16GB 1333MHz vs 12GB 1866MHz

G

GreyS

n00b
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
11
Hi all. :)

There is great price for G. Skill Ares 16 GB (4x4GB) on 1333MHz in my state. And Kingston Hyper X Fury 1866 12GB (3x4GB) is about same price.

Which one should I go with?

I use my PC for recording gameplay for PC games,for gaming and music/movies.
 
Get the 16GB

Unless benchmarking, you'll never see the gains from higher speed DDR3 memory except those which are psychological.
 
Always go for more memory. Also, you can easily run it faster, not that there is need to.
 
What voltage is the G. Skill rated for? If it's 1.5v or lower, you can probably overclock it to 1600 or 1866 without much trouble. Or tighten the latency.
 
Ruffy said:
To the op, the more jiggerbites the betterer
Click to expand...

Not really, if he doesn't need the extra ram it sits there pretty much doing nothing, depending on the os it may use it as a cache, while if he had faster ram it would speed up some programs
 
Since you're mostly gaming go with the extra RAM. The higher clocks will give you 1 - 3 more FPS in gaming which IMHO isn't worth it. You could always find ways to utilize more RAM.
 
munkle said:
Not really, if he doesn't need the extra ram it sits there pretty much doing nothing, depending on the os it may use it as a cache, while if he had faster ram it would speed up some programs
Click to expand...

I'll concede to usage, but these days 16GB is pretty much the defacto config for a gaming/higher end pc, and I can't see the real benefit of getting less ram for the same price when I can OC most ram easily. That said I don't bother since it's only a 1% change in performance.

Then again I haven't a clue what it takes to game and record.
 
if you are using integrated graphics there is a reason to want/need the higher MHZ ram... otherwise get the slower ram with more of it!!!

I am running DDR1333 with a 3930k and an R9 290x and getting very similar benchmark results on PCmark and 3DMark as systems with much faster ram..... since the faster they are the looser they are (that's what he said :)
 
Ruffy said:
I'll concede to usage, but these days 16GB is pretty much the defacto config for a gaming/higher end pc, and I can't see the real benefit of getting less ram for the same price when I can OC most ram easily. That said I don't bother since it's only a 1% change in performance.

Then again I haven't a clue what it takes to game and record.
Click to expand...

Eh... I would say most current mid to high end gaming rigs only need 8 gigabytes of RAM. 16gb is just overkill that would hardly ever be used.
 
I have 32gb and when I am using 3 monitors for productivity (office and web browsers) I see 4-5gb of RAM use..

When I play BF4 I see 6-8gb of RAM use.

When i edit video I use 24gb for RAM previews and render caching

I would think 16gb would serve 99% fine..... but this is [H]ard after all :)
 
3x4GB will slow you down unless you have a triple channel board because you have a choice of single or dual channel memory for most motherboards.
1 ram = single
2 ram = dual
3 ram = single
4 ram = dual

But as pointed out, Sandybridge onwards needs 1600MHz or higher to get the best out of it.
If I had those choices, I would get 8GB of 1866MHz.
But you may need more if recording videos, others can help establish this.

I use 8GB 2200MHz (overkill speed) on a clocked 2500K and havent had one single time where I felt I needed more ram for gaming.
(Running Win 7, you may need a bit more for Vista, you didnt give a lot of info)
 
Most important aspect of memory is capacity. Second most important aspect is configuration (proper channel). Importance of everything else is kinda wish-washy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top