Corsair 4400C25: Taking Samsung TCCD to New Heights
by Wesley Fink on January 4, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Performance Comparisons
Performance of the Corsair TwinX1024-4400C25 was compared to all of the memory recently tested on both the AMD Athlon 64 test bed and the Intel 875 memory test bed in:PQI & G. Skill: New Choices in 2-2-2 Memory
Athlon 64 Memory: Rewriting the Rules
OCZ 3700 Gold Rev. 3: DDR500 Value for Athlon 64 & Intel 478
Geil PC3200 Ultra X: High Speed & Record Bandwidth
=F-A-S-T= DDR Memory: 2-2-2 Roars on the Scene
Buffalo FireStix: Red Hot Name for a New High-End Memory
New DDR Highs: Shikatronics, OCZ, and the Fastest Memory Yet
The Return of 2-2-2: Corsair 3200XL & Samsung PC4000
OCZ 3700EB: Making Hay with Athlon 64
OCZ 3500EB: The Importance of Balanced Memory Timings
Mushkin PC3200 2-2-2 Special: Last of a Legend
PMI DDR533: A New Name in High-Performance Memory
Samsung PC3700: DDR466 Memory for the Masses
Kingmax Hardcore Memory: Tiny BGA Reaches For Top Speed
New Memory Highs: Corsair and OCZ Introduce DDR550
OCZ PC3700 Gold Rev. 2: The Universal Soldier
OCZ 4200EL: Tops in Memory Performance
Mushkin PC4000 High Performance: DDR500 PLUS
Corsair TwinX1024-4000 PRO: Improving DDR500 Performance
Mushkin & Adata: 2 for the Fast-Timings Lane
Searching for the Memory Holy Grail - Part 2
AMD Memory Comparisons
Corsair TwinX1024-4400C25 was compared to other memory included in our recent Athlon 64 Memory Roundup. Memory performance was compared at 200x12 (2.4Ghz, DDR400), 218x11 (2.4Ghz, DDR438), 240x10 (2.4Ghz, DDR480), 267x9 (2.4Ghz, DDR533), the Highest Memory Speed that could be reached, and the Highest Memory Performance Settings that we could reach. With a constant CPU speed, memory comparisons show the true impact of faster speed and slower memory timings on memory performance.Intel Memory Comparisons
For easier comparison to other TCCD memory on the Intel platform, we have color-coded memory from revent reviews of DDR400 2-2-2 memory in light green. Memory in those reviews are predominately based on Samsung TCCD memory chips. Memory performance was compared at DDR400, DDR433, DDR466, DDR500, DDR533 (where possible), and the highest stable overclock that we could achieve, which would run Quake 3, UT2003, and Super PI to 2MM places.Results are compared for Quake 3, Sandra UNBufferred Memory Test, and Super PI. SiSoft Sandra 2004 reports 2 results for each memory test - an Integer value and a Float value. Results reported in our charts are the result of averaging the INT and FLOAT scores, which are normally close in value. In other words, INT and FLOAT scores were added and divided by 2 for our reported score.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
View All Comments
DonCornelius - Saturday, January 22, 2005 - link
Can anyone tell me why we can't get 2-2-2 timings on 1GB size DIMMs? The only DIMMs I see with this timings are 512MB and 256MB. Is this marketing or a limit on the technology?Live - Thursday, January 6, 2005 - link
If what PrinceGaz is sayimng about memory on the AMD platform is true I think it would warrant some clarification from Anandtech. If money is an object what gives best bang for the buck. Cheap memory and faster CPU or the other way around?PrinceGaz - Wednesday, January 5, 2005 - link
from #20- "#19 - The $82 PQI Turbo stuff at newegg is 2.5-3-3 timing RAM. The cheapest you can get a 2-2-2 512MB stick of RAM at newegg is the Patriot for $107."Given that we've already got a 2.5-3-3 timings with the PQI, and it was the module that at most was 3% slower on memory-bandwidth bound applications with the Athlon 64, I think that answers my question about why budget memory has not been covered.
You may as well save still more money and get brand-name value-products for an AMD box, unless you are going for a high-end overclocking system with an FX-55 where every component is the best in it's class. Even if overclocking you aren't going to suffer because there is no such thing as an asynchronous memory frequency with an Athlon 64 (there is no Northbridge between the CPU and memory) so just set the budget memory to "DDR333" and you'll be fine for overclocking up to about DDR500.
Actually when you combine the S939 Athlon 64's lack of dependence on memory bandwidth with it's onboard memory controller that ensures any memory speed is equally efficient; when building a mid-range Athlon 64 box you may as well just get cheap brand-name DDR400 and run it at what ever speed it is happiest with after overclocking your CPU. Which makes all these high-end memory review articles pointless for all except extreme overclockers.
eetnoyer - Wednesday, January 5, 2005 - link
#19 - The $82 PQI Turbo stuff at newegg is 2.5-3-3 timing RAM. The cheapest you can get a 2-2-2 512MB stick of RAM at newegg is the Patriot for $107.kmmatney - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
With NewEgg having PQI turbo 3200 at $82, I thinks that's the best deal, probably worth the extra $10 or so over value RAM. In this review it performed almost as well as the top of the line stuff.Googer - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
Correction:the standard JDEC complient ram does not need to be included in the overclocking tests.
Googer - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
All memory should be tested agains JDEC Standard Ramusing JDEC standard Timings For DDR400. Standard ISSUE Crucial (not ballistix) should also be included as a base compairson for all DDR400 Tests.
When it comes to overclocking the JDEC complient ram
does not need to be tested becuase that was never the intent of its design.
Fricardo - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
#'s 6,12,14,15Here here. I couldn't care less about timings...it's not worth the cash to get ever so slightly more performance. I'd just like some decent RAM that'll let me overclock an A64, nothing fancy.
miketheidiot - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
Cheap memory review! Enough of this expensive junk.JustAnAverageGuy - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
#13I think he was thinking more along the lines of say Kingston\Corsair ValueRAM which runs for around $65-70 for a 512MB stick.
Zebo did something similar (see CPU & OC forums), but I've been waiting for the AnandTech review.