DDR3 2000 for new i7 920 build?

[toastyy]

Hey guys,

I have been stressing looking over a few different ram kits for my upcoming i7 920 build.

I guess my first question is is DDR3 2000 worth it? There are a few kits out there that cost relatively the same as many of the DDR3 1600 kits.

Here is what I was looking at

DDR3 2000 G.Skill Ripjaw Cas 9
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231306

Mushkin DDR3 2000 Cas 8
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226057

The reviews on these kits are basically non existent. Am I better off just going with some DDR3 1600 cas7 kit? I have a budget around 200 dollars.

Thanks!

 

[BohleyK]

The timings are too high. Better off with 1600. Look for 7-7-7-28 or something near there

 

[kleinberg]

Here's an article talking about memory speeds for DDR2: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/tight-timings-high-clock-frequencies,1236. There's a similar one for DDR3, but I can't seem to find it right now. Basically, the conclusions were that the DDR3-2000 kits had too slow timings and didn't help except in very specific situations like WinRAR. In games, the differences were 1-2%, and it actually depended on the game as to whether faster timing/1333 or 2000 kits resulted in better frame rates.

This is definitely one of those areas where if you have to ask, you don't need it (even if you're a hardcore gamer). The differences in performance are small, and unless you have very specific needs (I'm a photographer dealing with 200 photoshop files a day and I need my RAM to do x), you're not going to be able to even tell the difference. If it were me, I would go with the faster timings on a 1600 kit.

 

[toastyy]

I guess my question is why go for DDR3 1600 when DDR3 2000 are similary prices? Will the timings make a more noticeable difference?

Also can someone reccomend some good DDR3 1600 kits with decent times? I wanted that CAS6 Mushkin but it has been out of stock for a while.

 

[kleinberg]

I would just do the math:

9 CAS @ 2000mhz = 4.5 microseconds actual latency
8 CAS @ 2000 = 4.0

7 CAS @ 1600 = 4.3
6 CAS @ 1600 = 3.7

So an 8 at 2000 is actually slightly better than 7 at 1600, as far as timings. But at the end of the day, no, none of this will make much of a measureable difference, much less a noticeable one. Changes in CPU speeds will drown out any of these differences in memory, so just pick a rough "best" of the ones that are actually available and don't sweat it.