Adding additional 8GB ram that's slower, diff. timings than current ram - Bad idea?

By Colin.B
in Hardware Hangout

 Share

Recommended Posts

Veteran

Colin.B

Posted
Posted

I currently have 8GB of G.Skill Sniper DDR3 1866 ram. I was given an 8GB stick of Kingston DDR3 1600 ram with slower timings. I mostly game with some photo editing on the side so I really don't even need 16GB of ram. Would there be any benefit of adding the additional 8 or would the lower speeds/timing negate the benefits of the added 8 for what I use my PC for?

Usually all my memory is the same speed so I've never actually had to bother with this. Thanks for any input!

Veteran

Colin.B

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ehh I'm probably just going to set it aside for a frankenbuild I'm putting together for my wife. She's using my old Q6600 with a GTX 460 and 4GB ram right now so I'm sure it will work better for her with new hardware than it will me.

Grand Master

offroadaaron

Posted
Posted (edited)

I personally think more RAM over speed. I'd chuck it in, I don't think you'll notice a difference either way. You'll be able keep more in memory rather than paging it and a HDD is slower that RAM.

It all depends on much more detail than what you've given us.

Grand Master

binaryzero

Posted
Posted (edited)
  On 03/09/2015 at 07:02, offroadaaron said:

 

Why? Because Windows doesn't like different brands of RAM?

Well I guess different brands, I was more referring to the different speeds, and maybe timings. Either way I've had mixed experiences when I've mixed and matched RAM sticks. 

May the force be with you.

Grand Master

DevTech

Posted
Posted

The speed of RAM has very little effect on system performance. But more RAM almost always helps since if your usual software can't take advantage of it, then Windows will use it to cache disk access.

It the RAM works together (and that is not always the case) then try it. If they work, the RAM will run at the slower speed which just doesn't matter. The whole matched pair thing is for tight manual timings you set in the BIOS for overclocking.

Over the course of a day you should feel your computer being a bit more responsive.

Grand Master

Jim K Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted

I'd just throw it in.  The worse that could happen is you'll blue screen...which shouldn't happen as long as the added RAM isn't defective.  The 1866 RAM will just slow down to 1600 which you wouldn't notice.  

Veteran

Colin.B

Posted
  • Author
Posted
  On 03/09/2015 at 07:59, n_K said:

Q6600 is DDR2 not DDR3 afaik.

  On 03/09/2015 at 07:39, PsYcHoKiLLa said:

Doesn't Q6600 only support 800MHz memory?

 

Right. I was saying if I don't put it in this PC, I'll put it in my wife's PC I'm building her to replace her aging Q6600.

  On 03/09/2015 at 10:45, DevTech said:

The speed of RAM has very little effect on system performance. But more RAM almost always helps since if your usual software can't take advantage of it, then Windows will use it to cache disk access.

It the RAM works together (and that is not always the case) then try it. If they work, the RAM will run at the slower speed which just doesn't matter. The whole matched pair thing is for tight manual timings you set in the BIOS for overclocking.

Over the course of a day you should feel your computer being a bit more responsive.

Yeah...I forgot I have an OC in my Bios ha. I might want to take that into consideration!

Grand Master

Roger H. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

More RAM is ALWAYS better then fast RAM. PERIOD. 

I will take 16GB of 800mhz vs 8GB of 1600mhz any day of the year even if my usage only required 6GB of RAM

  • +Warwagon, gameboy1977 and DevTech
  • Like 3
Grand Master

DevTech

Posted
Posted
  On 03/09/2015 at 17:38, DigitalManifestations said:

 

 

Yeah...I forgot I have an OC in my Bios ha. I might want to take that into consideration!

I also forgot something obvious. With just a single stick you are currently in single channel mode. Adding a second will put it into dual mode which will actually speed the RAM access much more than the speed issue.

If you had previously set the individual RAM timings in the BIOS such as CAS etc, consider changinf to AUTO to let the BIOS relax them. If you have any bluescreens, there will also often be BIOS settings that favor more stable RAM access.

If you have a locked CPU muliplier (i.e. not using a "K" series i5 or i7) then sometimes faster RAM speeds result in FSB overclocking when the RAM to FSB is set to 1:1 ratio. Just dump the 1:1 setting and let the RAM lock in at 1600.

 

 

Veteran

Colin.B

Posted
  • Author
Posted
  On 03/09/2015 at 18:04, DevTech said:

 

I also forgot something obvious. With just a single stick you are currently in single channel mode. Adding a second will put it into dual mode which will actually speed the RAM access much more than the speed issue.

If you had previously set the individual RAM timings in the BIOS such as CAS etc, consider changinf to AUTO to let the BIOS relax them. If you have any bluescreens, there will also often be BIOS settings that favor more stable RAM access.

If you have a locked CPU muliplier (i.e. not using a "K" series i5 or i7) then sometimes faster RAM speeds result in FSB overclocking when the RAM to FSB is set to 1:1 ratio. Just dump the 1:1 setting and let the RAM lock in at 1600.

 

 

Right now I currently have a dual channel setup and the new stick is a single 8GB stick. I have an unlocked multiplier currently. I'm using a 3570K. I guess that's relevant information I could have put in my initial post huh?

Grand Master

Astra.Xtreme

Posted
Posted

There are lots of tests out there that prove that the faster RAM is a waste of money.  RAM is the basically the fastest component in your PC, so clocking it with even more overhead doesn't gain you much of anything.

http://techbuyersguru.com/does-ram-speed-matter-ddr3-1600-vs-1866-2133-and-2400-games

Experienced

br0adband

Posted
Posted

Honestly, you are not going to notice any difference - only a memory benchmark testing latency is really going to show any differences. The actual memory throughput because of the difference in timings would be like, a few hundred megs per second but when you're talking about 16GB/s or higher a few hundred megs - as noted - will not be very noticeable in most any respect.

 

Grand Master

Mindovermaster Global Moderator

Posted
  • Global Moderator
Posted
  On 03/09/2015 at 20:31, Astra.Xtreme said:

There are lots of tests out there that prove that the faster RAM is a waste of money.  RAM is the basically the fastest component in your PC, so clocking it with even more overhead doesn't gain you much of anything.

http://techbuyersguru.com/does-ram-speed-matter-ddr3-1600-vs-1866-2133-and-2400-games

The reason I'm perfectly fine with my 1333 DDR3 sticks

  • Astra.Xtreme
  • Like 1
Grand Master

offroadaaron

Posted
Posted
  On 03/09/2015 at 08:55, Jared- said:

Well I guess different brands, I was more referring to the different speeds, and maybe timings. Either way I've had mixed experiences when I've mixed and matched RAM sticks. 

May the force be with you.

It's just used the lowest setting across the board. It won't use mismatched timings and speed.

Grand Master

Max Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted (edited)

Install the RAM. The PC will clock it down to 1600Mhz and the latency of the modules will most probably decrease. You'll get the added benefit of dual channel as well if you use 1x8GB currently. Its a win-win here. If you have 2x4GB in two of the slots, move the 2x4GB into one channel, (usually marked by same coloured slots) and add the 8GB in the second for a dual channel setup.

Grand Master

DevTech

Posted
Posted
  On 04/09/2015 at 03:35, Max said:

Install the RAM. The PC will clock it down to 1600Mhz and the latency of the modules will most probably decrease. You'll get the added benefit of dual channel as well if you use 1x8GB currently. Its a win-win here. If you have 2x4GB in two of the slots, move the 2x4GB into one channel, (usually marked by same coloured slots) and add the 8GB in the second for a dual channel setup.

He has 2x4g so you have described exactly the procedure to use.

FWIW, if the BIOS isn't stupid, the latency won't improve because it will use the timings from the slower 1600 DIMM.

 

  • 1 month later...
Grand Master

PGHammer

Posted
Posted
  On 03/09/2015 at 07:59, n_K said:

Q6600 is DDR2 not DDR3 afaik.

Chipset issue - NOT CPU issue.

The most obvious example is the different iterations of the corporate-stable stumblebum that is Intel's G41 - while it doesn't support overclocking, there ARE versions that support DDR3 - even in mATX.

However, it costs no less (and is therefore less cost-effective) compared to LGA1150/Z97, and especially with G3258 as your CPU of choice.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.