Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

4gb of Reaper 6400 or 2gb of Reaper 8500??

Last response: in Memory
January 1, 2008 10:13:15 AM

Hey all

Long time reader, first time poster!

I'm slowly building my new machine to replace an ageing Athlon XP 3200+...

I've got a P5K Premium in an Antec 900 case, a Creative Fatal1ty card, and I wanna get a Q9450 and a 9600gtx in Jan (or Feb, or whenever) - anyway ...

I'm trying to choose ram, should I get:

2 gig of DDR2 8500, rated at 5-5-5-15 or ...

4 gig of DDR2 6400, rated at 4-4-3-15

I use my pc for recording (ram intensive) and gaming - Crysis, COD4, etc.

4gb of slower stuff will only cost about $AUD 50 more, although I know that Win XP (or Vista 32 bit) will not see all ther ram anyway. Prob even less with a lot of memory on the video card. Will prob just run a mild overclock - I'd be happy with 3-3.3ghz (up from 2.66) ... So, should I get less of the faster stuff? Looking forward to your replies!

January 1, 2008 11:45:49 AM


It sort of depends what kit your going for. If your going for the 6400 in 2x2gb then get that as 2x2gb is better then 4x1gb. Then again you may as well buy the 8500 in 2x1gb and then buy another 2x1gb in the future. On the whole though I noticed a nice difference when going from 2gb to 4gb, especially as I am using vista. Personally I would go for 4gb, just try and make it 2x2gb not 1x4gb.
a b } Memory
January 2, 2008 8:28:33 AM

Hello and welcome to the forums mate :) 

Even if u asked 4GB 6400 vs 4GB 8500, i would have said 4GB 6400, I would have said 4GB 6400 because the difference between 6400 and 8500 isnt much and also 6400 OCs very good too

also the timings of that 4GB 6400 are better than that 8500

so definitely go for 4GB 6400
Related resources
January 2, 2008 2:14:54 PM

4 GB with the caveat that you will probabbly want a 64 bit OS to use all 4 Gb. A 32 bit OS will be able to use only 3 to 3.5 Gb out of that 4 Gb.
May 14, 2008 7:58:43 PM

I was researching this exact same question and found this thread. I'm looking to buy 2 kits (for 8GB) of the Reapers to replace my 8GB Corsair (which don't want to go above 860Mhz no matter what I try). Is the PC8500 just a gimic...just more expensive PC6400 and not worth the cost or do you believe the PC8500 Reapers will actually overclock better? I ask this question because I've heard people say that PC8500 (DDR2 1066) is a waste and you should just get good PC6400. I just wanted to check again before I spend the $$.
May 15, 2008 7:14:25 AM

It is true in most situations that PC2 6400 is the better overclocker. However, in your situation, due to you filling all 4 RAM slots on your motherboard with 2GB modules, your motherbord memory controller will be quite stressed as it is at its absolute max. Therefore the chances are you won't get a very good overclock, no matter what RAM you are using.

If you really do want faster running RAM, then you could just get the PC2 8500 but then again the timings are probably worse than the Corsair PC2 6400 you already own. Altogether I don't think you'll see a large performance change for the money you spend.
a b } Memory
May 15, 2008 8:20:24 AM

Definitely 4GB REAPER PC2 6400:

1_its 4GB
2_The difference between DDR2 800 and DDR2 1066 isnt noticeable and DDR2 800 is a good OCer
3_It has better timings than the PC2 8500 one
May 15, 2008 8:27:14 AM

Maziar said:
Definitely 4GB REAPER PC2 6400:

1_its 4GB
2_The difference between DDR2 800 and DDR2 1066 isnt noticeable and DDR2 800 is a good OCer
3_It has better timings than the PC2 8500 one

Guys thanks for the advice. I went with the PC8500 (with the rebate it didn't cost much more), and I'll hope 4 of these sticks can do least 1066 @ 5-5-5-12 which is what I'm running these Corsairs at (come on Rampage Formula, don't let me down). I can put half of my existing 8GB in my wife's machine and keep the other 4GB as spare.