DDR3 1333 vs 1600

TheRift

TheRift

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2008
Messages
2,540
Reaction score
20
Location
Cape Town
Right, so I purchased some Kingston ValueRAM 2x2G modules DDR3 1333MHz (667) and wondering now if I should try out the 1600MHz modules.

Works out about R200 more than what I've got already. Someone could make use of the current pair.

Does it make a massive difference? My brother will not opt for 667 units, only the 800 items but I reckon he notices it way more on his machines constantly running 100% workloads.

I'm not interested in the gaming glow-in-the-dark RAM. During my DDR400 days I swapped up to Kingston HyperX from normal hynix units which had no heatsinks and really gained nothing.

So worth going from 667 to 800?

This is in conjunction with a PhenomII 955BE and Asus M4A78T-E. I recall there being something about this board only offering the 1600MHz on 2 of the 4 RAM slots. Need to read those docs this evening.
 
Last edited:
It depends what application you use, If the motherboard and CPU FSB supports that ram speed then yes there would be a difference, you will not feel/notice it when you post on MyBB but you may notice it in gaming. To be sure test with Si-soft Sandra or other util that measures speed/performance and bandwidth of the ram memory, CPU and GPU in various tests and see if it speeds up the system in general.
 
You won't a different dude.

Take 667 and 1066 ddr 2 there is about 1-3% performance gain if any most of the time.

You will be wasting your time and money. Of course benchmarks will show you there is a difference but real time conditions you will see nothing in my opinion.
 
I am Penguin said:
It depends what application you use, If the motherboard and CPU FSB supports that ram speed then yes there would be a difference, you will not feel/notice it when you post on MyBB but you may notice it in gaming. To be sure test with Si-soft Sandra or other util that measures speed/performance and bandwidth of the ram memory, CPU and GPU in various tests and see if it speeds up the system in general.
Click to expand...

Got some DDR3 800s I can use to test? :)

Alot of the stuff the box winds up doing is transcodes. That should be quite a bit of RAM work, but I suppose not enough to warrant R200 extra expense (or more as I'll have to sell the current RAM for less).

Then again, considering the likes of Win7 eats up RAM, perhaps there could be something to having some faster stuff.
 
Tom's Hardware has run some articles comparing multiple speed grades on the same CPU platform - with the unsurprising result that you gain very very little actual performance when stepping up to faster RAM.
See http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-scaling-i7,2325-11.html for example.
So... don't do it! Keep your existing RAM, and spend the money on something else (two months' worth of Wacky Wednesdays perhaps?) :-)
 
:D

This whole RAM speed thing got confusing out of whack from back in the DDR days. 400MHz was actually 200MHz x 2 channels. 533 used to be 266MHz x 2 channels, etc, etc.

So 1333 these days is what? Actually 667MHz x 2 or 333MHz x 4?

That's from the FSB point of view, but AMD is HT referenced. So with a HT clock of 2000MHz, what RAM do you need for a synchronous clock? I hear the Intels don't show much difference either way, but the AMD does better with better RAM.

I hate you you silly RAM engineer. And your marketing dudey as well. :D

And I feel old.

I'm going to need a whacky wednesday now. Crap... 1 day too late.

But, I'll keeping my "1333MHz", but pretty curious now how these numbers are calculated lately. Used to be so much simpler a few years back.
 
moron51 said:
Tom's Hardware has run some articles comparing multiple speed grades on the same CPU platform - with the unsurprising result that you gain very very little actual performance when stepping up to faster RAM.
See http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-scaling-i7,2325-11.html for example.
So... don't do it! Keep your existing RAM, and spend the money on something else (two months' worth of Wacky Wednesdays perhaps?) :-)
Click to expand...

Got any where the do this on an AMD platform?
 
TheRift said:
Got some DDR3 800s I can use to test? :)

Alot of the stuff the box winds up doing is transcodes. That should be quite a bit of RAM work, but I suppose not enough to warrant R200 extra expense (or more as I'll have to sell the current RAM for less).

Then again, considering the likes of Win7 eats up RAM, perhaps there could be something to having some faster stuff.
Click to expand...

My take will be this. IF' the higher speed ram enables you to run a higher FSB on the Motherboard/CPU combo then YES it's worth forking out the bucks. If you are to remain on the same FSB the higer speed ram will not effectively give you the noticoble boost required. On most motherboards of today If you install the higher speed RAM modules you should be able to overclock the FSB speed of the CPU due to the faster Ram modules. So on Xp and Windows7 a bigger benefit will be gained by increasing the ram size rather than speed, if the FSB is to remain the same. The best is to do all, Increase Ram speed, Increase FSB of system by selecting the appropiate higher speed FSB setting for the CPU/MB/RAM or overclocking and at the same time Increase ram size say from 2GB to 4Gb+ at the same time.
 
But this is an AMD where it doesn't use FSB for RAM comms. Ofcourse it is linked to the HT speed.
 
TheRift said:
Ah, found one:

http://www.tomshardware.com/picturestory/511-memory-scaling-ddr3.html
Click to expand...

Good article!

Read this one

Conclusion

The memory industry, which typically focuses on offering faster (and more expensive) memory products, must find these results rather annoying—there is simply very little benefit to fast DDR3 memory on a fast processor such as the Intel Core i7-975. More than ever, premium RAM can be compared to a high-end sports car: it may provide better performance, but the benefit in everyday life is often very limited.

DDR3 memory kits capable of running beyond DDR3-2000 speeds at increased voltage are the best you can get. However, we limited the testing to DDR3-1600 speed, and stayed at a voltage level of 1.65 V for this article, which represents a reasonable maximum for most users (hitting 2133 in our i7-975 review required a screaming 1.75 V QPI). Our testing included all other selectable RAM speeds, all the way down to DDR3-800, trying both tight and relaxed latencies for each of the RAM clock speed settings.


High End Memory Is Not Worth The Money

The results are obvious: going from one memory speed to the next, e.g. from DDR3-1066 to 1333, does not provide major benefits. Even the replacement of slow DDR3-800 RAM by DDR3-1600 memory will mostly yield disappointing results. While the performance advantage is measurable, it is never noticeable.

Exceptions, however, do exist. Compressing files with WinRAR is significantly quicker on fast, low latency DDR3-1600 RAM. Some applications, such as games, can at least take minor advantage of the upgraded memory horsepower.


What If?

In this light, we decided to add a few more benchmark results at overclocked processor speeds. We decided to accelerate the CPU by one clock speed increment, which reflects exactly what happens if you decide to purchase a faster processor instead of high performance memory.

Click here for all faster CPU benchmarks results.

As you will see, a higher CPU clock speed typically provides better performance in most of the benchmarks—but not in all of them.

Memory Recommendation

Knowing all of these results, it is obvious that highest speed DDR3 memory only makes sense for serious enthusiasts, or for those with unlimited budgets. Everyone else should focus on mainstream clock speeds of DDR3-1066 or DDR3-1333, and go for a trustworthy brand and the quickest timings their budget allows
Click to expand...

Point and case. If the aaim is to speed up the CPU/MB combo then the faster ram will benefit you the most!
 
I thought RAM speed only depends on the CPU and motherboard FSB. So if you got 1600 instead of 1333 you wont notice any difference unless you increase the motherboard FSB. (overclocking)
 
SaiyanZ said:
I thought RAM speed only depends on the CPU and motherboard FSB. So if you got 1600 instead of 1333 you wont notice any difference unless you increase the motherboard FSB. (overclocking)
Click to expand...

Yep. But most people just buy the ram and do not even look at the correct FSB, so you could get many systems running at a lower FSB the system can handle.
 
Yes, ofcourse, but that's still FSB based. As said, AMD don't use FSB for transfer.

DDR3 1333MHz it will remain until I decide time to overclock the bugger. Finding lower latency DDR3 seems to be recommended, but ofcourse those tend to cost a blerrie fortune.

Busy working now so will read that article just a bit later.
 
Rift you are wasting time and money for next to no improvement man.

Honestly even 2000mhz memory with lower latency is not going to give you a speed boost that justifies the large amount of money spent.

Rather get a raptor or SSD drive for the same money if possible, not sure how much you got to spend.
 
TheRift said:
:D

This whole RAM speed thing got confusing out of whack from back in the DDR days. 400MHz was actually 200MHz x 2 channels. 533 used to be 266MHz x 2 channels, etc, etc.

So 1333 these days is what? Actually 667MHz x 2 or 333MHz x 4?

That's from the FSB point of view, but AMD is HT referenced. So with a HT clock of 2000MHz, what RAM do you need for a synchronous clock? I hear the Intels don't show much difference either way, but the AMD does better with better RAM.

I hate you you silly RAM engineer. And your marketing dudey as well. :D

And I feel old.

I'm going to need a whacky wednesday now. Crap... 1 day too late.

But, I'll keeping my "1333MHz", but pretty curious now how these numbers are calculated lately. Used to be so much simpler a few years back.
Click to expand...

It's still internal speed X 2 as it's still Double Data Rate RAM. The channels thing has to do with the bus width of communication between CPU and RAM, not the RAM's operational speed.

It achieves nearly twice the bandwidth of the preceding single data rate (SDR) SDRAM by double pumping (transferring data on the rising and falling edges of the clock signal) without increasing the clock frequency.
Click to expand...

Source
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X