Now now... let's not jump to conspiracy theories just yet. Give them the benefit of the doubt. The article is almost a month old now and Mushkin could have lowered the timings on those modules since then...
You're definitely right though, the timings are much lower than what was tested.
I agree, and my open ended "BS" remark was as much if not more directed @ Mushkin as it was @ THG for the reason that their RAM was detected in Everest w/ those timings. Although, I have seen other RAM detected incorrectly in Everest as well.
I'm even more intrigued now as Newegg was showing that RAM @ $169. (out of stock) a few days ago and now it's @ $285.
Big price difference almost overnight and the new price will hardly be justified by the lower timings as pointed out in the article.
Perhaps this new RAM, if it is new, will be included in the next round of testing. For my $$ though, the Aeneon looks rather interesting.
I thought this article had alot of info that was useful for me. Maybe I missed it but I think a recommendation should have been made for people who do not overclock. It seems obvious to me that if you are NOT overclocking you should use the DS (double sided) RAM. I chose the PQI Turbo. It was half the price of the Patriot SS (fastest single sided w/o overclocking).
The risk I made with my RAM order was I went for the PGI TURBO DDR2 800 hoping on the benchmarks of the test in this article. But after the order was sent I realized that the CAS was 5. Maybe since this RAM is theoretically a hight standard (800) I will be able to run it at a faster CAS than 5. Oh well; I'll see how I like it, since I usually run at normal speeds (not overclocked).
I don't really understand some conclusions of this article. In almost every graphic, excluding the bus overclocking ones, I've seen A-Data memory with the bests results. Why is TH saying then that its performance is poor?
I am not an overclocking target, so it would be nice an article for recommending RAM without an overclocking purpose.