Corsair to Continue Receiving Samsung TCCD Memory

Doggie Fizzle writes "Bigbruin.com has a review of some Corsair XMS TWINX1024-4400C25PT DDR, but info on the future of TCCD may be the most interesting part. TCCD chips are well known for their proven overclocking, but the buzz is that Samsung has stopped making TCCD chips, and that we will no longer see them on the market once the current supply runs out. Not true according to Corsair. According to a source quoted in the review, Corsair will soon be the only source of TCCD chips."

Comments

Is there really a difference?

[Dancin_Santa]

I can't tell the difference between a machine running with this XMS memory and one with normal DDR SDRAM. Sure, I can see the difference in the benchmarks, but real-life speed isn't really a problem. For all intents and purposes, it's the same.

In addition, it's the limited bus speed of the x86 architecture that is the primary bottleneck these days. Running at only a fraction of the processor speed, memory accesses are slow because the bus can't keep up with the CPU and everything in turn waits for the bus to catch up. RAM running at any speed faster than the bus will be unnoticeable from the perspective of a user.

I don't think anyone thinks that we should all just sit around on our laurels and let technology stagnate, but really... Faster memory... Big whoop.

Re:Is there really a difference?

[Anonymous Coward]

Kind of the bottleneck? There is not "kind of" about it. It is one of the bottlenecks. Otherwise, why do we have caches?

And what does HT link speed have anything to do with memory on Athlon 64? Unless you're running multi-processor Opteron, CPU's memory accesses don't travel through the HT link. Internal path between CPU core(s) and DRAM inside K8 is way faster than any current DRAM technology can use. Not only that, it scales with K8's frequency, unlike HT or DRAM.

And what does that "hit 1.25GHz" tell you anyway? First of all, HT links are double-pumped, so 1.25GHz at 8-bit link is 2.5GB/s (minus overhead). Same at 16-bit link is 5.0GB/s (minus overhead). Frequency alone doesn't tell you anything. I fear the original poster may have been thinking that since it's 1.25GHz (>>400MHz of DDR400), it's plenty. Yeah right. Dual-channel DDR400 has 128-bit bus width (6.4GB/s), not that this has anything to do with memory bottleneck since CPU/DRAM traffic does not travel on the HT links.

Who's modding these "Insightful?"

Review

[dawnread]

A review of these chips compaing performance on AMD and Intel processors!

There Is No

[Anonymous Coward]

Such word as noone! No One is NOT A COMPOUND WORD!
First one to spell no one as noone is a moron!

Re:Such a good idea?

[Breakfast Pants]

That isn't true at all. Gratned you got the first post, but you did so by completely making something up on a topic on which you have no knowledge. Samsung's packages are what made TCCD chips known for their overclocking abilities. Almost any article you read about it, Samsung's packages are the ones being overclocked.