• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

The RAM equation: capacity vs. frequency vs. latency?

L

Liquiadeux

Junior Member
I'm putting together a computer for my old man. Having been in the IT business for many years he has developed a knack for asking questions, and he asked me one that I hope you could help answer:

"In terms of overall performance, how important is capacity, frequency and latency respectively?"

I should add that whatever the model I'm already set on a capacity of 8GB, so that shouldn't be a bottleneck. But seeing as RAM is as cheap as it is, is it worthwhile to go for high frequency and low latency and if so, at what point does it become bleeding edge?

For reference, here's the setup I'm looking at:

Processor Core i7 I7-2600K 8 MB
Motherboard ASUS P8P67-M B3 Revision
RAM Mushkin Extreme Performance 2x4GB, 1600MHz, CL 7-9-8-24 1.65V
Harddrive OCZ Vertex 3 Series Solid State Disk 120 GB
PSU Seasonic X-400 Fanless
Keyboard Logitech Wireless Illuminated Keyboard K800
Case Antec Performance One Mini P180
Optical drive Samsung Super-WriteMaster SH-S223C
Speakers Bose Companion 2 Series II
Cooling Noctua NH-C14, Noctua NF-B9, Noctua NF-P12
 
Last edited:
The short answer is:

capacity >>>>>>>>>>>>> freq/latency

More RAM will be the best thing (assuming you can make use of it, of course). For most users, doing email, office, games, video watching, and the like, frequency and latency are irrelevant and only show a couple of % increase in speed.

Now if you run superpi benchmarks, then yes, it will help, but for day to day use, any freq/latency combo will be fine.

IMHO, the only reason (in the pre-SB days) was to get high freq RAM so you could OC your CPU, and you needed high speed RAM to get to the higher bus speeds to get that high CPU OC.

With the SB k-series, their cpu multiplier is unlocked, so you can run your RAM at normal speeds while OC'ing the CPU.

Just get 8Gig RAM that runs at the DDR3 JEDEC default of 1.5V, so you are not having to overvolt your RAM. Other then that, get whatever that is cheapest (or has the best rebate 😀 ) from whatever company you feel comfortable with.
 
GarfieldtheCat said:
The short answer is:

capacity >>>>>>>>>>>>> freq/latency

More RAM will be the best thing (assuming you can make use of it, of course). For most users, doing email, office, games, video watching, and the like, frequency and latency are irrelevant and only show a couple of % increase in speed.

Now if you run superpi benchmarks, then yes, it will help, but for day to day use, any freq/latency combo will be fine.

IMHO, the only reason (in the pre-SB days) was to get high freq RAM so you could OC your CPU, and you needed high speed RAM to get to the higher bus speeds to get that high CPU OC.

With the SB k-series, their cpu multiplier is unlocked, so you can run your RAM at normal speeds while OC'ing the CPU.

Just get 8Gig RAM that runs at the DDR3 JEDEC default of 1.5V, so you are not having to overvolt your RAM. Other then that, get whatever that is cheapest (or has the best rebate 😀 ) from whatever company you feel comfortable with.
Click to expand...
Thanks for an elaborate reply. So unless I want a high-end computer or use unusually demanding applications I should just get some random sticks and be happy about it.

My only objection then, is that the add cost is so negligible that it basically boils down to "I might as well". So I guess what I'm asking is, would I be able to feel any difference - at all - between 8GB@1600/7-9-8-24 and 8GB@1333/9-9-9-24 with normal computer use?
 
Liquiadeux said:
My only objection then, is that the add cost is so negligible that it basically boils down to "I might as well". So I guess what I'm asking is, would I be able to feel any difference - at all - between 8GB@1600/7-9-8-24 and 8GB@1333/9-9-9-24 with normal computer use?
Click to expand...

You won't see a difference, but if you get a good deal on a 1600Mhz set, go for it 🙂 I would just stick to 1.5V RAM, since anything over that is technically overvolting it.
 
I got better scores on my RAM going from 1600mhz @ 7-7-7-19 to 1866mhz @ 9-9-9-24. So it looks like SB likes frequency a little better than timings.

But it makes no difference other than in benchmarks.
 
Depends. If your gonna use up all the RAM then go for higher latency but bigger bandwidth.

If you normally dont ever use above 6GB then get latency.

thx and gl
 
GarfieldtheCat said:
More RAM will be the best thing (assuming you can make use of it, of course). For most users, doing email, office, games, video watching, and the like, frequency and latency are irrelevant and only show a couple of % increase in speed.

Now if you run superpi benchmarks, then yes, it will help, but for day to day use, any freq/latency combo will be fine.

IMHO, the only reason (in the pre-SB days) was to get high freq RAM so you could OC your CPU, and you needed high speed RAM to get to the higher bus speeds to get that high CPU OC.

With the SB k-series, their cpu multiplier is unlocked, so you can run your RAM at normal speeds while OC'ing the CPU.

Just get 8Gig RAM that runs at the DDR3 JEDEC default of 1.5V, so you are not having to overvolt your RAM.
Click to expand...

Best answer. :thumbsup:

BTW Liquiadeux, have you decided on a graphics card? The P8P67-M does not support the CPU's IGP.
 
Blain said:
If I were shopping for the highest quality memory I could afford, I would use the following parameters as a guide...

* DDR3 rated at 1.5v or lower
* DDR3 rated at the lowest CAS I could afford
* DDR3 rated at the highest clock speed I could afford
* Limit the scope of my purchease to G.Skill, Mushkin, Corsair XMS or Crucial (non-Ballistix)

While not wavering on the voltage point, I would balance the other issues with my budget.



Remember kids my goal is not pure "benchmarking" performance, but simply finding the highest quality memory I can afford. :colbert:
I want to avoid having to post any "Is my memory bad" threads, just because I saved a couple of bucks on the initial purchase price.
Click to expand...
:colbert: What he said
 
Not random sticks. Get RAM from a known name brand Crucial, Corsair, etc, not "G Skill" or whatever. And then test it with Memtest so you know it's good, before giving the computer to your dad.
 
g.skill is like ocz - hell i've had good luck with 1.5V corsair xms3 and the microcenter rebadged (Adata?) ram at 1.5V

But yeah use all the same ram type. buy it now , false hysteria is jacking prices fast!
 
Edrick said:
I got better scores on my RAM going from 1600mhz @ 7-7-7-19 to 1866mhz @ 9-9-9-24. So it looks like SB likes frequency a little better than timings.
Click to expand...
Well you're swapping 10% in latency for 17% in frequencies, so if the benchmark values both the same amount, no wonder there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top