| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 148889 | 2020-03-11 10:20:00 | Less RAM @ 3200Mhz or more RAM @ 2600Mhz... Which one? | chiefnz (545) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1467299 | 2020-03-11 10:20:00 | A pretty "bland topic" but keen to hear some opinions... I currently have 16GB (2 x 8GB) of Klevv KD48GU880-32A160U BOLT X Gaming DDR4 @3200Mhz (XMP) installed. These replaced 16GB (2 x 8GB) of G-Skill Ripjaws V F4-2666C15D-16GVR @2600Mhz (XMP). The Klevv's timings and voltage is 16-18-18-38, 1.35v and the G-Skill's timings and voltage is 15-15-15-35 1.2v both sets support XMP 2.0, are dual channel kits obviously and are 8GB (1 rank, 16 banks) modules. The thing is I haven't really "noticed" any gains in performance so to speak so I'm wondering if it's more beneficial to install the G-Skill and just have 32GB of memory @ 2600Mhz (XMP) with the CPU running at 4.3-4.7Ghz. CPU overclocks to 4.3Ghz (boosts up to 4.7Ghz) comfortably with either of these 2 sets of RAM modules with the only difference being that the Klevv's run at 3200Mhz whilst the G-Skill's run at 2600Mhz. The only other major difference is that when I run the preset Asus OC Tuner 5Ghz over-clock setting with the Kelvv's, the over-clock seems a lot more stable than it was when I had the G-Skills installed. The thing is I don't really have any intention of running the 5Ghz overclock as a "standard" config. The only reason I've been running it lately is because of I've been messing around with overclocking my GPU (1660 Super OC) and again, I've dialled that overclock back to default speeds any way - I was just tinkering for a bit and now that phase has past. So what do you think, stick with the faster 16GB of memory or run with 32GB at a slower speed XMP memory overclock which would still give me the same 4.3-4.7Ghz regardless? Thanks, |
chiefnz (545) | ||
| 1467300 | 2020-03-11 18:33:00 | What do you use the PC for? bit hard to answer without knowing. For gaming increasing the RAM won't do much. For other things it might. Intel is less memory speed sensitive than AMD, and you only have a mid range GPU. Honestly I don't think you will notice much difference with any of the options you suggest. The gains from faster RAM are fairly minor and you might need a faster GPU to see it. |
dugimodo (138) | ||
| 1467301 | 2020-03-11 19:34:00 | Others have asked the same questions with no defined results www.youtube.com JayzTwoCents probably in line with your question www.youtube.com |
Lawrence (2987) | ||
| 1467302 | 2020-03-11 19:42:00 | Of course you didn't notice. You'd have to be a CPU to notice. But IMO more ram is always good, yes you can have more than needed, but so? Always better than not enough. Do it. I would. |
piroska (17583) | ||
| 1467303 | 2020-03-11 20:11:00 | for AVERAGE use faster RAM doesnt help slightly faster CPU speed doesnt help (overclocking etc) 32Gb RAM isnt needed (16Gb usually more than enough) thats for general use, allways exceptions of course , and assuming the old RAM is fast enough for the CPU & MB bus speed :) |
1101 (13337) | ||
| 1467304 | 2020-03-12 03:59:00 | Mostly a gaming PC, but I do some video encoding which is probably the most intensive out of everything I do. I'll just chuck it in for now.. no harm no foul. Thanks for all the replies. |
chiefnz (545) | ||
| 1 | |||||