DDR 3 1600 a sham or what?

jeffa123 · 9 Jun 2013 at 02:58

Isn't it funny that something never really does what it is says on the box. When I purchased a Motherboard bundle it came with 2x4GB Corsair Blue LP Vengeance. I set it up and as with any new motherboard now they do a Ram check stability test before even going into the Bios. The Bios Screen tells me it is 1333MHZ (default), but then again I have another motherboard setup with one stick of Mushkin 8GB DDR3 ram LP in it. I never saw a default report on this single channel setup, so I began digging. Though the Corsair has a profile 1.2 in XMP for the memory it is PC3-10700H and the default is 1.5V, this puts its bus speed at 667MHZ at most whereas the Mushkin is 800 by default giving it an instant profile above that of Corsair and it actually stipulates that it is PC3-12800, and meets the QVL as set down by ASUS my motherboard manufacturer. I have the Corsair on Dual Channel and have placed the single channel 8GB Mushkin module into the 1st slot of the 2nd channel. As this is the channel most used for overclocking I just thought it would be interesting to see if it actually speeded up the operation. I have not even thought of overclocking even if I am running an i7 3770K. It runs quite happily at 3.9Ghz using the stock fan for the CPU. I expect to get 3.9GHZ out of the CPU because that is what it said on the tin. Though I am questioning the truance of the Corsair memory.
I have tried it in the XMP profile at 1600MHZ and didn't cause any issues but I am a bit bewildered about claims. Corsair get by on their gaming profile but as yet they have not impressed me. Just having 1600 in the label isn't enough for me. Perhaps I am reading things wrong and someone can correct me. I am only just asking the question?

tribz · 9 Jun 2013 at 07:09

Come again with a TL;DR line?

Orcvader · 9 Jun 2013 at 12:26

So let me get this straight... you're complaining because the 1600mhz profile on the Corsair is a XMP profile, while the Mushkin is the standard JEDEC?

This is because the Corsair RAM was designed before the 1600mhz speed became a normal RAM standard, since the speed was not official yet they had to set it as an XMP profile. And if I remember correctly back when the Vengence was released, memory controllers was only rated for 1333mhz anyway, and anything beyond counted as overclocking.

You can't really blame Corsair for this, blame the JEDEC standard for being slow to catch up to fast RAM speeds.

EDIT: Checking on the Corsair site, all Vengence RAM is officially rated at 1333mhz, with speeds beyond being overclocked profiles (XMP). The Venegnce Pro is the updated line with the 1600mhz JEDEC profile.

jeffa123 · 9 Jun 2013 at 22:40

Well I never. Isn't it funny the RAM I have from Corsair is brand new, and so is the Mushkin, but if it is new they should have updated the chips and design to the 12800 format. Even my Corsair DDR2 XMS memory runs at 800MHZ on a Dual channel motherboard. OK it may be an older Q6600 setup. I don't have to go into the bios to setup an XMP profile and the Ram design is at least 5 years older than the PC3 architecture.
The problem here is that they build a reputation on one form of setup but decide not to change it for the next and because they can get the chips at a low price they win on the overall package. The OEM's love it because they get a good package deal on bundles but the end user is left scrathing his or her head at the performance lag. I don't doubt your intentions but like everything the days of living in the past are like waiting for your current PC to fossilize. Even people like Apple get overtaken at their own business in the end, because they were too careful protecting their coat tails and failing to take care of current business.
Like anything, you flood the market with a certain product it plateuxs and the demand for something better and faster comes around the corner at a lower price, or at such a price margin that it makes the upgrade to a better vendor mor attractive.
I am not saying I know this for sure but given the amount of agressive amrketting on motherboard bundles at present for Overclocking and the Corsair Vengeance brand being the most prominently marketted always has to pose the question. But like a Processor you overclock it and it will shorten its lifespan. I don't overclock but I do like things to be as advertised and not as overclocked.

arknor · 9 Jun 2013 at 23:09

I bet some mushkin ram is exactly the same.
it's how most of the big ram brands are they can't wait for new ram standards to be set so they go beyond them

also a lot of older motherboards won't go beyond 1333mhz without over-clocking the ram to it's standard speed.

Orcvader · 9 Jun 2013 at 23:10

Well, about the Q6600, checking the Intel site XMP only came around 2009. The Core 2 series was released around 2006 odd. I guess during those times the JEDEC standards were fast enough.

You have to remember the Vengence line was designed to run at those "overclocked" speeds anyway, so they should last as long as the Venegence Pro versions running at the same speed.

Looking at the price there doesn't seem to be that much of a difference between the Vengence and Vengence Pro anyway. Corsair probably added "Pro" to avoid confusion between the 1600mhz XMP and 1600mhz JEDEC profile. I've seen some RAM makers which have updated the XMP profile to JEDEC but with the same name, and to be honest that could cause confusion for those trying to add more RAM and wanting to keep same type of RAM sticks.

jeffa123 · 10 Jun 2013 at 09:03

I understand where you are coming from and that some feel that they are being decieved by numbers which don't make a lot of sense to a layman. I have been browsing the sites and many a forum and found many new user come up against this wall of confusion. Most Ram sticks are sold in matching pairs to get the best clock bus speed for the user and for the maker, but in amonst that are the tri setups and the quads. Many don't realise you can just bung a single 8GB stick into slot one and off you go. you get as much performance from a single stick as you get from a dual channel setup. I have tested Windows XP, Vista 32 and 64 and Windows 7 using both multi-tasking down to core independent work. Put in a simple graphics card and Cinebenched on single core on both the 3570K and 3770K and was really surprised. So Ram is confusing and clock speeds can be their method of deception. The amount of people on forums complaing about the BSOD because of RAM configurations is unbelievable. There should be a forum where the simple layman can go to and not be ridiculed because he or she raises a valid issue. It benefits all users. Also to take an aproach whereby if they are beginners they are not made to feel like simpletons. Otherwise it will be like the old Nvidia ATI flame wars used to be on here back a few years.
I am not out to flame anyone I am just out to understand why people alway add to a myth rather than be honest about the word speed.