FWIW - I was getting around 180-230 fps on CS GO. I couldnt work out why but when I enabled XMP on the BIOS for the 3200mhz, i am getting mostly maxed out 299fps and minimums of around 245-250 ish.
I've ordered a 16Gb kit of the Kingston 3333Mhz. The only way to stop myself going over the pros and cons is to just buy the damn stuff and forget about it
FWIW - I was getting around 180-230 fps on CS GO. I couldnt work out why but when I enabled XMP on the BIOS for the 3200mhz, i am getting mostly maxed out 299fps and minimums of around 245-250 ish.
Actually faster RAM and tighter timings but your point still stands. I'm actually getting slightly better scores in older benchmarks and Kontakt does seem to switch between samples faster but that could be Placebo effect
Actually faster RAM and tighter timings but your point still stands. I'm actually getting slightly better scores in older benchmarks and Kontakt does seem to switch between samples faster but that could be Placebo effect
There will be a difference, it depends mainly on the software. For example WinRar when it does a solid compression is looking at the entire memory area. This results in low cache hits so faster memory will make a good speed improvement. Another area is VM machines where the VM's are context switching, again low cache hits as high bandwidth involved with multiple running VM's from the same physical machine. I expect similar is happening with Kontakt.
However for most Windows processes and applications there is a large amount of cache hits, so as you are noticing the faster RAM is not making your computer faster in any general area.
When people consider CPU's they choose on core count, but the importance of larger on-board cache especially on i7 and i9 CPU's is often overlooked.
I think you understand where i'm coming from anyway .
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.