Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Corsair 2.0 vs. Samsung 2.5

Last response: in Memory
Share
June 4, 2002 6:56:26 PM

Which is better a Corsair PC2700 with CL2.0 or Samsung PC2700 with CL2.5? I read that Samsung is better at overclocking, but the latency difference would seem to make a difference in overall speed. Can you not overclock the Corsair memory?
Is Samsung still a better choice even though the CL is 2.5?

More about : corsair samsung

June 4, 2002 11:45:46 PM

My Samsung PC2700 can run at clk2 on 177MHz FSB and it's much cheaper than Corsair.

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
June 5, 2002 1:19:06 PM

Howdo you do this? They are sold as 2.5....so how would you lower the CL to 2.0?
Related resources
June 5, 2002 2:06:34 PM

just change the BIOS setting

<i>It's always the one thing you never suspected.</i>
June 5, 2002 3:24:38 PM

Ok...thanks....but why don't they just sell it as CL2? Do you think the Samsung is better than Corsair?
June 5, 2002 3:38:06 PM

I would guess so that they would have less RMA's :) 
June 5, 2002 8:54:09 PM

Any and all memory settings are what they default to, and/or the highest supported setting. If you put in a stick of PC2700 Cas2.5, it would default to 166MHz (assuming it's in a board that supports such) and Cas2.5. Almost all memory will run higher than that when forced with no problems, but the manufacturer is saying that it will not support anything above that. If the memory refuses to run correct at or below the rated speeds, you are entitled to be able to return it and get a new stick of RAM that will. Unless you bought OCZ, in which case you'll likely go through a dozen sticks before finding one that works, and then another two dozen to get one that actually runs at rated speed (yes, that's exaggerated).

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
June 6, 2002 12:07:12 AM

Still....which one is better...Samsung or Corsair?
June 6, 2002 1:18:00 AM

I'm going for Samsung PC2700 at the end fo June.

<b>(<font color=yellow>as good as it looks</font color=yellow>)</b>
June 6, 2002 7:47:28 PM

I'll cast a vote for Samsung, though Corsair is well known for being a good product.

<font color=blue>Hi mom!</font color=blue>
June 6, 2002 11:54:04 PM

accurate comment, thx.


now im a tank, armoured against bs@dum.
<i>if you know you don't know, the way could be more easy
June 7, 2002 12:28:45 PM

I had the same question like you, and after all, i bought the Cosair XMC3000. At the same speed, it's more stable than 2700 and Samsung; for oc, it's also the best one.
June 7, 2002 12:32:06 PM

Quote:
Unless you bought OCZ, in which case you'll likely go through a dozen sticks before finding one that works, and then another two dozen to get one that actually runs at rated speed (yes, that's exaggerated).

sigh. Don't I know it.

<i>It's always the one thing you never suspected.</i>
June 12, 2002 9:54:03 PM

Corsair.

Samsung will give you no help in any matters that arise in their product.

Kill a man, you're a murdered. Kill many and you're a conqueror. Kill them all, you're a GOD
June 13, 2002 4:51:43 AM

corsair, corsair, corsair!!! not because it's better, but because you know what you're getting. I spent 3 hours the other night looking for a reseller that gave the proper model number of the stick that i was looking for and the ones that i found i looked up on samsung's site ( they have this exact model number lookup engine that will tell you exactly what you have) and every single model number i found on the net turned out to be a "customer sample" The ONLY one that turned out to be legit was the newegg one, which came out as "mass production" So if you do plan to buy samsung, get it from newegg and nowhere else, you never know what these dicks are giving you, customer sample my ass. I just bought corsair to save myself the headache and have support that i can actually count on. Do yourself a favor, avoid samsung, go with crucial or corsair definitely. and hey if it breaks or you don't like it it's waranteed for life so you can just send the bitch back, you could only dream to be so lucky with a samsung stick, it seems as though they like to hide their ram. Well they can keep it, not worth the trouble, or the risk.
Anonymous
a b } Memory
a b K Overclocking
a b Ô Samsung
June 13, 2002 6:37:16 AM

agreed. i think also that the first one is corsair but i have seen the specifications for the new DDR 3200 and i have been a bit disappointed.

here they are:

<b>Corsair Micro XMS DIMM 512Mo - DDR PC-3200 CAS 2.5</b>

tested at 200 MHz (400 Mhz DDR) and more
** CAS 2.5-3-3 @ 200 MHz / CAS 2-2-2 @ 166 Mhz **

Specifications
LATENCY : CAS 2.5 @ 200 MHz (400 MHz DDR) / CAS 2 @ 166 MHz (333 MHz DDR)
voltage : 2.5 v
norm JEDEC PC-2100 and PC-3200
constructor mark : CMX512-3200
life warranty

and for the pc-2700 memory:

<b>Corsair Micro XMS DIMM 512Mo - DDR PC-2700 CAS 2</b>

tested at 166 MHz (333 Mhz DDR) and more
** CAS 2-3-3 @ 166 MHz **
LATENCY : CAS 2 @ 166 MHz / 333 MHz DDR
voltage : 2.5 v
norm JEDEC PC-2100, PC-2700
constructor mark : CMX512-2700C2
life warranty

you can notice that the latency for each memory model is surprising and even more when you compare them each other.

oops, i have forgotten one:

<b>Corsair Micro XMS DIMM 256Mo - DDR PC-3000 CAS 2</b>

tested at 185 MHz (370 Mhz DDR) and more
** CAS 2-3-3 @ 185 MHz & 2-2-2 @ 166 MHz **
LATENCY : CAS 2 @ 185 MHz (370 Mhz DDR) / CAS 2 @ 166 Mhz (333 Mhz DDR)
voltage : 2.5 v
norm JEDEC PC-2100, PC-3000
constructor mark : CMX256A-3000C2
Life warranty



then what is the global performance difference between those both memory?
June 13, 2002 7:09:21 PM

they have a pc3000 cas 2.0 that's what i'm getting
June 14, 2002 3:39:29 AM

they also have PC3200 Cas2.5 but officially the ram is exactly the same stuff, just Certified for a different speed/cas rating.

i too have the corsair and its great stuff!

<font color=purple>All advice I offer has been
Audited by Arthur Anderson.</font color=purple>
June 14, 2002 5:21:01 AM

FYI, Corsair uses Samsung chips on their memory as well as Mushkin.
<b><A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.html?i=1636&p=2" target="_new"><font color=blue><i>Anandtech</A></font color=blue></b></i>

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
June 15, 2002 2:05:30 AM

Well wouldn't it be better than to buy Samsung then since Samsung is the semi conductor company making the chips while Corsair is just using their chips?
June 17, 2002 1:38:33 AM

corsair test them though for higher than normal operation.
any that dont work get piffed.
they also use their own low noise PCB designs.

plus there is the heat spreader.
i think the black spreader looks just so cool its not funny :smile:

<font color=purple>All advice I offer has been
Audited by Arthur Andersen.</font color=purple>
June 17, 2002 3:49:40 AM

agreed, i just got one in the mail, the black heat spreader is sweet, too bad it's for my parents.
June 17, 2002 4:02:47 AM

:smile:
i think the heatspreader makes the ram safer to handle too! less chance of frying it.


<font color=purple>All advice I offer has been
Audited by Arthur Andersen.</font color=purple>
June 17, 2002 11:23:45 PM

alright I see.

What about corsair vs mushkin?

Would you say they're equivalent to eachother or would you still go for Corsair? Just because of their black heat spreader?.hehe..
June 18, 2002 12:16:07 AM

lol no idea

i went for corsair cauz it offered top notch stuff. with a slinky sexy black heat spreader.

<font color=purple>All advice I offer has been
Audited by Arthur Andersen.</font color=purple>
Anonymous
a b } Memory
a b K Overclocking
a b Ô Samsung
June 18, 2002 5:44:26 AM

<A HREF="http://store.yahoo.com/buyaib/samormajbran.html" target="_new">samsung high memory</A>

:smile: i like toasted cpus but not AMD-inside. :smile:
June 18, 2002 5:56:55 PM

haha.. I guess you can't go wrong with Corsair.

just the price is a little above average.
June 19, 2002 7:39:20 AM

worth it for the sexy black heat spreader if nothing else LOL

<font color=blue>All religions are true, for a given value of 'true' - Terry Pratchett.</font color=blue>
June 20, 2002 6:36:20 PM

Can someone tell me what is difference in Cas2.0 and Cas2.5? Howcome no one mention Kingston memory?
June 20, 2002 11:11:32 PM

READ the FAQ at the top of this forum... it will explain it better than i can.

<font color=blue>All religions are true, for a given value of 'true' - Terry Pratchett.</font color=blue>
June 22, 2002 11:49:41 AM

"Howcome no one mention Kingston memory?"
too expensive.
June 22, 2002 12:21:36 PM

Actually, that's completely WRONG. CAS is a latency but it has no fixed length of time. CAS2 means to wait for 2 cycles and 2.5 means to wait for 2.5 clock cycles. Depends on what the RAM runs at, the length of a clock cycle differs. For example, PC133 and PC2100 have 7.5ns (that's <b>nanoseconds</b>) clock cylces. So if you have CAS2, you wait for 15ns. CAS2.5 would be 18.75ns.

PC2700 has 6ns clock cycles. So that's 12ns for CAS2, 15ns for CAS2.5.

As you can see, CAS2.5 PC2700 has the exact same latency as CAS2 PC2700. Since AMD motherboards run at 266MHz, they never take advantage of the extra bandwidth and since many people run their PC2700, they won't see an improvement in latency either. Therefore, unless you run your PC2700 at CAS2, you'll be better off saving some money with PC2100!

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
June 22, 2002 12:40:37 PM

i think you didn't follow the "Explan" link. roflmao (second)
June 22, 2002 12:46:15 PM

moreover theire is a error in your explan.

CAS2 => you wait 2 clock cycles not 15ns
CAS2.5 => 2.5 clock cycles not 18.75ns

you have 7.5ns memory but 1 cycle clock time is under 7.5ns.

Geez.
June 22, 2002 12:54:43 PM

What are you talking about? PC133 and PC2100 both run at 133MHz. PC2100 outputs processing data twice per cycle. Anyway, so 1000/133 = the memory rating in ns which you see on the RAM. For PC133 and PC2100, that's approximately 7.5ns. Therefore, the length of 1 clock cycle is 7.5 ns.

2 cycles = 15ns in this case.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
June 22, 2002 1:03:16 PM

ok.

here is the link from THG which explains memory clock cycle bases in 1998.
minimum clock cycle of 5ns for an old EDO memory with a global 80ns access time.

<A HREF="http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboard/98q4/981024/ram-0..." target="_new">http://www.tomshardware.com/mainboard/98q4/981024/ram-0...;/A>

now the question is yours: what are you talking about?


i think you can calculate an average cycle time with something like that:

- you know the memory global access time.(1)
- you know the number of cycles needed by the current memory. (2)

avg clock cycle time = (1)/(2)

fo some corsair pc3200 @CAS 2-3-3-5-1 (400Mhz DDR,200Mhz realtime), you have:

avg clock cycle time = (1/200) / 14 = 0.36ns
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by 8235k8hta on 06/23/02 01:46 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
!