Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

G.Skill memory question...

Last response: in Memory
Share
November 16, 2011 6:10:48 AM

Okay so I ended up getting G.Skill Sniper 9-9-9-24 1.5v 1600Mhz due to thinking I was going to have clearing issues with my HSF. Little did I know alot of the people writing reviews on NewEgg have no knowledge of the products they have. That said how are the Snipers compared to the oh-so-famous RipSaw brand? I'm a betting man and would like to say both kits are the same just different heatspreaders. What do you think?

Also in terms of the Sandy Bridge and K series chips I'm finding it very repetitive that RAM frequency, cas, etc everyone is saying there isn't that big of a difference in performance. The ram set I bought is the cheapest item in my build but the best in "low-profile" aspect. At one point I could have gotten Corsair XMP 1600 8-8-8-24 1.5v with tall sinks for $30 shipped. Although I don't think I'd notice a difference in performance between the sticks I'd like them for improved heat dissipation.

That said should I keep the kit I have or spend the extra money and get tall-sink 9-9-9-24 1.5 modules for better cooling?

Edit: No intentions to overclock the ram either. Don't see any real gain in doing so.

More about : skill memory question

November 16, 2011 2:32:53 PM

You might be right but look @ the egg for pc6400 ram... I get that ram to 1,000Mhz with 4-4-4-14 1.85v timings rated for 5-5-5-24 1.8v. So very quality ram sticks they offer. I'm not going to worry about it because I know how these companies work.... same modules different heat sink. I've never had G.Skill fail on me. Other name-brand's I've had die on me... such as OCZ Gold/Platinum, Mushkin, and Kingston.
m
0
l
a b } Memory
November 16, 2011 3:11:00 PM

At 1.5v heat spreaders are not even needed, it's just for looks.
m
0
l
Related resources
November 16, 2011 5:16:10 PM

You don't think bigger head spreaders = colder ram = better speeds because it runs at a lower temp?
m
0
l
a b } Memory
November 16, 2011 8:10:12 PM

When your pc is on, touch the ram, it's hardly even warm most likely because the in case temp is warmer than the outside air. The top of my ripjaw x actually felt cold.
m
0
l
November 16, 2011 8:50:43 PM

Yeah your right they are barely warm running memory-extensive programs. Another question while your here.... for maximum speed/compatibility would it be better to run the ram @ spec of 1600Mhz 9-9-9-24 1.5v or 1333Mhz 8-8-8-24 1.5v. I know people say they run their ram at 1600 but i5/i7's ram to cpu speed is 1333mhz so logically that would make one believe running it at 1600Mhz you lose that 300Mhz (reason people compare 1333/1600/1866 ram and they don't see a difference lol).
m
0
l

Best solution

a b } Memory
November 17, 2011 2:16:31 AM

1333 is the stock speed, not the speed it's always at, 1600 is an OC speed ie not stock. 1600 cl9 is faster and is what the ram to cpu connection will be at if you set it to that. You do see a small difference, but everyone says it's not worth it because on SB the ram speed is independent of cpu speed when overclocking (and partly unnoticeable because normal peoples' tasks). http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/memory/2011/01/11/the-... This even shows benchmarks comparing different speeds with different cpus: SB, lynnfield, and nehalem. And you can see with either, ram speed is only a small difference.

Everyone recommends 1600 because the price difference is currently only $1-$3. And there are a few minor performance drops with 1333 as seen in the benchmark.
Share
November 17, 2011 4:16:43 AM

Best answer selected by centora.
m
0
l
November 17, 2011 4:22:11 AM

Thanks for all the help k1114
m
0
l
!