Frequency vs Capacity

[JaiJai1]

Looking to get the the Ryzen 1700x and im not exactly sure what would be better.
2x8gb at 3200 or 2x16 at 2400 with future plans to O/C and expand.

Fast ram as shown slightly better load times but does having 16 extra gigs make up for the difference? Cant find many people asking this as ram is annoyingly expensive.

Looking to game and render..

 

[kanewolf]

Fast RAM on Ryzen is still hit-or-miss based on what I have read. The BIOS code needs more revisions before high clock RAM is a sure thing.
Why not get the 1700 (non X) and have cash left over??

 

[HybridWolf]

Generally, more capacity ram is always better. Since you have "More" Of that one RAM, it's going to be utilized much more efficiently.

Otherwise, if you have higher frequency RAM, ( Such as 3200 Mhz ) you will have to do alot of work in the bios and such to get it to even run at that speed.

8 GB is well enough for gaming but not so much on rendering.

16 GB is great for gaming and rendering.

I'd say go with capacity.

Hopefully this helps.

- TheHybridWolf

 

[JaiJai1]

Fast RAM on Ryzen is still hit-or-miss based on what I have read. The BIOS code needs more revisions before high clock RAM is a sure thing.
Why not get the 1700 (non X) and have cash left over??

Was my first choice to be honest, but amazon has a nice deal other than newegg or tiger direct and I may sell the chip to a friend after getting used to it for when the next gen drops.

I usually wait for 2nd gen but I feel understanding the 1700x will put me a head in the future.

 

[JaiJai1]

Generally, more capacity ram is always better. Since you have "More" Of that one RAM, it's going to be utilized much more efficiently.

Otherwise, if you have higher frequency RAM, ( Such as 3200 Mhz ) you will have to do alot of work in the bios and such to get it to even run at that speed.

8 GB is well enough for gaming but not so much on rendering.

16 GB is great for gaming and rendering.

I'd say go with capacity.

Hopefully this helps.

- TheHybridWolf

Makes sense because I want to play games like Arma 3 and Star Citizen and games of that caliber without any issues.

What is the highest frequency you think can be achieved with a 2400 Mhz? I would surely want to surpass 3200 Mhz with cas latency of at leeast 14.

 

[JaiJai1]

To retort. Does increasing capacity make up for lack of speed?

Going fast and delivering 1 brick across the street is the same as going half speed and carrying 2 bricks except less power used, less strain on the memory controller, no?

 

[HybridWolf]

It might, depends.

Usually, it will, i'd stick with 2400 Mhz and 16/8Gb of ram to save money, and to be 99% Compatible.

As for overclocking ram however, i don't have a clue in that section, it'd be best to ask a new question on a new thread how to do that.

You'll find more luck with memory experts rather than me for now.

- TheHybridWolf

 

[madmatt30]

Overclocking ram on ryzen ??

You'd gave to be very lucky given the issues with running even fast rated ram at its optimal speed.

32gb is likely to max out at 2666mhz anyway (even if its rated at 3200)
Most board specs state that's max speed with either 4 sticks or 2 sticks of double sided.

Seen a couple of reports of people running w x16gb 3200 flare x at 2933 but thats it.

Running 2x8 GB ballistix sport 2400 here at 2666 1t - it did run at 2933 2t but required a heavy voltage increase & performance was about the same.

Capacity make up for lack of speed ??
No not at all.
Your PC will use whatever amount of ram is necessary at the time - you can't force it to use more.

A miniscule amount of users will actually ever need more than 16gb of ram.

 

[JaiJai1]

Overclocking ram on ryzen ??

You'd gave to be very lucky given the issues with running even fast rated ram at its optimal speed.

32gb is likely to max out at 2666mhz anyway (even if its rated at 3200)
Most board specs state that's max speed with either 4 sticks or 2 sticks of double sided.

Seen a couple of reports of people running w x16gb 3200 flare x at 2933 but thats it.

Running 2x8 GB ballistix sport 2400 here at 2666 1t - it did run at 2933 2t but required a heavy voltage increase & performance was about the same.

Capacity make up for lack of speed ??
No not at all.
Your PC will use whatever amount of ram is necessary at the time - you can't force it to use more.

A miniscule amount of users will actually ever need more than 16gb of ram.

You're right, massive amounts of ram is unnecessary but I want to run the OS off the ram and still have space left over for gaming, maybe install a game thats less than and still have at least 8GB to run off of.

 

[madmatt30]

Gaming ?? Never seen more than 6.5gb used with any game mate with basic windows stuff running in the background.

A lot of people are still only running 8gb & manage fine.
I do agree personally that 8gb isnt really enough nowadays.
16gb absolutely is though, unless you're gaming WHILE rendering 3 or 4 simultaneous video encodes and running a browser with 20-30 windows open you wont come close to using 16gb.

I've done the above by the way & still topped out at 13gb of ram usage - by that point the CPU was struggling to cope with that much going on , ram was never an issue.

 

[pluto2]

I recently upgraded from 12 gigs to 24 gigs, upon doing so my Row Refresh Cycle Time went from 107 to 174. I tried to do some researching on it and it seems to be only an interest among enthusiasts. Does anyone happen to know if there is any real world difference between those two values? Mostly use the computer for gaming with some 3D rendering here and there.

 

[JaiJai1]

I just learned Ryzen works much better with faster memory. Guess this give me a chance to show others the difference.