How much a difference would it make if I switch from 1600MHz C11 to 1866-2000MHz C8-9

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Z

Zeqiang Zhao

Honorable
Sep 19, 2013
17
0
10,510
I recently bought two modules of 8G (16G total) Corsair Vengeance Series memory
Specs: 1600MHz CL11 DDR3.
System Specs: i7 4770K to 4.0GHz
ASUS GTX 770
MSI Z87 ZMPOWER MAX
During most of the games I have played, the performance is really good. However, when I play PlanetSide2, the framerate sometimes drops to a level unplayable. I do realize that the game currently is poorly optimized for multicore CPUs, but some people have told me in-game that they even have steady 45-60 fps during big fights with an i5. And comparing the fps before and after I overclocked my CPU to 4.0Ghz reveals no significant improvement. So I suspect that it is the memory that is bottlenecking the performance.
First of all, do you agree?
Second, even if that's not the case for the game, would I benefit a lot and see some noticeable improvement over gaming performance if I switch out the 1600MHz CL11 memory and use memory of higher frequencies, like 1866 or 2000MHz +, with a lower CL like 8 or 9? Because I think CL11 might be too high at 1600MHz and will hold back my system. Thank you!
 
Solution
getochkn
It would make maybe 1fps difference if that. Faster RAM is good if you are overclocking the whole system bus or want a bigger number to say mine is bigger than yours. In benchmarks their may be a small difference. In reality, you won't notice anything really.
Sort by date Sort by votes
getochkn

getochkn

Polypheme
Jul 2, 2006
12,407
54
65,040
It would make maybe 1fps difference if that. Faster RAM is good if you are overclocking the whole system bus or want a bigger number to say mine is bigger than yours. In benchmarks their may be a small difference. In reality, you won't notice anything really.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
Z

Zeqiang Zhao

Honorable
Sep 19, 2013
17
0
10,510


So there really is not much gain in performance even from 1600MHz CL11 to 1866MHz CL8? Wouldnt it mean that the time for the memory to retrieve data will be reduced by 1/4, and with higher frequency, more than 1/4, which translates to faster gaming performance?
The issue I have is that in most games I have fps higher than 60 so they dont really matter.
In PlanetSide2 however, sometimes during intense fight, I have 20-30 fps which is really unplayable. Some people in game claims that they have pretty good fps throughout with even i5, so I have been trying to identify the problem with my system, which is holding it back, for this particular game that I play the most. Thank you!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
robax91

robax91

Distinguished
Dec 26, 2012
882
0
19,660


Your system is very nice compared to mine, however there are some tweaks that can make your set up work better.

One is to change the draw distance manually in the ini file... look up a tutorial for that... because normally even with a flying vehicle, you can't realistically hit moving targets as far as the game shows targets (ones on the horizon), just set it to a reasonable amount like 1200 meters. This also adds a cool fog of war type feel (only in flying vehicles) on ground units or fps mode you don't notice anything. This improves fps greatly by having to render way less stuff.

Also, I know people love their shadows... but they don't do anything for the game. They compound the workload with all those moving objects. Just turn off shadows all together and you might be able to improve overall rendering and object quality by sacrificing those already jagged shadows.

Hope these tips help a little. I can run the game on my i5-3750k with my 650ti at around 40 consistent fps using these settings in heavy combat. Good luck!


edit- I just remembered this tweak too I posted a while back "Look up simple code lines for the game you are playing and see if you can turn PhysX off in that application. One example that I use myself is "GPUphysics = 0" under "rendering" preferences in Planet Side 2 (because hundreds of explosions and people would be death to my GPU.) (You would set Physx to GPU then disable via game code in useroptions.ini" physX really adds dazzle to explosions... up close. In a game like PS2, you won't be close enough to see those extras in most cases anyways... so just disable it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

Zeqiang Zhao

Honorable
Sep 19, 2013
17
0
10,510


I tried lowing the graphics to low, and the fps rate doesnt change, plus the in-game fps display says that the CPU is holding back the frame rate. So with a system like mine cant even run the game smoothly at low settings during intense fight (20-35 fps), most people should struggle as well, but in fact there are still many people playing it so it seems that this problem is not pervasive. This really makes me sad because I play this game the most. Other games I played are mostly single player games, and Team Fortress, which really isnt demanding at all.
But anyway, I think Newegg and Amazon have a decent return policy, so do you think it is wise to buy a kit and try them to see if it improves fps? if not I can always return them at a small cost.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

Zeqiang Zhao

Honorable
Sep 19, 2013
17
0
10,510
Robax:
Thank you for your advice. I once tried to turn the graphics settings all the way to low just to see if it gives me crazily high fps. As it turned out, the fps hardly changed, so I believe that it is a CPU-related issue, or network bottleneck. What resolution do you play on? I have it on 1080p, and i maxed out render distance, and shadow. The thing is that it says my CPU is holding the performance back, so will turning off shadows and render distances really help? I mean, I have GTX 770, so it should handle a game like PS2 really easily right?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
robax91

robax91

Distinguished
Dec 26, 2012
882
0
19,660


Playing at 1080p is also probably straining the system a bit. Honestly I play at 1600x900 and 1080p looks nearly the same to me.

I did edit my last post but let me simplify it in a few steps to try:

1. Try 1600x900
2. Disable Shadows (you can do this in the ini file)
3. Disable PhysX (check last post on how to do this)
4. Lower the draw distance or add a limit. (default is =0 which means it renders the entire map, set it to a number = to meters, test it at 1500 and lower it in 100 steps until you find one you like and that isn't too much strain.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

Zeqiang Zhao

Honorable
Sep 19, 2013
17
0
10,510


Will those settings affect CPU usage though? Because I think I have low frame rate because of CPU strain (it shows in-game 20fps [CPU], which means the CPU is bottlenecking performance). So are you saying that those effects rely heavily on CPU power, so disabling them will free up and improve CPU performance? Because if they are mostly processed by the graphics card then disabling them probably wont help.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
robax91

robax91

Distinguished
Dec 26, 2012
882
0
19,660


Yes some of those will relieve stress. Honestly, you'd have to try them to see if they work. For me they did.

Going back to your original question, no. Upgrading your RAM will not make a noticeable difference.

Check PlanetSide 2 forums for tweaks and performance boosts, after all we kinda derailed this thread.

If you think your CPU is the bottle neck, then just overclock it. If you don't have an aftermarket cooler, look into getting one and try that 4770k out at 4.2Ghz. My i5-3750k is sitting at 4.233Ghz right now, I'm using a Corsair H70 liquid closed system setup. It's probably more beneficial for you to try that (and at less cost) than trying to get new RAM that doesn't have a noticeable performance boost. Also consider an SSD. Not that this will fix the issue, but because I load PS2 maps in seconds.

These are all suggestions, I don't know anything for sure because I only know what has worked for me.

Side note- Sometimes the PhysX is linked to the CPU, which would be a big strain on the CPU. At least try my recommendations before you come to a conclusion.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

Zeqiang Zhao

Honorable
Sep 19, 2013
17
0
10,510
Thank you! I will. What Im gonna do is Im gonna turn all the settings to lowest setting possible, and gradually crank up each one of them to see which setting causes the most performance drop, and from there I can further investigate the problem. Also, if I have another set of RAM module, is it possible to just use them as RAMDISK? I heard that maybe all the system RAMs have to run at the same frequency. Is that true? if so, how about timing?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tradesman1

Tradesman1

Legenda in Aeternum
Jun 5, 2013
67,883
40
126,960
1600/9 is basically entry level, so 1600/11 is very slow in comparison, and yes it does make a difference, even going to 1866/9 should show a difference - how much is games would depend on the game, more are starting to utilize memory as more than just a conduit to link the CPU and GPU....I'd suggest going to a 1866/9 or 8 set as the prices of 1866 and 1600 are near the same. If running mixed sticks of DRAM, all DRAM in the system runs at the same freq, either the mobo default (gen 1333 or 1600 with Intel) or at the freq you manually set, if you don't manually set the timings they will gen default to somewhere around (+/-1) 10-10-10-30 at 1600
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

Zeqiang Zhao

Honorable
Sep 19, 2013
17
0
10,510


Thank you Tradsman. I bought a 8GB kit (2 x 4GB) GSkill 1866MHz 8-9-9-24. They run pretty nice. I have noticed a framerate improvement of about 5-10 fps, not huge, but nice to have.
So now with this kit, and my original corsair 16GB 1600Mhz kits, I am think that maybe I can utilize the Corsair kit for RAMDisk. I heard that it is possible to have different frequencies among ram modules (unlink), so is it possible to do RAMdisk with the corsair kit? Is it feasible?
Or, since the OS cant distinguish the 4 modules, it wont be able to make individual RAM RAMdisk, but may end up using part of the Gskill modules and part of the corsair modules?
Do you recommend doing this?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Z

Zeqiang Zhao

Honorable
Sep 19, 2013
17
0
10,510

Maybe I didnt get my points across: I am thinking about using both kits--the fast GSkill kits for system RAM, and Corsair kits for RAMDisk. However I suspect that it may not be feasible, in that the system cannot address individual RAM modules. So I wonder if it is possible to do that. If it is, then I can use the 1600/11 as RAMDisk, and use the 1866/8 as system RAM.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom