open All Channels
seplocked EVE General Discussion
blankseplocked Anyone try that HyperX Kingston memory?
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: [1] 2

Author Topic

Qwyp
Posted - 2009.03.05 22:06:00 - [1]
 

I had been sitting at 1 gig for a while and finally decided to upgrade my ram to 2 gig and ordered some Kingston HyperX ddr2 800 pc6400 ram, newegg had a pretty good price for it. They list it as "high performance/gaming memory" as compared to the normal kingston ddr2 800.

I did notice it says 2.0volts for the ram so I called my mobo and double checked all should be ok and they said it should post with default settings, but then go into bios and bump it up to 2.0volts for memory.

So hope all goes well, just curious if anyone else has ever used hyperx memory and how well it is or if it's just a gimmick really.

my mobo is getting a little aged, it's a msi k9n4 sli-f using amd 64 x2 4200 cpu, atm just 1 gig of ram, vid card is pci-e gforce 7600 256mb.

Thought it would be good to upgrade to 2 gig in preparation for the new expansion.

Anyhow just looking for any huge performance jumps with hyperx memory over normal memory? just curious


Cat o'Ninetails
Caldari
Rancer Defence League
Posted - 2009.03.05 22:16:00 - [2]
 

i have two gigabytes of ram but i dont know about what you are talking about

i would definitely say get two gigabytes though because more is best

Jhango Fett
Gallente
Federal Navy Academy
Posted - 2009.03.05 22:31:00 - [3]
 

Performance is going to have more to do with your graphics card than system memory, but more system memory is always a good thing.

Elysarian
Minmatar
Elysarian Corp
Posted - 2009.03.05 23:00:00 - [4]
 

tbh, the main bottleneck in that system of yours isn't the ram or the gfx...

It's the Processor.

I'd upgrade that before I even thought of buying performance RAM (about £60 in the UK for an Athlon X2 6000+ that'll run in your AM2 board).

If you do see any performance gains on upgrading to 2GB then it'll only be because Windows doesn't have to page to disk as much - not because of the lower latency of the RAM.

xJohnnyDx
Phoibe Enterprises
SOLAR WING
Posted - 2009.03.05 23:05:00 - [5]
 

I've used the HyperX stuff for a while now, and it's always been good for me.

Y Berion
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.03.05 23:36:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: Y Berion on 05/03/2009 23:37:06
I got 2x1 GB of exactly the same memory you have mentioned. On default settings. They are working fine but tbh, comparing with my old `non-HyperX & no name` 667 MHz DDR2, there is no real noticeable difference. I guess HyperX could be overclocked better but I just don`t like to do that (ugly memories... hmgr)

Zhora Six
Posted - 2009.03.05 23:53:00 - [7]
 

Edited by: Zhora Six on 05/03/2009 23:54:50
Originally by: Y Berion
I guess HyperX could be overclocked better


This. If you're not planning to overclock into the upper limits, save a couple bucks and get the non-HyperX.

ps - I've had much experience with Kingston and they've always served me well.

Anubis Assassin
Caldari
SandStorm.
The Babylon Consortium
Posted - 2009.03.06 00:07:00 - [8]
 

Even without overclocking, you'll notice the difference with the better ram. The cas latency and timings on it help data transfer through it faster. That being said, if the ram isn't the bottleneck in the first place, then no, you wouldn't notice a difference between regular or high performance ram.

As for the Kingston HyperX memory, I've personally never used them, but I've heard good things about 'em. I'm partial to OCZ myself though. I also here good things about G.SKILL. I'm debating whether or not I want to do an upgrade myself and juggling between trying some G.SKILL or sticking with OCZ (which I'm leaning towards).

Stupid question though. You said you had 1gb and you are upgrading to 2gb. Did you just order one stick of 1gb or what?

Qwyp
Posted - 2009.03.06 01:39:00 - [9]
 

Originally by: Anubis Assassin


Stupid question though. You said you had 1gb and you are upgrading to 2gb. Did you just order one stick of 1gb or what?


naa, currently have 2 sticks of 512mb to equal 1 gig.

So I purchased a 2x 1gig hyperx kit

here is a link to it
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820134125

so I will remove what I got the 2 512mb sticks and put this in it's place, then according to MSI when I called them I go into bios and up the voltage to 2.0 volts this memory is supposedly set for.



Taedrin
Gallente
Kushan Industrial
Posted - 2009.03.06 01:47:00 - [10]
 

Originally by: Elysarian
tbh, the main bottleneck in that system of yours isn't the ram or the gfx...

It's the Processor.

I'd upgrade that before I even thought of buying performance RAM (about £60 in the UK for an Athlon X2 6000+ that'll run in your AM2 board).

If you do see any performance gains on upgrading to 2GB then it'll only be because Windows doesn't have to page to disk as much - not because of the lower latency of the RAM.



The CPU only becomes the bottleneck if the application being run can be properly loaded into the L1 cache. Otherwise the CPU has to wait for the memory before the next instruction can be executed.

maranne marachian
Posted - 2009.03.06 01:53:00 - [11]
 

Edited by: maranne marachian on 06/03/2009 01:54:20
Originally by: Elysarian
tbh, the main bottleneck in that system of yours isn't the ram or the gfx...

It's the Processor.


EL OH EL.

heres a hint if you have below 2GB of memory if its a x64 system i'd even go as far as saying 4gig getting those ammounts will give you a greater speed increase for your money.

you will almost always get a bigger upgrade in system speed from memory than from the same price in memory.

you WILL see a speed gain from less paging purely because you will page ALOT on less than 2gig.

oh and lower latency IS better for speed my friend do some research before making such false claims.

Qwyp
Posted - 2009.03.06 02:02:00 - [12]
 

good to hear, I don't seem to have a cpu bottleneck with my amd 64 x2 4200 cpu but after a while the memory useage of the client is pretty high, I don't have many problems in eve other than after a long time seems a slight memory leak or something my ram useage is sitting about at max so after like 3 or 4 hours I have to just restart the client.

So kinda broke atm, and thought I'd upgrade to the 2 gigs of hyperx, I have 4 memory slots so that makes it easy in future to go to 4 gigs by purchasing another 2 sticks of the same memory.

thanks for the info and opinions on things, helps get a fresh perspective on things.

Anubis Assassin
Caldari
SandStorm.
The Babylon Consortium
Posted - 2009.03.06 02:25:00 - [13]
 

I do believe with the premium client, most of the workload has been shifted from the CPU onto the GPU so EVE shouldn't be so processor needy. I'm currently thinking about upgrading my comp a little. It's still truckin' along pretty good, but I fear it will start showing its age soon. Crysis would get a little choppy ever now and then because of my processor and I'm sure there are more games on the way that is going to put a hurt on it as well Sad So, I'll be needing a new mobo, cpu and ram, all of which I have picked out already.

Strak Yogorn
Amarr
Mind Warpers
Posted - 2009.03.06 03:36:00 - [14]
 

like most "performance" ram, you wont get the most of it, if you dont overclock, so save some cash and get ordinary ram. your system will perform alot better with the extra ram, 1gb is nothing these days ..

Agent Unknown
Caldari
Posted - 2009.03.06 06:00:00 - [15]
 

"Gaming memory"? Laughing

They are both the exact same speed...higher voltage will just push the temps up and force you to use more cooling anyway. If you really want a boost, go DDR3 if your mobo can handle it. If not, find another upgrade path.

I suppose there can be "features" in the memory that makes it better than your run-of-a-mill memory, but to each his own I suppose...

Qwyp
Posted - 2009.03.06 07:25:00 - [16]
 

Originally by: Agent Unknown
"Gaming memory"? Laughing

They are both the exact same speed...higher voltage will just push the temps up and force you to use more cooling anyway. If you really want a boost, go DDR3 if your mobo can handle it. If not, find another upgrade path.

I suppose there can be "features" in the memory that makes it better than your run-of-a-mill memory, but to each his own I suppose...



It is double the performance of the normal ram I have. Checking the stats my normal memory is like 1.8 volts 10 cas latency.

hyperx is 2.0 volts so I do not see .2 volts causing that much more heat, but the timing on this memory is 4-4-4-12, 4 cas compared to normal ddr2 or ddr3 that runs from 8 to 12 cas.

so this memory is super fast for what it is. which is main reason I went ahead and ordered it. the memory does come with heat spreaders and the reviews I've read is it don't heat up at all for running at the required 2.0 volts for this "gaming memory or high performance" memory.

I did look over at G.skill's gaming/high performance and they have some really low CAS memory as well as OCZ but I've always been a kingston fanboi and a nvidia fanboi so going with the hyperx series.

for those interested here is kingston's site on hyperx low cas memory and info on different memory types.

http://www.kingston.com/hyperx/default.asp

compared to normal kingston, the hyperx speeds are pretty slick.

Regardless the 2 gigs upgrade should help quite a bit. But yes there is "gaming memory" for those not in the know :)
compared to my current crappy 1 gig of cas 10 memory this 2 gigs of cas 4 should really fly.

Y Berion
Minmatar
Posted - 2009.03.06 08:00:00 - [17]
 

HyperX is good choice, that`s for sure. You can check memory bandwith in some test software (Gold memory, for example) and you are going to get slightly better numbers comparing with your regular DDR module(s). But as a user I doubt that you`ll be able to really notice any improvement. What you are going to "feel" is jump from 1 to 2 GB though. Oh and if you are Win XP user then don`t take more than 3 GB in total because 32bit OS cannot address more.

Btw I am not sure why you have to manually change that voltage value...? If set to `auto` your motherboard BIOS should alone determine correct values.

Qwyp
Posted - 2009.03.06 08:08:00 - [18]
 

yea I called MSI and they said to double check bios, auto should detect, if not set it 2.0v. I forget what it was at when first built, I think it is set to auto so all should be fine.

and yea I really need that 2 gigs, and i got 4 slots available, and since Im still on winxp 32bit atm that's one reason I went with the 2 gigs. I was waiting for windows 7 to jump to the 64 bit stuff Im thinking, or I may go ahead and pickup winxp 64. Of course then with the 2 remaining slots I can just buy 2 more sticks of the same stuff for 4 gigs.

I will soon need to upgrade my video card its a PCI-E EVGA Geforce 7600 256mb which works pretty good for most games I get 70-80 fps with premium client with shadows turned off. But I do see a lot of memory useage which atm is my main bottleneck.

my gameplan due to financial issues for now is ram upgrade, then in couple more months, vid card upgrade, then cpu.

but for the moment
amd 64 x2 4200
1 gig (soon to be the 2 gig)
the gforce 7600 256mb
100 gig sata II hdd
550 watt power supply
on a msi k9n4 sli-f mobo

not uber by no means but still pushing along pretty strong :) just can't wait to get the more ram :) Was happy newegg takes paypal -grin-


Bellum Eternus
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2009.03.06 08:33:00 - [19]
 

The amount of incorrect information and assumptions in this thread is insane.

If you're running Vista, run 4gb minimum. The difference of +0.2v can double the running temperature of your ram quite quickly. Not that that would be a problem for high performance ram, particularly with heat spreaders and good airflow.

If you buy two 1GB sticks of ram as a set, and then buy *another* two 1GB sticks as a matched set, you're probably going to have all sorts of problems getting your computer booted without loosening up your ram timings quite a bit.

The best way to do it is to get a two stick 4GB set, and make sure it requires as little overvolting as possible.

You're welcome.

Ehronn
Caldari
Nutz N Boltz
Posted - 2009.03.06 08:59:00 - [20]
 

Edited by: Ehronn on 06/03/2009 09:00:44
hyperx memory is pretty fast, checking out their site, looks pretty like pretty good stuff


Reven Cordelle
Caldari
Total Mayhem.
Cry Havoc.
Posted - 2009.03.06 09:11:00 - [21]
 

Needs to be in OOPE.

I haven't tried Kingston Memory. I used to use it when building a lot of systems and the failure rate was disturbing.

Then again that was their baseline cheap stuff so it was probably relabelled Chu-Hyung-Dong-Sing memory.

I personally hit up Corsair Dominator. Mainly because they look like Afro Combs.

Zhora Six
Posted - 2009.03.06 09:46:00 - [22]
 

Originally by: Qwyp
Originally by: Agent Unknown
"Gaming memory"? Laughing

They are both the exact same speed...higher voltage will just push the temps up and force you to use more cooling anyway. If you really want a boost, go DDR3 if your mobo can handle it. If not, find another upgrade path.

I suppose there can be "features" in the memory that makes it better than your run-of-a-mill memory, but to each his own I suppose...



It is double the performance of the normal ram I have. Checking the stats my normal memory is like 1.8 volts 10 cas latency.

hyperx is 2.0 volts so I do not see .2 volts causing that much more heat, but the timing on this memory is 4-4-4-12, 4 cas compared to normal ddr2 or ddr3 that runs from 8 to 12 cas.

so this memory is super fast for what it is. which is main reason I went ahead and ordered it. the memory does come with heat spreaders and the reviews I've read is it don't heat up at all for running at the required 2.0 volts for this "gaming memory or high performance" memory.

I did look over at G.skill's gaming/high performance and they have some really low CAS memory as well as OCZ but I've always been a kingston fanboi and a nvidia fanboi so going with the hyperx series.

for those interested here is kingston's site on hyperx low cas memory and info on different memory types.

http://www.kingston.com/hyperx/default.asp

compared to normal kingston, the hyperx speeds are pretty slick.

Regardless the 2 gigs upgrade should help quite a bit. But yes there is "gaming memory" for those not in the know :)
compared to my current crappy 1 gig of cas 10 memory this 2 gigs of cas 4 should really fly.



Yikes! I can't remember the last time I saw cas 10 ram.

As for my previous comment about the normal ram being just as good, I'd assumed you were looking at the ones that both have cas 5. Of course, cas 4 will be a slight improvement.

2gb is enough for most people. EVE usually takes about 800Mb - 1.2Gb of memory, leaving enough for whatever programs you would normally run in the background. From the specs you listed, you're definitely making the best upgrade choice for the value, but you already knew that. Wink

Zhora Six
Posted - 2009.03.06 09:50:00 - [23]
 

Originally by: Reven Cordelle
I haven't tried Kingston Memory. I used to use it when building a lot of systems and the failure rate was disturbing.


A few years ago, they were pretty terrible to be sure. They've since formed into a respectable company, at least from my experience. I've built several system in the past couple of years that use their ram without issue.

Antiquus Altercor
Minmatar
Phoenix Propulsion Labs
Posted - 2009.03.06 11:47:00 - [24]
 

I've used Kingston predominately for years in everything I build and I build 3-4 systems a year. I've had to return 1 stick in 5 years. I wish I could say that about Mushkin or OCZ - everything I buy from them has seemed to fail eventually. But then again, I expect lifetime memory to mean just that.

Yes, the best bang for your buck is to upgrade your memory if you have only 1gb. I'd bump it to 4gb frankly. You processor is huffing and puffing a bit, but you are oh so much better off that some poor dweeb with a Pentium 4, so relax you are in the middle of the Eve System bell curve.

Victor Valka
Caldari
The Kairos Syndicate
Transmission Lost
Posted - 2009.03.06 12:25:00 - [25]
 

While more memory is good, faster memory is better, fast FSB is even better.

Large amount of memory will only take you so far, and on desktop system running regular applications (no DBs or horde of virtual machines) anything over 4GiB is going to be a subject of (very) diminishing returns.

Fast memory with fast FSB will improve the performance far more then throwing yet more memory at a (desktop) problem ever will.

Gunnanmon
Gallente
PURPLE.
Posted - 2009.03.06 13:02:00 - [26]
 

ibtm

Mourn LeBlade
Posted - 2009.03.06 14:25:00 - [27]
 

I built three machines recently that use 2x1GB of Hyper-X ddr2 800/PC6400. It works great, and you can get a pair for $50 w/ a $25 rebate. Get the faster CAS variety, the quicker timings will always boost performance. IMPORTANT: Make sure to tweak up the voltage to what the higher performance memory needs - 1.9, 2.0, 2.1 volts depending on model. If you leave your BIOS at the default and likely undervolt the memory, you will get all kinds of fantastic failures.

Par'Gellen
Gallente
Neon Cranium
Posted - 2009.03.06 14:27:00 - [28]
 

I use Kingston memory exclusively and have never had any issues at all with it. Very good high quality stuff.

OffBeaT
Caldari
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2009.03.06 14:55:00 - [29]
 

Edited by: OffBeaT on 06/03/2009 14:55:17
Originally by: Jhango Fett
Performance is going to have more to do with your graphics card than system memory, but more system memory is always a good thing.


well not if you use a laptop or the newer ddr3 systems as graphic cards will swap with system mem these days so get that system mem up to as high as you can..

ER0X
Amarr
Eternity INC.
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2009.03.06 15:59:00 - [30]
 

Originally by: Bellum Eternus
The amount of incorrect information and assumptions in this thread is insane.

If you're running Vista, run 4gb minimum. The difference of +0.2v can double the running temperature of your ram quite quickly. Not that that would be a problem for high performance ram, particularly with heat spreaders and good airflow.

If you buy two 1GB sticks of ram as a set, and then buy *another* two 1GB sticks as a matched set, you're probably going to have all sorts of problems getting your computer booted without loosening up your ram timings quite a bit.

The best way to do it is to get a two stick 4GB set, and make sure it requires as little overvolting as possible.

You're welcome.


Both you and the poster Mourn LeBlade just above me are pretty much on the ball here. I would also add that it may be necessary to push the volts to 2.1v for those particular sticks. The problem for me in ascertaining wither this may be necessary or not is that in order to confidently advise I would have to conduct an extensive search to discover wither this particular board has any voltage problems +/-. At this point I could then advise what may be a recommended voltage setting for that board alone. Personally I would go for a paired 2 x 2 GB kit but unless youíre using a 64 bit OS you wonít have the use of it all.

Bellum Eternus the only thing I might argue against is I wouldnít place too much stock in the heat/voltage comments you made earlier (even though it is technically correct) with what we know about the set up already and that none of this units components are being pushed (meaning heat is less of a problem). Also I wouldnít be concerned with volts and heat for anything lower than 8 GB of RAM and even then I would only be nudging the NB volts to deal with the needed voltage draw of the extra sticks (incidentally this board has an NB fan). He will notice a little improvement as the paging file is accessed less however the biggy here is that he can now achieve parity far easier between the CPU and RAM with the fabled 1:1 setting which would be noticeable. Iíll explain in case itís not already known.

  • Now the CPU FSB: memory bus 1:1 *clock* ratio is only 1:1 for Intel CPUs and RAM running in dual-channel mode. Since on Intel systems all data to/from RAM goes through the FSB, you want the data throughput of the FSB to match the data throughput of the memory bus, so neither is a bottleneck.

    Data throughput of FSB = FSB clock rate x 4 (that's why it's called "quad-pumped" ).

    Data throughput of memory bus in dual-channel mode = individual DIMM throughput x 2 (two channels in parallel doubles the throughput).

    Individual DIMM throughput = memory bus clock rate x 2 ("DDR" means double data rate).

    Thus, to match data throughput of FSB and data throughput of memory bus, we get:
    FSB clock rate x 4 = (individual DIMM throughput) x 2; expanding further, we get:
    FSB clock rate x 4 = (memory bus clock rate x 2) x 2

    This works out to:
    FSB clock rate x 4 = memory bus clock rate x 4, or

    FSB clock rate = memory bus clock rate, which is the famed 1:1 ratio!

    Quick example:
    For 1333MHz FSB throughput, FSB *clock* is 1333MHz/4 = 333MHz. Thus, for the 1:1 ratio in this case here, we want the memory bus clock to be 333MHz, which is the same as running the DIMM modules at 333MHz x 2 = DDR2-667 speed.


Hope this helps when you set your RAM voltage and timings.


Pages: [1] 2

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only