Corsair, OCZ Debate Over Heat Spreader Design

[onethreehill]

http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=706

[Tony]

I really can't beleive Corsair would do this, they sent that article out to the world and his dog and accomplished nothing.

OCZ's heatspreader is better than our old one at cooling the dimms, whether it is better than Corsairs we don't really care. We also wanted to bling it up a little..some peeps like it some don't..we will all get used to it in the end.

Fact is within the margin of error (the 0.2% gain they saw in speed) we would say our heatspreader did a prettly slick job in keeping up with their more expensive part...and we think it looks better ..LOL ;)

I really hope this topic dies soon as this must have embarrased corsair, they even had to ask dailytech to have their employee's comments removed LOL.

I will finish with this, i call on corsair to leave OCZ alone to market its own products without backlash just as we leave corsair alone to market theirs. OCZ have never, and will never openly bash corsair in the way Corsair goes after OCZ. We want our products to talk for us, and ultimately our market share.

[[XC] leviathan18]

we all know OCZ>corsair

how many times pro OC here have to remove the heatspreaders because we all know they are useless?

i think corsair is scared cuz ocz has a lot better products right now

[turtle]

Well said Tony. Props on giving them respect regardless.

And yes, the products do speak for themselves, as does the forum(s) support, and the custumer service, and the...

;)

[Kallenator]

we all know OCZ>corsair

That statement is a bit to bold isent it?

I agree that ocz is better than corsairs just as we speak, but not over the whole RAM arena.

[ahmad]

This is pretty sad on Corsair's part IMHO. Just because they weren't the ones to come up with the idea, does not mean that it sucks :rolleyes:

I have personally never owned corsair memory. Why? It always seemed overpriced for abolutely no reason. I'll pay a premium for good memory, but I won't pay more than I have to for just a name.

I have owned many OCZ sticks and I can say I was never dissatisfied with any of my purchases. Couple that with awesome OCZ support, and I think I can consider it to be one of the better hardware packagers/manufacturers. In fact, OCZ is the only company I have seen that pays customer service agents and product experts to check forums (I can count at least 3 off the top of my head) to help people out. I think that says something to the competitors and to us consumers.

[afireinside]

That's sad... No heatspreaders is better anyway. Lower temps and lower prices.

[[XC] leviathan18]

That statement is a bit to bold isent it?

I agree that ocz is better than corsairs just as we speak, but not over the whole RAM arena.


dunno about ddr2 but at least in DDR ocz offers better memory than corsair in tccd and bh5 flavors most of the best enthusiasts mems comes from OCZ :fact:

[bachus_anonym]

@Tony,

Honestly, I would not let that document ruin your day too quickly, Tony :) I for one don't really see it as a "go-after-OCZ" but just a comparison that in the end does not actually show any revolutionary results in favor of any design. Measuring OC'ability with different heatspreaders seems to me like a very hard task as there are many variables. Measuring heat dissipation is a lot easier and would make more sense.

If one is buing new OCZ products I'm pretty sure it's not because OCZ mesh heatspreader transfers heat much better or worse than other designs. Not that customer has a choice of heatspreader anyway... It's only looks and feel.

OCZ mesh looks interesting and may appeal to some. Same goes for Corsair's HSs w/LEDs... Some will love it, some will hate it. But only few enthusiasts will care that much about heat-dissipation, anyway :shrug: They would care more about "how easy is it to remove", not that HS removal gives a lot better results or its purpose can't be questioned...

[Pinnacle]

OCZ is the only company I have seen that pays customer service agents and product experts to check forums

I wonder what Oczryder is getting payed right now :p:

[ahmad]

Honestly, I would not let that document ruin your day too quickly, Tony :) I for one don't really see it as a "go-after-OCZ" but ...

Sorry, but I just have one thing left to say: you know it costs Corsair a lot of money to pay someone to test this stuff, write the document and do all these analysis comparisons. Do you really think Corsair did it for no reason?

:stick:
:stick:
:stick:

[bachus_anonym]

Sorry, but I just have one thing left to say: you know it costs Corsair a lot of money to pay someone to test this stuff, write the document and do all these analysis comparisons. Do you really think Corsair did it for no reason?This was in-house testing, on equipment they already have, and honestly could have taken couple of days, tops. Not that much money involved, I guess. Besdies, an educated and reasonable user will come up with conclusion that none of the 3 HS designs are superior in terms of OCability. At least, this is what I think. Only 1MHz difference is no difference at all, considering margin of error and other factors that may influence results.

[RyderOCZ]

I wonder what Oczryder is getting payed right now :p:Not enough to put up with you guys :eek: :eek:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Just kidding everyone :D

[[XC] leviathan18]

ryder :toast: rox he saved my mems :D

[Vapor]

Why weren't Mushkin's and G.Skill's tested as well?

Also, was there ample airflow during the tests?

But, yeah, I agree with B_A here....nothing to fret over, the results don't speak for themselves other than: "well, how's this look?" :-/

[Pinnacle]

Not enough to put up with you guys :eek: :eek:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA Just kidding everyone :D


There is our boy :toast: :toast: :toast:

[Kunaak]

I am one of the people that recieved this document a few days ago... I can say this about it.

this was not meant to be a direct compariison of OCZ vs Corsair.
Never was, and never should have been taken like that.
when I told corsair that I would not post this, cause we do have OCZ people here, supporting XS and doing a very good job of it, and that this might appear Bias since it seemed to imply that Corsairs XMS heatspreader was the best...
thier reply was... "we didn't want this to become a thing of corsair vs. OCZ, but to show that Heatspreaders when done right, do have a good effect on the cooling and OC abaility of the ram"
then, it was pretty much agreed that this document could easily be taken the exact opposite way... and thats exactly what happend.

this was never meant to be Corsair Vs. OCZ.
OCZ has probably the most unique and forward thinking design of heatspreaders on the market, thats why they were chosen.
it was meant to show that heatspreaders do have a good effect on ram...

this is the reason I said I would not post this document, nor would I mention it, cause it too easily could be twisted to start some little war between corsair and OCZ... which it wasn't meant to do.
what it was meant to do, was take two of the best companies on the market, use thier best ram sinks... and then test them to see what was better... ramsinks... or no ram sinks.
throwing OCZ into the mix, was to give variety to the testing.

upon hearing my opinion on the subject, I was assured that I was probably right, and should just let the document be.

I did.

but others, just seem to like trying to start wars, cause they like drama...
don't get sucked into this drama that they created.
it's BS, and doesn't deserve the attention it's getting.

[nn_step]

oooh for 1Mhz.. woohoo.. I don't think 1 Mhz is that freaking important...heck you can get even better than that with Phase.. why don't they compare those numbers huh... :poke:
waste of resources and our time...