What differences would I see if I jump from 1600 to 2400

[timesavage]

As the title states, and not a canned internet answer. When I am sitting in front of my computer and I turn it on, what noticeable differences would I see and are they worth it? Thanks

 

[bob4933]

Nothing. Go check out benchmarks, linus has a benchmark up testing everything from 800mhz to 3000mhz for normal operations to heavy gaming (no rendering or other ram heavy processes though to be fair). Going from 800 to 3000mhz produced less than 1fps on most games and no average increase in load or boot times. edit: this is spoken with the understanding that all other things are kept relatively constant.

edit 2: YES! before I get lambasted for not saying it, faster ram is... duh... faster! Will you see human, real world gains? Not really.
Amount and compatibility > speed for most platforms.

 

[timesavage]

Awesome, thank you!!!

 

[EarthDog]

Noticeable? Nothing really. Maybe a fps here or there but certainly not worth the added cost.

 

[sobe]

The difference if not benching would be increased e-peen!

 

[Woomack]

anything below 2400 looks like it's broken and is running in a safe mode ...

 

[sobe]

anything below 2400 looks like it's broken and is running in a safe mode ...

Unless I'm missing something, how does DDR3 1600 look broken?

 

[Woomack]

Unless I'm missing something, how does DDR3 1600 look broken?

joking of course ... I usually see 1600 when I have to reset BIOS

 

[sobe]

Lol, I thought there was something I was completely missing there, so confused.

 

[freeagent]

Might see a minimal decrease in latency, could feel a bit snappier.. But generally not much difference, outside of benchmarks

 

[Mandrake4565]

The difference if not benching would be increased e-peen!

Best answer!

 

[caddi daddi]

1333, 1600, 1866, 2000, 2133, just nothing to be gained in 24/7 use.
I had some nice 2133 that was great for benching but have found that bang for the buck with my fx rigs is 1866, but 1333 will do fine.

 

[MongGrel]

I'm still just debating rather to try out ECC unbuffered vs vanilla these days, that worth it as I can't run registered ?

Probably not really I imagine.

 

[EarthDog]

Not worth it. That is for servers in an enterprise environment, not your home.

 

[Woomack]

waste of money unless you find something like this:
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=743213
but still, it won't give you performance gain worth to pay for a new memory and you won't see any difference running on ECC

 

[cullam3n]

I'm onboard with the rest of you guys, but I did read threads such as this one where people say the minimum FPS is 1-3 FPS higher at at faster RAM speeds.

That said, I used to run at 9-9-9 1600, and now I run 10-12-12 2200. Can't say that the minimum FPS is better, or that it is smoother as some of said on that thread I linked above.

 

[wingman99]

+1 you wont see any real world performance going higher than 1600Mhz.

 

[bubbleawsome]

I can say my OEM 1066 ram with who-knows-what timings is suffering a lot for ram. I could gain ~6 fps by going up to 2400 with tighter timings in some of my CPU intensive games.

 

[EarthDog]

Yes. You will see gains from 1066 to 1866. After that, not so much at all. Buying more than 1866 Mhz ram unless you are benching is, to me, a waste of money for the negligible at best gains.

 

[wagex]

yea i seen an article from corsair the other day on their FB page kind of an interesting read
http://www.corsair.com/en-us/blog/2014/march/haswellrealworld

The prevailing wisdom in the enthusiast community has been, for generations, that DDR3-1600 is the sweet spot and that faster memory offers at best extremely limited performance improvement and that at worst, it’s snake oil. There’s an element of truth to that; AMD’s Bulldozer architecture and its derivatives see arguably minimal benefit from faster memory, and Ivy Bridge and its predecessors actually were just fine at DDR3-1600. So the idea that the paradigm might have shifted is tough to swallow because it goes against wisdom that’s been ingrained for years, a veritable lifetime in our industry.

i was intrigued seeing an 8-10fps gain from just faster memory... the only difference is the extra money you spent on ram to ge that you could have just gotten a faster video card lol. Starcraft could have also just been cherry picked for some reason, and i didnt read deep into it to see if they were using onboard video or not.

although the other benches are just plain not worth it imho