all the way to 3100 on just xmp is impressive

The problem is that most of these 3000+ kits are single-sided. There is a substantial performance hit taken when using single-sided sticks vs double-sided ones.

ADATA is stepping up lately - I just read a review of their 2400/2x4GB kit in this series, and it easily overclocked to 2700 on an Ivy system without much tweaking. I also like the look of the heat sinks, the gold looks great with Asus Z87 boards and some of the MSIs, and the gray should look okay with blue or red themed boards. The aluminum looks a lot more effective than the steel ones on my HyperX Beast DIMMs, and the Beast is only stable at default XMP profile timings (2400-11-13-13-30-2T). I'll definitely be looking at ADATA kits when I do my next build.

the ram itself is nice the ad with the mech with ram wings is just silly

my ram is a gundam, your argument is invalid

This ...

This new product's dual channel is designed to bring ultimate performance to gamers

This unprecedented speed will gratify those who always seek an edge in boosting system performance.

Not only can speeds of 3100MHz be reached, but bandwidth can attain rates of up to 24,800MB/second, once again breaking through top performance levels for overclocking memory.

... is utter crap.

Single Sided Hynix MFR does not equal anything performance. This is from another review at TPU, also with single sided MFR. Draw your own conclusions.

I laugh at the people who pay a premium for fast DDR3 RAM above 1600 MHz. that provides no tangible system performance increase. If only they had known, they could have spent their money on something of value. :wtf: I guess if you're technically challenged you don't bother to get the facts before you spend your money, you just jump in with both feet?

Sabishii HitoThe problem is that most of these 3000+ kits are single-sided. There is a substantial performance hit taken when using single-sided sticks vs double-sided ones.

I don't think you know the difference between single and double sided ram.

www.computing.net/answers/hardware/double-vs-single-sided-ram-/67771.html

JorgeI laugh at the people who pay a premium for fast DDR3 RAM above 1600 MHz. that provides no tangible system performance increase. If only they had known, they could have spent their money on something of value. :wtf: I guess if you're technically challenged you don't bother to get the facts before you spend your money, you just jump in with both feet?

You're going on the old values from when speed bumps meant a 2x premium. Now there's a $20 difference between 1600c9 and 2133c9, which just so happens to be where tangible benefits tapper off for 90% of games (some stuff does still scale higher.) Just get the good stuff for piece of mind.

MassmanThis ...







... is utter crap.

Single Sided Hynix MFR does not equal anything performance. This is from another review at TPU, also with single sided MFR. Draw your own conclusions.

tpucdn.com/reviews/GSkill/F3-2933C12D-8GTXDG/images/aida_read.gif

On Ivy Bridge this performance figure is related to the IMC, not single / dual sided memory.

Wark0On Ivy Bridge this performance figure is related to the IMC, not single / dual sided memory.

Figures are for Haswell www.techpowerup.com/reviews/GSkill/F3-2933C12D-8GTXDG/5.html

The performance deficit is mainly related to Rank Interleaving, and the high RTLs won't help either. It's quite simple really; single sided DDR3-3000 is slower than dual sided DDR3-2133C11. Doesn't matter what platform.

JorgeI laugh at the people who pay a premium for fast DDR3 RAM above 1600 MHz. that provides no tangible system performance increase. If only they had known, they could have spent their money on something of value. :wtf: I guess if you're technically challenged you don't bother to get the facts before you spend your money, you just jump in with both feet?

Cough cough, which is why I still run 12 gb ddr3 1600, cough cough..
:laugh:

MassmanFigures are for Haswell www.techpowerup.com/reviews/GSkill/F3-2933C12D-8GTXDG/5.html

The performance deficit is mainly related to Rank Interleaving, and the high RTLs won't help either. It's quite simple really; single sided DDR3-3000 is slower than dual sided DDR3-2133C11. Doesn't matter what platform.

It's the same problem with Haswell.

If you run the same DDR3-2933 kit @ 2600 bandwith will be better, so for me it's related to the IMC configuration and not the DDR3 itself.

NorthboundOcclusivemy ram is a gundam, your argument is invalid

What argument are you referring to?

MassmanFigures are for Haswell www.techpowerup.com/reviews/GSkill/F3-2933C12D-8GTXDG/5.html

The performance deficit is mainly related to Rank Interleaving, and the high RTLs won't help either. It's quite simple really; single sided DDR3-3000 is slower than dual sided DDR3-2133C11. Doesn't matter what platform.

From the same review:

Timings looked fine in ASUS's MemTweakIt utility, but I found performance to be lacking in a big way. This isn't due to the sticks themselves but rather because of the board's settings for the 2933 MHz divider, as I saw similar behavior using other sticks. When I set the 2800 MHz memory divider manually in the BIOS, performance for the G.Skill TridentX 2933 MHz 8 GB kit increased quite a bit, but I used the G.Skill TridentX 2933 MHz 8 GB kit's XMP profile because we report "out-of-the-box" performance results.

Seems to me it has nothing to do with single sided/dual sided configurations.

JorgeI laugh at the people who pay a premium for fast DDR3 RAM above 1600 MHz. that provides no tangible system performance increase. If only they had known, they could have spent their money on something of value. :wtf: I guess if you're technically challenged you don't bother to get the facts before you spend your money, you just jump in with both feet?

I bought my kit 7 months ago, when RAM prices were low (Kingston HyperX Beast 2400 2 x 4GB), for $65, when most 1600 kits were going for $40-$50, so I didn't hesitate to spend an extra $15. The same kit is now $95, but 1600 kits are now $70 (on average), so I guess I'd still go for the faster RAM. As for "tangible" increases, ask anyone who does video or photo rendering on a regular basis - faster RAM = shorter time spent waiting. Overclocking the CPU is more productive when paired with fast RAM. But don't take my word for it, read some real world benchmark results comparisons with various RAM kits.
Now when you start talking about paying $300-$400 for a 2800 kit of G.Skill 2 x 4GB, I agree, it's a complete waste of $ when you consider the upgrades that money could have got you, such as a much better video card. But remember, these kits are aimed at the people who already have the best hardware and are looking for that last little bit of performance.
I believe that there's a sweet spot for RAM price/performance ratio for any point in time. 7 months ago, it seemed to be 2133 kits, now 2400 may be the new sweet spot. Performance is performance, just because all RAM is so fast it's hard to tell the difference doesn't mean there's no difference. If most of what you do is gaming, the performance won't matter. For those of us who use our PCs for more CPU/RAM intensive tasks, it certainly DOES matter.

Looked at my Mushkin Blackline memory as pretty cool looking RAM, but this RAM looks too f**king cool.

I could have gotten 1600mhz RAM for £5 cheaper than my 2133mhz RAM (which runs at 2400mhz) but some people like paying more for a "better" product, who cares if the gains past 1600mhz are tangible? I have 2400mhz RAMS and my epeen is 7 inches bigger than yours, therefore I win the internets :cool:

TarkheinSeems to me it has nothing to do with single sided/dual sided configurations.

I have two more single-sided kits here for reviews, real answers will be provided on that subject in that review. I've done over 500 benchmark runs so far, covering speeds from 1333 MHz on up to 3100 MHz. Unfortunately, my current double-sided sticks aren't capable of much more than 2666 MHz reliably, so I can only provide comparison numbers at specific intervals. All past memory testing had to be re-done since BIOSes have changed the way my test board works, and things are kind of different now than they were before(I even have to use different slots for memory, and OC is not the same as it was before either, for me.)

NdMk2o1oI could have gotten 1600mhz RAM for £5 cheaper than my 2133mhz RAM (which runs at 2400mhz) but some people like paying more for a "better" product, who cares if the gains past 1600mhz are tangible? I have 2400mhz RAMS and my epeen is 7 inches bigger than yours, therefore I win the internets :cool:

In the past, CPU speed increases have required BCLK increases on many platforms, so high-performance memory was required due to higher default memory speeds with higher BCLKs. Today, that doesn't much apply, and most users are using 100 MHz BCLK with 1600 MHz memory or so, and maybe missing 10% performance, which is relatively minor. Haswell again brings in BCLK adjustments, so high performance memory may become useful again in getting the most out of your system. Maybe.