Corsair: The Complete Guide

One framing point worth getting right before reading further, because Corsair's own disclosures invite the error. The company reports two segments — Gamer and Creator Peripherals, and Gaming Components and Systems — and memory lives inside the second 2. Separately, its quarterly filings also break revenue down by product category, where "Memory products" appears as its own line 6. That line is a disaggregation for disclosure purposes, not a reportable segment. Quoting "Memory products" revenue as though it were segment revenue mixes two different cuts of the same business, and the two are not interchangeable.

The second point is about where the growth currently is. In the quarter ended 30 June 2026, Memory products revenue was $123.0m against $75.4m for all other component products, and the other-components line had fallen from $112.5m a year earlier while memory rose from $105.0m 6. Memory was about 39% of the company's $314.3m of net revenue that quarter — our arithmetic on the filing's own figures — and the only component category growing at all.

The board composition follows from the control position. The 2026 proxy lists nine directors: George L. Majoros, Jr. as chair, chief executive Thi La, Jason Glen Cahilly, Samuel R. Szteinbaum, Anup Bagaria, Stuart A. Martin, Randall J. Weisenburger, Diana Bell and Sarah Mears Kim 10. Majoros and Bagaria also appear as reporting persons on the Schedule 13D filed for the EagleTree holding vehicles 15, which names the chain as Corsair Group (Cayman), LP; EagleTree-Carbide (GP), LLC; EagleTree Partners IV (GP), LP; and EagleTree Partners IV Ultimate GP, LLC 15.

Two leadership changes landed inside twelve months, which is worth knowing when reading commentary from either period. Founder Andy Paul's retirement was announced on 12 February 2025 and took effect on 1 July 2025, when Thi La — previously chief operating officer since 2013 and president since 2021 — became chief executive; Paul left the board at the same time, not merely the executive role 16 8. The finance role turned over in November 2025: Michael G. Potter resigned as chief financial officer effective 2 December 2025 — the same day Gordon Mattingly was appointed — then left the company on 31 December 2025 and provided transitional services under a consulting arrangement from 1 January to 31 March 2026 9. Any earnings-call transcript from that window can therefore carry a speaker attribution that looks wrong and is merely stale.

The Fanatec transaction is the one where the filing and the press release describe genuinely different things, and the filing is the more precise document. Corsair's press release said it had acquired "the Fanatec Sim Racing brand and all associated personnel, in an asset purchase from Endor AG" and that "Financial terms of the acquisition were not disclosed" 20. Its quarterly filing describes the same deal as "the business (the 'Fanatec Business') of Endor AG ('Endor'), which includes certain assets and all the personnel of Endor, as well as the equity interests of certain of Endor's subsidiaries", closing on 19 September 2024, for approximately $43.7 million net of $4.5 million of cash acquired 26.

So the price was disclosed — in the accounts, not the announcement. The filing also reveals the shape of the deal: Corsair had entered "a Bridge Loan Agreement ('Bridge Loan') in May 2024 and a Debtor-In-Possession Loan Agreement ('DIP Loan') in September 2024 with Endor to provide short-term financing for Endor's operations", and those loans, totalling about $16.6 million, were set off against the purchase price at closing 26. Corsair lent the target money, then deducted the loans from what it paid for it. Note also what it did not buy: the filing's careful "certain assets" and "certain of Endor's subsidiaries" means Corsair did not acquire Endor AG, the listed company 26. Exhibit 21.1 shows the pieces that did come across — Corsair Fanatec Australia PTY Ltd., Corsair Fanatec Japan KK, Endor Technology (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. and Endor Hong Kong Ltd. 11.

On ownership, the drift from EagleTree's original position to today's is a dilution story rather than a selling story. The Schedule 13D of November 2022 reports EagleTree’s holding as "56,300,771 shares", or "56.0%" 15. That same share count still appears in filings years later, against a share count that has grown — 106,662,337 shares outstanding at 12 February 2026 2 and 108,176,959 at 28 July 2026 27. 56,300,771 against roughly 107 million is about 53%, which is what the 2026 proxy says 10. EagleTree's holding fell as a percentage because the company issued more shares, not because EagleTree sold.

Two lines deserve separating out because they are not consumer memory at all. WS DDR5 ECC RDIMM targets Intel Xeon W-3400/W-2400 on W790 and AMD Threadripper PRO 7000/WX on TRX50 and WRX90, for "memory hungry applications such as 3D imaging, video applications, and CAD simulations", from DDR5-4800 base up to a tested DDR5-6400 and 64–256GB, carrying both "Intel XMP 3.0 support" and "AMD EXPO support" 31. The published part CMA64GX5M4B6400C32 is a 64GB four-module kit at 6400 MT/s CL32 and 1.35V, requiring "Intel W790 or newer" 38. Registered ECC memory in a gaming brand's catalogue is unusual and easy to miss.

SHUGO, announced 26 May 2026, is the newest line and the strangest. Corsair calls it a "limited-edition enthusiast memory series created for builders who see the machine as both a performance PC and a personal design statement", built with "hand-selected, highly binned DDR5 ICs" and a "Patent-pending light-emitting micro-drilling technology, which allows RGB lighting to shine through the side of the module" 21. The published parts are 6000 MT/s CL28 32GB kits under the names ONYX BLADE (CMZ32GX5M2X6000Z28OB) and SAKURA NOA (CMZ32GX5M2X6000Z28SN), with a UV-printed aluminium heat spreader 28.

And one line that does not exist yet. Corsair publishes a full explainer on CAMM2 and LPCAMM2, describing CAMM2 as "Compression Attached Memory Module (version two)" with contacts "arranged in a grid, similar to what you'd find on a modern processor", and calling LPCAMM2 "a much more attractive option" for laptops 39. That page was read in full and appeared complete, and it announces no Corsair CAMM2 or LPCAMM2 product — its only forward-looking line is "rest assured that CORSAIR will ensure you have access to the best memory solutions to maximize your system's performance" 39. No such part was found in any catalogue page in this check.

A limit of this page, stated rather than glossed. Corsair publishes the vocabulary of binning but not its thresholds. "Hand-sorted", "tightly-screened", "hand-selected, highly binned" and the published "IC Performance Bin" values of "Plus" and "Standard" 34 are all real and all Corsair's own 19 28, but no document retrieved in this check states what test a chip must pass to earn "Plus" rather than "Standard", who performs the sort, or on what equipment. That is not the same as saying Corsair publishes nothing about it — only that the pages read here, listed in the sources below, do not say.

What Corsair does put a number on is the electrical design. In Corsair's words, "DDR5 modules are the first equipped with onboard voltage regulation" 19 — a statement about the generation rather than about Corsair — the regulator being the module's PMIC, whose grade Corsair publishes per part as "Overclock PMIC" or "Extreme OC PMIC" 36 33. That regulator is also what iCUE reaches when it adjusts module voltage: "You can use iCUE to regulate the memory module's voltage for more stable overclocking" 42. On DDR4 there was no such thing — voltage regulation lived on the motherboard — which is why the DDR4 and DDR5 halves of Corsair's own catalogue read so differently.

A gap in this page worth naming precisely, because it is a limit of the check and not a finding about Corsair. Item 2, "Properties", of the 2025 annual report could not be retrieved. Every attempt at the filing — six by a research pass, and one made directly for this page — truncated inside Item 1A, Risk Factors; the furthest any of them reached was Item 1C, Cybersecurity, with Item 2 beginning on page 39 2. So the full facility list, with square footages and owned-versus-leased status, is not reflected here. Nothing on this page should be read as a claim that Corsair does not publish its properties: it is required to, it presumably does, and this check could not read that far.

What could be read is the risk language about concentration, and it is blunter than the marketing. Alongside the Taiwan, China and Vietnam reliance 2, the supply-chain risk factor states that "We and our manufacturers rely on an extended third-party supply chain and the availability of raw materials to produce a significant amount of our products", and that "From time to time, we have experienced product shortages due to both disruptions in supply from the third parties that manufacture or supply our products and our inability or the inability of these third-party manufacturers to obtain necessary components, and we may experience similar shortages in the future" 2. The trade-policy risk factor adds exposure to "changes in trade relations or the implementation of tariffs or economic and trade sanctions and export restrictions, in particular any tariffs, sanctions or export restrictions affecting trade between the United States and China" 2.

On dual profiles, Corsair changed its position and dated the change, which is useful. Its explainer records an update of 20 January 2026 stating that "all CORSAIR AMD Memory Kits are now dual profile, meaning that they are compatible with EXPO and XMP", and — the asymmetry that matters — "Intel Memory kits are not dual-profile" 47. Earlier the dual-profile scope was narrower: "select AMD EXPO DDR5 memory kits…specifically those kits that are rated at 6,000 MT/s or slower with CAS latencies of 30 or higher" 47. EXPO first arrived on Corsair DDR5 on 30 August 2022, covering the "for AMD" variants of Dominator Platinum RGB, Vengeance RGB and Vengeance at speeds up to 6,000 MT/s 48.

The live catalogue bears this out and shows how to read a part number for it. Corsair’s own decoder gives the pairing directly, using the two Dominator parts as its worked examples: "CMP32GX5M2X7200C34 = Intel XMP" and "CMP32GX5M2B6000Z30 = AMD EXPO" 49. The catalogue matches — the AMD Dominator Titanium RGB parts carry Z, listed as CMP32GX5M2B6000Z30 and CMP32GX5M2B6000Z30W 35, while the Intel-only high-speed parts use C: CMT32GX5M2X7200C34, CMKC48GX5M2X9200C44, CMH32GX5M2E6000C36 37 33 36. Corsair's own decoder confirms the convention: DDR5 XMP kits take a "C__" latency suffix and AMD EXPO kits a "Z__" suffix 49.

A word on the software, because it is where Corsair's memory differs most from a generic module. iCUE reaches the module itself: through it a user can "customize and synchronize the lighting effects", "see the current temperature and voltage readings of each memory module" in the Cooling tab, set temperature-triggered actions in the Alerts tab, and "create custom XMP profiles to tailor performance for specific apps and tasks" 50. Reading a DIMM's own temperature and rewriting its XMP profile from the desktop are things DDR5's on-module electronics made possible and that Corsair chose to expose.

Whether the memory needs iCUE is a fair question and the honest answer is partial. Corsair documents that lighting persists without it: Hardware Lighting is "an iCUE feature you can use to set Lighting Effects to display whenever iCUE is not running", including on "a computer that does not have iCUE installed", and DRAM is named among the products whose profiles are "saved automatically" 51. Its cheaper RGB line can also be driven by motherboard software instead — ASUS Aura Sync, MSI Mystic Light or Gigabyte RGB Fusion 29. An explicit statement that the modules themselves run normally without iCUE was not found on the pages read for this check; what is documented is that the lighting does, and that the monitoring and profile-authoring features are what require the software 50 51.

One standards footnote. Corsair's form-factor explainer points readers to JEDEC for DDR5 behind the link text "JEDEC specifications", whose target is the JESD79-5C01 page — Corsair does not name the revision in visible text 13. That URL now serves JESD79-5D, version 1.41, published November 2025 14, so the revision Corsair linked has been superseded. Worth knowing if a specification argument turns on which revision is being quoted.

Corsair's published decoder has fallen behind its own catalogue, and anyone relying on it should know where. It is not a thin page: it lists thirteen DDR4 family letters and five DDR5 ones, running from Value Select and Vengeance LED through to Dominator Titanium RGB, and it covers SODIMMs on both generations 52. But three prefixes visibly in use on live parts are missing from it: CMKC and CMHC for CUDIMMs 44 33, CMZ for SHUGO 28, and CMA for the WS ECC RDIMM line 38. The decoder is not wrong about what it covers; it is simply older than the catalogue. A newer or localised decoder may exist that this check did not find.

Two smaller conventions from the support article, both useful and neither obvious: "If a DDR5 kit has a K at the end, this means it a revised kit", and the latency-suffix rule separating XMP (C) from EXPO (Z) kits 49. On the kit-versus-module question, note that capacity in the part number is the kit total, not the module size — "the sum of all modules' capacities" 49 — so CMKC48GX5M2X9200C44 is two 24GB modules, not two 48GB ones 33.

What Corsair publishes instead of a price list is a warranty schedule, and on that schedule memory is the best-covered category it sells. DRAM modules carry a "Limited Lifetime" warranty, against a general floor where "All new Corsair branded products include at least a 2-year warranty" 58. For contrast, the same schedule gives SSDs three to five years, flash devices five to ten, power supplies three to ten, cases two, cooling two to six, gaming peripherals two, graphics cards two and certified refurbished units ninety days 58. Memory is the only line at lifetime cover. The product pages carry the same badge — "LIMITED LIFETIME WARRANTY — For complete peace of mind and years of worry-free performance" 33 — and the workstation line adds "24/7 technical support assistance" 31.

That is the same trade Kingston makes, and it is worth naming as a pattern rather than a coincidence: a module brand that cannot control the price of its main input publishes a warranty instead of a price, because the warranty is the thing it can actually promise. Corsair's filings explain why the input price is beyond its control — "The market for these ICs is highly competitive and cyclical", and "Declines in the market price of ICs enable our competitors to lower prices and we will likely be forced to lower our product prices in order to compete effectively" 2.

Corsair has named a specific die once, in a press release, and it is worth recording because it shows the company will be specific when the specificity is a selling point. Announcing its fastest DDR4 kit on 14 September 2017 — CMK16GX4M2F4600C19, 4,600 MHz at CL19-26-26-46 and 1.5V — Corsair said it was "Built using hand-sorted industry-leading Samsung B-die IC's" 57. That is a named maker and a named die revision, in Corsair's own words.

What could not be established, stated as a limit rather than a finding. Across the pages read in full for this check — the IC article, the version decoder, both RAM FAQs, the Memory Explained explainer, the memory hub and landing pages, and the individual Vengeance, Vengeance RGB, Dominator Platinum RGB, Dominator Titanium RGB, Titanium First Edition, CUDIMM 9200, Vengeance LPX and WS RDIMM product pages — no per-part-number die-vendor lookup was found, and no current DDR5 product page names a die maker in its specifications. Nor was any statement found either promising or refusing to confirm a vendor on request. Note that a mirror of the IC article on Corsair's support site could not be read in this check, and it may say more. So: Corsair names its suppliers and publishes how to identify them after purchase; whether it will tell a buyer in advance is not something this check could determine either way.

On HBM — the section heading a chip maker would see here — there is nothing to report and that is the point. Corsair runs no wafer fab — its annual report has it assembling, testing and packaging modules in Taiwan from bought-in chips 2 — and neither "HBM" nor "high-bandwidth memory" appears anywhere in that filing or on any Corsair memory page read for this check. Its exposure to the HBM boom is entirely indirect, and entirely as a victim of it rather than a participant: the same AI build-out that consumes HBM capacity is what its filings blame for the cost of the ordinary DDR5 chips it buys. Its annual report states that "There is currently a worldwide shortage of semiconductor, memory and other electronic components driven by the proliferation of AI infrastructure" 2, and its quarterly filing describes "significant constraints in the global supply of semiconductors, particularly memory components, driven in part by demand associated with the buildout of AI infrastructure" 6.

What memory buyers are actually doing right now is visible in the product-category disclosure, and it is a divergence rather than a trend. In the quarter ended 30 June 2026, Memory products revenue rose to $123.0m from $105.0m a year earlier while Other Component products fell to $75.4m from $112.5m — a 33% decline — and Gaming Peripherals rose to $115.9m from $102.6m 6. Memory gross profit over the same comparison nearly doubled, $28.7m against $16.3m, and across the six months $75.7m against $40.2m 6.

Corsair's own explanation of that split is the most interesting sentence in its recent reporting, because it is a claim about buyer behaviour rather than about Corsair: "Higher memory pricing continued to weigh on the market for DIY PC builds and standalone components, which shrank year-over-year during the quarter", while "Memory revenue grew 17% year-over-year, supported by continued excellence in supply chain management, robust demand and sequential market share gains" 56. Expensive memory, on this account, stops people building whole computers — which hurts the case, cooler and power-supply lines — while the memory itself sells more, at higher prices, to people upgrading what they already own. The company's forward view is that "demand has been deferred, not lost" 56. The same pattern appeared a quarter earlier: memory revenue "grew 6% year over year, supported by prior inventory investments, strong supply chain execution, and sequential market share gains in North America", against "elevated pricing" weighing "on consumer demand" 62.

The most consequential quiet disclosure is three words in the supplier sentence: Corsair buys its DRAM chips "largely from third-party distributors" 2. Kingston, the other module brand in this section, qualifies its suppliers directly and names them as suppliers — a purchasing relationship; see that page for the sourcing. Corsair names the same three companies as the producers of the chips it uses, while buying predominantly, though not exclusively, through the distribution channel rather than from them 2. That is a materially different position in a shortage — though read the filing's fallback sentence carefully before overstating it: "Should supply from any of these vendors be limited, there can be no assurance that we would be able to meet our needs by purchasing DRAM ICs produced by other manufacturers or from agents and distributors" 2. That names both routes, so the risk described is an industry-wide shortage rather than a disadvantage of the channel as such. What the channel does change is the lever available: the company that navigated the 2025–26 shortage by "strategically built memory inventory" 56 is describing a buffer it bought early, not an allocation it was granted.

Finally, a governance detail with a real consequence for readers who hold the shares. Because EagleTree controls a majority of the voting power, Corsair relies on Nasdaq's controlled-company exemptions, and states in its own risk factors: "You will not have the same protections afforded to stockholders of companies that are subject to such requirements" 2 10. The company says this about itself; it is not an outside criticism.

Two limits of this page, named so they are not mistaken for findings about the company. First, Item 1A could not be read to its end: every retrieval of the 2025 annual report truncated inside the risk factors, the furthest reaching Item 1C 2. So this section reflects the risk factors that were retrievable, not the complete set, and no claim is made here that Corsair omits any particular risk. Specifically: supplier risk in the retrieved text sits under a supply-chain heading — "Supply chain issues, including scarcity of raw materials or other components to produce our products and limited ability to control or influence our procurement process" — rather than under a heading about reliance on a limited number of suppliers; and no separate Taiwan–China or natural-disaster heading appeared before the fetch truncated, which is a statement about the fetch, not about the filing. Second, the trade-policy risk factor runs to roughly a thousand words and only parts of it were obtained verbatim.

One genuine and specific weakness does belong here, because it is established from pages that were read in full. Corsair's own disclosure that kits sharing a part number may contain different chips 53, combined with the absence of any per-part-number vendor lookup among the pages listed in the sources below, means a buyer who needs a specific die — to match an existing kit, to replace one failed module of four, or because a particular vendor's chips overclock better on their board — cannot reliably order one from Corsair's catalogue. They can only identify what arrived, from the sticker, once it has 53 52. For most buyers this is irrelevant. For the enthusiasts who are Corsair's own stated market — the people buying "Extreme OC PMIC" parts at 9200 MT/s 33 — it is the single most awkward thing about the brand.

This section is deliberately narrow, and here is exactly how far the evidence goes. Two claims are solid because the documents were read in full: Exhibit 21.1 lists 23 subsidiaries and none is Indian 11, and the authorised-resellers page names no Indian company and has no memory category at all 63. Two further observations are weaker and are stated as such: the careers page's office list was retrieved but cannot be confirmed complete 43, and Corsair's "where to buy" page renders a region selector whose option list did not load, so whether India appears among Corsair's own listed regions could not be determined — that is a limit of the renderer, not evidence of absence.

And one claim that is not made here at all: that Corsair's filings are silent on India. Items 2 and 7 of the annual report and the notes to the accounts — including any geographic revenue table — could not be retrieved 2, so the question of what Corsair tells its regulator about India is open. What can be said is that Indian buyers of Corsair memory are buying through a channel Corsair does not document on its own site, from a company with no Indian legal entity, at prices Corsair does not publish in their region.

On records, Corsair's own page claims 12,832 MT/s, achieved by the overclocker "saltycroissant" using a Vengeance DDR5 module that "runs at 7000MT/s stock" — on an ASRock Z890 Taichi OCF with an Intel Core Ultra 7 265K, with 12,250 MT/s cited at ambient temperature against 12,832 under liquid nitrogen 66. That page carries no publication date, which is worth knowing before citing it as current.

Higher figures on Corsair modules have been reported since — 13,530 MT/s on a single 24GB Vengeance DDR5 module in November 2025, on a Gigabyte Z890 Aorus Tachyon ICE with an Intel Core Ultra 9 285K 67. That is press, not a Corsair publication, and is labelled so here: no Corsair page for any figure above 12,832 MT/s was found in this check, which is a statement about what was searched rather than about what exists. The pattern itself is the durable point: extreme memory records now run on module brands' parts and chip makers' dies, and it is the module brand that announces them.

The last thing to watch is structural rather than technical. Corsair's memory business is now the growth engine of a company whose other component lines are shrinking 6, inside a segment where memory sits next to those shrinking lines 2, with a supply position resting predominantly on distributors and on inventory timing rather than on contracted direct allocation 2 56. If memory prices normalise as Corsair expects 56, both halves of that reverse at once: the component lines recover and the memory margins compress. The interesting question for the next few filings is not whether Corsair survives expensive memory — the numbers say it is thriving on it — but what its margins look like when memory gets cheap again, which its own risk factors say is the harder case 2.