how to choose ram?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
P

p1que

Reputable
Sep 23, 2014
86
0
4,630
Does the manufacturer of ram really matter? or should i just buy based on the amount of gigs i want. (which speaking of--is 8gigs ok for gaming)
 
Solution
voltoid27
The manufacturer only matters if the name is questionable to you. If the names on the table are well-known like Corsair, Crucial, or G.Skill, then no, it doesn't matter. Brands like Team or Pareema might be good, but less people tend to buy these so the reviews might be more sparse.

GB capacity is important, but in many cases, so is speed. If you run integrated graphics, for example in an AMD APU, RAM performance is key to squeezing the most power out of them. The best APU's can handle DDR3-2133, while Intel's mainstream processors use DDR3-1600. The insane Haswell-E platform uses DDR4-2133.

And yes, 8 GB is OK for gaming :)

Here are my recommendations for a variety of processors:

Intel mainstream processors (ix-4xxx)...
Sort by date Sort by votes
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
"Run of the mill" or hi performance ?

Brand - I look 1st at Mushkin as the Redline series, at least the ones I have been getting have all been Hynix modules. In the upper performance range, they also have slightly better timings and won two recent Editor's Choice roundups her on THG. If I don't find what I am looking fir there, I'll look to Corsair and then Gskill. Everybody has their favorites but underneath, other than the modules used, it's pretty much all the same .... buty I don't like "blingy" graphic type logos. I avoid the new "lower priced" guys on the block .... no bad experiences, just been afraid to dump my toes in those waters.

Speed - Faster is better despite all the post to the contrary..... check THG reviews and you will see up to an 11% fps increase in some games with 2400, other games show 0% but the average is 2-5%.

CAS - Lower is better.

Height - Those tall heat sinks with the teethy things, have a very important cooling function .... and that is "looking cool" (I guess). That is the only cooling function they provide so best to stick with the low profile jobs which won't hit ya air coolers.

Warranty - If RAM is gonna fail it will do so in a short time, that's why just about everyone offers Lifetime warranty.

I like 2 x 8GB, 2 x 4Gb is certainly serviceable.

Best 2 x 8GB kit buy right now are the Mushkin 2133's @ $145
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226420

Vest 2 x 4 GB kit buy is the Mushkin 2133 Blacklines @ $77
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226525





 
Upvote 0 Downvote
voltoid27

voltoid27

Reputable
Sep 17, 2014
609
0
5,660
The manufacturer only matters if the name is questionable to you. If the names on the table are well-known like Corsair, Crucial, or G.Skill, then no, it doesn't matter. Brands like Team or Pareema might be good, but less people tend to buy these so the reviews might be more sparse.

GB capacity is important, but in many cases, so is speed. If you run integrated graphics, for example in an AMD APU, RAM performance is key to squeezing the most power out of them. The best APU's can handle DDR3-2133, while Intel's mainstream processors use DDR3-1600. The insane Haswell-E platform uses DDR4-2133.

And yes, 8 GB is OK for gaming :)

Here are my recommendations for a variety of processors:

Intel mainstream processors (ix-4xxx): http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231445

Intel enthusiast processors (i7-5xxx):
http://pcpartpicker.com/mr/newegg/gskill-memory-f42133c15q16gnt

AMD high-end APU (A8 or A10):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231468

AMD midrange APU (A4 or A6):
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231538

AMD Socket AM1 APU:
same as Intel mainstream

Let me know your specs and I can find the perfect RAM for your system.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
The best one are in my post above..... if you still want 16 GB, nothing will touch those Mushkins. Corsair used to use Hynix modules (the Gold Standard) in their Vengeance Pro line but they switched to a cheaper supplier after version 4.51

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-scaling-gaming-haswell-richland,3593-18.html

We invited all of the major players in the retail memory business to participate in today’s evaluation of memory scaling across both desktop platforms with on-die graphics. The willing participants submitted samples ranging from a low-cost high-latency DDR3-1866 kit to high-cost low-latency DDR3-2400. We found that DDR3-2133 performed best on both AMD and Intel platforms, and Mushkin’s 997121R won the performance race by being latency-optimized at that data rate. It gets our most prestigious and rare Elite award for being the best product in its class.
Click to expand...

In short, it's better and cheaper than anything offered by the competition at this point in time....at least on this side of the pond... UK will pay more.



 
Upvote 0 Downvote
voltoid27

voltoid27

Reputable
Sep 17, 2014
609
0
5,660
It's 2 pounds cheaper lol. Both kits will serve you very well, it's just a matter of preference at this point.

Jack, that Mushkin kit is £170 in the UK. Is it better? Probably, but it's not cheaper.

EDIT: In retrospect, I'm sure you already knew that. BTW, love your signature :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

foreign

Reputable
Sep 30, 2014
108
0
4,690


I would better pay £2 extra to match ROG's motherboard design :D

BTW, mushkin should look good on ROG's motherboard as well but is it worth £40 extra? I'm not this good at understanding clock speed and cas impact on performance :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
Well yes, I have the Mushkin Ridgebacks in the Asus Maximus VI Formula and they do match perfectly .... can't see very well in this pic tho.....

After this picture, I tweaked the coolant coloring a bit to better match the red.

200x300px-LM-20ded621_002.jpeg


If you were doing 2 x 4GB which is fine for a gaming box....the 2400s are only 70 pounds

I'd look at these 2 x 4Gb .... best 2400's on market .... dunno why the 16 Gb is so expensive over there .... except that Mushkin can't keep up with demand .... I scored my last set for $155 .... now they are $210 here

http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/part/mushkin-memory-997083
http://uk.pcpartpicker.com/part/mushkin-memory-997122r

here ya see the effect of faster speed memory on gaming performance w/ 2400..... 0% in Crysis / 11% in F1
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/32-gb-ddr3-ram,3790-10.html

So would I pay 6 pounds to go from the Gskill 1600 set at 64 pounds to the 2400s at 70.... in a heartbeat.

But at 16GB, from 132 pounds to 200 is a bit harder to justify.... I would but wouldn't recommend that anyone on a budget take the jump.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

foreign

Reputable
Sep 30, 2014
108
0
4,690


Ok, thank you, I will keep vengeance pro on my list then :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

foreign

Reputable
Sep 30, 2014
108
0
4,690


your rig looks too expensive for me :)

The cheapest is £200 which is even more compared to the one you suggested earlier :S
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
Yes, at 1600 speed, everybody is at 1.5 volts ... Most 1866 is now at 1.5 too and even some 2133's are starting to show up at 1.5 / 1.55

Under XMP setting for 2400 though, everybody (Corsair, Gskill, Mushkin ,etc) is at 1.65 volts. Those Hynix modules can withstand 1.9v and more.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

foreign

Reputable
Sep 30, 2014
108
0
4,690


well, if you look at the price of my build £50 won't make much of a difference but i need to know how much superior mushkin 2133 mhz or 2400 mhz is over vengeance pro 1866 mhz? will I notice a difference in day to day use as well as gaming?

also, mushkin has a way higher latency rates, as far as I know lower is better lol, but i have NO idea how big impact of CAS is on performance. Could you please clear this out for me? :)

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
F

foreign

Reputable
Sep 30, 2014
108
0
4,690


tbh, I have no idea what you are talking about :D is it related to power consumption or something to do with overclocking or something else? :D
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
voltoid27

voltoid27

Reputable
Sep 17, 2014
609
0
5,660
It's related to both. More voltage, more power consumption, more heat. People overvolt their RAM because it allows them to reach higher speeds or lower latencies. Generally sticks with lower rated voltages have more overclocking headroom, but it depends more on the module quality.

Really, you don't need to worry about it. Overclocking RAM doesn't do much for performance other than giving you bragging rights :D
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
voltoid27

voltoid27

Reputable
Sep 17, 2014
609
0
5,660


Not much. RAM speed doesn't affect performance more than 10% outside of synthetic benchmarks. You might see single digit percentage gains, but day-to-day use won't reveal any benefit.

CAS latency can't be evaluated on its own. DDR3-2133 at CL10 has much lower latency than DDR3-1600 CL10. The Mushkins' CAS latency is higher because the speed is higher, as latency is based on clock speed as well; the two essentially cancel out for similar latency compared to other sticks mentioned in this thread.. Latency doesn't have much of an impact on performance either. Lower is better, but price is a much more important factor.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
JackNaylorPE

JackNaylorPE

Titan
BANNED
Oct 30, 2004
32,255
14
99,960
FPS increases have been notes as high as 11% .... CAD, video recording, financial data manipulation all benefit significantly from faster RAM. The differences aren't much, barely breaking into double digits but again, a 980 is only 14% faster than a 970.

So the way to look at it is on return on investment. We have roughly a 1600 GBP build here.... assuming for the moment assume that OP goes with 8 GB system..... so +6GBP / $1600 GBP is a cost increase 0.4%. Since we know the performance increase is way more than 0.4%, this is the proverbial "no brainer".


Now lets look at a 1650 GBP system w/ 16GB and to stretch the issue , let's use those 200 GBP Mushkins which is a 68 GBP increase in cost.

68 / 1650 = 4% .... so with an average 2 - 5 % increase in performance, sometimes being 0% and sometimes being 11%, it's a bit more of a conundrum..... if you are a F1 fanatic, yeah sure....otherwise I could see an argument both for and against.

Those DDR3-1600 Corsair Vengeance CAS 9 kits are $145 here in US ... a pair of Gskill Tridents at 2400 CAS 10 are $175

1650 GBP is about $2650 here but let's take off $500 cause UK gets stuffed on prices. Maybe more / maybe less, i dodn't wanna redo whole build to find out :)

$30 for 2400 over 1600 is a cost increase of 1.4% ..... now 2 - 5% performance increase looks a helluva lot better at a 1.4% increase in cost....so at US prices, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

Her's how to compare latency ... if you have 1866 CAS 9 and 2133 CAS 9, 2133 is faster.

Your Corsairs are DDR3-1866 CAS 9
The Mushkins are DDR3-2400 CAS 10

CAS x 100/ DDR speed

So....

Corsairs = 9 x 1000 / 1866 = 4.82 nanoseconds
Mushkins = 10 x 1000 / 2400 = 4.16 nanoseconds

So with respect to CAS / latency, Corsairs are about 16 % slower.






 
Upvote 0 Downvote
voltoid27

voltoid27

Reputable
Sep 17, 2014
609
0
5,660
And herein lies the problem with my logic. I considered only the cost of the RAM in the value, but RAM does not a PC make. When you look at it from a whole-build perspective, it does start to make sense.

By the way, your ns latency values are half of what the actual values are. Latency calculations use the "I/O bus speed", which is half of the advertised speed, as the bus isn't double-speed like the RAM itself (I can't explain it very well but it makes sense in my head :D). The DDR part of DDR3 isn't taken into account. The formula is CAS * 100 / (speed / 2).

 
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