- Joined
- Aug 2, 2003
- Location
- VA
I've read alot about Corsair, Mushkin, and Kingston being top-of-the-line memory, and (as we all know) each of these makers have one production-thing in common. They don't make their own chips, and instead use the "best" chips they can find on the open market, usually WinBond CH/BH-5.
As long as the chips they use perform well, as they do, this is no drawback to "serious" overclockers who are willing to cash out what it takes to buy them. But for those on a tighter budget, Memory makers who don't have chips manufactured "in-house" are at the qualms of the global chip market, as all non "in-house" makers scramble to corner their own supply of chips during world-wide shortages. Right now we are under a supply-shortage, as seen in Mushkin's being forced to bid on BH-5 chips while other makers fall to lower-performing CH-5 series. While "in-house" makers do expirience shortages just the same, they are more-or-so protected by having "exclusive" rights to their chips.
These days arn't the best of times to purchase memory, as many global chip makers are setting-up to retool or have already begun. This limits production of the chips that we've seen for a while, and of course raises prices. From what I've heard, these price rises will not be getting any better, and will probably get worse, for Q3/Q4 2003.
With the long boring speech out of the way, back to the question. Which maker, with distributers in the states, has currently the best memory? More specifically, which maker has the best PC3200 DDR SDRAM?
Crucial/Micron and GeIL are the two makers that come to my mind currently, what are the other "in-house" makers? If any?
I've read alot of poor reviews on OC forums about GeIL, while also reading alot of good reviews on review-sites. The main problem seems to be inconsistant running with low timings. I am new here, and please pardon me if this may sound absurb, but are low timings always best? I've seen alot of high "real-world" test scores with higher then lowest-possible timings. Buffered scores are nice and all, but unless better memory relates to increased fps, what's the point? (to a gamer) Could there possible be a more optimum timing for certain memory that would allow it to perform "on-par" or exceeding in "real-world" tests then that running at its lowest-possible (as according to bus speed) timing? Is there any tests on this ? (using UnBuffered or "real-world" tests)
I am new here, btw and do not want this thread to be a flame-fest, or ignored if can be.
As long as the chips they use perform well, as they do, this is no drawback to "serious" overclockers who are willing to cash out what it takes to buy them. But for those on a tighter budget, Memory makers who don't have chips manufactured "in-house" are at the qualms of the global chip market, as all non "in-house" makers scramble to corner their own supply of chips during world-wide shortages. Right now we are under a supply-shortage, as seen in Mushkin's being forced to bid on BH-5 chips while other makers fall to lower-performing CH-5 series. While "in-house" makers do expirience shortages just the same, they are more-or-so protected by having "exclusive" rights to their chips.
These days arn't the best of times to purchase memory, as many global chip makers are setting-up to retool or have already begun. This limits production of the chips that we've seen for a while, and of course raises prices. From what I've heard, these price rises will not be getting any better, and will probably get worse, for Q3/Q4 2003.
With the long boring speech out of the way, back to the question. Which maker, with distributers in the states, has currently the best memory? More specifically, which maker has the best PC3200 DDR SDRAM?
Crucial/Micron and GeIL are the two makers that come to my mind currently, what are the other "in-house" makers? If any?
I've read alot of poor reviews on OC forums about GeIL, while also reading alot of good reviews on review-sites. The main problem seems to be inconsistant running with low timings. I am new here, and please pardon me if this may sound absurb, but are low timings always best? I've seen alot of high "real-world" test scores with higher then lowest-possible timings. Buffered scores are nice and all, but unless better memory relates to increased fps, what's the point? (to a gamer) Could there possible be a more optimum timing for certain memory that would allow it to perform "on-par" or exceeding in "real-world" tests then that running at its lowest-possible (as according to bus speed) timing? Is there any tests on this ? (using UnBuffered or "real-world" tests)
I am new here, btw and do not want this thread to be a flame-fest, or ignored if can be.