DDR3 ram performance

Synesthesia

Synesthesia

New Member
There have probably been threads like this before...so if you don't feel like answering, just posting a link would be fine.

DDR3 1600 ram *should* be 2x faster than DDR2 800 ram, yet from what I have heard it is not. I am considering going DDR3 on a new mobo (needed anyways). I was looking at this: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820145200

What percentage increase in performance should I expect with this ram over my OcZ reaper ram 800mhz? I know that many people think that DDR3 is a "failed ram type"...though it seems that all of these performance issues seem to be caused by lack of understanding as to how DDR3 functions and how it needs to be set up.

I know I can get a 45nm wofldale quad for around this price.....would that be a better improvement? I currently have a 2.6GHz C2D conroe. I could also just buy a GTX 260......though I also want to see a performance increase in non-game related programs like photoshop and winrar.

Anyways, either the replaced ram or cpu will not go to waste, I will use it to build a comp for a friend.
 
I would wait personally.

Wait till January...AMD will bring out its 45nm quad by then Intel will drop the price on its 45nm Quads/DC and then you should see a better DDR3 support. I was told the X58 chipset would increase the DDR3 ability too.

From what I am told atm nothing really uses the DDR3 ram yet.
 
Yeah......I was considering getting the X58, but I heard that gaming performance under that chip will only be slightly better than under the C2D. And, apparently the cheapest mobo will be a burning $300. That, + the cheapest cpu, + DDR3 ram is around $800. I can personally run my programs just barely fast enough, but its the gaming that worries me. I'm an fps freak and kinda need to bring out the best in my games, hence the extreme tuning of Crysis and other games (natively I can't run it maxed out) which has allowed me to run it 100% under my marginally high performance computer.
 
Well the reason why its not much better is its a new chip set they haven't had time to let the drivers mature reason why it might be wise to wait 2-3 months.

Both for price and to allow the drivers to mature...or perhaps wait for better chip sets.

Also quads don't really do the job right now....16 games currently have 2.5 threads so that means only 1 game currently actually uses more then 2 1/2 cores.

Since you OC you might want to get a E8400 which is 45nm and OC to 4ghz if you have water cooling then you can get 4ghz-5ghz. But its not worth it since you have a 3.6ghz C2D

Price vs Performance your PC is good enough to last 2-3 months.
 
Last edited:
The reason why I'm a little stressed about this now is that my computer is down. The mobo was somehow destroyed during shipping (I moved). I have gone 2 months so far without my baby.....it hurts. I'm using my C2D 2 ghz lap top right now, with absolutely no gaming abilities. I have so many options! I could take the easiest route a just get a standard $150 mobo....but, there is a large temptation to upgrade while I'm at it. I could wait a few months (and suffer tremendously) and see what comes of the i7.....I could upgrade the ram type, processor, video card.........too many options.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top