G.Skill Releases TridentX DDR3 Kits for Ivy Bridge

[Guest]

G.Skill is offering DDR3 memory kits for Intel's Ivy bridge processors and Z77 platform.

G.Skill Releases TridentX DDR3 Kits for Ivy Bridge : Read more

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

1.65V? Where's the promised voltage drop from Sandy Bridge's 1.5V RAM?

 

[halcyon]

Wow. Makes my little 2000Mhz Corsairs look pathetic in comparison.

 

[thehelix]

Do those fins on ram modules actually do anything or they are there just for the looks?

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]TheHelix[/nom]Do those fins on ram modules actually do anything or they are there just for the looks?[/citation]

If you're not going for extreme RAM OCing, RAM heatsinks and waterblocks are useless.

 

[halcyon]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]If you're not going for extreme RAM OCing, RAM heatsinks and waterblocks are useless.[/citation]
Well, they do tend to look nice and that seems to be their usual purpose.

 

[yumri]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]If you're not going for extreme RAM OCing, RAM heatsinks and waterblocks are useless.[/citation]
usually yes they are just for looks but for these they might actually put off enough heat to warrant having a heat spreader on the RAM sticks as they go almost twice the entry speeds of the first Sandy bridge RAM memory controller speeds ( they were later increased to higher DDR3 speeds ). What i am also wondering is in the spec for Ivy bridge it had 2 memory controllers one for DDR3 and one for XDR so where is our XDR RAM motherboards or was that memory controller dropped in the final design of Ivy bridge?

 

[c_for]

The Trident RAM has 5 tines on top of the heatsync...

Things that make you go Hmmmmmm

 

[Guest]

and, it could boost performance by nearly 1% in certain synthetic benchmarks, but if you're building a big gaming rig in an attempt to compensate for a small male-part, that may not matter to you.

 

[sykozis]

Why are all these memory kits at 1.65v when the voltage limit for both SB and IB is only 1.5v???

 

[halcyon]

[citation][nom]sykozis[/nom]Why are all these memory kits at 1.65v when the voltage limit for both SB and IB is only 1.5v???[/citation]
Did you see the first comment?

 

[__-_-_-__]

very high timing.

 

[Soda-88]

[citation][nom]sykozis[/nom]Why are all these memory kits at 1.65v when the voltage limit for both SB and IB is only 1.5v???[/citation]

Because you need some more juice to run at those speeds I'd assume.

 

[ojas]

[citation][nom]amk-aka-phantom[/nom]1.65V? Where's the promised voltage drop from Sandy Bridge's 1.5V RAM?[/citation]
If you read Intel's spec sheets then you'll see they say that 7-series mobos support both 1.35v and 1.5v RAM. In fact even some of the newer 6-series mobos had support for 1.35v.

I guess these 1.65v sticks are for compatible motherboards only, or if you're adventurous enough

 

[frombehind]

funny story about that ~3 GhZ ram.... Ivy bridge can only interface with its ram up to 1600 MhZ. Anything above this can be considered wasteful. While faster ram CAN impact some synthetic benchmarks... FPS in games, nor any processing speeds in applications will not increase 1 bit past 1600. The only real way ram can gain "speed" is cap out to 1600 and get the lowest latency ram you can find. Many CL 7 kits can be purchased at that speed... these kits at CL10 and CL11 are a tough sell for anyone who knows what they are doing building a computer.

 

[Deleted member 217926]

I wonder if anything over 1.5v voids the CPU warranty like with Sandy Bridge? If not that seems odd to me since Ivy Bridge hates high voltage so much when overclocking.

 

[Why_Me]

1.65V? Where's the promised voltage drop from Sandy Bridge's 1.5V RAM?

+1

I though we were done with high voltage RAM. It looks like were going backwards instead of forward.

 

[CaedenV]

[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]If you're not going for extreme RAM OCing, RAM heatsinks and waterblocks are useless.[/citation]
You mean that being pretty isn't a use?

 

[erunion]

Latency?

 

[razor512]

while this RAM won't cause a notiecable increase in performance, it will improve your ability to overclock CPU's with locked multipliers without introducing a memory bottleneck from having to lower a memory divider a few notches and not be able push the bus speed high enough to get the memory back to it's recommended speed.

with this RAM simply leave the RAM at default ratio and just push the bus speed as far as you need.

 

[xtreme5]

would it worth to get 2800mhz??????????

 

[serendipiti]

The relatioship of CPU clock / Memory clock to final performance is quite a complex one and by no means a linear relation.
Modern CPUs with huge caches made the impact of memory irrelevant outside of the sweet spot. But now that GPUs get into the CPU die and share the memory bus, perhaps the memory clocking will get relevant again.

 

[A Bad Day]

[citation][nom]Halcyon[/nom]Well, they do tend to look nice and that seems to be their usual purpose.[/citation]

Yeah, I tend to forget about that. Sometimes I wonder why do some people pay so much for seemly overpriced components, then it dawns upon me that it's their hobby and they like nice-looking rigs. Kinda like how some people invest so much into their bird-keeping or customized sports car hobby, or how some people prefer more expensive styled glass-steel buildings over the cheaper giant concrete blocks.

 

[kristoffe]

it's hype. there's a limitation to the speed you can real world use this ram. just like most ram rated at 2x what you clock at.

 

[amk-aka-Phantom]

If you read Intel's spec sheets then you'll see they say that 7-series mobos support both 1.35v and 1.5v RAM. In fact even some of the newer 6-series mobos had support for 1.35v.

I guess these 1.65v sticks are for compatible motherboards only, or if you're adventurous enough

I read the spec sheets. That's why I'm asking! See, I expected all new RAM to be 1.35V and having 1.5V option for the support of older-gen Sandy Bridge RAM.