Difference between these sticks?

Deific

Deific

Deific

Soldato
Joined
7 Sep 2009
Posts
4,229
Location
Cheshire
Better settings on the C9D one (Lower latency), but i would get the cheaper one.
 
Last edited:
Better timings are better obviously. No idea why they're cheaper. 1.65v allows you to use them with a Core i5/i7 platform if you want.
 
'Wes said:
Better settings on the C9D one (Lower latency), but i would get the cheaper one.
Click to expand...

Since when has 9-9-9-24 been better settings than 8-8-8-24. The lower the number the tighter the timings and the lower the latency.

The C8 pair are better all round, and run at lower voltages. They probably have just as good an overclocking potential by simply slackening the timings and upping the voltages too.

As for being cheaper, perhaps its just a different batch and OCUK got them from Corsair at a different price. Im sure OCUK price according to how much they buy stuff for :P.

As Ben said, neither of these sets are optimized for i5 dual channel, or i7 tripple, but if your building an AMD setup then personally I would go for the cheaper C8 parts.
 
Corasik said:
Since when has 9-9-9-24 been better settings than 8-8-8-24. The lower the number the tighter the timings and the lower the latency.

The C8 pair are better all round, and run at lower voltages. They probably have just as good an overclocking potential by simply slackening the timings and upping the voltages too.

As for being cheaper, perhaps its just a different batch and OCUK got them from Corsair at a different price. Im sure OCUK price according to how much they buy stuff for :P.

As Ben said, neither of these sets are optimized for i5 dual channel, or i7 tripple, but if your building an AMD setup then personally I would go for the cheaper C8 parts.
Click to expand...

All very good points ! CMD4GX3M2B1600C8 is tuned for AMD. If you are shopping for parts for an Intel based build, you need CMD4GX3M2A1600C8

Here is our memory listing if it helps clarify anything:

CORSAIR MEMORY LISTING
 
The C9's have been 'matched', meaning they have been tested as a pair running at the clocked speeds, which may explain the price difference as they are slower than the C8's.
 
I understand that all modules have been tested individually, but isn't the advantage of a 'matched pair' that they have been tested as a pair rather than possibly two independently tested modules?
 
Morlock said:
I understand that all modules have been tested individually, but isn't the advantage of a 'matched pair' that they have been tested as a pair rather than possibly two independently tested modules?
Click to expand...

You misunderstand my post. 3 module kits are tested all together in an X58 MOBO. 2 module kits are tested together in an appropriate 2 channel motherboard, etc etc with 4 module kits, 6 module kits.
 
For Corsair ram the "TwinX" name is only given to matched memory kits, and "TriChannel" for the intel 3 stick sets. Both the links the OP provided are TwinX matched pairs.
 
That is interesting, but seems to contradict what Yellowbeard states, as not all Corsair memory is TwinX or Tri-Channel.

Is there a difference between Tri-Channel and Triple Channel? (Possibly Triple Channel not being matched modules?)
 
I don't know how to say this any more clearly.

If we sell you 2 modules in a kit they have ALL been tested together before packaging.

If we sell you 3 modules in a kit they have ALL been tested together before packaging.

If we sell you 4 modules in a kit they have ALL been tested together before packaging.

If we sell you 6 modules in a kit in a kit they have ALL been tested together before packaging.

Dual channel or triple channel or any variation of that is not a memory term. It's a descriptor for the memory controller. If you will check the Corsair website you'll note that we do not use this terminology. Our terminology is to denote the number of modules used in the kit. How it is run is determined by the user and the chosen equipment.
 
It's actually understandable and I was just trying to be concise. First, our part numbering scheme has changed significantly over the past year so that does not help. Second, the general industry terminology is in many cases not clear. And third, the wording of the OCUK advertisement is using parts of 2 part numbering schemes.

Cheers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom