Searching for the Memory Holy Grail - Part 2
by Wesley Fink on August 26, 2003 11:11 PM EST- Posted in
- Memory
Corsair XMS4000
Click the image to view a larger picture.
Corsair DDR500 carries the XMS label, which Corsair uses for their high-performance memory. Modules are packaged with the Corsair trademark low-luster black aluminum heatspreaders and are supplied as a matched pair in a TwinX kit. Corsair uses Hynix chips in their DDR500 — the same chips used by OCZ and Geil.
Corsair has a reputation for reliably meeting or exceeding their performance specifications, and their XMS4000 performed well at DDR500, overclocking to a stable DDR530. While this is excellent performance, we were a bit surprised that the other Hynix chip entries — OCZ and Geil — both overclocked to significantly higher speeds than Corsair. Other reviews that we have seen of Corsair XMS4000 are showing very similar overclocks to what we found, so DDR530 appears to be a typical overclock for Corsair XMS4000.
Corsair XMS4000 — 2 x 512 MB Double-Bank | |||||
Speed | Memory Timings & Voltage | Quake3 fps |
Sandra UNBuffered | Sandra Standard Buffered | Super PI 2M places (time in sec) |
400DDR 800FSB |
2.5-3-4-5 2.55V |
319.63 | INT 2636 FLT 2647 |
INT 4702 FLT 4740 |
132 |
500DDR 1000FSB |
2.5-3-4-6 2.65V |
400.20 | INT 3215 FLT 3246 |
INT 5961 FLT 5951 |
107 |
530DDR 1060FSB |
3-4-4-8 2.85V |
417.43 | INT 3420 FLT 3443 |
INT 6263 FLT 6216 |
101 |
77 Comments
View All Comments
Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
I am tired of setting the memory timing and bench mark all the time. Is there a program there which can tell me what kind of results I would get? Say if I can increase my CPU by 5 MHz but have to set back my memory timing a bit, which way should I go?oldfart - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
Here are some reviews comparing tight timings Vs loose:http://www.hardtecs4u.com/reviews/2003/ddr400_roun... (need language translator)
http://www.octools.com/index.cgi?caller=articles/c...
http://www.3dxtreme.org/Corsair_xms3700_twinx_p1.s...
Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
I think this was an extremely helpful and thorough review. There was one comparison, though, that I would find most helpful and haven't found anywhere. I'm currently debating the importance of running synchronously, and thus found the section "Does memory speed really matter in the real world" extremely interesting. However, I would have greatly preferred one additional test -- running 1066FSB at 3:2 and 5:4 with memory with tight timings (2-2-2-5), since my real debate is whether to buy PC3200 or PC3500 with tight timings and run at 5:4 or 3:2, or PC4000 with loose timings and run at 1:1. While I expect that the synchronous memory would result in better performance, I'd really like to know how much better, since PC4000 memory is expensive!Thanks,
Steve
Dennis Travis - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
Great Review Wes. Keep Em coming. I am not "PAID" to say this either. I wanted to. I am getting nothing for it either. Just the satisfaction of telling Wes I loved his review.Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
Great review Wesley. Nah I'm not paid to say this, I just enjoyed the review!Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
I have tested Kingston HyperX RAM at 1:1 3-4-4-8 @ DDR500, and 5:4 2-2-2-5 @ DDR400 at the same FSBs on a P4P800, with MAM Enabled and Turbo performance mode in both cases. While the 1:1 gets about 3-5% better Sandra bandwidth scores (buffered and unbuffered), SuperPI completes about 1.5% sooner at the 5:4 settings.So real-world performance may be slightly better at 5:4, but you won't win any Sandra bragging rights with it.
--MeowChow
Anonymous User - Thursday, August 28, 2003 - link
oldfart - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Wow, looks I'm not the only guy who wants to see250 FSB
1:1 3-4-4-8
5:4 2-2-2-6
type of testing. I've seen several reviews that show the lower latency ram @ 5:4 to be faster.
Part 3??
Anonymous User - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
Hey Wesley,Thanks for all the good info...
Any chance you could test Various FSB's
5:4 2-2-2-5 vs the same FSB at 1:1 2.5-4-4-7
It would be great to show the readers how the new PC4000 REALLY compares to older slower low latency RAM, Mushkin PC3500 level2 would be perfect for that.
Now that would be a seriously good Anandtech caliber review. :D
Wesley Fink - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - link
#32 and #40 -Mushkin did not have a product in our hands when the review was done. In fact I completed a review of Mushkin PC3500 Level II just a couple of days ago, and compared it's performance to ALL the memory in this review at DDR400. I also tested Adata DDR450, which did not meet our requirement of running at DDR500, but DID perform well at DDR400.
The reviews should be up here shortly. The Mushkin did VERY well at DDR400 to DDR450. Mushkin is also about to release DDR500 - but they did not have a product ready in time for our review. We WILL be testing it as soon as it is available if time allows.