Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

Recommend memory for ASUS Sabertooth X58

Last response: in Memory
Share
November 5, 2010 7:01:49 PM

Hi,

This is parts list so far that I came up with:
- i7 950
- ASUS Sabertooth X58 LGA 1366
- intel 80GB SSD (boot drive) or 1 TB
- AMD 6870
- Antec 550W
- Antec P180 (will use from old build)
- Win 7 64

I can't make up my mind about memory/brand. I was thinking 3x2GB sticks.

Any help is appreciated!
a b } Memory
a b Ĉ ASUS
November 6, 2010 2:58:37 PM

In america , the most common recommendation is from G.Skill namely because they offer better / price performance ratio . I personally prefer Corsair's XMP range or OCZ Blades
m
0
l
Related resources
November 7, 2010 4:49:31 AM

Thanks for they replies!

I'm mostly after something that is reliable and has lots of reviews from other users. I think for 6GBs I shouldn't pay more then $150.
If no one else has any other suggestions I might go with above G.Skill
m
0
l
November 7, 2010 10:32:58 AM

Hi,
I built my system with an i7 950, Sabertooth x58, HD 6850 just last week and I am using the QVL Kingston 6Gb HyperX KHX1600C9D3K3/6GB and it has been very reliable so far. I was abit afraid when first booting because I had seen many posts on forums about people complaining that QVL memory (mainly Corsair if my memory serves me right) were not recogized over 4 GB and they had to change slots and various memory troubles, but I just plugged in all three memory units and they were instantly recognized. I haven't clocked up to 1600 MHz just yet though, I just learnt the other day that you need to do that manually in BIOS. But performance has been topnotch so far.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
a b Ĉ ASUS
November 7, 2010 10:38:25 AM

My suggestion, would be to double check with the desired mobo manufacturer and the ram manufacturer. Chances are, the ram manufacturer has a tool to help you choose the rams specific to your mobo maker or that they are simply arranged according to the chipset.

@ pumpkin_eater - Yeah sometimes QVL sucks!
m
0
l
November 7, 2010 12:35:30 PM

Lutfij said:

@ pumpkin_eater - Yeah sometimes QVL sucks!


Hmmm... why do you say that? My point was that I was quite happy with the memory since all of it was recognized instantly which is different from what I have read here, on Asus forums and elsewhere, and I was beginning to think that everyone having a Sabertooth x58 would have such problems.

The "clocked down thing" I admit I do not understand, but the person who told me about it said that ALL memory sold as 1600 MHz will work at 1066 or 1333 MHz at stock and it is up to us to clock them to 1600 if we want the speedc we are paying for. Although they have been tested at that speed so in my opinion it is not the same thing as overclocking.
m
0
l
a c 347 } Memory
a c 207 Ĉ ASUS
November 7, 2010 1:04:41 PM

I would file-13 the Antec 550W.


You know - there's a reason the Corsair's sell-out...!!! I wonder why??
$180 CORSAIR DOMINATOR 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 TR3X6G1600C8D - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

$165 CORSAIR DOMINATOR 6GB (3 x 2GB) DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800) CMP6GX3M3A1600C8 http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Comparison Module #1: Mushkin Redline 996805 6-8-6-24 1600MHz
Comparison Module #2: G.Skill Pi Series 7-8-7-24 1600MHz
Comparison Module #3: Mushkin 998687 8-9-8-24 1866MHz
Comparison Module #4: Corsair Dominator TR3X6G1600C8D 8-8-8-24 1600MHz
Comparison Module #5: Kingston HyperX T1 9-9-9-27 1600MHz
Comparison Module #6: Mushkin Blackline 998677B 7-7-7-20 1333MHz
Comparison Module #7: Patriot Viper II Sector 7 9-9-9-27 1800MHz


m
0
l
a b } Memory
a b Ĉ ASUS
November 7, 2010 4:25:11 PM

@ pumpkin_eater - comparing QVL with mobo specs are a good thing, don't get me wrong, but most of the problems faced with mobo's on forums is the ram. Oddly enough you'll also find that the rams caused problems even though they were included in the QVL. I found my modules in an Asus QVL but the silly thing is i have them setup in different slots (and in dual channel), yet they work fine and dandy with an overclock as well.

And i mean't to say SOMETIMES :) 

Back to OP - now that the benchmark picture just popped up, I'd ask micko_escalade what your workload will be on your machine (gaming, rendering, cad work, photoshop or just intense gaming) Since real world usage varies a great deal from benchmarked results/numbers.
m
0
l
a c 347 } Memory
a c 207 Ĉ ASUS
November 7, 2010 4:37:50 PM

^ I use the {TR3X6G1600C8D} on all my pseudo Workstations {i7 930s' | SSD | RAID 1 | ASUS P6X58D-E | H-50}, they're solid/stable/reliable and built extremely well and they're NOT for gaming; and I too use them for my EVGA Gaming rigs or I use the GT.
m
0
l
November 8, 2010 12:49:27 AM

Thanks guys!

I've checked out Corsair Dominator TR3X6G1600C8D 8-8-8-24 and even though its bit more then $150 I'm willing to pay because its investment that I'll using for at least 3 years.
As far as what I'll be using it mostly it'll be Rendering, photoshop and occasional gaming ie. Medal of Honor, Battlefield, far cry and chrysis.

I've tried to find what people were able to OC with same future config as mine?
m
0
l
a b } Memory
a b Ĉ ASUS
November 8, 2010 1:07:58 AM

^ i do all the above with an i5-750 on an Asus Maximus III Formula, but i'll tell you something your really making a good investment in....that i7 will tear apart any render you throw at it :)  The GPU is more than capable for Adobe CS5 work along with the triple channel ram.

OC'ing on the sabertooth is like reciting your ABC's. it's very user friendly with profiles. A feature Asus have on all their board lineups.
m
0
l
November 8, 2010 1:23:58 AM

Lutfij said:
^ i do all the above with an i5-750 on an Asus Maximus III Formula, but i'll tell you something your really making a good investment in....that i7 will tear apart any render you throw at it :)  The GPU is more than capable for Adobe CS5 work along with the triple channel ram.

OC'ing on the sabertooth is like reciting your ABC's. it's very user friendly with profiles. A feature Asus have on all their board lineups.

Thanks! That's good to know.
m
0
l
a c 347 } Memory
a c 207 Ĉ ASUS
November 8, 2010 9:48:34 AM

My solo concern of your rig is the 80GB SSD; the objective is to accelerate BOTH the OS and Apps. A possible alternative is a RAID 10 (4 1TB) or RAID 1 (2 1TB); the RAID 10 accelerates with redundancy the RAID 1 is a mirror only - either has backup.

Once the 80 GB if full, maybe day 1 then it gets very tricky to spread your Apps across multiple HDDs. At minimum I would look at 128 MB SSD; the Kingston SSDNow V Series is ~ $190.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
a b Ĉ ASUS
November 8, 2010 10:58:28 AM

^ Good point. +1 to RAID 10
m
0
l
November 10, 2010 3:08:56 AM

I've changed from Intel 80GB to OCZ Vertex 2 120GB http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...

Is that better option?

While speaking of HDD I've posted a question over in HDD section http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/263709-32-recommend-r...

And hell_storm2004 suggested Western Digital Caviar Black WD1002FAEX 1TB http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... it has 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s compered to Samsung http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168... which does not have.

I was also compering WD
http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/hdd_lookup.php?cpu=WD...
and Samsung
http://www.harddrivebenchmark.net/hdd_lookup.php?cpu=SA...

Only reason why I'm tempted by WD is because in my opinion they are more reliable then Samsung, am I wrong? any other thoughts suggestion?

Thanks!

m
0
l

Best solution

a c 347 } Memory
a c 207 Ĉ ASUS
November 10, 2010 1:26:29 PM

To answer your questions:

MOBO
For a little more, the ASUS P6X58D-E is easily worth the difference; more power to CPU/DIMM Slots and 3-WAY support i.e. superior PCIe support.
ASUS P6X58D-E - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Compare - http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submi...|13-131-665^13-131-665-TS,13-131-641^13-131-641-TS,13-188-065^13-188-065-TS
2 SATA3 w/no RAID N/A
6 SATA2 w/RAID {0/1/5/10}

SSD (SATA3)
One of the best SSD for R/W on the planet and only a small cost difference; surpasses SATA2 R speeds and W is 200+ MB/s.
Crucial RealSSD C300 CTFDDAC128MAG-1G1 2.5" 128GB SATA III MLC Internal Solid State Drive (SSD) http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Tests http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/windows-7-ssd-trim,...

HDD (SATA2)
The WD HDDs lack TLER support, needed on many RAID Controllers, unless you go to WD Enterprise drives. Also, no HDD will be more than 1/2 ~140 MB/s R/W speed which is half the SATA2 limit of 300 MB/s; the "6.0 Gb/s" only refers to Interface speeds - SATA3 HDD is a waste of money unless ALL your SATA connections are SATA3 types or attached to a SATA3 RAID Controller.
Seagate Barracuda ES.2 ST31000340NS 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive -Bare Drive http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
Compare http://www.newegg.com/Product/Productcompare.aspx?Submi...|22-136-313^22-136-313-TS,22-148-278^22-148-278-TS,22-152-238^22-152-238-TS

The Consumer WD are NOT better than either the Samsung or Hitachi HDDs, my servers run Hitachi SAS which are the most reliable {proven by studies as of today}. With acquisitions and mergers and it's difficult to keep up with the who's better today w/o a study driver per drive.

If you want a good WD - http://www.wdc.com/en/products/index.asp?cat=2 specifically the RE4 {1TB WD1003FBYX} http://www.wdc.com/en/products/products.asp?driveid=799

The 'ideal' solution is SSD + RAID 1 HDD {mirror} which is exactly what I do, plus backup critical data {server or external drive}.
Share
November 23, 2010 6:24:37 AM

Best answer selected by micko_escalade.
m
0
l
!