Corsair 4400C25: Taking Samsung TCCD to New Heights
by Wesley Fink on January 4, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Test Results: Corsair XMS4404v1.1
To be considered stable for test purposes, Quake3 benchmark, UT2003 Demo, Super PI, Aquamark 3, and Comanche 4 had to complete without incident. Any of these, and in particular Super PI, will crash a less-than stable memory configuration.AMD Test Results
| Corsair XMS4404v1.1 (DDR550) - 2x512Mb Double-Bank | |||||||
| CPU Ratio at 2.4GHz | Memory Speed | Memory Timings & Voltage |
Quake3 fps |
Sandra UNBuffered | Sandra Standard Buffered |
Super PI 2M places (time in sec) |
Wolfenstein - Radar - Enemy Territory fps |
| 12x200 | 400 DDR | 2-3-3-10 2.5V 1T |
501.0 | INT 2641 FLT 2764 |
INT 6051 FLT 601 |
82 | 108.2 |
| 11x218 | 436 DDR | 2-3-3-10 2.6V 1T |
510.1 | INT 2680 FLT 2855 |
INT 6439 FLT 6372 |
81 | 109.7 |
| 10x240 | 480 DDR | 2-3-3-10 2.75V 1T |
522.7 | INT 2903 FLT 3095 |
INT 6684 FLT 6609 |
80 | 112.0 |
| 9x267 | 533 DDR | 2.5-3-3-10 2.75V 1T |
533.3 | INT 3045 FLT 3266 |
INT 6972 FLT 6885 |
78 | 113.3 |
| 8x305 (2.44GHz) |
Highest 1T Mem Speed 610 DDR |
2.5-3-4-10 2.8V 1T |
569.2 | INT 3248 FLT 3467 |
INT 7531 FLT 7441 |
77 | 116.6 |
| 8x318 (2.54GHz) |
Highest 2T Mem Speed 636 DDR |
3-4-4-10 2.85V 2T |
568.7 | INT 3088 FLT 3149 |
INT 7011 FLT 7549 |
76 | 122.6 |
| 9x295 (2.75GHz) |
Highest Performance 590 DDR |
2.5-4-3-10 2.8v 1T |
572.8 | INT 3346 FLT 3538 |
INT 7712 FLT 7549 |
72 | 122.9 |
Corsair handily turns in the highest memory performance that we have yet seen on the Athlon 64. The highest 2T value of DDR636, the Highest 1T value of 610, and the Top Performance of 9x295 at 1T are all records on the AMD platform. It is clear that Corsair aimed for best performance at the top with this DDR550 memory, since performance at DDR400 is not up to the same standards achieved at the top. Corsair says that modules will typically do 2-2-2 timings at DDR400, but the best that we could do at any voltage is 2-3-3 at DDR400. Corsair selected Samsung TCCD chips for absolute best performance at the top and they clearly succeeded in reaching this goal. The compromise was a bit less performance at DDR400 - at least with the modules we tested.
Intel Test Results
| Corsair XMS4404v1.1 (DDR550) - 2x512Mb Double-Bank | ||||||
| Speed | Memory Timings & Voltage |
Quake3 fps |
Sandra UNBuffered | Sandra Standard Buffered |
Super PI 2M places (time in sec) |
RCW-ET fps |
| 400DDR 800FSB |
2-3-3-5 2.5V |
331.0 | INT 2720 FLT 2728 |
INT 4457 FLT 4453 |
130 | 70.1 |
| 433DDR 866FSB |
2-3-3-5 2.55V |
358.1 | INT 2910 FLT 2827 |
INT 4784 FLT 4802 |
120 | 77.4 |
| 466DDR 933FSB |
2-3-3-5 2.65V |
384.5 | INT 3107 FLT 3187 |
INT 5162 FLT 5189 |
112 | 83.0 |
| 500DDR 1000FSB |
2-3-3-5 2.75V |
409.1 | INT 3348 FLT 3396 |
INT 5567 FLT 5561 |
104 | 89.6 |
| 533DDR 1066FSB |
2.5-3-3-5 2.75V |
430.3 | INT 3580 FLT 3623 |
INT 5947 FLT 5851 |
98 | 94.9 |
| 572DDR 1144FSB |
2.5-4-4-6 2.85V |
450.1 | INT 3763 FLT 3799 |
INT 6348 FLT 6273 |
93 | 97.8 |
The pattern is similar on the Intel memory platform, although the domination by Corsair at the top of the performance charts is not nearly so clear. Corsair lags the best TCCD memory in performance at DDR400, but by DDR466, the superior high-end performance of Corsair DDR550 has established itself. As speed further increases, the advantage of the Corsair DDR550 widens.
After looking at both Intel and AMD performance results, it is obvious that Corsair has binned Samsung TCCD for this memory with the clear goal of performance at the top. Corsair rating the memory at DDR550 instead of the DDR400 used in most other TCCD memory is clearly justified with this emphasis on the top-end of memory performance. Corsair had to compromise DDR400 performance a bit - at least on the modules that we tested - to achieve the incredible top-end results that we see in these benchmarks.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
23 Comments
View All Comments
kmmatney - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
The review did have some mid-range memory in the tests. Their value was noted in the last sentence of the review, but it should be highlighted more.According to the review, the PQI turbo 3200 performed almost as well, but is almost half the price! The money saved can be spent on a cpu or video upgrade.
A quick glance at NewEgg shows PQI turbo 4000 memory priced at $95.50, which I think is a good deal.
PrinceGaz - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
#6- I've been wondering about the value/mid-range round-up too. Looking at the AMD 533/2.4GHz results page, the largest difference between the best and worst memory types in the real-world applications is just over 3%, and these are applications that were chosen because they are more affected by memory-bandwidth than usual. At the end of every review of premium memory it should say "it doesn't really matter which premium module you get for an AMD system so buy the cheapest as it'll make no real difference in performance, and the money would be better spent on a higher-rated CPU or better cooling". Maybe the worry is that if they test some budget/mid-range memory, they'll find you'd be better off getting that instead of the premium modules because it makes so little difference, and that would annoy the companies that send them premium samples :pIntel platforms are more affected by memory bandwidth, but they are moving to DDR2 which makes DDR tests increasingly irrelevant for them.
HardwareD00d - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
Wes - Thank you for the clarification.I'll trade you my 2 sticks of ShikaXRam for your Corsair sample. ;)
Wesley Fink - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
#9 - No conspiracy intended. Our AMD memory test bed was not even set up when we tested the Shikatronics memory in June. We have stated many times that Hynix B, the chipsets used in the Shikatronics, does not generally perform as well on the Athlon 64 platform as it does on Intel. TCCD usually does better on AMD than Intel. Also the timings are 3-4-4 on the Shika which are slower than TCCD at the same memory speed.Just to make sure we weren't blowing smoke, I popped the Shikatronics 550 into the AMD test bed. It did it's specified DDR550 on the A64 at 3-4-4-10 2.85V, which is excellent for Hynix B on AMD. However, I could not make it to even DDR560 as the memory topped out at 554 on the AMD platform.
We are testing new memory on both AMD and Intel, but we have not gone back to past Hynix B dimms for an AMD update, nor do we plan to.
HardwareD00d - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
I've got the Shikatronics PC4400 DC kit for my Athlon64, and I'd like to see that compared against the Corsair modules. It IS on the Intel side, and is the clear winner. Seems strange that you wouldn't compare the "priorly fastest" memory (per a previous review) against the new Corsair modules. This omission seems a little fishy to me.erinlegault - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
Maybe other PC4400 rated memory from other companies should be compared, especially the OCZ PC4200 Pt Series ram. All the ram used was PC3200, except for the PC3700 OCZ, and overclocked from the rated 400MHz to near 600MHz. The Corsair PC4400 memory was only overclocked from the rated 550MHz to 636MHz. I would personally like to see if any other PC4000 or higher rated memory could do any better.Wesley Fink - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
#2 - We used 5X HT at stock speeds, 4X HT for 218 and 240, and 3X HT for 267 up. All other settings are in the reviews.#4 - With the huge number of memories reviewed at AnandTech, we feel comfortable in talking about relative positioning of tested memory. With 28 memories compared in performance on the Intel charts and seven different DDR400 2-2-2 memories in the AMD charts, there is certainly comparative info to draw conclusions. The Corsair 4400C25 proved to reach the highest FSB, but it was not the best choice in the DDR400 to DDR450 range. We state that clearly in our conclusion.
eetnoyer - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
Wow, another elitist memory review. As if TCCD weren't reviewed to death already. By the way, still waiting for that value memory round-up. Any idea when you will be able to get around to reviewing memory products that are useful for the majority of your users?Marlowe - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
Really interesting IMO.. But I would love if you could review the A-Data Vitesta PC4800 ram also. They are based on TCCD and have maby Brainpower PCB. On my P4C800 my 2x512 kit can do 2-2-2-5 at 220MHz and tops out around 275-280 MHz on 2,5-3-3-5, both on 2,85V. Well that's what I could do with my 3,0E and watercooling anyways :P Also they're quite affordable in comparison.arswihart - Tuesday, January 4, 2005 - link
anandtech reviews are more and more praising a product as ultimate, best, etc... all based on in some cases, insufficient testing to say such things. granted all review sites do that to some respect, its just the conclusions pages are getting kind of narrow viewed as if they have a whole picture and are 100% sure of there recommendations, while often they haven't tested enough competing products or taken all of their recommended product's potential drawbacks or limitations into consideration. still, its a really good review site