The Return of 2-2-2: Corsair 3200XL & Samsung PC4000
by Wesley Fink on June 15, 2004 9:00 PM EST- Posted in
- Memory
AMD Test Results: Corsair 3200XL
We attempted to run the same tests on Corsair 3200XL, comparing a 3800+ at the standard 12x200 to 10x240, which is also a processor speed of 2.4GHz. Unfortunately, we could not find memory timings that would work with Corsair 3200XL at DDR480 on the Asus A8V Deluxe. Since the Socket 939 has just been introduced, we suspect that this is just a matter of Corsair tweaking SPD timings for higher overclocking on Socket 939 dual-channel. The Corsair 3200XL performs very well at stock speed.| Standard CPU Speed and Variable Memory Speed Corsair 3200XL (DDR400) - 2 x 512Mb Double-Bank |
||
| Benchmark | 3800+ (2.4GHz) 200x12 4xHT 2-2-2=10 |
3800+ (2.4GHz) 240x10 4xHT 2.5-3-3-10 |
| Super PI 2M Places |
83 seconds | - |
| Quake 3 FPS |
464.4 | - |
| Sandra Memory Test Standard Buffered |
INT 6051 FLT 5982 |
- |
| Sandra Memory Test Standard UNBuffered |
INT 2890 FLT 3005 |
- |
| UT2003 FPS |
Flyby 292.5 Botmatch 121.6 |
- |
| Aquamark 3 Standard Score Run |
46,445 | - |
We do not want to leave the wrong impression here because Corsair 3200XL performed very well on the Asus A8V Deluxe up to DDR466 at 2-3-3-10 timings. With further tweaks in the 3200XL SPD, we are confident that the 3200XL can reach even higher overclocks on the Socket 939 Asus A8V Deluxe.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
11 Comments
View All Comments
Pumpkinierre - Tuesday, June 15, 2004 - link
Good article again, Wesley. Pity its not DDR500 at 2-2-2. I'm still holding off upgrading. I wouldnt trust that VIA chipset with the Corsair RAM. Plenty of people run their memory outside SPD specs withot problems. And don't give up on the i875 yet. There's a lot of issues with DDR2 and 915/925. I notice that ABIT have brought out a Sckt775 865 mobo. Hmm I wonder why?Also the P4/i875 seems to equal or better the S939 a64 in unbuffered sandra which I wouldnt have expected because of the on die a64 mem. controller etc.. Then in the buffered test the a64 clearly gets the upper hand which again is a suprise as many of the buffers are associated with MMX/SSE/SSE2 where the a64s are supposed to be weaker. I only trust the unbufferd tests but this may explain the fact that the FX chips beat the P4s on memory bandwidth but were behind on the bandwidth intensive encoding tests.
In the one test (Samsung mem.) where you test the a64 at different bus speeds (200&240MHz), the gaming results were equal or worse in the game tests despite an ~85 increase in mem. bandwidth ! Unfortunately you had different memory timings but it reinforces the importance of latency reduction rather than bandwidth for gaming performance.