SimForums.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General Discussion Forums > Hardware, Software, and Computer Technology
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Is use of all four memoryslot an absolut NO GO ?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Is use of all four memoryslot an absolut NO GO ?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
jfri View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May-10-2004
Points: 273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jfri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is use of all four memoryslot an absolut NO GO ?
    Posted: November-03-2018 at 8:59am
I built a haswell system five years ago from advice here which had two 4 Gb memory modules to give a total 8 Gb. In theory I could add an additional two 4 Gb modules and thus upgrade to 16 Gb RAM. But I think it has always been advised against using all memory slots on a motherboard.
But why should it be a problem if a motherboard is designed to to be able to have four modules?
It could be mentioned that the exact modules I then purchased does not exist any more but a an alternative with the same name Corsair Vengeance Pro with same frequency and both CL9.
Another thing I discovered these current day  two 4 Gb modules cost more than double what I paid back in 2013. I have always been used to computer component being cheaper with time.
What is happening with RAM memory pricing ? What can we expect in the future ?
Back to Top
Bert Pieke View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: January-03-2003
Location: Canada
Points: 5256
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bert Pieke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-03-2018 at 1:31pm
I am in the same situation as you are..

What you are seeing is that DDR3 modules are becoming less available, since the new motherboards use DDR4.

As a result, you are going to have more and more trouble finding your DDR3 modules and the price goes up accordingly.

Personally, I would remove the 4GB modules and put in two 8GB modules.

Cooling can be an issue when all four slots are filled..
Bert
Back to Top
Ted striker View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: January-24-2006
Location: Denver
Points: 143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ted striker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-03-2018 at 1:47pm
My understanding is that it you can obtain a higher overclock with only two RAM modules. Other than that I do not know if there is a disadvantage to having four.

Ted
3770K @4.5Ghz, Noctua NH-C12P, Asus Z77-V Deluxe, Corsair 2133-9-11-10-27-2T, 780 GTX, Win7-64 on 256gb Intel SSD, FSX, P3Dv3, P3Dv4 on 500gb Intel SSD, PC Power & Cooling 750W, Antec P193 case
Back to Top
jfri View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May-10-2004
Points: 273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jfri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-03-2018 at 2:12pm
Originally posted by Ted striker Ted striker wrote:

My understanding is that it you can obtain a higher overclock with only two RAM modules. Other than that I do not know if there is a disadvantage to having four.

Ted


And I don't overclock my RAM memory. Another thing I noticed if choosing lower frequency memory there are more to choose from and the prices are lower. So what is best more Gb at a lower speed or less Gb (8) at a higher speed.
Back to Top
Bert Pieke View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: January-03-2003
Location: Canada
Points: 5256
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bert Pieke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-03-2018 at 6:16pm
https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/544073-new-p3d-v4-pc-advice-and-comments-welcome/

https://www.avsim.com/forums/topic/544168-how-much-ram-do-you-have-for-p3d-v4/

Go for the best speed/latency combination you can find.

Personally, I never come close to using the 8GB that I have installed, so do not see any benefit in adding more memory.

YMMV!   

This is what I have installed:

https://www.amazon.ca/G-Skill-PC3-19200-2400MHz-Trident-10-12-12-31/dp/B007V9RXFI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1540872955&sr=8-1&keywords=G.SKILL+TridentX+F3-2400C10D-8GTX
Bert
Back to Top
Ted striker View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: January-24-2006
Location: Denver
Points: 143
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Ted striker Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-04-2018 at 9:52am
Originally posted by jfri jfri wrote:

And I don't overclock my RAM memory.


I should have been more specific. It is my understanding that you can obtain a higher CPU overclock with 2 RAM modules vs. 4. In addition to what Bert linked you to, there is a good recent discussion on XMP memory in this forum that you may find helpful. Nick's pinned Bible thread a good section on memory also.

Ted
3770K @4.5Ghz, Noctua NH-C12P, Asus Z77-V Deluxe, Corsair 2133-9-11-10-27-2T, 780 GTX, Win7-64 on 256gb Intel SSD, FSX, P3Dv3, P3Dv4 on 500gb Intel SSD, PC Power & Cooling 750W, Antec P193 case
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NickN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-04-2018 at 10:28am
Where 2 sticks can be better than 4:
 
 
 
CPU overclock - less stress on the memory controller can allow higher stable CPU clock and easier to obtain without higher voltages.
 
 
---------------------------------------------------------
 
Memory tertiary and sub timing - Most people don't realize but your memory primary timings (the ones XMP or you set manually) are not the only timings involved. When a motherboard is populated by more than 2 sticks these sub timings are usually changed to higher values. This is done by the motherboard using the on-stick programming of the memory modules.
 
This means that what you expect in overall latency will be higher with 4 sticks over 2 with the same primary timings set.
 
Its not just the number of sticks but the density too. You can have 2 16GB or 2 32GB modules and they may run slower in tertiary and sub timing than their next step down in memory amount counterparts. In other words 2x8 may run faster than 2x16, and 2x16 may run faster than 2x32 even on the same speed and primary timing
 
 
---------------------------------------
 
Memory clocking - This is becoming more popular with DDR4, memory stability in overclocking memory speed from its factory default is more stable with 2 instead of 4 sticks. This is not something the average person would usually do but the more sticks, the more difficult it can be to accomplish without intermittent errors and crashes to find the sweet spot.
 
 
 
 
When you get into motherboards and CPUs that are specifically designed for quad channel operation then you must use 4 sticks in order to obtain the benefit of the quad system although I am not so sure of the value to flight sim over A/V and engineering programs as well as modeling and CAD setups with such a system. I don't think Flightsim of any kind is that far along in engine development to really take advantage of such a system over a raw-speed setup with high graphic card support.
Back to Top
robmw View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: April-02-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 287
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robmw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-04-2018 at 11:27am
Regarding 32 vs. 64-bit and the recommendation to have 16GB installed for P3D v4, where does that memory get used?

The reason I ask is that I'm in a similar situation with 2 x 4GB installed. I have the decent 2400 CL9 memory and certainly wouldn't want to give up any performance.

Let's say P3D v4 is run with comparable graphics settings to v3, so not extending LOD or autogen radius, texture resolution and so on which I can see will take extra resources. In that case is the memory footprint similar to v3 allowing maybe an additional 2GB of memory for the simulator to handle complex aircraft? My point is that if the intention is to be able to run aircraft add-ons that pushed the VAS limit in 32-bit then that extra 2GB, keeping other things the same, might be more than enough to deliver and so further additional memory might not be required.

Am I missing something here (maybe experience as I haven't tried this yet)?

My instinct says this is possible if I'm not concerned on using all that extra memory on visuals as I'm happy enough where I am now.

i7 4790K @4.4 GHz, Asus Z97 Deluxe, 8GB 2400 DDR3, EVGA GTX 1080Ti, Samsung SSDs 850 Pro + WD HD, Windows 7 Pro 64.
Back to Top
Bert Pieke View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: January-03-2003
Location: Canada
Points: 5256
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bert Pieke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-04-2018 at 11:43am
I am in the same camp as you.. and on P3DV4.3.

However, there clearly is another (bigger?) camp of flightsimmers who want to drive their hardware to the bloody edge, including getting their expensive video cards to deliver something for the money they invested..

So, if you go to 4K monitors, set the scenery and texture settings to the highest levels, dynamic lighting and shadows to max.. you can indeed give your 1080ti card something to do, and at the same time drive up RAM usage well above 8GB.

You have to decide which camp you would like to be in, I guess

4770K@4.2, GTX1070, 8GB 2400DDR3 RAM
Bert
Back to Top
robmw View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: April-02-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 287
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robmw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-04-2018 at 12:59pm
Yes, that's what I'm trying to find out before I dive into 64-bit. I found the 1080Ti upgrade finally let me run heavy weather and maxed out scenery in v3.4 smoothly. A lot of money to spend but I hadn't upgraded my gpu in 3 years. I also don't run 4K but 2560 x 1440 so the 1080Ti isn't being pushed to the max.

I intend to run 64-bit in the same way so I'm hoping it gives me the headroom for those situations where VAS is exhausted in 32-bit. So it seems from what you are saying this is achievable in 8GB if I'm sensible about what I want to achieve.

Of course if I don't want to run heavy duty aircraft then I might be able to ramp up the scenery somewhat instead.

I just don't want to spend money upgrading the sim for no benefit.
i7 4790K @4.4 GHz, Asus Z97 Deluxe, 8GB 2400 DDR3, EVGA GTX 1080Ti, Samsung SSDs 850 Pro + WD HD, Windows 7 Pro 64.
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NickN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-04-2018 at 9:33pm
VAS is not system memory...   you know that Rob. 64bit isn't increasing your physical memory use, but it allows items that will hit VAS to extend past the wall.
 
 
But its when you start adding the extended scenery radius and updated scenery that has been revamped the system memory starts getting eaten. I know people who run P3Dv4 on 8GB and others who just cant get enough and have to push it up.
 
Really, the only way to know is, install it..  install your addons (if they will work in P3Dv4) and go from there.
 
You have P3Dv3 and v4 living side by side without issues. I have FSX box, FSXSE, P3dv3 and P3Dv4 all on the same system.
 
 
 
Back to Top
robmw View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: April-02-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 287
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robmw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-05-2018 at 12:00pm
Originally posted by NickN NickN wrote:

VAS is not system memory...   you know that Rob. 64bit isn't increasing your physical memory use, but it allows items that will hit VAS to extend past the wall.
 
But its when you start adding the extended scenery radius and updated scenery that has been revamped the system memory starts getting eaten. I know people who run P3Dv4 on 8GB and others who just cant get enough and have to push it up. 


Yes, I do, I didn't explain what I was asking very well Ouch

What I was trying to ask is if there is anything in v4 that increases it's memory overhead significantly over v3 eating into that extra memory that is now available beyond 4GB to the application itself, even before starting to push the graphics options that will use a lot of that memory. So if v4 was using 3-4GB in situations where v3 was using 2GB (other things being as similar as possible) there would be less headroom for the application on a system with 'only' 8GB of total system memory - you see what I'm trying to get at? My Windows footprint is a bit under 2GB so that leaves me around 5.5GB realistically available for the app.

I think you've told me what I suspected though, much of the advantage is quickly used up if you're not careful and an extra 1.5GB isn't that much. It's the same old thing as getting higher spec. hardware and then throwing everything at it and wondering where the benefit went.

However, I'm cautious and know what I want to achieve so I think the effort of moving some stuff over on my system will be worthwhile - as you say the truth is in the doing.

And I too still have a minimal FSX install for some things I haven't got the heart to stop using. LOL
i7 4790K @4.4 GHz, Asus Z97 Deluxe, 8GB 2400 DDR3, EVGA GTX 1080Ti, Samsung SSDs 850 Pro + WD HD, Windows 7 Pro 64.
Back to Top
Bert Pieke View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: January-03-2003
Location: Canada
Points: 5256
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bert Pieke Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-05-2018 at 2:09pm
If it helps at all.. I am happily running P3DV4.3. with 8GB RAM, and no, there is nothing that suddenly takes up more memory.

Now, we know that XP11 uses more than 8GB.. so is it possible that P3D V5 will also?.. Could well be.
Bert
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NickN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-06-2018 at 10:28am
Originally posted by robmw robmw wrote:

Originally posted by NickN NickN wrote:

VAS is not system memory...   you know that Rob. 64bit isn't increasing your physical memory use, but it allows items that will hit VAS to extend past the wall.
 
But its when you start adding the extended scenery radius and updated scenery that has been revamped the system memory starts getting eaten. I know people who run P3Dv4 on 8GB and others who just cant get enough and have to push it up. 


What I was trying to ask is if there is anything in v4 that increases it's memory overhead significantly over v3 eating into that extra memory that is now available beyond 4GB to the application itself, even before starting to push the graphics options that will use a lot of that memory. So if v4 was using 3-4GB in situations where v3 was using 2GB (other things being as similar as possible) there would be less headroom for the application on a system with 'only' 8GB of total system memory - you see what I'm trying to get at? My Windows footprint is a bit under 2GB so that leaves me around 5.5GB realistically available for the app.

 
 
v4 isn't going to consume much more memory than v3 on similar settings and similar scenery but what one must understand is that several of the scenery slider positions in v4 are far higher than they are in v3 @ 100% which means equal settings is not equal slider positions.
 
 With certain types of scenery and pushing high res texture edits in the config file, along with high levels of AA, you could easily begin to consume the memory in a video card. In some cases approaching that 11GB wall in the 1080ti. From what I understand they did make some changes in the engine whereby memory is being released as the flight moves along (system and GPU) which is why I said the only way to really know where you personally stand is run it and monitor the resources.
 
 
 
 
Back to Top
robmw View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: April-02-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 287
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robmw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-06-2018 at 6:11pm
That does sound encouraging (Nick and Bert's replies). Like I said I'm cautious and plan to keep visuals at about v3 levels and just use the extra available application memory to cope with situations that push me to the edge now in v3.

My enthusiasm for upgrading has lessened over the years as it takes me too long each time to get everything working how I like it so I need to convince myself it's worthwhile making the effort...
i7 4790K @4.4 GHz, Asus Z97 Deluxe, 8GB 2400 DDR3, EVGA GTX 1080Ti, Samsung SSDs 850 Pro + WD HD, Windows 7 Pro 64.
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NickN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-07-2018 at 2:45am
No one can tell you what your system will or will not handle.
 
 
 
That is something you will need to discover for yourself on your individual system. It's not hard, simply run the 'resource monitor' while testing your most intense scenery and aircraft flights and then tick 'up' on sliders as you have room to work and recheck.
 
 
I run P3dv4 on a 4.75Ghz Haswell with a 780GTX video card but I also don't buy into every dog and pony show airport/city/region product either. I can understand the desire for a 'home base' airport addon, even get buying into a individual region I might fly most often, but what I don't buy into is dynamic lighting, goofy reflections, shiny hanger knobs or the hooker running a business behind the barn where there are cows grazing in the pasture.
 
 
I do use cloud shadows with my own preferences to get the most for the least.
 
 
Back to Top
bc621 View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: November-30-2009
Points: 366
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote bc621 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-07-2018 at 5:54pm
Originally posted by NickN NickN wrote:

 
 
 
I do use cloud shadows with my own preferences to get the most for the least.
 
 

Would you mind sharing your preferences  ?? 

Thanks !
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NickN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-07-2018 at 7:42pm
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NickN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-08-2018 at 5:14am
Originally posted by robmw robmw wrote:

That does sound encouraging (Nick and Bert's replies). Like I said I'm cautious and plan to keep visuals at about v3 levels and just use the extra available application memory to cope with situations that push me to the edge now in v3.

 
 
If you are curious about v4 and the difference in scenery distance,.. here is a quick and dirty sample
 
 
 
Yea, I know..   holy..  LOL    so if you run the scenery that includes the hookers and cows along with a choice payware 'been updated for dynamic lighting and reflection' airport, do'in really stupid chit,.. like also add this entry to the P3D.cfg file;
 
[TERRAIN]
TEXTURE_SIZE_EXP=10
 
 .....expect the worst.
 
Beer
 
Back to Top
robmw View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: April-02-2005
Location: United Kingdom
Points: 287
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote robmw Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-08-2018 at 11:45am
I'll just have to try it out. I'll be tempted by the increase in scenery distance but presumably I can bring that back to v3 levels if I want to use the extra available application memory on other things.

I'm used to running different configs for different purposes and I'm sure that a lot of my GA flying in rural or wilderness areas will be fine, even allowing for increasing scenery settings.

The one thing that pushes me toward and sometimes over the edge at the moment is more complex GA and dense urban areas and that's where I'd hope v4 to be of benefit if I can keep scenery levels similar.

One thing this thread makes clear is that for those of us who don't tread the flightsim hamster wheel, sooner or later something comes up that makes hanging on to what we have more problematic. I'm even beginning to think about XP for certain things as well but seems that 16GB in that case will be necessary.


i7 4790K @4.4 GHz, Asus Z97 Deluxe, 8GB 2400 DDR3, EVGA GTX 1080Ti, Samsung SSDs 850 Pro + WD HD, Windows 7 Pro 64.
Back to Top
jfri View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May-10-2004
Points: 273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jfri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-08-2018 at 1:31pm
Originally posted by NickN NickN wrote:

 
Memory tertiary and sub timing - Most people don't realize but your memory primary timings (the ones XMP or you set manually) are not the only timings involved. When a motherboard is populated by more than 2 sticks these sub timings are usually changed to higher values. This is done by the motherboard using the on-stick programming of the memory modules.
 
This means that what you expect in overall latency will be higher with 4 sticks over 2 with the same primary timings set.
 
Its not just the number of sticks but the density too. You can have 2 16GB or 2 32GB modules and they may run slower in tertiary and sub timing than their next step down in memory amount counterparts. In other words 2x8 may run faster than 2x16, and 2x16 may run faster than 2x32 even on the same speed and primary timing
 


Do you mean that the CAS Latency will change with 4 sticks ? So for example in my case CL9 will become higher like for example CL10 ? How much difference could this make ?
Do you also suggest that sticks running at lower frequency (in my case 2133 MHz) than sticks at higher frequency can be faster if they have lower CAS latency ?

Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NickN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-09-2018 at 8:08pm
Originally posted by jfri jfri wrote:

Originally posted by NickN NickN wrote:

 
Memory tertiary and sub timing - Most people don't realize but your memory primary timings (the ones XMP or you set manually) are not the only timings involved. When a motherboard is populated by more than 2 sticks these sub timings are usually changed to higher values. This is done by the motherboard using the on-stick programming of the memory modules.
 
This means that what you expect in overall latency will be higher with 4 sticks over 2 with the same primary timings set.
 
Its not just the number of sticks but the density too. You can have 2 16GB or 2 32GB modules and they may run slower in tertiary and sub timing than their next step down in memory amount counterparts. In other words 2x8 may run faster than 2x16, and 2x16 may run faster than 2x32 even on the same speed and primary timing
 

 
Do you mean that the CAS Latency will change with 4 sticks ? So for example in my case CL9 will become higher like for example CL10 ? How much difference could this make ?

 
 
That is not what I said..  I said your primary timing will remain the same (which includes CAS Latency) in terms of the values you see in the BIOS or in software that reads those values in Windows.
 
Its your sub timings that can change and in doing so EVEN THOUGH you still run the same FAB-4 primary timings, the memory will run slower to accommodate the extra slots used, or, the higher density sticks.
 
 
Originally posted by jfri jfri wrote:

 
Do you also suggest that sticks running at lower frequency (in my case 2133 MHz) than sticks at higher frequency can be faster if they have lower CAS latency ?
 
 
 
Yes, that is possible. If I am running DDR3 2400 CL 12-13-13-37 memory and you are running DDR3 2133 CL 8-8-8-27 you are running much faster than I am regardless of if I have greater bandwidth.
 
 
 
Back to Top
jfri View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member


Joined: May-10-2004
Points: 273
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jfri Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-11-2018 at 8:00am
Originally posted by NickN NickN wrote:

That is not what I said..  I said your primary timing will remain the same (which includes CAS Latency) in terms of the values you see in the BIOS or in software that reads those values in Windows.
 
Its your sub timings that can change and in doing so EVEN THOUGH you still run the same FAB-4 primary timings, the memory will run slower to accommodate the extra slots used, or, the higher density sticks.


In addition to the CL value I can also see a data called
Access timing 9-11-10-30
Is this sub timings ?

My current RAM modules has no such data listed in the product description but just CL9.
So if I would add these sticks to my current system
http://https://www.dustinhome.se/product/5010785275/vengeance-pro-series
what could I expect ? Slower RAM and if so how much difference ? Can it make a noticeable effect ?
 
 
Originally posted by jfri jfri wrote:

Do you also suggest that sticks running at lower frequency (in my case 2133 MHz) than sticks at higher frequency can be faster if they have lower CAS latency ?

Originally posted by NickN NickN wrote:

Yes, that is possible. If I am running DDR3 2400 CL 12-13-13-37 memory and you are running DDR3 2133 CL 8-8-8-27 you are running much faster than I am regardless of if I have greater bandwidth.
 


When I look at available sticks of 2*8 Gb 2133 MHZ I see that in all cases the CL value is higher than CL9 (CL10 or CL11) and one pair 2*8 Gb 2666 MHz is CL12 so this does not seem better.
Back to Top
NickN View Drop Down
Certified Professional
Certified Professional


Joined: November-21-2007
Points: 17358
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote NickN Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: November-11-2018 at 5:35pm
 
 
A.
You wont see the sub and tertiary timings posted at the manufacture site. Those are typically reserved for the engineering department of the company, and, each motherboard can set those slightly different..  that's what the motherboard does to work with the memory. In the motherboard BIOS advanced settings (depending on the board) you will usually find a very long list of memory timing settings below the primary 4-5..  those are the ones I am talking about.
 
 
B.
You probably wont find DDR3 memory anymore that has high performance timing...   that all sold out about 2014-2015. That's why I warn folks when new high speed memory with low timing is available, get it.. because it wont last long on the market.
 
 
 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 12.01
Copyright ©2001-2018 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.154 seconds.