Corsair 4400C25: Taking Samsung TCCD to New Heights
by Wesley Fink on January 4, 2005 12:05 AM EST- Posted in
- Memory
AMD Performance Test Configuration
The Corsair TwinX1024-4400C25 were first tested on the new Athlon 64 memory test bed. You can find more information on the new memory test setup in Athlon 64 Memory: Rewriting the Rules.The A64 test bed includes components that have been proven in Socket 939 Athlon 64 benchmarking, such as the Gold Editors Choice MSI K8N Neo2, the completely unlocked Socket 939 FX53, and the OCZ Power Stream 520 Power Supply. Since the Athlon 64 tests represent a new series of DDR testing, we have chosen the current generation nVidia 6800 Ultra video card for benchmarking. We have found the 6800 Ultra to be a particularly good match to nVidia nForce3 Ultra motherboards.
All other basic test conditions attempted to mirror those used in our earlier Intel memory reviews. However, test results are not directly comparable to tests performed on the Intel test bed.
| AMD nForce3 Ultra Performance Test Configuration | |
| Processor(s): | AMD FX53 Athlon 64 (2.4GHz, Socket 939, Dual Channel, 1000HT) |
| RAM: | Corsair TwinX1024-4400C25 (DS) 2X512MB G. Skill TCCD (DS) 2X512MB PQI 3200 Turbo (DS) 2X512MB Crucial Ballistix (DS) 2X512MB Geil PC3200 Ultra X (DS) 2X512MB OCZ PC3200 Platinum Rev 2 (DS) 2X512MB OCZ PC3700 Gold Rev 3 (DS) 2X512MB |
| Hard Drives | Seagate 120GB PATA (IDE) 7200RPM 8MB Cache |
| PCI/AGP Speed | Fixed at 33/66 |
| Bus Master Drivers: | nVidia nForce Platform Driver 4.24 (5-10-2004) |
| Video Card(s): | nVidia 6800 Ultra 256MB, 256MB aperture, 1024x768x32 |
| Video Drivers: | nVidia Forceware 61.77 |
| Power Supply: | OCZ Power Stream 520W |
| Operating System(s): | Windows XP Professional SP1 |
| Motherboards: | MSI K8N Neo2 |
We have found the fastest performance on AMD Athlon 64 chipsets (nForce3, VIA K8T800 PRO) to be achieved at Cycle Time or tRAS of 10. Athlon 64 platform benchmarks were therefore run with the tRAS timing of 10 for all A64 benchmarks.
Test Settings
The FX53 is completely unlocked, which allows a different approach to memory testing that truly measures performance differences in memory speed alone. All tests were run with CPU speed as close to the specified 2.4GHz of the FX53 as possible, with CPU speed/Memory Speed increased at lower multipliers to achieve 2.4Ghz. This approach allows the true measurement of the impact of higher memory speed and timings on performance, since CPU speed is fixed, removing CPU speed as a factor in memory performance.The following settings were tested with the Corsair DDR550 on the Athlon 64 test bed:
- 12x200/DDR400 - the highest stock memory speed supported on K8T800-Pro/nF3-4/SiS755-FX motherboards.
- 11x218/DDR436 - a ratio near the standard DDR433 speed
- 10x240/DDR480 - a ratio near the standard rating of DDR466
- 9x267/DDR533 - a standard memory speed used in testing other high-speed memory
- Highest Memory Speed - the highest memory speed that we could achieve regardless of the multiplier. This setting was generally achieved at a 2T command rate and performance is often poorer than slower memory timings at a 1T Command Rate.
- Highest Performance - the highest memory performance settings that we could achieve. This setting is normally the highest stable speed using a 1T Command Rate.
We ran our standard suite of memory performance benchmarks: Quake 3, Return to Castle Wolfenstein-Enemy Territory-Radar, Super Pi 2M, and Sandra 2004 Standard and UnBuffered. Since the results for Athlon 64 tests are new, we are now including Sandra Buffered (Standard) test results and Sandra UnBuffered test results. RTCW Enemy Territory has also been added as a standard memory benchmark.
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.