Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD Compatable Ram? Marketing Gimmick?

Last response: in Memory
August 27, 2012 1:37:09 AM

Primary Question
Trying to figure this out, could use some help please with understanding RAM labeled as AMD Compatable. I'm planning on probably getting an AMD FX-8350 Piledriver when it comes out (assuming it isn't another benchmark flop). Specs says it natively supports 1866.

I figured, because I plan to overclock, and because my motherboard can support 2133, I was looking at primarily G.Skill ram (open to other suggestions) and I ran into some confusing information.

On the F3-14900CL10S-8GBXL 1866MHZ Ripjaws X
"XMP Ready for 2nd and 3rd Generation Intel Core Processors Compatible with AMD AM3/FM1 APU platforms"

While the F3-2133C11D-16GZL 2133MHZ Ripjaws Z
"XMP Ready for 2nd and 3rd Generation Intel Core Processors"

Is it a marketing gimmick saying the 1866 is compatible just because the ram is rated for 1866MHZ, or is there some actual real basis that makes it more compatible that I should be aware of.

Secondary Questions
1) With OCing in mind, I'm thinking 2133 is necessary. Reason being with FSB OCing, 2133 gives me some headroom past 1866. The alternative would be using a lower speed profile to keep it under the rated speed. Am I mistaken in that idea? I was told the sweet spot was was at least 1600mhz (since there isn't major performance difference past 1600mhz)

2) Getting a Noctua NH-D14 down the road, so I'm dumping the Corsair Vengeances I'm using to get something that fits beneath it. Eyeballing primarily G.Skill atm. Anyone have strong recommendations for any other brands I should consider (that would fit)

3) How much ram do you think will be needed in the future? 8GB(2x4) is enough atm and with 2 open slots, should I replace my current with a 2x8 pair to "future proof" by leaving me room to go up as high as 32GB Max, or is it unlikely in the next 2-4 years I would ever be bottlenecked by 16gb?

Strictly a MMO and RPG Gaming rig, not so much with FPS. Thanks in advance to anyone who can help me get educated on this stuff.
a b } Memory
August 27, 2012 5:41:44 PM

I would say you're probably reading a little too much into that line. I would say that the likely scenario is that they are targeting people using Sandy and Ivy Bridge CPUs, but they want to make sure somewhere on the marketing material they make it clear that if you're building around the corresponding AMD platform, the RAM works there as well.

You are something of an enthusiast, and so that sort of thing would be essentially a given for you, but it might not be for a first time, or novice, in the art of high performance computer building. That message is aimed more at them.
August 29, 2012 5:26:32 PM

Ran into a some old forum posts regarding IMC and Overclocking Issues with the Deneb chips, can't seen to find it. Other forums I've ran across also make me question compatability as well.

On the G.Skill forum, some were asking if there was a actual difference vs seemingly identical Ripjaws X series vs the Ares series.

For example, only the new Ripjaws Z supports XMP 1.3, so if the kit needs it, it will contain it for the latest X79 chipset. Performance would be optimal since the memory was designed with that particular chipset. RipJaws, Ripjaws X, Sniper, they can all work as well, but they were simply designed on other platforms.

Although they refer to XMP, I question if that principle applies to AMD chips. It's things like this and other random forum articles that make me worried. I think ideally I want ram cabale to overclock higher and give me more headroom to work with, despite the higher expense. Then forum posts, articles and comments like one stated by G.Skill makes me stop and think wait, should I play it safe?

To Quote another post in that same thread
as CPUs improve in performance and ability to handle DRAM (more and faster), need to think of where to put your R&D dollars for new/better/faster designs. Since overall Intel is basically a couple of years ahead of AMD, I would be thinking/looking only at Intel.
From an economic or business viewpoint, to go back and start designing slower sticks when you already have a good selection that works extremely well for AMD rigs doesn't make a lot of sense.

Ugh this makes my head swim trying to decide on playing it safe and spend less($100ish for 2x8gb, give or take), or getting what I think would be more ideal overclocking headroom and stability in one sense, yet have concerns of instability in another sense and pay 50% more ($150ishh for 2x8gb, give or take).

If I could only get a winning lotto ticket so I can just burn money on a new pc should i end up overclocking and melting my current system :whistle: