(15/08/2010 12:30 PM)S7* Wrote:  Memory: G.Skilll Ripjaws F3-16000CL9D-4GBRH (2Gx2) - £105

Lol, that exact same RAM costs $125AUD (= £71) here.  EDIT: Not just that, everything seems more expensive.  How can you have worse prices than an island in the middle of the pacific ocean...?

Also, this is somewhat cheaper...
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Kingston-KHX1600...809&sr=8-8

(This post was last modified: 15/08/2010 04:41 PM by Assassinator.)

I chose G.Skill because they are favored by overclockers and performance enthusiasts above others quite significantly - plus I chose the G.Skill pair after looking at that pair you linked to. The RAM I chose has been praised for it's value for money so it seems worth it.

I'm happy with the case, it's nice, simple and has a window which I fancied, that reminds me I need to find a PSU ~_~

(15/08/2010 04:46 PM)S7* Wrote:  I chose G.Skill because they are favored by overclockers and performance enthusiasts above others quite significantly - plus I chose the G.Skill pair after looking at that pair you linked to. The RAM I chose has been praised for it's value for money so it seems worth it.

Overclocking the RAM isn't really worth it IIRC.  You can't overclock it much, shortens the lifespan, and gives like almost no performance gain.

Here's a review on RAM performance.  --» http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-...,1807.html

review conclusion Wrote:The results must look disappointing for the memory vendors, as the largest performance differences wee found amount to 7-8% with DivX and WinRAR, while almost all other benchmarks and applications perform alike: a 1-3% performance delta cannot be noticed at all. Some games showed several per cent performance difference between low-latency high-speed memory and conventional high-latency average speed DIMMs. The synthetic benchmarks on the memory revealed even more differences, but these clearly aren’t very relevant in everyday life.

The range of RAM they tested goes all the way from DDR2-667 to DDR3-1333.  And if you can only get a 7-8% performance difference at best from such a large difference in clock speed (1333 is double 667), I doubt your RAM overclocking will show any significant effect at all (really not worth the possibility of burning out your RAM in 6 months time).  So imo, RAM speeds is overrated as hell.  (But then again, I've actually heard someone say it's good to overclock the PCI-E and you get more performance from your GPU   x10).



And before you mention it... I know clock speed isn't everything for RAM, and latency is very important too, but clock speed is the only thing you can really change by overclocking.  You can't "overclock" your 6-6-6-15 timing to 4-4-4-12, no way, that comes with the extra money spent on high end products.

(This post was last modified: 15/08/2010 05:45 PM by Assassinator.)

I never intended to overclock the memory, only have good memory that won't hinder a decent CPU overclock. ^^

(15/08/2010 06:09 PM)S7* Wrote:  I never intended to overclock the memory, only have good memory that won't hinder a decent CPU overclock. ^^

Lol, how is your RAM going to hinder your CPU overclock?  That's like saying, my HDD is going to hinder my CPU overclock....

You realize you can down the memory multiplier when you up your base clock, to keep the memory clock speed around it's stock value (+- some small amount), no matter how much you overclock your CPU, right?  So the memory should never be restricting the overclock.

As for the RAM burning out and dying, that usually doesn't happen if you don't overclock it.

Trouble brews when I'm trying to recall stuff from when I read CustomPC years ago I guess ^^'

I will follow this guide at Overclockers.com when the time comes.

At the end of the month the parts from Amazon.co.uk is the stuff I'll go for first with the exception of the monitor. I wonder if the Titan Fenrir will come with a decent thermal paste.. I guess I could go safe and get Arctic Silver 5 but I doubt Titan would jeopardise their own product..

I'm going for the Kingston RAM over the G.Skill now I've read more reviews and yeah, you're right, the premium isn't worth paying and the Kingstons perform well.
(Thinking about it afterwards the thought of installing RAM that cost more than the motherboard itself seemed weird ^^')

(15/08/2010 04:46 PM)S7* Wrote:  I'm happy with the case, it's nice, simple and has a window which I fancied, that reminds me I need to find a PSU ~_~

http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp

I got like 485W, taking a few guesses (like the overclock).  You should do it yourself ofcourse, because you know exactly what's going into your machine.

Either way, you want to buy something a bit higher than what you got from that, to be safe.  Maybe like 550-600W?

(16/08/2010 06:37 AM)Assassinator Wrote:  

(15/08/2010 04:46 PM)S7* Wrote:  I'm happy with the case, it's nice, simple and has a window which I fancied, that reminds me I need to find a PSU ~_~

http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp

I got like 485W, taking a few guesses (like the overclock).  You should do it yourself ofcourse, because you know exactly what's going into your machine.

Either way, you want to buy something a bit higher than what you got from that, to be safe.  Maybe like 550-600W?

Done it, came out 419W after I added a bunch of extra stuff too :/

Regardless, I think I'll go with a 550W and play it safe.

I'm liking the look of the Corsair VX 550W
http://www.overclockers.co.uk/showproduc...=CA-014-CS

I believe that latencies can sometimes be lowered through changing voltages to the RAM, but with the amount of cache CPUs have these days, RAM performance isn't terribly important.