Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Solved

16gb 1866 or 8gb 2133

Last response: in Systems
Share
May 2, 2012 11:10:57 PM

your op?

More about : 16gb 1866 8gb 2133

May 2, 2012 11:26:58 PM

assuming it's for gaming with an ivy/sandy cpu.
8GB 1600.

Speed past 1600 offers less than a 1% increase in performance.
16GB is useless unless it's a workstation. In that case the 16GB 1866 would be best.

If had to go with one of the above for gaming I'd choose the 16GB though. In a 4x4GB config, cause it looks nice to have all the slots filled up. And ram speed can't be made use of past 1600mhz.

All this would change if we moved away from ivy/sandy. I believe lano see considerable advances from ram speed since the on-die gpu uses that ram.
m
0
l
Related resources
May 2, 2012 11:53:20 PM

They are all right!

DDR3-1600 is the "sweet spot" for Sandy Bridge CPU's, I assume the same for Ivy Bridge. Any bump in spped will not be noticed, only cost you $$.

If you (can) overclock it, then ok, all the better.

No real difference between CAS/CL 8 or 9, either.
m
0
l
May 2, 2012 11:53:56 PM

i want to get into video and graphic design, does the 1600 rule still apply?
m
0
l
May 2, 2012 11:55:06 PM

Still makes zero difference.
m
0
l

Best solution

May 2, 2012 11:58:12 PM

The current Intel nehalem and sandy bridge cpu's have an excellent integrated ram controller. It is able to keep the cpu fed with data from any speed ram.
The difference in real application performance or FPS between the fastest and slowest ram is on the order of 1-3%.

Synthetic benchmark differences will be impressive, but are largely irrelevant in the real world.

Fancy heat spreaders are mostly marketing too.

Only if you are seeking record level overclocks should you consider faster ram or better latencies.
Read this Anandtech article on memory scaling:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4503/sandy-bridge-memory-...
---------------bottom line------------

DDR3 1600 is the sweet spot.

I see no negative with 16gb. No game will use more than 2-3gb, but lots of ram will be used by windows to keep code in ram, ready for instant launch.

Ram is sold in kits for a reason.
Ram from the same vendor and part number can be made up of differing manufacturing components over time.
Some motherboards can be very sensitive to this.
Although, I think the problem has lessened with the newer Intel chipsets. Still,
it is safer to get what you need in one kit.

It often turns out that a single kit will be cheaper too.
Share
May 3, 2012 12:03:50 AM

if there both 1600mhz and the cas latency doesn't make much of a difference in real world, then what benifit do i get over 2 8gb from 4 4gb when the 4 4gb are cheaper
m
0
l
May 3, 2012 12:12:03 AM

Quote:
The 16GB crucial set will work flawlessly, whereas you are teaming up 2 different sets, and this can cause issues.


Remember, this is a non-ECC debate...
m
0
l
May 3, 2012 12:19:01 AM

robthatguyx said:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E168...
i know performance over looks most of the time but idk if id want to put that inside my case lol, now with that gskill being one kit instead of 2 better?


Please feel free to overlook the best non-ECC DDR3 on the market because it doesn't have a pretty "heat spreader." Read some reviews, come back and apologize.
m
0
l
May 3, 2012 12:25:11 AM

i agree with recon-uk, its inside a haf x on a z77 asrock with a h100 id perfer to just get the ram thats good and looks good then the ram thats great but looks very very cheap even if it isnt
m
0
l
May 3, 2012 12:34:14 AM

ill be honest if they were the same price as the other 16gb kits id get them but idk if its worth 50$ more
m
0
l
May 3, 2012 12:36:16 AM

8gb sticks have come down in price, but are still a bit more expensive per gb than 4gb sticks.

The advantage of 16gb using 2 x 8gb is that the voltage to run two sticks is easier to manage than 4. When oc'ing, this may be an issue, depending on the motherboard.

2 x 8gb also gives you an option to go to 32gb.

Ram is relatively cheap, so it does not pay to anguish too much about it.

You want documented ram compatibility. If you should ever have a problem, you want supported ram.
Otherwise, you risk a finger pointing battle between the ram and motherboard support sites, claiming "not my problem".
One place to check is your motherboards web site.
Look for the ram QVL list. It lists all of the ram kits that have been tested with that particular motherboard.
Sometimes the QVL list is not updated after the motherboard is released.
For more current info, go to a ram vendor's web site and access their ram selection configurator.
Enter your motherboard, and you will get a list of compatible ram kits.
While today's motherboards are more tolerant of different ram, it makes sense to buy ram that is known to work and is supported.
m
0
l
May 3, 2012 12:39:29 AM

i have checked with asrock and the ram from gskill is compatible i was thinking 16gb because i dont ever see me using more than 4-6 so 16 seemed pretty overkill for both future proofing and general use
m
0
l
May 3, 2012 12:48:43 AM

Quote:
Some folk like to have a pretty/performance pc..


robthatguyx said:
i agree with recon-uk, its inside a haf x on a z77 asrock with a h100 id perfer to just get the ram thats good and looks good then the ram thats great but looks very very cheap even if it isnt


Obviously everyone is entitled to their opinion. I've always been a Performance > Price > Aesthetics kinda guy. You won't find better performing RAM than the 30nm Samsungs right now. If you want to get the prettiest RAM, this thread is kind of pointless. Just buy what you want instead of fishing for people to agree with what you have already picked out.
m
0
l
May 3, 2012 1:01:58 AM

Best answer selected by robthatguyx.
m
0
l
!