Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

I need help picking RAM out?

RAM HELP

  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#13 ccokeman

ccokeman

    ????????????

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12447 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 April 2015 - 06:08 PM

 

for one thats only 2 sticks so dual channel and second its 2400 @ CAS 16 (ew). Now the difference isn't big enough to matter but why not have better overclock abilities and said benfits for $50?

 

edit: now if the ops wants to go the cheapest 32gb route, than yes that would be the best choice. Gskills 32gb (same specs) kit is $333.

 

Yeah, if he wants 32GB then picking up two of the ones IVI recommended is the way to go. If he only wants 16GB and quad channel, it's best to get a quad channel kit for that. If you're already planning to go the X99 route, why stay with dual channel RAM when you can run quad? Eight total DIMM slots on the board, so better to go with four sticks at the start and see where that gets you.

 

The Kingston kits linked earlier would be a great set thanks to the tight 13-14-14 timings and 2666Mhz speed bin. More so than the Ballistix set linked which are 2400Mhz Cl-16. 


Processor Intel Core I7 4690X  4.3Ghz
Memory G.Skill RipJaws  32GB 2400Mhz
Motherboard ASUS Rampage IV BE
Graphics  GTX TitanX x2
Power Corsair AX 1200,
Monitor ASUS PQ321Q
Cooling Liquid by comittee

Storage  OCZ RevoDrive 350 480GB  Seagate 8TB
Follow OCC on facebook.png


#14 ir_cow

ir_cow

    I Am A Cow...

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6399 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WA

Posted 29 April 2015 - 06:50 PM

I usually don't like linking other sites but here is a good Anandtech aritcle covering Timings ans speeds. From the slowest to the fastest speeds its upwards of 15fps difference in some games. Other things however have zero impact. So if you are playing games and or overclocking at all, faster ram will help out a more than a 2133 kit.

 

http://anandtech.com...ata-and-crucial

 

10%20-%20Performance%20Index.png


IR Twitter / OCC YouTube Channel / NVIDIA OC Guides; 1070, 1070 Ti, 1080 Ti, 2080

OCC Best AMD Motherboard Picks 2018 / OCC Best Mid ATX Computer Cases 2018

Main Rig: Threadripper 1920X, GIGABYTE X399 Designare EX, NVIDIA RTX 2080, Intel 730(s) 480GB, 32GB [email protected], Seasonic 1000w Plat.

Review Test Rig: : i7-4770k @ 4.2ghz, MSI-GD65 Gaming, Geforce GTX 770 , Corsair Force GT 240 GB, Patriot 16 GB 2400 (2x8gb), Thermaltake 750w.


#15 IVIYTH0S

IVIYTH0S

    They call me... General Help.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South, NJ

Posted 29 April 2015 - 07:32 PM

I usually don't like linking other sites but here is a good Anandtech aritcle covering Timings ans speeds. From the slowest to the fastest speeds its upwards of 15fps difference in some games. Other things however have zero impact. So if you are playing games and or overclocking at all, faster ram will help out a more than a 2133 kit.

 

http://anandtech.com...ata-and-crucial

 

CHART!

So according that chart the "performance index" of the 2666MHz memory sporting CL13 is 36.67% "faster" in contrast to the 2400MHz sticks at CL16....at a 76% price hike. Even IF that performance would scale linearly for all applications, and not just synthetic benchmarks, which be honest, it will not... it's a already a bad investment and that's in the best possible artificial situation. Your link only further proves my point at how little memory speeds/timings matter lol. I just scanned through the benchmarks and they perfectly outline just how pointless throwing money into better memory of a system should be the very last thing one with excess money to burn should be concerned with...there's ALWAYS a better use for that money.


Edited by IVIYTH0S, 29 April 2015 - 07:36 PM.

"GilliumX58" DESKTOP
Mobo: Asus P8Z68-V-PRO | Processor: Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz | CPU Cooler: Zalman CNPS9900MAXR | Videocard: ASUS GTX970 Strix
Memory: Patriot/Kingston 16GB 1866mhz | OS SSD: SanDisk Extreme 240GB SATA | PSU: PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W
Monitor: Samsung 30" 305T | CD/DVD: Samsung SH-S223F | Keyboard: Sentey Phoenix | Mouse: Razer Lachesis

OCC Cool Club Member

 
 

Rebate Success Thread 2015---RMA Success Thread 2016---GPU Comparison tool on AnAndTech


#16 bp9801

bp9801

    Please press any key to continue

  • Senior Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11275 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tucson, AZ

Posted 29 April 2015 - 07:46 PM

 

I usually don't like linking other sites but here is a good Anandtech aritcle covering Timings ans speeds. From the slowest to the fastest speeds its upwards of 15fps difference in some games. Other things however have zero impact. So if you are playing games and or overclocking at all, faster ram will help out a more than a 2133 kit.

 

http://anandtech.com...ata-and-crucial

 

CHART!

So according that chart the "performance index" of the 2666MHz memory sporting CL13 is 36.67% "faster" in contrast to the 2400MHz sticks at CL16....at a 76% price hike. Even IF that performance would scale linearly for all applications, and not just synthetic benchmarks, which be honest, it will not... it's a already a bad investment and that's in the best possible artificial situation. Your link only further proves my point at how little memory speeds/timings matter lol. I just scanned through the benchmarks and they perfectly outline just how pointless throwing money into better memory of a system should be the very last thing one with excess money to burn should be concerned with...there's ALWAYS a better use for that money.

 

 

By going with a dual channel kit instead of getting quad channel like the chipset and processor are designed for?


Intel Core i5 4690K - ASUS Z97-A - EVGA GTX 770 2GB
Mushkin Ridgeback 16GB DDR3-2133 - Samsung 840 EVO 250GB SSD - Seagate 750GB + 2TB - WD 1TB - Cooler Master SPH 1050W
ASUS Xonar Xense + Sennheiser PC-350 Xense Edition + Klipsch ProMedia 2.1 - Sapphire Vapor-X CPU Cooler - Cooler Master HAF XM

Follow OCC on facebook.png
KPMA7MM.png


#17 IVIYTH0S

IVIYTH0S

    They call me... General Help.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South, NJ

Posted 29 April 2015 - 08:51 PM

 

 

I usually don't like linking other sites but here is a good Anandtech aritcle covering Timings ans speeds. From the slowest to the fastest speeds its upwards of 15fps difference in some games. Other things however have zero impact. So if you are playing games and or overclocking at all, faster ram will help out a more than a 2133 kit.

 

http://anandtech.com...ata-and-crucial

 

CHART!

So according that chart the "performance index" of the 2666MHz memory sporting CL13 is 36.67% "faster" in contrast to the 2400MHz sticks at CL16....at a 76% price hike. Even IF that performance would scale linearly for all applications, and not just synthetic benchmarks, which be honest, it will not... it's a already a bad investment and that's in the best possible artificial situation. Your link only further proves my point at how little memory speeds/timings matter lol. I just scanned through the benchmarks and they perfectly outline just how pointless throwing money into better memory of a system should be the very last thing one with excess money to burn should be concerned with...there's ALWAYS a better use for that money.

 

 

By going with a dual channel kit instead of getting quad channel like the chipset and processor are designed for?

 

Again I'm sure it'd make an immeasurable difference whether they're in single channel, dual channel, triple channel or quad channel. Certainly not worth $300


"GilliumX58" DESKTOP
Mobo: Asus P8Z68-V-PRO | Processor: Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz | CPU Cooler: Zalman CNPS9900MAXR | Videocard: ASUS GTX970 Strix
Memory: Patriot/Kingston 16GB 1866mhz | OS SSD: SanDisk Extreme 240GB SATA | PSU: PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W
Monitor: Samsung 30" 305T | CD/DVD: Samsung SH-S223F | Keyboard: Sentey Phoenix | Mouse: Razer Lachesis

OCC Cool Club Member

 
 

Rebate Success Thread 2015---RMA Success Thread 2016---GPU Comparison tool on AnAndTech


#18 ir_cow

ir_cow

    I Am A Cow...

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6399 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:WA

Posted 29 April 2015 - 09:01 PM

Also remember those charts are all based on 4 an 8 dimm configurations, which is still quad channel. While the real world performance is minimal in difference, having Quad Channel is faster and the ability to overclock higher and have higher preformance because the link is higher.

 

If I wanted to go the cheapest route, than the crucial is the best option no doubt. If the op wants the preformance for the buck without breaking the bank than those Hyperx is better (at the combo price). Otherwise It would be a toss up of getting the G.Skills 3000 and tighten the timing to 15 @ 2666 and those crucial sticks because than I would be going for the cheapest bang for the buck.


IR Twitter / OCC YouTube Channel / NVIDIA OC Guides; 1070, 1070 Ti, 1080 Ti, 2080

OCC Best AMD Motherboard Picks 2018 / OCC Best Mid ATX Computer Cases 2018

Main Rig: Threadripper 1920X, GIGABYTE X399 Designare EX, NVIDIA RTX 2080, Intel 730(s) 480GB, 32GB [email protected], Seasonic 1000w Plat.

Review Test Rig: : i7-4770k @ 4.2ghz, MSI-GD65 Gaming, Geforce GTX 770 , Corsair Force GT 240 GB, Patriot 16 GB 2400 (2x8gb), Thermaltake 750w.


#19 IVIYTH0S

IVIYTH0S

    They call me... General Help.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South, NJ

Posted 30 April 2015 - 12:06 PM

Also remember those charts are all based on 4 an 8 dimm configurations, which is still quad channel. While the real world performance is minimal in difference, having Quad Channel is faster and the ability to overclock higher and have higher preformance because the link is higher.

 

If I wanted to go the cheapest route, than the crucial is the best option no doubt. If the op wants the preformance for the buck without breaking the bank than those Hyperx is better (at the combo price). Otherwise It would be a toss up of getting the G.Skills 3000 and tighten the timing to 15 @ 2666 and those crucial sticks because than I would be going for the cheapest bang for the buck.

But it's not the best performance for the buck unless he's already running the best i7 with triSLI GTX 980Tis/R9 390Xs and a phase change cooler clocked to the moon with a 1TB PCI-E SSD :lol: .


Edited by IVIYTH0S, 30 April 2015 - 01:35 PM.

"GilliumX58" DESKTOP
Mobo: Asus P8Z68-V-PRO | Processor: Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz | CPU Cooler: Zalman CNPS9900MAXR | Videocard: ASUS GTX970 Strix
Memory: Patriot/Kingston 16GB 1866mhz | OS SSD: SanDisk Extreme 240GB SATA | PSU: PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W
Monitor: Samsung 30" 305T | CD/DVD: Samsung SH-S223F | Keyboard: Sentey Phoenix | Mouse: Razer Lachesis

OCC Cool Club Member

 
 

Rebate Success Thread 2015---RMA Success Thread 2016---GPU Comparison tool on AnAndTech


#20 ccokeman

ccokeman

    ????????????

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12447 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 April 2015 - 06:42 PM

 

 

 

I usually don't like linking other sites but here is a good Anandtech aritcle covering Timings ans speeds. From the slowest to the fastest speeds its upwards of 15fps difference in some games. Other things however have zero impact. So if you are playing games and or overclocking at all, faster ram will help out a more than a 2133 kit.

 

http://anandtech.com...ata-and-crucial

 

CHART!

So according that chart the "performance index" of the 2666MHz memory sporting CL13 is 36.67% "faster" in contrast to the 2400MHz sticks at CL16....at a 76% price hike. Even IF that performance would scale linearly for all applications, and not just synthetic benchmarks, which be honest, it will not... it's a already a bad investment and that's in the best possible artificial situation. Your link only further proves my point at how little memory speeds/timings matter lol. I just scanned through the benchmarks and they perfectly outline just how pointless throwing money into better memory of a system should be the very last thing one with excess money to burn should be concerned with...there's ALWAYS a better use for that money.

 

 

By going with a dual channel kit instead of getting quad channel like the chipset and processor are designed for?

 

Again I'm sure it'd make an immeasurable difference whether they're in single channel, dual channel, triple channel or quad channel. Certainly not worth $300

 

 

 

And if you have never tried messing with mixed quad channel kits on an X99 or X79 platform you really do not have an understanding of how finicky they can be with mixed kits. I have.  Faster kits, tighter timings, tuning the secondary and tertiary timings all come into play on X99 even though you can run XMP 2 profiles of need be.   


Processor Intel Core I7 4690X  4.3Ghz
Memory G.Skill RipJaws  32GB 2400Mhz
Motherboard ASUS Rampage IV BE
Graphics  GTX TitanX x2
Power Corsair AX 1200,
Monitor ASUS PQ321Q
Cooling Liquid by comittee

Storage  OCZ RevoDrive 350 480GB  Seagate 8TB
Follow OCC on facebook.png


#21 IVIYTH0S

IVIYTH0S

    They call me... General Help.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South, NJ

Posted 30 April 2015 - 11:31 PM

And if you have never tried messing with mixed quad channel kits on an X99 or X79 platform you really do not have an understanding of how finicky they can be with mixed kits. I have. Faster kits, tighter timings, tuning the secondary and tertiary timings all come into play on X99 even though you can run XMP 2 profiles of need be.

Ok.... I never said to do that though lol, he COULD get two kits of the Crucial sticks or just one for now until DDR4 isn't so disgustingly overpriced... I still will bet that "only" running dual channel is going to make an infinitesimal difference in real life. In fact if he actually bought both kits and could prove that he's getting 76% better performance then I'd pay for the second kit and take it all back, I'd be surprised to even see a 7.6% of actual improvement in his games/tasks (real not synthetic) :lol:

Edited by IVIYTH0S, 30 April 2015 - 11:33 PM.

"GilliumX58" DESKTOP
Mobo: Asus P8Z68-V-PRO | Processor: Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz | CPU Cooler: Zalman CNPS9900MAXR | Videocard: ASUS GTX970 Strix
Memory: Patriot/Kingston 16GB 1866mhz | OS SSD: SanDisk Extreme 240GB SATA | PSU: PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W
Monitor: Samsung 30" 305T | CD/DVD: Samsung SH-S223F | Keyboard: Sentey Phoenix | Mouse: Razer Lachesis

OCC Cool Club Member

 
 

Rebate Success Thread 2015---RMA Success Thread 2016---GPU Comparison tool on AnAndTech


#22 ccokeman

ccokeman

    ????????????

  • Reviewer
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12447 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 01 May 2015 - 04:05 PM

DDR4 in dual channel with low speeds and loose timings will provide less performance than DDR3 modules. Its a fact. Until I can get my hands on a 5820 to test I cant really make that comparison between DDR3 quad and Dual channel and DDR4 in Quad and dual channel.  If you look at a comparable Dual channel Haswell Z97 system and a Quad Channel Haswell variant strictly looking at the memory sub system and bandwidth results you can get an idea of the swing in performance potential doing memory intensive tasks.  When it comes to a GPU limited test the rest of the system is almost irrelevant until you start testing AMD and Intel systems. There you see a difference.

 

If you are buying high end hardware there is a cost of entry, Don't handicap the system right out of the gate. Go quad channel with a 16GB kit to start then add on if you need it for your usage model.   


Processor Intel Core I7 4690X  4.3Ghz
Memory G.Skill RipJaws  32GB 2400Mhz
Motherboard ASUS Rampage IV BE
Graphics  GTX TitanX x2
Power Corsair AX 1200,
Monitor ASUS PQ321Q
Cooling Liquid by comittee

Storage  OCZ RevoDrive 350 480GB  Seagate 8TB
Follow OCC on facebook.png


#23 IVIYTH0S

IVIYTH0S

    They call me... General Help.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21620 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South, NJ

Posted 01 May 2015 - 04:59 PM

DDR4 in dual channel with low speeds and loose timings will provide less performance than DDR3 modules. Its a fact. Until I can get my hands on a 5820 to test I cant really make that comparison between DDR3 quad and Dual channel and DDR4 in Quad and dual channel.  If you look at a comparable Dual channel Haswell Z97 system and a Quad Channel Haswell variant strictly looking at the memory sub system and bandwidth results you can get an idea of the swing in performance potential doing memory intensive tasks.  When it comes to a GPU limited test the rest of the system is almost irrelevant until you start testing AMD and Intel systems. There you see a difference.

 

If you are buying high end hardware there is a cost of entry, Don't handicap the system right out of the gate. Go quad channel with a 16GB kit to start then add on if you need it for your usage model.   

And you act like "just DDR3 speeds" will matter either, you're missing the point here :lol:

 

But fine to put the quad channel debate to rest: http://www.newegg.co...ID=3938566&SID=happy, they've got tighter timings too for the same price as the Crucials I see no problem recommending these since they're the same price.


Edited by IVIYTH0S, 01 May 2015 - 05:00 PM.

"GilliumX58" DESKTOP
Mobo: Asus P8Z68-V-PRO | Processor: Intel Core i7 2600K @ 4.6ghz | CPU Cooler: Zalman CNPS9900MAXR | Videocard: ASUS GTX970 Strix
Memory: Patriot/Kingston 16GB 1866mhz | OS SSD: SanDisk Extreme 240GB SATA | PSU: PC Power & Cooling Silencer 750W
Monitor: Samsung 30" 305T | CD/DVD: Samsung SH-S223F | Keyboard: Sentey Phoenix | Mouse: Razer Lachesis

OCC Cool Club Member

 
 

Rebate Success Thread 2015---RMA Success Thread 2016---GPU Comparison tool on AnAndTech


#24 Velin

Velin

    New Member

  • Members
  • 5 posts

Posted 01 May 2015 - 06:31 PM

So you guys think the 13-14-14 timing with kingston isn't that great of an improvement? I mean it's a combo with the CPU i picked out so It's like the same price as getting the other 16 GB Quad Channel G Skill RAM, Either way i'm sticking with 16 GB because I don't do video editing just audio editing so I doubt I would ever need more than 16 GB. However I just want the best RAM that will prevent my DAW Software from Crashing and having problems with performance. Because the software I use allows me to load audio samples into RAM which is amazing! Thanks again for all the replies.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: RAM, HELP