1600Mhz configuration

7 replies [Last post]
DragonMatt
Offline
Joined: 08/08/2012
Posts: 16

I've heard by many people that 1600Mhz RAM isn't plug and play and needs a little bit of tweaking in your BIOS. I just built a system with a Gigabyte GA-X79-UP4 mobo and G.SKILL Ripjaws X Series 8GB(2 x 4GB) DDR3 1600(PC3 12800) Desktop Memory. I e-mail G.Skill and Gigabyte asking them how to configure this exact memory and mobo but neither one has responded yet. I was wondering if anyone on here could help me. I got some general settings but my BIOS is a bit confusing so an explanation on how to do it on the Gigabyte 3d BIOS would be UBER helpful thanks!

eire1274
eire1274's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/12/2003
Posts: 1211

Not all systems can properly address 1600Mhz (or faster) memory specifications automatically. I have actually seen a better result on AMD based systems (A-series and FX-series) than even on the current Ivy Bridge Intel platforms.

What needs to be done is adjust the BIOS settings on the memory clock. This should be visible under the M.I.T. screen, under the Advanced Frequency Settings sub-page, under Memory Frequency. Full information is on page 38 of the current manual PDF downloadble from Gigabyte's website.

Nick McDermott

Prophet4NO1
Offline
Joined: 09/13/2010
Posts: 196

Intel by default does not support speeds over 1333. To go higher board makers have to modify things in the BIOS to allow for it. Essentially you are overclocking the RAM as far as the board is concerned. That is why the speeds above 1333 say (O.C.) after them on the spec sheets. Just set the ram speed, voltage, and timings as they are listed on the stick and/or packaging. Problem solved.

eire1274
eire1274's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/12/2003
Posts: 1211

In all honesty, with the current Intel memory controllers, exceeding 1333Mhz really does not improve performance. The controller cycling methodology gets in the way, until you really start pushing it (memory specs beyond 2000Mhz). AMD systems cycle differently and see improvements much quicker as memory speeds increase, however they currently can't compete core-to-core against Ivy Bridge.

Nick McDermott

Prophet4NO1
Offline
Joined: 09/13/2010
Posts: 196

Unless building a server, data mining, or doing heavy content creation faster memory does little. In those areas it has an effect. Not huge, but measurable. Also if being used for RAMdisk or RAMcache it has pretty big effects. Both on Intel and AMD.

DragonMatt
Offline
Joined: 08/08/2012
Posts: 16

Thanks for the help, you guys are the best!

eire1274
eire1274's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/12/2003
Posts: 1211

Actually, from experience, an increase of memory frequencies (1333 to 1600) means almost 1% performance increase on AMD Zambesi / Piledriver, less than .2% on Intel Ivy Bridge, and no change at all on Sandy Bridge.

Large memory spaces are far better in the examples you offered, Prophet4NO1, and again those are less likely to see increases due to memory speed. Slower memory, just lots of it, as the memory is being used as a storage platform.

Nick McDermott

Prophet4NO1
Offline
Joined: 09/13/2010
Posts: 196

From my playing around, speed and size play factors. I went from 2133 8GB kit and with RAMcaching on was getting almost 8GB/s read. Now I have 32GB of 1600 and get about 6.5GB/s read, but I have two 10GB RAMcaches running. All on a 2600K @ 4.8 for day to day stuff. Have yet to see if my 5.1 benchmark clocks have any effect.