backtop

Hardware Kingston Announces CL5 DDR3
Anh Tuan Huynh (Blog) - July 12, 2007 1:46 PM
Print E-mail del.icio.us 30 comment(s) - last by Stutz Lannigan.. on Jul 19 at 8:22 PM

Kingston HyperX DDR3 module (Source: Kingston)
New 1375 MHz HyperX modules deliver ultra low latencies

Kingston Technology today announced its ultra low-latency, or ULL, DDR3 HyperX memory modules. The new ULL PC3 HyperX modules arrive capable of speeds up to 1375 MHz. Kingston rates the ULL PC3 1375 MHz HyperX with a CAS latency of 5, a new low for DDR3 latencies.

“Lower CAS latencies deliver better performance without driving thermal conditions that would require extra cooling in a system,” said Mark Tekunoff, senior technology manager, Kingston. “As a high-volume production company, Kingston’s goal is to launch true production memory that can run at full speed in normal dual channel, dual module configurations.”

Kingston offers the new ULL PC3 1375 MHz HyperX modules in two packages – a single 1GB module or a 2x1GB kit for dual-channel. Manufacturer suggested retail pricing for the ULL PC3 1375 MHz HyperX modules start at $400 for the KHX11000D3UL/1G single 1GB module and $800 for the KHX11000D3ULK2/2G dual-channel kit.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Thats high, and good. But man!
By Fusible on 7/12/2007 1:54:45 PM , Rating: 2
Thats pretty expensive, I'll stick with DDR2 as long as I can. It's not worth it right now, but those are pretty appealing with such low latencies. But the price killed it for me. :(




RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By RussianSensation on 7/12/2007 2:05:15 PM , Rating: 5
I thought about buying $80 Corsair XMS2 6400 2GB kit but then I realized I only had to spend 10x more to get whooping 2% performance increase. I am in!!!


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By GhandiInstinct on 7/12/2007 2:11:04 PM , Rating: 2
ti prav malchik...

who would spend that much money for something that gives you insignificant performance.


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By MrBungle123 on 7/12/2007 3:37:02 PM , Rating: 5
people who masturbate to their 3DMark scores.


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By MaK2000 on 7/13/2007 4:18:46 PM , Rating: 2
Was that you looking in my window?


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By Pirks on 7/12/07, Rating: -1
RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By sirius4k on 7/13/2007 2:46:00 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
and who cares if intel rig is so much more expensive than amd one

You know that's not true right ??


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By murphyslabrat on 7/13/2007 12:24:41 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You know that's not true right ??


Uhm, Actaully, it is:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...
vs.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...

and that is a fairly close comparison, the 6000+ being on the loosing side of neck and neck.

$318+free shipping(e6600/2.66/4M
vs
$169.99+free shipping(6000+/3.0/2M).

Motherboards were about 15% more expensive, on average, for equivelant Mobos(same company, same tier; which is about as close to "hard-and-fast" as you can get)

It appears as though AMD is actually cheaper, at least untill Intel's next price cuts, at which time real prices will probably put the e6600 at ~$200.


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By MaK2000 on 7/13/2007 4:26:29 PM , Rating: 2
Just wanted to point out that you linked to the E6700. The E66 is 222 not 318 and the E66 is faster already but it will crush the 6000 in OCing potential.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8...


By 3kliksphilip on 7/15/2007 1:12:06 PM , Rating: 2
Which one's better for overclocking?


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By Pirks on 7/13/07, Rating: 0
RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By SmokeRngs on 7/13/2007 11:20:51 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
they replace their amd cpus with intel ones, which gives them extra 1 second of windows boot time or extra 5 fps in their beloved shooter


While I did pay a bit more upfront for my C2D purchase over an Athlon X2 back at the end of December, I don't regret it. Ripping and encoding a couple of hundred CDs along with a good number of DVDs takes a bit of time. The C2D excels over AMD in those areas as well as being a great overclocker. I have my E6400 up to 3.4 Ghz stable. That has been a large performance increase for me.

I also do a bit of folding and I'll take as much efficient clock speed as I can get to get the results done faster. My overclocked C2D rapes X2's in folding times. I'd say for the extra I paid over an AMD rig, I got my money's worth.


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By Pirks on 7/13/2007 3:37:43 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
I have my E6400 up to 3.4 Ghz stable
I wasn't talking about overclocking, since everyone knows Intel chips are faster than AMD when overclocked. I was talking about most users who just buy hardware as is and don't tweak it much


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By Jedi2155 on 7/13/2007 1:24:35 AM , Rating: 2
Extreme Editions anyone?


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By omnicronx on 7/12/2007 2:16:43 PM , Rating: 2
Im still sticking with ddr1 haha. DDR3 will not give you any big improvements until it reaches 1600mhz with low latencies.
i recently looked a review on dt with ddr3 ram compared to out of spec overclocked ddr2 ram on intels new x95 chipset and ddr3 only gave minor improvements while the chipset gave up to 15% improvements on both modules.

in the end you pay a premium to be on the cutting edge ;)


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By pnyffeler on 7/12/2007 2:58:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Im still sticking with ddr1 haha.


Has there been any comparisons between DDR, DDR2, and DDR3 and their real world performance increases? I know it's difficult, since processors and chipsets are different for each of those memory, but how does memory affect gaming and application speeds? I mean, wanting to get to the millionth position of Pi is great and all, but that won't make me buy DDR3.


By omnicronx on 7/12/2007 3:27:43 PM , Rating: 2
depends on what you do, gaming or any other bandwidth intense applications of course you will probably see an improvement.
But for normal tasks such as surfing the web or watching movies, i cant even tell the difference between different CAS ratings. (i could not tell the difference between CAS3 and CAS2 on ddr1 ram when browsing the web or doing simple tasks)

some people see the difference others dont, i for one do not notice the few ms on normal daily tasks


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By Tmansport on 7/12/2007 5:04:33 PM , Rating: 2
Gaming in particular is very sensitive to latency. It has been shown that having extremely tight timings can be better for gaming then say an extra 66mhz of memory speed. That is why when you switch from DDR to DDR2 to DDR3 you have to drastically increase the speed of the ram to get comparitive performance because the latency is increased.


RE: Thats high, and good. But man!
By danrien on 7/12/2007 8:25:41 PM , Rating: 2
ddr3 is quad pumped so its running at a stock speed of 343.75 MHz. not too much of a clock speed boost compared to DDR2 and DDR. But since the memory is being accessed four times in a clock, latencies go up.


By murphyslabrat on 7/13/2007 12:04:52 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
ddr3 is quad pumped...

As Criminal Quint would say, "Incorrectness!"(anyone who loved the Timon & Pumba series should get that that).

Try actually reading something about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR3_SDRAM.
Each successive iteration of DDR specs(1,2,3) doubles the local prefetch buffer, allowing for faster speeds with a latency cost. So, while only being double clocked(hence Double Data Rate-ddr) it has better stability at much higher actual speeds.

-Murphy


Kingston's new add slogan
By darkpaw on 7/12/2007 4:01:39 PM , Rating: 5
Typical day in the marketing department:

What to call the new product?

Memory for retards?

Nah, accurate but potentially offensive.

How about Paris Hilton brand Memory?

Perfect, its for people with tons of money and no brains what-so-ever. Brilliant!

Now we just need to color it pink and put fake diamonds on it to capture the bling crowd!




By Stutz Lannigan on 7/19/2007 8:22:52 PM , Rating: 2
Geez listen to yourselves.... don't blame Kingston, blame Intel and AMD for shoving new technology down our throats. Yes all this is going to make Windows boot just a second faster so what? If you want to rock your Athlon XP and 9200 AGP card more power to you. Don't blame the technology companies for releasing new stuff. There are going to be those that demand the latest and greatest. Some buy sports cars capable of 200 MPG when the speed limit is 65, others buy the latest Titanium golf club so they can hit a ball 10 yards further. Right or wrong it's all around us and probably most of us our guilty of shelling out a few extra bucks to get the latest whatever. Kinda like the time you borrowed an extra $10 from your Mom to get the "cool" wheels for your scooter.....


W00t! CPU upgrade time!
By HETT on 7/12/2007 2:07:50 PM , Rating: 2
$800 for 2GB of DDR3? Hmmm.... I could apply part of that $800 towards an upgrade from a C2Q Q6600 to a C2E QX6800.... ;)




RE: W00t! CPU upgrade time!
By Dactyl on 7/13/2007 8:22:09 AM , Rating: 2
$800 for 2GB of DDR3?

That's a perfectly reasonable price--it's what a 2GB stick of DDR2 cost just last year!

Kingston has to charge high prices because they have only a very limited number of chips performing so well. If they only charged $600 per 2GB stick, they would sell out.


RE: W00t! CPU upgrade time!
By coldpower27 on 7/14/2007 9:35:07 PM , Rating: 2
2GB sticks still have a price premium over 2x1Gb sticks right now.

This isn't even comparable a 2x1Gb Kit of DDR3 for 800USD, is still pretty outrageous at this point in time, but overtime it will drop I suppose.


Sigh....
By jgigz on 7/13/2007 6:56:42 AM , Rating: 3
I love how everyone always gets pissed about new technology not being that big of an improvement over the current generation. Everyone always says its not worth the money etc etc, while this is true, the thing you have to realize is that it is new technology, it was devoloped because they have reached the physyical limitations or have no where else to go in the previous generation. DDR2 was the same way, and it matured into from what I understand to be a pretty signifigant improvement over DDR. DDR3 will do the same thin, it just takes time. If you don't see any point in buying it in the current status then don't, but the fact that it is so new and does have an improvement on the latest and greatest from the previousgeneration means it will only get better.




RE: Sigh....
By LogicallyGenius on 7/14/2007 4:02:33 AM , Rating: 2
thats a scam dear


I want higher density
By phil126 on 7/12/2007 6:23:05 PM , Rating: 2
I want higher density RAM. I am tired of these 2 Gig and 4 Gig kits. It has been around for about 5 years now. How come I cannot by 8 Gig sticks at this point. I would have thought that 2 and 4 Gig sticks would be more common place by this point.




RE: I want higher density
By ultimaone on 7/12/2007 11:43:11 PM , Rating: 2
because windows xp couldn't see beyond 4 gb of memory....

so what would a 8 gb stick do for you ?
nadda..


By Naviblue on 7/12/2007 2:59:52 PM , Rating: 3
Because those prices are fairly unreasonable, even if it's "bleeding edge". Besides, it's not truly innovative if there's no real benefit besides bragging rights, which would be dumb if anyone even tried to brag about it. You could build a descent PC at the cost of 2 gigs of DDR3.




"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen

DailyTech Poll
Which web browser do you use on your primary personal machine? 






44 Comments







botimage
Copyright 2009 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki