Performance Difference Between 1600, 1866 and 2000 ?

Dicehunter · 20 Dec 2011 at 23:54

At the moment I have 16GB of Corsair Vengeance Black 1600MHZ and was wondering if there would be any difference at all if I was to have 1866MHZ or even 2000MHZ ?

Shadz · 20 Dec 2011 at 23:55

I don't think that there would be any noticeable difference in any sort of speed to be honest
especially with that amount of memory.

andybird123 · 21 Dec 2011 at 10:20

in synthetic benchmarks there's a difference but in most "real world" type benchmarks / apps the difference is pretty negligible - if you already have the 1600 it's not worth upgrading at this point, lower CAS 1600 is better than high cas 2133 or 1866

I went for 1866 purely because I found a good deal on 1866 cas 9 and most of the not outrageously expensive 1600 is also cas 9 so the bump to 1866 was effectively "free"

you could just try getting your existing RAM to run at tighter timings possibly with a small voltage bump (after all, what's the point of those massive heat sinks if you can't overclock it in some way)

Threepwood · 21 Dec 2011 at 14:28

^^ High cas 2133/1866 will run at lower cas at 1600 than 1600 ram will run at 1600.

Food for thought.

andybird123 · 22 Dec 2011 at 12:34

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/memory/display/sandy-bridge-ddr3_6.html

seems that higher frequency is always better on sandy bridge - latency makes a small difference but slightly looser higher frequency is always better than lower cas same freq.

having said that, it's only a small percentage so not really worth worrying about overly

if it was me I would try running your memory at 1866 at 1.6v