Gskill ddr3 RAM cl 7-8-9-10 REALLY can't decide what to take, please help me out

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
W

wes182

Reputable
Sep 23, 2014
4
0
4,510
Hello everyone,

I'm about to upgrade my current rig with a new mobo/cpu/ram and afterwards a new gpu, that is if I get rid of my old one first.

So basically I just have to pick 3 things but I'm still doubting 2 of them actually..

cpu: Intel Core i5 4690K
mobo: Asus z97K vs Gigabyte z97 D3h vs Giga-byte GA-Z97X-Gaming 5
Now, the first 2 ones are equal in price, the gaming 5 one costs about 30 euro's extra (+-40-45dollars), but I've been reading it should be better for overclocking.

The reason I'm doubting is because I've never OC'ed before so I don't even know if I'll be doing it, also I might be able to OC it slightly on the cheaper mobo anyway with a stock cooler, it's not my main intention to push it really far.

Any of you guys could make a suggestion here? I'm also open to other mobo's, as long as it's a familiar brand like asus/msi/gigabyte, oh yeah there is one condition, it should have a digital audio exit (coaxial or spdif doesn't really matter).

Now comes the part this thread was actually intended for, the memory 'brainbreaker', I've been reading about this for the past 2 days and still can't decide wich one to go with, I'm pretty positive I want G skills, since they have best mhz/cas ratings for the price, now, if the prices would be well spread and the 1600mhz would be cheapest by far I wouldn't have a doubt, but between 1600 and 2400 there's only a +-10 dollar difference.

Here are the different options, as you'll probably know, the GTX ones are Trident x's, the GXH one are ripjaw modules

G.SKILL 16GTX (16384 mb, 1600 mhz, CL7, 1.5 v, non-ecc, unbuffered, kit of 2)
157,75 €

G.SKILL 16GTX (16384 mb, 1866 mhz, CL8, 1.6 v, non-ecc, unbuffered, kit of 2)
169,52 €

G.SKILL 16GTX (16384 mb, 2133 mhz, CL9, 1.6 v, non-ecc, unbuffered, kit of 2)
169,20 €

G.SKILL 16GXH (16384 mb, 2133 mhz, CL9, 1.6 v, non-ecc, unbuffered, kit of 2)
166,92 €

G.SKILL 16GTX (16384 mb, 2400 mhz, CL10, 1.65 v, non-ecc, unbuffered, kit of 2)
164,82 €

As you can see, about equal in price, the 2133mhz ripjaws where the only ripjaws I could find in my store with the same latency, I just added them because they are cheaper than the 2133 tridents and I just like the way they look better.

So could anyone give me some advice, and explain to me why I should or shouldn't get one of these. The little price difference makes no difference to me, having a stable machine does. I've been reading alot about this and actually already know the 2400mhz ones should be a little faster, but I just wouldn't want to get myself into trouble just for the little extra speed they'll grant.

Is it better to have max 1.5 voltage or doesn't it really matter?

Maybe I should also include that this pc will be occasionally used for gaming but most of all just for browsing, multitasking,.. I will not be using heavy graphical programs, and I know 8gb would be sufficient right now, I just don't want to fill up 2 ram slots to only get 8 gig, I intend to use this system again for probably 5-6 years, so it would be nice to be able to add an extra 16gb in 2-3 years or so just in case I feel like to. Also I think it's easier to sell big modules next time I plann on upgrading.

Now if you'll excuse me for the extreme long text, I got a little carried away :)

Thanks in advance for any advice
 
Solution
Tradesman1
The 4690K is more than sufficient for multi-tasking, and even if you don't want to OC right now, it will be like having a free CPU upgrade sitting in the case just waiting for you. On the DRAM I'd still go with the 2400/10, with your CPU chances are good the sticks will run at 2133/9 with no OC so good there, and if and when you do OC the CPU, you just crack the sticks up to 2400 also :)
Sort by date Sort by votes
W

wes182

Reputable
Sep 23, 2014
4
0
4,510


thx for your quick reply there, but I'm not sure I fully understand, for example if I only OC the cpu, should I also bother tweaking the ram? To be honest I don't think I'm ever really gonna do it, I just know to little atm, maybe if I dig into it, but I don't know how hard it is doing so, just don't see myself spending days finetuning everything, unless it meant a big increase in performance.

Most of all just regular day use, nothing special, but I like my pc to be responsive, want to be able to open a bunch of internet tabs while I open for example VLC and start downloading big files.

The thing is, pricewise I don't need to doubt, just want the fastest RAM without having to OC it, or without having to worry about compatibility.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tradesman1

Tradesman1

Legenda in Aeternum
Jun 5, 2013
67,883
40
126,960
I'd go the Gigabyte z97 D3h, and go ahead and get the 2400 sticks, even if you don't OC those are the 2nd least expensive and can always run them at a lower freq (i.e. the 2400/10 set will easily run at 2133/9 or 1866/8 or 1600/7), so they are there and can run as fast as you want them to (to run 2400/10 you may need a slight OC on the CPU, and if you want, I often run the Tri 2400/10 you are looking at at 2666/11 (they do have OC headroom)
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
S

swifty_morgan

Illustrious
Feb 10, 2006
13,566
1
42,960



when I over clock I usually find at what the lowest voltage the cpu will run at stock speeds without any problems. then I will bump the mutiplyer until I do have problems. then I will increase the voltage a little until the problems go away........... and so forth and so on until you get as fast as you can with the least amount of voltage. then I back off a little.
the ram. you can have the fastest ram on the planet, but if your apps don't respond to it it's not worth having. having said that......... again, lower voltage and bump the bus speed a little. you're not going to get a lot I don't think on most sockets. you're better off getting in the BIOS and playing with the xmp profiles and save yourself some trouble.
some boards will give you options to run that 2400 at faster speeds. this is where you might need to increase voltages or loosen timings or both.
want to run a bunch of apps at the same time........ multi core/multi thread processors.......... lots and lots of ram.
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
W

wes182

Reputable
Sep 23, 2014
4
0
4,510


Yeah that's why I found it so difficult to choose. Guess you're right about that, those are just things I can adjust in the bios easily right? Now I've been reading some things about overclocking and on first sight I think yeah, I can do that, increase the mhz, add some power. But what about cooling, tweaking it to perfection, probably have to download some programs to make sure temperatures don't rise to much.

Now it seems like alot of fun to accomplish all that, once you know what you're doing, but atm I just don't see myself putting in days of effort figuring it all out :) Allthough the part of modifying the mhz/cas is a thing I'm willing to try. Anyhow, I'm finally on the edge now to make a decision, I think :) Gonna wait a bit more in hope some other people will push me in the same direction. But I really wanna thank you already for clearing some things out and helping me make a descission!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tradesman1

Tradesman1

Legenda in Aeternum
Jun 5, 2013
67,883
40
126,960
If the DRAM is 2400 it will have two profiles profile 1 is the normal (to spec) profile for 2400, Profile 2 is an enthusiasts profile where often the CR is set to 1 instead of 2. All you should have to do for 2400 is enable XMP and select profile 1, if no go at stock a simple small OC to the CPU should put you where XMP will run the sticks at 2400
 
Upvote 1 Downvote
W

wes182

Reputable
Sep 23, 2014
4
0
4,510


Hey guys, sorry for replying so late, but I've been kinda busy last few weeks (buying a house), want to thank you again for the quick replies. I still wasn't able to get rid of my old config so didn't buy anything yet. I've been thinking about what you said though, I would possibly need a small cpu OC to be running those sticks at 2400mhz. Would this be the same case with for example 2133mhz ram? I'm not sure yet if I want to risk OC'ing right away, first of all because of waranty, second of all because I have 0 experience.

Maybe for me it's just better to get 1600mhz then? Also perhaps I should consider a locked 4690? It all sounds fairly easy the way you guys explain it, but in practise I'm afraid I might screw things up. If I can save 80 on a good cpu cooler (just use stock instead), and 20 on the 4690 vs 4690k, I saved €100, giving me the opportunity to just invest more frequently on a new cpu in the future.

Or another thing that comes to mind, might it be better to invest €52 more to get me a i7 4790 (€ 274) instead of a overclockable 4690k (€ 222)? I will mainly use the pc for general purpose anyway, especially want it to run smooth if multitasking. I do like to check out some new games just to see cool new graphics but I'm really not a frequent (pc) gamer anyway so it might be better to get an i7 then?
What would be more benificial for my purposes, a 4690k running at 4.4ghz, or a 4790 running at stock speed? Also for future proofing I mean, I'm using my current pc for about 6 years now and I'm intending to keep the next one for at least 5 years also.

Thanks

Sorry for rethinking this guys, I really apreciate your help but just want you to see it from my point of view and advice me what would be the best value for my money on the long haul.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tradesman1

Tradesman1

Legenda in Aeternum
Jun 5, 2013
67,883
40
126,960
The 4690K is more than sufficient for multi-tasking, and even if you don't want to OC right now, it will be like having a free CPU upgrade sitting in the case just waiting for you. On the DRAM I'd still go with the 2400/10, with your CPU chances are good the sticks will run at 2133/9 with no OC so good there, and if and when you do OC the CPU, you just crack the sticks up to 2400 also :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom