Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > RAM

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old June 19, 2014, 05:12 PM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,908

My System Specs

Default Which of these ram speeds would you run

As with all my OCing I don't push anything too hard and like to have voltage at or below its factory setting. That said I have played a bit with my ram lately and have found what speeds and timings I can get it stable with (leaving voltage at stock 1.5v....not increasing it).

Corsair vengeance 2x4gb 1600mhz rated for 9-9-9-24 2T. So far been able to get it to run in the following settings:

1. 1600mhz 9-9-9-24 1T (may be able to tighten timings a bit...haven't tested much at 1600mhz)
2. 1866mhz 9-10-9-24 1T (9-10-9 is as low as it will go at 1.5v. Was running 27 stable...testing 24 now)
3. 2000mhz 10-11-10-27 1T (booted to windows with this otherwise its untested, so it may not be 100% stable)

Any timings lowered at all gives errors or no boot at 1866 or 2000. 2133mhz is a no go (I have tried timings as high as 12-13-13-31 2T at 2133 with no post @ 1.5v). Might be able to get it with more voltage or very relaxed timings, but I won't be trying.

To me the minor increase in one timing to run 1866mhz makes it worth my while over 1600mhz. The increase in timings across the board to get it to run marginally faster at 2000mhz is a tougher call.

The question is which of the 3 settings above would you run?
__________________
Desktop: Antec Three Hundred, Z77-D3H, 3570K undervolt @4.1ghz with Zalman Optima Cooler, Corsair Vengeance 2x4gb@1866mhz, MSI Cyclone GTX 460, Seasonic S12II 500W, WD Black 1TB, Intel 530 120GB
Away from home light Gamer: Acer Aspire 15.6", A8-3500m undervolt and OC to 2Ghz, 2x4gb Corsair Vengeance, Crucial M500 240gb

Last edited by Bond007; June 19, 2014 at 07:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old June 19, 2014, 06:53 PM
JD's Avatar
JD JD is offline
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 6,903

My System Specs

Default

I think clock speed matters more than timings with recent Intel platforms. That being said, are you going to notice any difference when using your PC? I suspect not...

As you said though, 1866 seems like a fair trade off. Higher speed, slightly looser timings and you know it's stable.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old June 19, 2014, 07:06 PM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,908

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD View Post
I think clock speed matters more than timings with recent Intel platforms. That being said, are you going to notice any difference when using your PC? I suspect not...

As you said though, 1866 seems like a fair trade off. Higher speed, slightly looser timings and you know it's stable.
Yeah I agree. From what I have read clock speed does have the largest affect, but likely I am looking at low single digit % performance differences at most.

I was leaning towards the 1866 setup, but am trying to see if anyone would recommend the 2000mhz setup with the looser timings. Basically as I said it is a higher frequency, but because its only 133mhz faster and I had too loosen all timings I am thinking there will be little to no benefit.
__________________
Desktop: Antec Three Hundred, Z77-D3H, 3570K undervolt @4.1ghz with Zalman Optima Cooler, Corsair Vengeance 2x4gb@1866mhz, MSI Cyclone GTX 460, Seasonic S12II 500W, WD Black 1TB, Intel 530 120GB
Away from home light Gamer: Acer Aspire 15.6", A8-3500m undervolt and OC to 2Ghz, 2x4gb Corsair Vengeance, Crucial M500 240gb
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old June 19, 2014, 10:08 PM
IRQ Conflict's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Drayton Valley, AB
Posts: 1,566

My System Specs

Default

I agree. Go the 1866 route. You will only notice 2000 with a magnifying glass and a synth bench.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old June 20, 2014, 08:21 AM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,908

My System Specs

Default

Thanks. I will run the 1866 setup for now, but if anyone has a different opinion or more info please post.
__________________
Desktop: Antec Three Hundred, Z77-D3H, 3570K undervolt @4.1ghz with Zalman Optima Cooler, Corsair Vengeance 2x4gb@1866mhz, MSI Cyclone GTX 460, Seasonic S12II 500W, WD Black 1TB, Intel 530 120GB
Away from home light Gamer: Acer Aspire 15.6", A8-3500m undervolt and OC to 2Ghz, 2x4gb Corsair Vengeance, Crucial M500 240gb
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old July 1, 2014, 12:18 PM
CrazyCanukk's Avatar
Rookie
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 7
Default

TBH 1866 is all you need unless you have some special uses that require blistering Ram speeds and there are precious few of those most consumer would ever use..even 1600 is more then enough honestly. There are little gains to be had with the higher speeds and potentially higher costs associated with them if purchasing. In other words..

you be spending more $$ for almost no noticeable gains in performance. I used to be a rabid memory overclocker..these days..memory is more then fast enough for most common uses. The only rule i follow for Ram is don't ever buy cheap ram..buy name brand well known and respected companies.

If 1866 is stable for you then stick with 1866 if you think it shows enough gains to justify the overclock. but make sure you see gains large enough since Oc'ing can introduce instability into a stable system sometimes.

Last edited by CrazyCanukk; July 1, 2014 at 12:32 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GTX 480 and 580 fan speeds? Slik Video Cards 2 January 27, 2011 12:48 AM
BFG 285 GTX clock speeds grinder Troubleshooting 11 November 22, 2009 07:25 PM
Why can't theoretical speeds be the ones you actually get? Arinoth Off Topic 10 September 28, 2009 04:52 PM
3G Speeds JMCD Off Topic 8 August 30, 2009 05:35 AM
Fan speeds, temperature... omgwtf CPU's and Motherboards 21 May 25, 2007 04:58 PM