Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

a-data vs. corsair

Last response: in Memory
Share
June 4, 2008 6:22:18 PM

ok, I have to choose over these two pair 2*2gb at 800mhz:

Corsair TWIN2X4096-6400C5DHX DDR2 4096 Mb ( 2 x 2048 Mb ), XMS2-6400 2x256Mx64non-ECC 2x240 DIMM, unbuffered, 5-5-5-15, 128Mx8 DRAMs, For 64bit OS, matched XMS2 with DHX Technology

and

A-Data Vitesta DDR2 800+ Extreme || 4GB Dual Kit DDR II 4096MB, 800MHz , SPD 5-5-5-18

price is aprox. equal.

so, I`m not fan of OC, I know nothing about OC, but I would do it if would much improve performance. but will OC erase my warranty? so what to choose?

More about : data corsair

June 4, 2008 6:42:59 PM

I would get the Corsair kit.
A-Data Vitesta is good from what I know but Corsair kits never caused me any problems and they have excellent compatibility and longer warranty.

Yes. Overclocking voids your warranty, but usually not for RAM. :) 
June 4, 2008 7:22:39 PM

corsair it is!

oh, and one more question:

what is all this talk about xp not seeing all 4 gigs? I don`t want to go with xp 64bits or with vista 64 bits, cause I`m mainly gaming.

so, how will my 32 bits xp pro deal with 4 gigs of ram?
Related resources
June 4, 2008 7:31:06 PM

back to the drawing board: corsair is corsair, a-data wins the tests, but in the long run? God, computers are really complicated these days.

and again, will my 32 bits xp see all 4 gigs?
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 7:37:40 PM

Vista 64 is needed to cache and utalize 4 GB or more system RAM. XP 64 will do so also, but not with the 'intelligence' of Vista 64 system RAM caching. Yeah, you will need a 64 bit OS period, XP 32 will not do the job. XP 32 will find your video card's memory and cache that as part of your system's memory. It's not as 'intelligent' as a 64 bit OS, particularily Vista 64.
June 4, 2008 8:03:03 PM

There aren't many 2 GB modules out there with micron chips. I can not verify A-Data or Corsair as being one of them.

Here is list if it helps: (Not complete by any means, only a guide)
http://ramlist.ath.cx/ddr2/

From my own experience with 2 exact systems, one with XP and one with Vista,
XP 32bit with 4 GB of ram is way faster than Vista 32bit with 4 GB of Ram.
I havent compaired XP 64 To Vista 64
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:12:21 PM

The 1GB Vitesta PC6400 are Micron chips. I can not say for sure either about the 2 Gb kits. Possibly not. The ADATA OP listed is a superior performing chip tha the 5CAS Corsiar He listed.

My experience is Vista 32 with 4GB is much faster than XP with the same RAM. I have many systems I have run Vista 32, Vista 64, XP and even two dual boot systems Vista/XP. Vista is my choice. I would never build personal computer (for myself) with XP when Vista 64 is available. Same with Vista 32. I have all of them installed on nearly two dozen machines presently. OP is asking why XP will not show 4GB installed when he buys the memory and installs it and it doesn't show 4 gigs. Not what will perform better.
June 4, 2008 8:14:52 PM

@eperdos
I gather you are not shopping at newegg but the C4DHX kit is cheaper than the C5DHX kit there.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

I'm not sure about the A-Data Vitesta kits but some people said they had issues with Gigabyte boards and their value kits.
The size of the RAM your XP 32-bit will see depends mostly on the graphics card(s) you are using. With a 512MB card 3.1-3.3GB RAM is typical.

@badge and rsetter1
The DHX kit is not the Dominator kit. The kits tested use 1024MB sticks. I would think their relative performance is likely not a good indicator for 2048MB kits (different class of chips)? This more of a question than a statement.
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:19:51 PM

The link I provided has the Corsair CA5 RAM included in the test. The Vitesta clearly outperforms it. I was looking for some 800MHz. 2 x 2 GB DIMMS that would run tight timings at transfer speeds of 8.5 GBs per second (at PC8500 transfer speeds). The Vitesta will do that for me, not the Corsair. I ordered the Vitesta and took a chance.
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:21:28 PM

The C4 Corsair kit is too tall for my P5E-VM HDMI micro board. Those would be a good choice also.
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:28:03 PM

Where is that UPS truck. :sol: 
June 4, 2008 8:33:16 PM

badge said:
Vista 64 is needed to cache and utalize 4 GB or more system RAM. XP 64 will do so also, but not with the 'intelligence' of Vista 64 system RAM caching. Yeah, you will need a 64 bit OS period, XP 32 will not do the job. XP 32 will find your video card's memory and cache that as part of your system's memory. It's not as 'intelligent' as a 64 bit OS, particularily Vista 64.


So with XP you will have @3.5 GB of avaiable Ram and with Vista 2.6 because Vista caches RAM to the OS. Right? Please explain because im following another one of your posts.
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:34:47 PM

Hey Andrius and rsetter, what do you think. I have a lot of systems, but on my main rig I have a q9450 and 8gigs of G. Skill PC8000 at 5-5-5-15 1066MHz. currently. I am thinking to install the 2 x 2GB kit of Adata Vitesta today and get the 4-4-4-12 timings at the same data transfer speeed, 1066 Mhz. I am leaning toward leaving the 8 gigs in here, Vista 64 is good with the RAM and I mean as much as you feed it, it caches. And caches it specifically. What do you think? I think I'll leave the 8 gigs and install the 2 x 2gb Vitesta kit in my P5e-VM HDMI G35 micro system. That system is Vista 64 also.
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:43:08 PM

Vista 64 caches system memory differently than XP. Vista 64 will not only cache more system RAM and more efficiently, it does so with Superfetch. Superfetch prioritizes the cached RAM to your uses. When you use a software, for example, Superfetch caches the load files to memory. When you open the software that instance is in memory, no search on the much slower hard drive, No XP hourglass displayed forever searching the HD to find the files necessary to open the application. Then, you have readyboost. Use a 4Gb super fast flash drive, compared to your HD, and Vista Supefetch will use that as 'special' cache for system memory too.

http://www.anandtech.com/systems/showdoc.aspx?i=2917&p=...

I like the way Vista 64 spins my 64 bit Quad processor around like a top too. Unlike XP 32.

a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:43:58 PM

XP RAM caching is a problem compared to Superfetch.
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:49:34 PM

I have noticed XP performs considerably better with low latencys and the faster transfers speeds the better. Crank it up and XP responds to it. Vista 64 responds too, but not like it was just willed a fine piece of azz. lol.
June 4, 2008 8:51:31 PM

He was asking about the ~3GB barrier, not stupidfetch and dorky boost.

I will use Vista when the security updates for XP stop in 2012+, and not before.

Badge, you have turned into a posting madman, what's up?

June 4, 2008 8:55:05 PM

@badge
I think you are better off with 8GB of "slow" RAM vs 4GB of "fast" RAM with Vista64. I don't think the latency matters all that much in real world loads. The 12MB cache of the Q9450 should negate any great performance gaps. If there's a specific task you want the low latencies for that might be a different story.

I'm not sure how XP(32 or 64bit) works with larger memory sizes but it's 7 years old. I would expect Vista to be better and more advanced at it no matter what. Superfetch is one of the features I liked about Vista but it's only half usefull with 2GB of RAM. I think P45 has a 16GB limit and using that would probably make Vista quite a nice OS (my work core programs are 12.5GB with a clean XP install).
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 8:55:17 PM

Yeah, I know. Your link should provide OP with a sufficient answer to his 'second' question. Vista drivers are out there and they are mature for the most part by now. Don't fear the Vista biatch. Installing and using Vista 64 is something I enjoy immemsly. I skipped Windows XP64 and I am so happy to finally have a 64 bit OS. Really, I think it's great.
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 9:00:20 PM

yeah andrius, for today, I'm leaving the 8 gigs at 5-5-5-15 1066MHz. 4 gigs overclocked to the hilt at 4-4-4-12 1066MHz. is not where am going with this today. My new P5E-VM G35 is getting the 2 x 2gig Vitesta upgrade later. Currently has Vista 64 and a 2 x 1GB kit of G. Skill micron PC6400 chips at 4-4-4-12 993MHz. These are very nice high overclocking chip. Micron.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...


June 4, 2008 9:29:11 PM

eperdos:

Here's the deal. Your 32bit OS will work great with 2x2 GB Ram modules.

Badge: Thank You?
June 4, 2008 9:56:26 PM

yes, I got it. I`ll buy 2*2gigs, I`ll be able to use about 3.2 of them.

thanks.

as about a-data or corsair, we`ll see...
a b } Memory
June 4, 2008 10:10:29 PM

Quote:
Badge: Thank You?


Ok. Your not going to try and convince me XP 32 is where it's at driving my 64bit quad systems?
June 4, 2008 11:04:12 PM

please don`t make this thread a 32 bit vs. 64 bit conflict war!
June 5, 2008 1:53:26 AM

badge said:
Vista drivers are out there and they are mature for the most part by now. Don't fear the Vista biatch. Installing and using Vista 64 is something I enjoy immemsly.
I'm not worried about the drivers. I'm worried about the DRM etc. Pigsh!t.

I have no desire to rehash the already beaten to death XP vs Vista debate. Enjoy Vista.
!