whole, will work faster at the rated voltage.
In order to ensure that the kit is stable at the new speed, we run the Linpack test within OCCT for five minutes as well as the PovRay benchmark. This is a small but thorough test, and we understand that users may wish to stability test for longer to reassure themselves of a longer element of stability. However for the purposes of throughput, a five minute test will catch immediate errors from the overclocking of the memory.
With this in mind, the kit performed as follows:
| Test | PovRay | OCCT |
| XMP | 1619.08 | 78C |
|---|---|---|
| XMP, 2T to 1T | 1607.58 | 78C |
| 2600 10-12-12 | 1596.28 | 78C |
| 2666 10-12-12 | 1610.35 | 78C |
| 2800 10-12-12 | No Boot | No Boot |
To jump from the 2400 MHz memory strap and finish up at 2666 MHz, out of the box, is always a positive note about a memory kit. There's performance for free if you want it.
| Subtimings | Peak MHz | PovRay | OCCT | Final PI |
| 7-9-9 | 1866 | 1591.49 | 76C | 267 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 8-10-10 | 2133 | 1621.11 | 77C | 267 |
| 9-11-11 | 2400 | 1612.14 | 77C | 267 |
| 10-12-12 | 2666 | 1619.43 | 76C | 267 |
| 11-13-13 | 2666 | 1621.53 | 77C | 242 |
| 12-14-14 | 2666 | 1616.83 | 76C | 222 |
| 13-15-15 | 2666 | 1607.44 | 77C | 205 |
Moving through the subtimings, 2666 MHz (at 1.72 volts) is the limit, giving a peak PI of 267. After 10-12-12, loosening the subtimings did nothing for the MHz, and thus giving our peak value.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
48 Comments
View All Comments
julandorid - Monday, November 18, 2013 - link
Thanks for the review, but what exactly "featured review" means?IanCutress - Monday, November 18, 2013 - link
That's a little tagline we can attach to the front page articles when they're on the top.Wall Street - Monday, November 18, 2013 - link
I think that it is the opposite of capsule review. A featured review is a.k.a. a full review.TemjinGold - Monday, November 18, 2013 - link
Whoa... why is the 2X4 by GSkill $520?IanCutress - Monday, November 18, 2013 - link
DDR-3000 C12: you have to bin a lot of ICs to get ones with the right voltage/performance characteristics for that kit. Same reason why the more expensive CPUs are also the faster (in MHz numbers or cores) than the cheaper ones.ShieTar - Tuesday, November 19, 2013 - link
True. But you can get DDR 2666 with CL10 for about 100€, so a set with an 7% shorter access time (higher "PI" as Ian insists on calling it), and only a 11% lower transfer rate for about a fifth of the price.The 500$ kit seems to be exclusively for those who don't have to work for their money, or maybe those who are hunting records as a hobby.
DanNeely - Tuesday, November 19, 2013 - link
The very top of the line always is extremely expensive, and - when it's the result of extreme binning - has to be in order to limit demand to the miniscule supply available.Gen-An - Tuesday, November 19, 2013 - link
Exactly, they have to test the ICs individually with those tester kits and bin them for speed. I just find it amazing that a chip that is designed for say, 1600 C11 at 1.5v has the potential to run 3100 C12 with 1.65v, that's nearly double its rated clock speed with a mere 0.15v bump in voltage.sf101 - Monday, December 9, 2013 - link
If you want 2400 guaranteed out of the box you pay the premiums.most of the 2133 mhz black momba sticks could also do 2666mhz @ 10-13-10-30-2t but your voltages may vary.
And more than likely some of that is because of individual IMC tolerances per cpu.
Franzen4Real - Monday, November 18, 2013 - link
When it comes to memory, over the years I have tried to read up on different reviews and look at benchmarks in an attempt to understand when it is better to run tighter timings/lower MHz as opposed to looser timings/higher bandwidth. I'm sure it is a case by case basis, but was wondering if the always knowledgeable and helpful Anandtech commenters could give me a quick, dummy terms, explanation of when tight timings or clockspeed is better? Looking at your graph, it shows the C7 1866 through C10 2666 all having the same performance index score, but what situations do those different timings/MHz become better/worse? I hope this isn't too in depth of a question.I don't know if this analogy is correct, but I'm seeing it as if RAM was a race car on a track, high bandwidth/loose timings would mean your car travels faster, but has to do more laps around the track to complete. Tight timings/lower bandwidth means the car travels slower but doesn't have to do as many laps to complete. If I am correct on this, at what point does less laps trump traveling faster?
As a side note, I am looking to build a Haswell desktop in Jan/Feb. It will have one GPU (probably one of the R9's) and more than likely a 2x8gb RAM kit. My usage would very roughly be 70% gaming, 25% rendering in 3DS Max and using some Adobe programs, 5% or less video encoding. I'm looking for help in deciding what to look for in this scenario, but also to finally have a better understanding of how these settings affect different workloads.
Sorry for the wall of text!!