DDR3 1600 with 7 Cas or 1866 with 8 Cas?

DarkDubzs

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
354
I am debating which variant of G.Skill Trident X's to get. It will be 16GB dual channel. I like to stay under 9 or at the most 9 cas latency, no matter which ddr3 memory it be. So, I am sure this has been asked and answered a million times, but I want to see what you guys think now.
It is either this set of 1600 with a latency of 7, or this set of 1866 with a latency of 8. In my mind right now, I would like to believe that its benefit of higher speed negate its cons of higher latency and timings, and that its benefit of lower latency and timings negate the con of the lower speed, but I have no way to be sure.

Besides the speed, latency, and timings, there are a couple extra factors. The 1866 set is $15 more expensive at $180, while the 1600 is $165 right now. Also, the 1866 has a higher voltage at 1.6V, which should create more heat (no idea how much more, even if a significant enough amount to factor in), but im not sure what other pros/cons a higher voltage would have, but I have read that generally, lower voltage is better, especially if they are at the same speed (eg. 1600 at 1.5V better than 1866 at 1.6V).

No plans to overclock, maybe up to 1866 at the most if the ram is not already 1866, but no real plans to oc the memory much if at all. Will be using a Haswell (Refresh) i7-4790k (Devil's Canyon), I also read that Haswell is safe to use and handle higher voltage memory, unlike Sandy Bridge for example.

Any help and feedback greatly appreciated. Thanks!
 
You won't notice a difference between either sets of RAM outside of synthetic benchmarks and extremely rare and specific situations. Nor would you notice a difference between those sets of RAM and this set of RAM:
$150 - Crucial BLS2CP8G3D1609DS1S00 Ballistix Sport 2 x 8GB DDR3 1600 RAM
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
You won't notice a difference between either sets of RAM outside of synthetic benchmarks and extremely rare and specific situations. Nor would you notice a difference between those sets of RAM and this set of RAM:
$150 - Crucial BLS2CP8G3D1609DS1S00 Ballistix Sport 2 x 8GB DDR3 1600 RAM

Thanks. Do you know in what situations would the differences in speed and latency or timings matter? How much of a difference would there be in those situations?

I also keep wondering one thing too, why would they even make both sets of ram if they perform the same? They must have their own big enough benefits, there has to be a reason G.Skill keeps making both, which must mean they have their own purpose that makes a significant enough difference between the two in one way or another.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Thanks. Do you know in what situations would the differences in speed and latency or timings matter? How much of a difference would there be in those situations?
Certain games at certain resolutions at certain settings see some increase in gaming performance but those increases are about 1 to 3 FPS at most. Folding@Home and some mathematical heavy type apps sees some performance increase as well with higher speed RAM. For every day usage and gaming, really no pratical difference.

I also keep wondering one thing too, why would they even make both sets of ram if they perform the same? They must have their own big enough benefits, there has to be a reason G.Skill keeps making both, which must mean they have their own purpose that makes a significant enough difference between the two in one way or another.
A few reasons:
1) A lot of people are hyped up on synthetic benchmarks
2) A lot of people are under the placebo effect.
 
So just stick with 1600 7 Cas?

What if I can get 1866 8 Cas for the same price? Which should I get in that situation?
 
So just stick with 1600 7 Cas?

What if I can get 1866 8 Cas for the same price? Which should I get in that situation?
I wouldn't even bother with the 1600 7 CAS. No point to it. 1600 CAS 7 would only be worth it if it costs the same as the cheapest CAS 11 DDR3 1600 RAM available. The difference is so damn small you won't even notice it.

Neither.
 
Crucial Ballistix 1600 1.35V and call it a day.

This.

As to your question about why G.Skill (or any manufacturer) makes multiple products that perform the same in real world applications, it's because of marketing departments. Higher/ lower numbers tick off checkboxes, if marketing can eek out an extra $15 from someone that is already spending $150, that's a 10% revenue increase for spending just a few pennies to put a different label on it.
 
Thanks guys for the help, but I still have one question:

Hypothetically, if a set of 1600 Cas 7 costs the same as 1866 Cas 8, which should one get? Dangman already gave me an answer, but I still want to know which set one should buy even if they are the same price and are the only two you can pick from. I know he said to get the cheapest 1600 Cas 11 set, but just for this question, let us assume they are all the same price or your only options are the 1600 Cas 7 set ot the 1866 Cas 8.

One small other question, if I may. Is there any real noticeable difference if you use 2400? This Trident X 2400 set is the most popular out of all the other sets they offer, why is that? Is it all just hype/marketing or is there a real benefit for any kind of computing, whether it be gaming, video/photo editing, rendering, etc.?
 
If you are locked in to an AMD APU and will be using the IPG, then get the fastest and lowest latency RAM your budget will allot. If not, then snag some of that delicious Ballistix.
 
Check out this article & the charts for CAS / MHZ performance:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7364/memory-scaling-on-haswell/10

These explain the technical side a bit, and why the nano-seconds are hard to tell ;)

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/299012-30-latency-speed#4314322
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1922024/ram-latency-clock-speed.html#12142196


In the end I got the lowest voltage 1600 I could find with CL9, very affordable and lifetime warranty. I also have run 2133 @ CL9 and couldn't tell the difference for nearly 2x the cost, that $ is better for a higher-end GPU or SSD, etc IMHO, or simply adding MORE ram if you need it.
 
Thanks guys for the help, but I still have one question:

Hypothetically, if a set of 1600 Cas 7 costs the same as 1866 Cas 8, which should one get? Dangman already gave me an answer, but I still want to know which set one should buy even if they are the same price and are the only two you can pick from. I know he said to get the cheapest 1600 Cas 11 set, but just for this question, let us assume they are all the same price or your only options are the 1600 Cas 7 set ot the 1866 Cas 8.
You're not getting it: It doesn't matter either way. You can literally flip a coin between the two and you're going to get the same perceived performance no matter what.
One small other question, if I may. Is there any real noticeable difference if you use 2400? This Trident X 2400 set is the most popular out of all the other sets they offer, why is that? Is it all just hype/marketing or is there a real benefit for any kind of computing, whether it be gaming, video/photo editing, rendering, etc.?
Even if you OC'd the RAM to DDR3 3000 speeds, there's still no noticeable performance increase that justifies the higher costs. Hype/marketing and because people are uninformed are the main reasons why that G.Skill RAM is supposedly selling well. Also noticed that a lot of users bought that RAM for use with AMD APUs which do see a performance increase in GPU performance with higher speed RAM.

Just to be clear: For the majority of hardware enthusiasts out there, high-speed RAM makes really no real-world difference if you're using an Intel based system with a discrete GPU. It's only when you get into professional server use (mainly database work) where high speed RAM is worthwhile for Intel. Even then, those uses also means ECC RAM is more important as well. So high-speed consumer grade RAM is still basically a waste for the vast majority of hardware enthusiasts with Intel systems let alone the whole consumer market. For AMD, the high speed RAM does make a difference with their APUs. However, I've never seen any sort of AMD FX CPU RAM testing. Probably won't see one until 2016 anyway.

Another article to check out: It shows that more RAM is better than higher speed RAM for Photoshop CS6:
http://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Photoshop-CS6-Memory-Optimization-182/
 
So the two sets are basically the same in terms of performance, got that, just wanted to clarify. 1600 CL 9 seems to always end up being the most agreed upon memory config, so that is cleared up. Thanks for the help guys.
 
I would get 1866, just because if it becomes unstable you can underclock it to 1600 to increase stability.


Also the difference between 1600 and 1333 in older double channel configurations is perceivable.

In modern quad channel, no perceivable difference. Except in apu.
 
I would get 1866, just because if it becomes unstable you can underclock it to 1600 to increase stability.


Also the difference between 1600 and 1333 in older double channel configurations is perceivable.

In modern quad channel, no perceivable difference. Except in apu.

That is kinda what I was thinking. Better to have more headroom, right.
No need to worry about anything under 1600, Im not considering that stuff. Also, I am pplanning for dual channel, quad channel upgrade may come later, but not any time soon unless I will need the extra memory for some reason.
 
I would get 1866, just because if it becomes unstable you can underclock it to 1600 to increase stability.
If the RAM I bought doesn't perform stable at the speed it's supposedly rated at, I'm sending that shit back. Get what you pay for.
Also the difference between 1600 and 1333 in older double channel configurations is perceivable.
Do you have any information backing this up outside of personal experience?
In modern quad channel, no perceivable difference. Except in apu.
APUs only support dual-channel.
That is kinda what I was thinking. Better to have more headroom, right.
Not right if it costs a significant amount of money.
Also, I am pplanning for dual channel, quad channel upgrade may come later, but not any time soon unless I will need the extra memory for some reason.
You're planning a mITX setup. You're not going to see quad-channel at all.
 
If the RAM I bought doesn't perform stable at the speed it's supposedly rated at, I'm sending that shit back. Get what you pay for.
I was assuming he meant if it became unstable after a while or something, like years?
Not right if it costs a significant amount of money.
Significant to me may be not be significant to you or vice versa. I would say significant is $15-20, maybe $10.
You're planning a mITX setup. You're not going to see quad-channel at all.

Sorry, I have been thinking of just doing mATX instead now. Better to go big first and not have to worry or kick yourself later for choosing less upfront. In fact, because I will be gaming at 1440p, I have seen game benchmarks (not synthetic) and the FPS for a lot of AAA titles are sub 60fps at that res on ultra. I would want at least 60 fps on ultra 1440p. So SLI 970 would fit the bill for that. That doesnt mean I will get dual 970's immediately, Ill probably get just one first so I can get the build started as soon as possible. Here is a relevant [H] thread.

What does that have to do with quad channel memory? mATX mobo=quad channel possibility.
 
I was assuming she meant if it became unstable after a while or something, like years?.
Then you RMA the RAM as it's clearly failing.

Significant to me may be not be significant to you or vice versa. I would say significant is $15-20, maybe $10..
To me, $5 to $10 is significant. In any case, the RAM I recommended to you earlier is $150. The RAM you're looking at costs $165 and $180 respectively. That's a difference of $15 and $30 respectively. So that's significant by your own admitted standards.
Sorry, I have been thinking of just doing mATX instead now. Better to go big first and not have to worry or kick yourself later for choosing less upfront. In fact, because I will be gaming at 1440p, I have seen game benchmarks (not synthetic) and the FPS for a lot of AAA titles are sub 60fps at that res on ultra. I would want at least 60 fps on ultra 1440p. So SLI 970 would fit the bill for that. That doesnt mean I will get dual 970's immediately, Ill probably get just one first so I can get the build started as soon as possible. Here is a relevant [H] thread.

What does that have to do with quad channel memory? mATX mobo=quad channel possibility.

I was talking about your previously planned mITX setup, not mATX. Read my post again.

In addition, to get quad-channel on mATX, you have to go with the more expensive X99 platform.
 
You got me seeing the light again, lol. Staying with 1600 ram.

Sorry, the last day or two is when I began to think about mATX instead of ITX. I know you were talking about the ITX build, didnt update that I was thinking of mATX.
Aw crap, forgot Z97 only does dual channel, I thought it was able to do quad because I saw four ram slots, derp. Well at least it supports SLI (x16/ x8 x8), I dont need quad channel anyways, I was just thinking it would be nice to have it as an option on my board.
Here is the mATX build. Based on the ITX, but I changed a few things for now.
 
You got me seeing the light again, lol. Staying with 1600 ram.

Sorry, the last day or two is when I began to think about mATX instead of ITX. I know you were talking about the ITX build, didnt update that I was thinking of mATX.
Aw crap, forgot Z97 only does dual channel, I thought it was able to do quad because I saw four ram slots, derp. Well at least it supports SLI (x16/ x8 x8), I dont need quad channel anyways, I was just thinking it would be nice to have it as an option on my board.
Here is the mATX build. Based on the ITX, but I changed a few things for now.
That Corsair PSU isn't that good:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/11/13/corsair_rm750_750w_power_supply_review/

That particular G.Skill RAM is still very overpriced compared to the Crucial RAM I recommended earlier. Or two of this Kingston RAM set (total $140) if you're buying today:
$70 - Kingston HyperX FURY HX316C10F/8 8GB DDR3 1600 RAM
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
That Corsair PSU isn't that good:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/11/13/corsair_rm750_750w_power_supply_review/

That particular G.Skill RAM is still very overpriced compared to the Crucial RAM I recommended earlier. Or two of this Kingston RAM set (total $140) if you're buying today:
$70 - Kingston HyperX FURY HX316C10F/8 8GB DDR3 1600 RAM

I know it isn't the best, but it definitely is not the worst either. I feel it is worth it and I don't have any uncertainty or lack of trust in it. I chose it because the fan doesn't turn on until 40% load, and with a single 970 and my specs, it should never really spin unless I am gaming or under load. One of the main things of this build is silence, so the no rpm fan is really a big selling point. They fixed an issue where the psu would shut off right before the fan would start spinning. It was either this or the very expensive AXi series to have the no rpm fan feature and fully modular. I also want fully modular because I'm going to buy their sleeved cables (8 pin cpu, 24 pin atx, pci-e cables, molex, sata power= ~$50 total). May seem stupid, but I want to take advantage of the big side window in the case and the dual chamber design to make it look clean and nice... Which includes sleeved cables. I know there were a couple smaller reasons, but I forget and theyre not that big of a deal anyways.

Jesus, that is cheap. Again, stupid and probably shallow, but looks count for me, so I want red ram. At the time I was looking, it was either the tridents or Ripjaws X red. I do also like A-Data's design, but I have yet to see a red set from them. That ram you linked is so cheap, and as long as it comes in red (I see it is an option, but $10 more), I guess I can settle since it is almost half the price. It's so cheap I want to buy it now, but I need to look into it all first and see about it. I also have a voice in the back of my head telling me to wait, because my plans may change or something may happen or come up having me regret buying it now instead of waiting for when I am ready to buy all the parts... But damn, that's a good price, I'm hoping it will stay that cheap.

Edit: Crap, that was the price for 8gb, didn't notice, derp. The 16gb is still a lot cheaper than the Tridents though... Hmm
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Get the Crucial Ballistix 1600 1.35V and a Cooler Master V-series or Seasonic X or Corsair AX PSU (whichever is cheapest at the time of purchase), and you are set. Check for combo deals on anything and everything you want, as well. :)
 
Seasonic X internals. Whichever one of those is cheaper when you checkout.
 
Why a Corsair AX? I know they are better, but are they worth the extra $50+?

Compared to the crappy RM series, yes the AX is worth it over the RM. Considering that you just mentioned earlier planning on spending $50 on cosmetic upgrades, it seems rather odd to say the least that you're questioning $50 for a significant upgrade in quality.

Though I would recommend the Seasonic X or G series myself. Just as quiet as the Corsair RM but not crap.

Also if your silence goal was actually serious, your choice of case and liquid AIO are poor choices for that goal.
 
Another question: what is your draw to the wider Air 240 over the 350D?
 
Another question: what is your draw to the wider Air 240 over the 350D?
I personally prefer wide and short over tall for some reason, just my opinion. I also like the dual chamber and windowed design.
Compared to the crappy RM series, yes the AX is worth it over the RM. Considering that you just mentioned earlier planning on spending $50 on cosmetic upgrades, it seems rather odd to say the least that you're questioning $50 for a significant upgrade in quality.

Though I would recommend the Seasonic X or G series myself. Just as quiet as the Corsair RM but not crap.

Also if your silence goal was actually serious, your choice of case and liquid AIO are poor choices for that goal.

I was questioning it because I was wondering if it would be a significant difference in quality or just marginal. If there really is a significant difference, then I will go for it.
These are my choices, except for the AXi and RM, so that leaves the HXi and AX, what's the difference between those?

I'll be using all Noctua fans, the stock h100i fans are horribly loud. I know the case is not the best for my goal of silence, but I just am choosing it with my heart this time.
 
If the RAM I bought doesn't perform stable at the speed it's supposedly rated at, I'm sending that shit back. Get what you pay for. (6 years later, when the system has been relegated to a child's pc? i hate buying obsolete ram)

Do you have any information backing this up outside of personal experience?(i followed your link and 1 second in short term tasks and minutes in longer tasks is perceivable to me. and personal experience, its not a meaningful difference imo, but perceivable)

APUs only support dual-channel.
yep still noticeable in dual channel, useless in quad channel, but for same price why not?

Not right if it costs a significant amount of money.

You're planning a mITX setup. You're not going to see quad-channel at all.

if they are the same price, i would buy 1866. if 1866 costs more, 1600.

my priorities: more ram, more channels, mhz up to about 1600, spend the money elsewhere.
 
Decided to go with the AX860, and specifically not the "i" version. I feel confident about the AX860, and from the countless posts ive read, reviews and articles, it is apparent that the i version is worse and mostly a waste of money to me. I dont care for its Corsair Link integration, it is made by a worse OEM instead of Seasonic, there are noise and clicking issues with the i's fan. I decided to not go with Seasonic X series because all the sleeved cables I find for them are way too expensive, with Corsair I can get what I need from them for less than $50. Too bad Corsair's cables are not compatible with Seasonic's connections.
 
(6 years later, when the system has been relegated to a child's pc? i hate buying obsolete ram)
Who said anything about buying? Yes I will RMA RAM even for old systems. In fact, just two months ago I RMA'd a set of Patriot DDR RAM and a set of Kingston DDR2 RAM.
Do you have any information backing this up outside of personal experience?(i followed your link and 1 second in short term tasks and minutes in longer tasks is perceivable to me. and personal experience, its not a meaningful difference imo, but perceivable)
That's also my point as well: It's not a meaningful difference to justify higher costs.
yep still noticeable in dual channel, useless in quad channel, but for same price why not?
Huh?

if they are the same price, i would buy 1866. if 1866 costs more, 1600.
I concur.
my priorities: more ram, more channels, mhz up to about 1600, spend the money elsewhere.
My priorities: price, amount of RAM, 1600Mhz, and anything else is extra.

I'll be using all Noctua fans, the stock h100i fans are horribly loud. I know the case is not the best for my goal of silence, but I just am choosing it with my heart this time.
I wasn't even talking about the stock H100i fans: I was talking about the fact that it's a liquid AIO: They're rather noisy. So even if you got those Noctua fans, you'll still hear the pump working. That's why air-cooling HSF or full-on water-cooling setups are still recommended for those who actually want to get as close to a quiet/silent system as possible. So

Your heart isn't exactly a solid reason to go with a part. That can easily be used to justify purchasing stupid parts.

Decided to go with the AX860, and specifically not the "i" version. I feel confident about the AX860, and from the countless posts ive read, reviews and articles, it is apparent that the i version is worse and mostly a waste of money to me. I dont care for its Corsair Link integration, it is made by a worse OEM instead of Seasonic, there are noise and clicking issues with the i's fan. I decided to not go with Seasonic X series because all the sleeved cables I find for them are way too expensive, with Corsair I can get what I need from them for less than $50. Too bad Corsair's cables are not compatible with Seasonic's connections.
Three things:
1) I always forget this when I'm talking with you but there's really no point in all of this hardware specific discussion since you're NOT EVEN BUYING ANYTIME SOON. So any hardware choices and recommendations made can still change which means any discussion or time spent researching those choices and recommendations are wasted. This is basically trying to research for a new car in 2014 that you're not buying until 2020. What's the point?

2) That PSU is still massive overkill for your needs. A solid 750W or even 650W PSU would be enough. If you're going single GPU, a good 550W PSU would be enough.

3) Note that Noctuas, if you still go for them, are ruining the red and black aesthetic you're aiming for. If looks actually count for you, then you want to make sure that colors of all the parts sync well with one another.
 
I wasn't even talking about the stock H100i fans: I was talking about the fact that it's a liquid AIO: They're rather noisy. So even if you got those Noctua fans, you'll still hear the pump working. That's why air-cooling HSF or full-on water-cooling setups are still recommended for those who actually want to get as close to a quiet/silent system as possible.
Would the pump be annoyingly loud? I should rephrase silent (as in, no sound) to quiet. I can put up with an idle low hum or a very slight mechanical noise from the pump. Whereas the fans are very noticeable at idle and sound like jets while running high RPM, based on the sound test ive heard at various sound levels.

Three things:
1) I always forget this when I'm talking with you but there's really no point in all of this hardware specific discussion since you're NOT EVEN BUYING ANYTIME SOON. So any hardware choices and recommendations made can still change which means any discussion or time spent researching those choices and recommendations are wasted. This is basically trying to research for a new car in 2014 that you're not buying until 2020. What's the point?

2) That PSU is still massive overkill for your needs. A solid 750W or even 650W PSU would be enough. If you're going single GPU, a good 550W PSU would be enough.

3) Note that Noctuas, if you still go for them, are ruining the red and black aesthetic you're aiming for. If looks actually count for you, then you want to make sure that colors of all the parts sync well with one another.

A couple or few months is not extremely far out into the future, of course things will change, but will everything need to be updated? I doubt it, but thing will change is for sure. What if I did not take the time to pick my case, cooler, psu, peripherals, HDD, etc. today and I have to spend time later on to pick those things that will likely not change much or end up picking the same stuff anyways? I would rather pick those things early on and not have to worry about it in the future, but things like CPU's, mobos, GPU's are likely to change a lot and new, better products can quickly take their place having us pick new ones. I dont think there can ever be too much research and preparation. You learn every day, like if I were to start researching when I had the money a few months from now, I would be rushing to find what I need/want and would end up with average parts, whereas I am researching early, I am learning what to look for, what to avoid, what else to look into for parts, definitions, processes, etc. I have probably learned more about these components in detail than I have in the last year combined. I could make a list of what I have learned this week about memory, fans, psu's, GPT, MBR, SSD's, even keyboards. I have a lot of time on my hands :p

Ive read tons of threads on multiple forums of people asking what PSU they need for their SLI 970's, or 980's or older cards. People generally agree that 750 is the bare minimum they should go for dual 970s, but 850 would be best, and 650 might scrape you by under load. Better to go overkill than underkill! Also, it is only like $10 to go from the 760 to the 860. I also plan to OC my cpu and gpu's a bit at least. With Corsair's No Fan feature, a higher wattage psu will have the fan turning on less because it only starts when it is at 40% load.

You are completely right there, but it is not a deal breaker for me. For how quiet they are and how well they perform (especially their static pressure for rads), I can happily accept their brown colors. In fact, if you look here, you can see that the fans are just out of sight, if not barely in sight, because of the case's window being just the right size.
Even if I or others can see them, we can recognize Noctua's trademark colors and maybe it wont be so bad knowing they are quality fans, lol (pathetic subjective excuse, but it is still one, I suppose).
 
Would the pump be annoyingly loud? I should rephrase silent (as in, no sound) to quiet. I can put up with an idle low hum or a very slight mechanical noise from the pump. Whereas the fans are very noticeable at idle and sound like jets while running high RPM, based on the sound test ive heard at various sound levels.
Depends on the case as well. But judging from my experience with the Corsair H80, it's definitely noticeable in a case like a Corsair 230T. Not screaming loud but you can't mistake it for anything else. In a quieter case like the Corsair 550D, it's a low hum. Again, also from experience.

A couple or few months is not extremely far out into the future, of course things will change, but will everything need to be updated? I doubt it, but thing will change is for sure. What if I did not take the time to pick my case, cooler, psu, peripherals, HDD, etc. today and I have to spend time later on to pick those things that will likely not change much or end up picking the same stuff anyways? I would rather pick those things early on and not have to worry about it in the future, but things like CPU's, mobos, GPU's are likely to change a lot and new, better products can quickly take their place having us pick new ones. I dont think there can ever be too much research and preparation. You learn every day, like if I were to start researching when I had the money a few months from now, I would be rushing to find what I need/want and would end up with average parts, whereas I am researching early, I am learning what to look for, what to avoid, what else to look into for parts, definitions, processes, etc. I have probably learned more about these components in detail than I have in the last year combined. I could make a list of what I have learned this week about memory, fans, psu's, GPT, MBR, SSD's, even keyboards. I have a lot of time on my hands :p
Yes everything may need to be updated due to your particular circumstances: You're not even sure if the budget you've set is guaranteed. In addition, you haven't narrowed down the exact time frame since you also said earlier that you wanted to wait for Windows 10. So by the time you buy, yes there is a good chance that you'll need to swap most of those parts. New articles may come out showing a different light on certain parts: Several months ago, I had nothing but Seagate hard drives in my build lists. Now I'm mixing in Western Digital, HGST, and occasionally a Toshiba drive in there in light of those series of BackBlaze posts about hard drive reliability.

Ultimately, my main problem is that you're choosing parts so early. Research is fine when learning about the basics. But actually choosing parts based on research so far in advance is a waste of time due to the volatility of the computer hardware market. Example: How you've had to change the PSU multiple times already. Deals and sales changes everything. I've literally had to change an entire build list three days after I posted it online due to rapid changes in hardware pricing that week. THREE DAYS. An extreme example yes but one that still illustrates that volatility.

Even after all your "research", I still have had to come in and correct you on multiple points for various different builds now.

Ive read tons of threads on multiple forums of people asking what PSU they need for their SLI 970's, or 980's or older cards. People generally agree that 750 is the bare minimum they should go for dual 970s, but 850 would be best, and 650 might scrape you by under load. Better to go overkill than underkill! Also, it is only like $10 to go from the 760 to the 860. I also plan to OC my cpu and gpu's a bit at least. With Corsair's No Fan feature, a higher wattage psu will have the fan turning on less because it only starts when it is at 40% load.
Then the posters in those threads were badly mis-informed or were talking about setups that didn't apply to you. Check out HardOCP's power consumptions for the GTX 970 SLI with a massively overclocked Core i7 3770K:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...970_sli_4k_nv_surround_review/10#.VHQgsIvF_t8

A whopping 451W at max load. That 850W PSU would only be justified with two heavily overclocked GTX 980 SLI:
http://www.hardocp.com/article/2014...980_sli_overclocked_gpu_review/6#.VHQgq4vF_t8

Also note that it's a $10 difference NOW. There wasn't a $10 difference a month ago.

You are completely right there, but it is not a deal breaker for me. For how quiet they are and how well they perform (especially their static pressure for rads), I can happily accept their brown colors. In fact, if you look here, you can see that the fans are just out of sight, if not barely in sight, because of the case's window being just the right size.
Even if I or others can see them, we can recognize Noctua's trademark colors and maybe it wont be so bad knowing they are quality fans, lol (pathetic subjective excuse, but it is still one, I suppose).
Then that leads me to my next point: If you're willing deal with the Noctua's colors, then why not the colors of the cheaper RAM out there? Rather inconsistent there.
 
Back
Top