DDR3-1600 Test Results
At DDR3-1600, G.Skill’s 7-8-7-10 latencies are a performance-match to the 7-8-7-8 of Kingston and Geil. It takes the top position, again alphabetically, in a three-way tie.
Even at this lower frequency, DRAM timings are far less restrictive than GPU limitations when games are configured at realistic limits. We like to play games at the limit of our hardware, of course, which is why we didn’t artificially inflate the performance difference by using lower resolutions or visual quality settings.
Current page: DDR3-1600 Test ResultsPrev Page DDR3-1866 Test Results Next Page Conclusion
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
now watch as that kingston ram price suddenly jumps up :/Reply
i miss the days when you could get 4gb of ram for 30 bucks *sigh*Reply
What happened to "get DDR3-1333 with tight timing: You'll never be able to appreciate `faster' stuff"?Reply
stuff rated 7-7-7-18 ment something, I thought …
what cpu cooler did you use? because some cpu coolers don't alow big memory ram instalReply
MMk sorry goose more ram is almost always and i mean 99.99999% better then faster ram :) i never saw any differences in ram speed turning off t1 and t2 timings slowing it down to a crawl turning off dual channel.. NEVER gave me an effective visual result. But adding more ram always gave me an instant result. I had this same argument with someone last week.. Nice to now have proof he was wrong about faster ram meaning something :) My ram is rated at 1600 but i have it only set on 1333 :/Reply
My DDR3 2000 CL9 runs @ 1915MHz CL6 just fine. And I had some DDR2 800 @ 1010MHz & DDR2 533 @ 727MHz. I think most RAM just OC's nicely. I've also had a few weaker sticks (DDR2 667 that can't go over 727MHz), but it all exceeds posted specs.Reply
I'm expecting to get my 2*4GB + 2*4GB DDR2 800MHz this weekReply
If I could do it over again I'd get that overly expensive DDR3 motherboard and just 1GB of RAM then later add more RAM sticks
Whenever DDR4 comes I'll jump in with small sticks and upgrade to more RAM when it gets cheaper (due to 20nm->15nm shrink)
Well, that's when Windows 9 arrives and 16 cores is the mainstream (2017?) I hope I have enough money for 3D projector at QuadHD, 4feet by 8feet white wall...
I would like to have seen something like the G.Skill Value series tested, but it really looks like RAM just doesn't make all that much difference for games.Reply
I know this wasn't the primary focus of the article, though it is a good example of how sending more juice to your RAM and upping the speed on it has no noticeable effect on gaming performance.Reply
ubercakeI know this wasn't the primary focus of the article, though it is a good example of how sending more juice to your RAM and upping the speed on it has no noticeable effect on gaming performance.Agreed,Reply
I would like to see a cheaper stick thrown in there like my Kinston Standard 512M X 64 Non-ECC 1333MHz 240-pin Unbuffered DIMM (DDR3, 1.5V, CL9, FBGA, Gold)
These RAMs with 19" Alloy wheels dont really seem to be worth their pricetags.
I think it is safe to say it is better to spend money on a better graphics card or CPU, perhaps a PSU.