Kingston memory demonstrated an Intel Core i7 920 system (YouTube) this week packed with 24 GB of DDR3 of the company's ValueRAM memory. The goal of course, was to show off how stable the system can be with a total of nine virtual machines running simultaneously. The cherry on top was having Crysis run on one of the nine VMs.
The system was configured with the following hardware:
The demo ran through an overnight run of MemTest86+ showing the system as being rock solid. Then, Windows Vista was loaded with VMware Server and nine Vista VMs were loaded. Crysis was launched on the last VM, and seemingly performed well--although no actual gameplay was shown. At this point, we'll have to say that the loading screen for Crysis is really not a valid indication of true performance. It's a shame Kingston did not allow the game to run through.
The system at its peaked however, used just 21 GB of memory with 3 GB to spare.
Clearly this was a demonstration of Kingston's ValueRAM stability, but honestly, the same can be accomplished with memory from other manufacturers too. The cost of Kingston's ValueRAM however, is usually significantly less than "higher-end" memory.
Which memory manufacturer do you prefer? Do you care about any particular brand? Or are you game with any memory that's simply compatible?
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Would have been impressive eight virtual machines running with eight separate instances of Crysis running on all of the virtual machines and actual simultaneous game play, possible using four GTX 295 (Obviously not in SLI).
I wanted to see some benchies. What a pointless article. I don't care what brand the RAM is so long as it is reliable. I find Kingston to be the most compatible and reliable but Gskill and OCZ have been great so far too.
