Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

16gb 1600mhz vs 8gb 1866mhz with amd 8350

Tags:
Last response: in CPUs
Share
December 3, 2012 6:44:01 PM

Which is the btter deal is there a speed difference?
a c 93 à CPUs
a b À AMD
December 3, 2012 6:47:31 PM

1866 mhz is faster then 1600mhz. what are you going to use it for?
m
0
l
December 3, 2012 6:49:21 PM

Gaming regular use some rendering ect
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 7:58:53 PM

Are the timings the same on the two? Some rendering software seems to like larger amounts of ram versus one step faster (just anecdotal from these forums and articles since I don't run any...).
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
December 3, 2012 8:49:31 PM

I would go with the 8GB at 1866, unless 16GB vs 8GB makes a big difference to your rendering software.
m
0
l
December 3, 2012 9:00:47 PM

littleleo said:
I would go with the 8GB at 1866, unless 16GB vs 8GB makes a big difference to your rendering software.


I can do it its just going to be hassle cause i have ti ship back to amazon
m
0
l
December 3, 2012 10:39:36 PM

I would NOT go with 1866 on vishera. Yes it's "supported" but i have seen many nightmare like scenarios where people couldn't get it to run 1866 no matter what they did, it got to the point where tiny tom logan said screw it and just ran his RAM at 1600. I'm running 16gigs @1700mhz (small oc from 1600mhz) on stock timings (9-9-9-24), i really didn't notice any difference at all. So personally i would go with 16 gigs at a lower speed than 8 gigs at one tier faster speed. You also need to get into timings and all of that technical garb. To make a long story short, just stick with the 16 gigs @1600mhz, you save yourself the potential headache.
m
0
l
December 3, 2012 10:41:17 PM

ProSnipor said:
I would NOT go with 1866 on vishera. Yes it's "supported" but i have seen many nightmare like scenarios where people couldn't get it to run 1866 no matter what they did, it got to the point where tiny tom logan said screw it and just ran his RAM at 1600. I'm running 16gigs @1700mhz (small oc from 1600mhz) on stock timings (9-9-9-24), i really didn't notice any difference at all. So personally i would go with 16 gigs at a lower speed than 8 gigs at one tier faster speed. You also need to get into timings and all of that technical garb. To make a long story short, just stick with the 16 gigs @1600mhz, you save yourself the potential headache.


Ya ive heard those stories too but i dont think its too bad
m
0
l
December 3, 2012 10:43:58 PM

hbeduryan818 said:
Ya ive heard those stories too but i dont think its too bad

That and 1600 vs 1866 in gaming won't make a difference at all, if it was something like 1066 vs 1600, i would say yea go ahead and upgrade. But in a scenario like this, i would stick with the 16 gigs. My last point to make most editing programs would rather 16 gigs of ram to eat up rather than 8 gigs of 1866. It's all up to you in the end though
m
0
l
!