Corsair TwinX1024-3200LLPro PC3200 Dual Channel Kit and Transcend PC4000 512MB Review Author: Alan Wong Date Posted: December 7th, 2003 Corsair TwinX1024-3200LLPro 1GB DDR400 Dual Channel Kit SLRating: Transcend TS64MLD64V5F DDR500 512MB SLRating: Bottom Line: If you want to tweak a bit extra out of your kit then its important to get good RAM. We evaluated two sets of RAM from Corsair and Transcend against gaming/system benchmarks, there was a difference, if you want to overclock which would be the best option for you, read on to find out in our official review............ Article Navigation Introduction Corsair TwinX1024-3200LLPRO Dual Channel Kit Transcend TS64MLD64V5F 512MB DDR500 Test Setup Gaming Benchmarks System/RAM Benchmarks Overclocked Results Conclusion Corsair TwinX1024-3200LLPro 1GB DDR400 Dual Channel Kit Transcend TS64MLD64V5F DDR500 512MB Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >> Discuss This Article

Gaming Benchmarks:

Halo - timedemo (No Vsync), Refresh Rate 60hz

3DMark2001 SE – Default Settings

3DMark03 (Build 340) - Default Settings

Aquamark 3 – High Quality Preset Setting

Unreal Tournament 2003 – HardOCP UT2K3 Benchmark Utility

OpenGL Rendering Engine

High Quality Setting

System/RAM Benchmarks:

PCMark2002 – Default Settings

PCMark04 – System and Memory Benchmarks Selected

SiSoftware Sandra Standard 2004 – Memory Bandwidth Benchmark

Gaming Benchmarks

3DMark03:

There was an increase of 7 points between the Corsair TwinX and the Transcend DDR500 (which we were only able to OC to 222MHz, rather than the ideal 250MHz). I expected more from the TwinX, since it had twice as much RAM as Transcend, had a lower latency, and was Dual Channel (as opposed to the Transcend DDR500, which was single channel).

3DMark2001 SE:

Scores were a bit awkward in this situation. The Transcend DDR500 scored 36 points less than the standard non-overclocked 512MB DDR400. The 512MB DDR400 had a timing of 3-3-3-8 as opposed to Transcend’s timing of 3-4-4-8, which probably led to Transcend’s decrease in performance. But keeping in mind, 36 points is very meager and is just a 0.26% decrease in performance/score. The Corsair TwinX comes in the lead again with 14018.

Aquamark 3:

Again, the results show only a small difference in performance between all 3 RAM modules tested.

Halo:

Strangely, the performance of the Corsair TwinX fell back when benchmarking at 1280x1024. The Transcend DDR500 was able to draw 0.3 more frames per second than TwinX while the greatest surprise was the the 512MB DDR400 outperformed the Corsiar TwinX and the Transcend DDR500.

When testing at 1024x768, results changed back to what they typically were in other benchmarks: the Corsair TwinX1024-3200LLPro leading, while the Transcend DDR500 is close behind and the 512MB DDR400 ending up last.

Unreal Tournament 2003:

Reflection:

In most of the gaming benchmarks, the Corsair TwinX came in lead with the highest scores/FPS. However, the increase was nothing dramatic and was a small disappointment to see how the TwinX (which had 1GB of RAM and a low timing of 2-3-2-6) only beat the Transcend 512MB DDR500 by about 1% (or less) in terms of score/FPS. Overall, impact all gaming was not much. For increase of performance in gaming, getting a high end video card would increase graphics much more significantly than getting high end RAM.

System/RAM Benchmarks

Article Options    Post/View Comments    Print This Article    E-Mail This Article

Article Navigation Introduction Corsair TwinX1024-3200LLPRO Dual Channel Kit Transcend TS64MLD64V5F 512MB DDR500 Test Setup Gaming Benchmarks System/RAM Benchmarks Overclocked Results Conclusions

	If you liked this review, you may like... SLCentral Memory Watch (Memory) SLCentral Memory Watch (Processors) SLCentral Memory Watch (Motherboards)

Hardware Reviews, Articles, News, All Reviews...	Gaming Reviews, Articles, News...
	Regular Sections A Guru's World, CPU/Memory Watch, SLDeals...
SLBoards Forums, Register(Free), Todays Discussions...	Site Info Search, About Us, Advertise...