Which is better: Kingston or Samsung or G.Skill?


Recommended Posts

Thinkin of upgradin soon, what I have now is a joke, I need to know which is better performance wise?

Currently I'm lookin at this F2-6400CL5S-4GBPQ from G.Skill

http://www.gskill.com/products.php?index=209

Thanks in advance for any help.

Look for memory compatibility charts for your motherboard. Both Kingston and G.Skill usually have the best compatibility (all slots populated) but then Kingston has cheap but equally reliable ValueRAM series for budget computers. I haven't seen many Samsung modules for desktops, can't say anything about them.

Besides, you're looking at DDR2. What exactly are you "upgrayedd"-ing?

Both Kingston and G.Skill make great RAM. I personally have the Ripjaw series from G.Skill and it's really really nice. Kingston is great too, if not even more reputable than G.Skill.

I also wasn't aware that Samsung made memory, so I don't have any comment on them.

Thanks Astra, I noticed they are reputable just makin sure.

Almost everyone around here have one of those "GUYS" products in their rig.

OK, I'm going with F2-6400CL5D-4GBPQ

Thank you all guys.

I don't think Samsung sells retail memory modules, I think they are just the manufacturer.

They have entered the market with their own 30nm superslim and very low voltage sticks very recently.

My current setup is (as my friend said it) from the stoneage.

1GB

Where I can find those charts?

Sites of most notable motherboard manufacturers usually have them. Try googling your motherboard's model.

However, I must say that it's not practical to stuff huge amounts of RAM in your "stone age" system - other components will starve it and it will just consume power sitting half-empty. Performance-wise, nothing short of overclocking (and even then negligibly for most loads) will increase performance. And performance between brands of memory doesn't differ at all. Reliability does.

Lastly, I figure you might be running 32-bit system, too, so anything over 4 GB will not be available to you whatsoever - that's a physical limit. Motherboard might not even support such amounts (or large-capacity sticks in some weird cases).

Your best bet would probably be throwing in two random 1 GB sticks or one 1 GB stick (depending on whether you have 2 x 512 MB or 1 x 1 GB configuration currently) to have 2 GB in total. That would make it "bronze age".

However, I must say that it's not practical to stuff huge amounts of RAM in your "stone age" system - other components will starve it and it will just consume power sitting half-empty.

How do you know without first asking his usage habits? 1GB is pretty low these days, I can see that being a huge bottleneck if OP tends to have a lot of programs open at once.

So having said that, what exactly do you do on your computer OP? Knowing your hardware specs would also help.

PS: My computer uses DDR2 memory as well, and while it's certainly not the newest hardware around, it's good enough to power through all the games I've tried so far. Core 2 Duo 2.66GHz, with 4GB of RAM and an Nvidia Geforce 8600 GT. A computer doesn't need to be running hardware from the last year to be a workhorse.

the only time I've seen Samsung RAM was inside my MacBook Pro, and quite honestly I laughed my ass off when I saw it when I went to switch it out with the RAM I bought on Newegg

I've had good experiences with both Kingston and Gskill RAM, you can't really go wrong with either

They have entered the market with their own 30nm superslim and very low voltage sticks very recently.

If by very recently you mean like the past 10 years or so, then yes you are correct.

the only time I've seen Samsung RAM was inside my MacBook Pro, and quite honestly I laughed my ass off when I saw it when I went to switch it out with the RAM I bought on Newegg

Lol why? The past 2 laptops I've owned (8gb and 4gb respectively) have both come with Samsung RAM. Haven't had a single problem with any of them, and I generally never shut down (or even sleep / hibernate) my laptop.

the only time I've seen Samsung RAM was inside my MacBook Pro, and quite honestly I laughed my ass off when I saw it when I went to switch it out with the RAM I bought on Newegg

Samsung makes a huge portion of the RAM used in consumer machines. Most companies don't actually make their own RAM. They just buy the chips from companies like Samsung, finish the manufacturing process, and sell it under their brand.

Kingston is cheap and reliable but I don't think it is for performance. GSkill is cheap (although not as cheap as kingston) reliable and is good for performance. I have no experience with Samsung. If performance is what you are looking for then go with GSKill. It is the cheapest performance memory you can buy and it is reliable. The only thing that you have to look out for when buying GSKill is if the memory conforms to specifications. They have lots of memory so some does and some does not. The memory that does not follow specifications will only work on some motherboards. The problem with that memory is that you usually have to set the memory timing in the BIOS manually which means you have to know what you are doing. Then sometimes it needs a higher voltage than the specification calls for. This is not a problem if the motherboard allows you to set these settings. The reason the memory that does not follow the specifications like that is so that you can overclock or run it at higher speeds.

They have entered the market with their own 30nm superslim and very low voltage sticks very recently.

Sites of most notable motherboard manufacturers usually have them. Try googling your motherboard's model.

However, I must say that it's not practical to stuff huge amounts of RAM in your "stone age" system - other components will starve it and it will just consume power sitting half-empty. Performance-wise, nothing short of overclocking (and even then negligibly for most loads) will increase performance. And performance between brands of memory doesn't differ at all. Reliability does.

Lastly, I figure you might be running 32-bit system, too, so anything over 4 GB will not be available to you whatsoever - that's a physical limit. Motherboard might not even support such amounts (or large-capacity sticks in some weird cases).

Your best bet would probably be throwing in two random 1 GB sticks or one 1 GB stick (depending on whether you have 2 x 512 MB or 1 x 1 GB configuration currently) to have 2 GB in total. That would make it "bronze age".

thanks bro, my system is stone age but my MoBo is ASRock N73V-S

That's what I will be upgradin to:

Thermaltake Element V [VL200N1W2Z]

Core 2 Quad Q9450 (12M Cache, 2.66 GHz, 1333 MHz FSB) ark.intel

G.Skill DDR2 800MHz (F2-6400CL5D-4GBPQ)

Western Digital Caviar Green 1TB IntelliPower 64MB SATA II WD10EARS

Old specs: [No LOLin' or laughtin')

Not so much case (I dont think it has a name)

CPU: Celeron 1.8GHz

1GB Ram (Don't know manfuctuer)

80 GB HDD (Don't know manfuctuer)

Well the system you listed is much better than a Celeron. However, it may end up being more expensive in the long run, as your upgrade options are very limited. Buying a motherboard that uses DDR2 memory as indicated by someone else is a very bad idea. Also, some legacy hardware may be expensive to begin with. You're better off saving your money and building it right.

Ok then.

WD Caviar Blue. It's all colors: green - eco, blue - mainstream, black - enthusiast. Blue one spins at 7200 RPM, so no stupid slowdowns occur. Want to save power? Set a power profile to turn off hard disk when not in use for a certain prolonged time. Don't know about now when parts are in short supply, but thus far WD hasn't put very much people down.

Heh, well, hard disk probably is the one that will put the biggest dent in your budget. Damn those Thai floods :/

  • Like 2

Definitely go with a Caviar Blue over a Green. Those green models are terrible and a lot of people have countless issues with them.

I'm willing to bet you could piece together an i3 setup with DDR3 for pretty darn cheap.

Also, I'm assuming you are buying the Q9450 used for somewhere, correct? If not, it's a pretty expensive CPU, and you could definitely get more modern components much cheaper.

  • Like 2
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Spotify really have turned in to a butthole of a company. Assuming this isn't a bug then this is a low act for Premium users. Honestly, YT Premium which includes YT Music is a genuine alternative. In any event, the internet enshitification continues unabated...next up, the banning of VPN's.
    • This is why science is the only path to truth. It isn't rigid in its beliefs, rather it changes its views based on scientific discoveries.
    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      164
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      92
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      76
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!