[SOLVED] i9 10900Kf, RTX3080, RoG Maximus XII Formula.....which RAM kit?!

Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
Here's the system I'm building (most pieces are already in my hands!!):
CPU: Intel i9 10900Kf (yep, there's an "f" there)
GPU: ASUS TUF RTX3080
MoBo: ASUS RoG Maximus XII Formula
PSU: FPS Hydro G Pro 1000W

Of course there're gonna be an AIO water cooling system for the CPU and a couple of M2 disks for OS and games.

Now, though, my main issue is with RAM modules.

My plan was to get the maximum possible, 128GB (4x32), starting with a 2-modules 64GB kit to later expand it to 128 with a second one.
But.
Apparently, 4000MHz+ 32GB modules are not a thing, unless one has time and money to waste.
I got the money, actually, but I'm starting to run out of patience, since it's proving hard to get a hold of them.

THIS was the kit I had in mind.
But, I don't know, it doesn't convince me. Especially because of that "Optimized for AMD Ryzen" stamp at the bottom of the description.
Thus I've started wandering the net looking for reviews mentioning good 64 or 128GB @4000MHz+ kits, but each one of them stated that anything above 3600MHz is basically a waste of money.

Ok, let's start over and let's say I'm looking for at least 64GB (preferably 2x32GB) @3600MHz.
More reasonable prices and, seemingly, also easier to get.
Doubts keep raining, though.

Here are my questions:
.- Is expanding my RAM at a later date a good idea, or is it better to get the kit as a whole?
-. With a system as the one listed, is it better to push on my budget a bit more and get a 4000MHz+ kit, or 3600MHz is more than reasonable?
.- I'm gonna use this system for a bit of gaming, and a fair amount of rendering/procedural calcs, especially with Blender, ZBrush, World Machine and UE4 (and possibly some VMware virtual machines): would 64GB be enough, or should I go for 128GB?

I'm moving from a 10yo, i7 920 @3.8GHz, 12GB (tri-channel) DDR3, GTX980Ti system, so I've lost touch with technology.
After all, my current setup can run Witcher 3 and GTA-V at nearly all-Ultra without noticeable FPS drops, I can't even start to imagine how much the performance will improve. And how relevant those 400MHz would be to my new system.

Please, elaborate your suggestions/opinions as much as possible, thank you.
 
Only you know how much ram you need, depending on the size of your objects, scenes and amount of VMs.
As for speed, that 4000mhz cl18 is actually the same speed as cl16 3600mhz, or atleast quite close, and while you could tighten the timings on 4000mhz cl18 to maybe cl16 or 17, that is still very similar and would not give a meaningful upgrade above 2-4%.
Optimized for ryzen means nothing, it's a habit of ram manufacturers since first gen ryzen was picky about ram, nowadays ryzen can handle almost all sticks.

Getting all ram together is generally better. While ram compatibility is not that big an issue nowadays, especially on amd, and especially if you get the same kit, i've seen 2 sticks that are literally the same and bought a week apart not work together.
You are probably fine getting 64 now then another later, but if you could 128 it would be better.

So, corsair rgb vengance pro whatever 32x4 or 32x2 3600 CL16 would be best.






Also
Intel lol
 
Reactions: Steamy_Steve
Only you know how much ram you need, depending on the size of your objects, scenes and amount of VMs.
As for speed, that 4000mhz cl18 is actually the same speed as cl16 3600mhz, or atleast quite close, and while you could tighten the timings on 4000mhz cl18 to maybe cl16 or 17, that is still very similar and would not give a meaningful upgrade above 2-4%.
Optimized for ryzen means nothing, it's a habit of ram manufacturers since first gen ryzen was picky about ram, nowadays ryzen can handle almost all sticks.

Getting all ram together is generally better. While ram compatibility is not that big an issue nowadays, especially on amd, and especially if you get the same kit, i've seen 2 sticks that are literally the same and bought a week apart not work together.
You are probably fine getting 64 now then another later, but if you could 128 it would be better.

So, corsair rgb vengance pro whatever 32x4 or 32x2 3600 CL16 would be best.






Also
Intel lol
 
Reactions: Steamy_Steve
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
Only you know how much ram you need, depending on the size of your objects, scenes and amount of VMs.
[....]
Well, that's one of my main issues: how would I know?
Until now I've always managed to make the best out of my 12GB, running modest VMs or sculpting in ZBrush without stepping too heavy on subdivisions. Let alone raising the resolution of my heightmaps in World Machine on device-heavy setups.
Even just 64GB would certainly be a huge leap, but I just can't fathom where I'd reach, once freed from the castrating boundaries of a 10yo PC.


[....]
Also
Intel lol
I wanted to give a ThreadRipper a chance, but they're way too expensive.
So I went for what I know, Intel.
It can't be that awful.

If you really think it's so bad, you should've written a review.
I've found plenty, from professional reviewers and users, and none said "Intel lol".
 
Well, that's one of my main issues: how would I know?
Until now I've always managed to make the best out of my 12GB, running modest VMs or sculpting in ZBrush without stepping too heavy on subdivisions. Let alone raising the resolution of my heightmaps in World Machine on device-heavy setups.
Even just 64GB would certainly be a huge leap, but I just can't fathom where I'd reach, once freed from the castrating boundaries of a 10yo PC.




I wanted to give a ThreadRipper a chance, but they're way too expensive.
So I went for what I know, Intel.
It can't be that awful.

If you really think it's so bad, you should've written a review.
I've found plenty, from professional reviewers and users, and none said "Intel lol".
Intel is not bad, just can't compete right now. I'm not a fanboy, and that was not a review obviously, It was ment as a joke. I'm running an i7 8700k myself.
Also, why put an i9 10900KF against threadripper? take a ryzen 9 5900X, 2 more cores, and much faster ones at that, with pci-e gen 4 support.
And costs about the same, on a cheaper motherboard.

As for ram amount, really, how many depends on what you do... You can have 3 VMs with 512mb ram each, or 10 VMs with 8 gigs each.
You can have a blender scene with 5 objects, and a scene with 5 thousand.
For basic computing and gaming, 16 is plenty.
If you could handle 12 before, maybe 32 gigs is actually what you really need?
 
Reactions: Steamy_Steve
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
[....]

As for ram amount, really, how many depends on what you do... You can have 3 VMs with 512mb ram each, or 10 VMs with 8 gigs each.
You can have a blender scene with 5 objects, and a scene with 5 thousand.
For basic computing and gaming, 16 is plenty.
If you could handle 12 before, maybe 32 gigs is actually what you really need?
64GB it is then....4x16GB, of course.
And it will be 3600MHz, your elaboration on the matter was convincing.

Now I just have to find a good kit that is also available on the market here where I live.
A new challenge, surely.
 
64GB it is then....4x16GB, of course.
And it will be 3600MHz, your elaboration on the matter was convincing.

Now I just have to find a good kit that is also available on the market here where I live.
A new challenge, surely.
Why 4x16? just harder on your cpu memory controller, and leaves you with less upgrade path.
You don't get more bandwidth taking more slots, only taking more channels. Your cpu has 2 channels, you only need to populate 2 slots to take full advantage of that.
 
Reactions: Steamy_Steve
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
Why 4x16? just harder on your cpu memory controller, and leaves you with less upgrade path.
You don't get more bandwidth taking more slots, only taking more channels. Your cpu has 2 channels, you only need to populate 2 slots to take full advantage of that.
It was just to make the whole ordeal a little less frustrating.
I mean, maybe it'd be easier to find smaller modules? Or not?

I don't know anymore....this is why my current PC is 10 years old, because I hate all the anxiety that comes from trying to pick the best investments.
For instance, your comment on AMD CPUs just made me panic (quietly).

Then....2x32GB modules.....ok....I see.....but what model?! >.<
I mean, what series? Not the Vengeance, I guess....? What about RipJaws? Patriot Viper? G.Skill Trident? HyperX Fury?!

I'm just reading names from Amazon among the available kits!!

There goes another tuft of hair.....
 
It was just to make the whole ordeal a little less frustrating.
I mean, maybe it'd be easier to find smaller modules? Or not?

I don't know anymore....this is why my current PC is 10 years old, because I hate all the anxiety that comes from trying to pick the best investments.
For instance, your comment on AMD CPUs just made me panic (quietly).

Then....2x32GB modules.....ok....I see.....but what model?! >.<
I mean, what series? Not the Vengeance, I guess....? What about RipJaws? Patriot Viper? G.Skill Trident? HyperX Fury?!

I'm just reading names from Amazon among the available kits!!

There goes another tuft of hair.....
You do realize, all of those companies don't make ram right?
They make fancy plastic shroud on a pcb.
What matters is the spec, not the brand.

Get what you think looks nice, costs normally and has the speed and latency you want, which is 3600mhz cl16 for best performance.
 
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
You do realize, all of those companies don't make ram right?
They make fancy plastic shroud on a pcb.
What matters is the spec, not the brand.

Get what you think looks nice, costs normally and has the speed and latency you want, which is 3600mhz cl16 for best performance.
Well, yeah, of course Corsair doesn't produce every single component of its range of products. It'd be insane!!

But.
At the same time they can either pick cheap stuff or good stuff.
That's where the brand makes a difference.

Anyway, I opted for a HyperX Fury 128GB @3600MHz kit. C18, though.
In terms of price is only slightly more expensive than the Corsair LPX 64GB @4000MHZ kit I tried to get before I stumbled on you.

Of course now you're gonna tell me that I could've aimed for something better, but no, I've been waiting for over 2 months already, and I'd say this kit is more than enough for my needs anyway.
Nothing else available, and I'm out of patience too. I've read good things, about HyperX memories, though.

And, who knows, in a few months I could sell this kit and get a new one, but I doubt I'll ever truly notice that C18 being any kind of bottleneck.
 
Last edited:
Well, yeah, of course Corsair doesn't produce every single component of its range of products. It'd be insane!!

But.
At the same time they can either pick cheap stuff or good stuff.
That's where the brand makes a difference.

Anyway, I opted for a HyperX Fury 128GB @3600MHz kit. C18, though.
In terms of price is only slightly more expensive than the Corsair LPX 64GB @4000MHZ kit I tried to get before I stumbled on you.

Of course now you're gonna tell me that I could've aimed for something better, but no, I've been waiting for over 2 months already, and I'd say this kit is more than enough for my needs anyway.
Nothing else available, and I'm out of patience too. I've read good things, about HyperX memories, anyway.

And, who knows, in a few months I could sell this kit and get a new one, but I doubt I'll ever truly notice that C18 being any kind of bottleneck.
Good choice. If you really really cared, you can always tighten the timings on your own.
 
Reactions: Steamy_Steve
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
Good choice. If you really really cared, you can always tighten the timings on your own.
Yeah, my same thought.
I mean, 12GB of DDR3 overclocked @2GHz+ lasted for over 10 years.
I might OC this kit as well, but I'll obviously aim a fan at them.

On a side note: do you know any good OC guide for i9 10900K? And RAM too, possibly?
I've been out of the game for a while, I can't really remember how to handle it anymore.
 
Yeah, my same thought.
I mean, 12GB of DDR3 overclocked @2GHz+ lasted for over 10 years.
I might OC this kit as well, but I'll obviously aim a fan at them.

On a side note: do you know any good OC guide for i9 10900K? And RAM too, possibly?
I've been out of the game for a while, I can't really remember how to handle it anymore.
DDR4 runs much cooler than DDR3, same as DDR3 ran cooler than the DDR2 that came before, so a fan is probably not needed.

RAM overclocking is basically dead aside from timings, and
OCing i9 10900k
lol good luck
(it runs at 5.3 ghz out the box. do you honestly think it can do any higher?)
 
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
DDR4 runs much cooler than DDR3, same as DDR3 ran cooler than the DDR2 that came before, so a fan is probably not needed.
Please, go tell that to my DDR3 kit, which gets as hot as a frying pan, without a fan constantly blowing on it.
Of course it's OC'd, so maybe that's the reason....?

RAM overclocking is basically dead aside from timings, and
OCing i9 10900k
lol good luck
(it runs at 5.3 ghz out the box. do you honestly think it can do any higher?)
No, well, I was looking at that "3.7GHz base frequency", while the 5.3GHz value is the "turbo frequency".
So, maybe I'm misunderstanding what is what....?
Got time to help me get it right?
 
Please, go tell that to my DDR3 kit, which gets as hot as a frying pan, without a fan constantly blowing on it.
Of course it's OC'd, so maybe that's the reason....?



No, well, I was looking at that "3.7GHz base frequency", while the 5.3GHz value is the "turbo frequency".
So, maybe I'm misunderstanding what is what....?
Got time to help me get it right?
As for the ram, as I mentioned, DDR4 doesn't get as hot, and also isn't worth the trial and error of OC'ing aside from the timings.
As for the CPU clocks:
3.7 base is the lowest the cpu will go in a full loaded 100% all core load, though if it's properly cooled it will usually hover a bit above that (on stock) at around 3.9 or 4ghz if I remember correctly.
The 5.3 boost is a temporary single core boost that only applies for a short while.
An all core temporary boost is at 4.9ghz.
The maintained 1 core boost is 5.2 and full core is 4.8ghz

Yes, this is dumb. Yes, it's what intel advertises.

Unlike AMD, Intel has a "timer" on their cpu boost behavior, so say, you start an all core boost, it will shoot up to 4.9ghz, then settle as 4.8, but slowly go as low as 3.7, but probably settle at around 4.0~ ghz and stay there (Thermal and power constraints not withstanding.)

As for overclocking there are a couple of things you can do
From easiest to hardest:
Enable multicore enhancement: Disables 'timer' on the boosting behavior, letting the CPU run at 4.8 all core and 5.2 single core without ever slowing down (If cooling is enough..)
Just set 4.9/5.0ghz all cores with nothing else changed. any i9 10900k should handle this gracefully with no voltage changes.
Meticulously OC it, trying to get every AVX offset and boosting capability to your desire, say, get all core maintained boost at 5.1 if possible, and get a 2 core boost of 5.2 instead of single, make the temporary boost the maintained one, and change each voltage individually and such. IMO not worth even trying. 1-2% faster and 100% less stable for hours of your time.
 
Reactions: Steamy_Steve
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
As for the ram, as I mentioned, DDR4 doesn't get as hot, and also isn't worth the trial and error of OC'ing aside from the timings.
As for the CPU clocks:
3.7 base is the lowest the cpu will go in a full loaded 100% all core load, though if it's properly cooled it will usually hover a bit above that (on stock) at around 3.9 or 4ghz if I remember correctly.
The 5.3 boost is a temporary single core boost [....]
Incredibly, I've found an OC guide that includes both my CPU and a MoBo model that is very close to mine.
As a result, now I know that, by enabling the multi-core enhancement (I believe you got the name right), the CPU goes straight to 4.9 and stays there.
Then, by barely touching LLC and core voltage, and raising the multiplier to 50x, it's possible to attain a 100% stable 5.0GHz (several hours of Prime95!!).
And with pretty decent temperatures too.

And that's all I'm asking for, I don't feel the need to push it any further.
 
Incredibly, I've found an OC guide that includes both my CPU and a MoBo model that is very close to mine.
As a result, now I know that, by enabling the multi-core enhancement (I believe you got the name right), the CPU goes straight to 4.9 and stays there.
Then, by barely touching LLC and core voltage, and raising the multiplier to 50x, it's possible to attain a 100% stable 5.0GHz (several hours of Prime95!!).
And with pretty decent temperatures too.

And that's all I'm asking for, I don't feel the need to push it any further.
Exactly as I said above.
Though not sure you even need core voltage changes for 5ghz all core.
 
Reactions: Steamy_Steve

TravisPNW

Proper
Aug 26, 2020
212
70
160
0
And costs about the same, on a cheaper motherboard.
The biggest difference between AMD and Intel right now is this thing called scalper tax.

Intel has none.

I paid $500 for my 10900k while guys are paying $1300 on eBay for the 5950x... it's not rocket science. You go Intel unless you are stupid.


Incredibly, I've found an OC guide that includes both my CPU and a MoBo model that is very close to mine.
As a result, now I know that, by enabling the multi-core enhancement (I believe you got the name right), the CPU goes straight to 4.9 and stays there.
Then, by barely touching LLC and core voltage, and raising the multiplier to 50x, it's possible to attain a 100% stable 5.0GHz (several hours of Prime95!!).
And with pretty decent temperatures too.

And that's all I'm asking for, I don't feel the need to push it any further.
I'm running 5.2 all core on my MSI Unify board @ 1.34v... and I went with the Ripjaws 64GB (2x32) 4000mhz CL18 modules because it was literally a $30 difference over the 3600 modules... so minimal performance increases aside it wasn't a big enough price gap for me to say no to the higher speed.

MSFS2020 loves fast ram so that was another reason in going with 4000mhz... LOL
 
The biggest difference between AMD and Intel right now is this thing called scalper tax.

Intel has none.

I paid $500 for my 10900k while guys are paying $1300 on eBay for the 5950x... it's not rocket science. You go Intel unless you are stupid.




I'm running 5.2 all core on my MSI Unify board @ 1.34v... and I went with the Ripjaws 64GB (2x32) 4000mhz CL18 modules because it was literally a $30 difference over the 3600 modules... so minimal performance increases aside it wasn't a big enough price gap for me to say no to the higher speed.

MSFS2020 loves fast ram so that was another reason in going with 4000mhz... LOL
Scalper tax is a whole nother story. where I come from, scalper prices don't exist, the prices are normally just high. i9 10900k is around 800$, and that's the normal price.
The 5950X is 300+$ more expensive than the i9 10900k usually, I don't know why you would compare the 2.
The 5900X is more equivalent in pricing (MSRP) but is still much more powerful.
The 5800X is closer to the i9 10900k in multicore and much faster in single core and has the same street pricing.

I'm not an AMD fanboy, nor an intel one. AMD is just plain better right now, scalper pricing or not.
Nice silicon on that cpu, but remember, his i9 might not fair that well. It's all part of the silicon lottery.
He also has a high end motherboard so VRMS shouldn't be his problem.
Most i9 10900k can do 5.1 all cores, but with uncontrollable thermal and high voltage.
As for ram, 3600cl16 is just a tiny bit slower than cl18 4000mhz, and also, are you getting 4000mhz on such high capacity modules? or do you just have 4000mhz dimms that run at 3600?
 

TravisPNW

Proper
Aug 26, 2020
212
70
160
0
Scalper tax is a whole nother story. where I come from, scalper prices don't exist

I don't know why you would compare the 2.
Where I'm talking about (USA) scalper tax most definitely does exist. I compared the 2 because they are the current flagship processors and the performance gap between them doesn't justify the price difference between them. I'm talking about scalper prices which is pretty much the only way you can buy the 5950x right now.

The 5950x isn't worth 2.5x the price of the 10900k... but that's what scalpers are selling them for.

I'm not an AMD fanboy
Oh yeah you are... or you wouldn't be repeating it over and over again. I stopped reading there. Nothing else to see in this thread. (y)
 
Where I'm talking about (USA) scalper tax most definitely does exist. I compared the 2 because they are the current flagship processors and the performance gap between them doesn't justify the price difference between them. I'm talking about scalper prices which is pretty much the only way you can buy the 5950x right now.

The 5950x isn't worth 2.5x the price of the 10900k... but that's what scalpers are selling them for.



Oh yeah you are... or you wouldn't be repeating it over and over again. I stopped reading there. Nothing else to see in this thread. (y)
I run an i7 8700k...
What does it matter that the i9 10900k and 5950X are both flagship?
The 5800X is more in line with pricing, performance and placement..
Where I come from the 5800X is 100$ cheaper than the 10900k and is better...
while the 5900X is a bit higher in price and much better.

Scalper prices don't apply here so I don't even know how much these chips run for there.
 
Reactions: Steamy_Steve

TravisPNW

Proper
Aug 26, 2020
212
70
160
0
I run an i7 8700k...
What does it matter that the i9 10900k and 5950X are both flagship?
LOL... all I said was in the USA the scalper price makes the 10900k a much better purchase due to the $500 price vs $1300 price and all you want to do is go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about how great AMD is. :rolleyes:

Go upgrade that 8700k with a 5000 series.... then you can own the hardware you are slobbering all over your screen about.

P.S.

Most i9 10900k can do 5.1 all cores, but with uncontrollable thermal and high voltage.
Wrong.

.... at least know what in the hell you are talking about before you go posting wrong information. 5.1 all core is the most it can do eh?

Why is mine running at 5.2 and has also run at 5.3?

Do your research before you post. Seriously.

...and LOL @ the downvote. Done responding to you now. Better things to do than argue with AMD fanboys. You should at least go buy one though bro... you seem to know more about AMD than you do Intel, I'll give you credit for that.
 
LOL... all I said was in the USA the scalper price makes the 10900k a much better purchase due to the $500 price vs $1300 price and all you want to do is go on and on and on and on and on and on and on and on about how great AMD is. :rolleyes:

Go upgrade that 8700k with a 5000 series.... then you can own the hardware you are slobbering all over your screen about.

P.S.



Wrong.

.... at least know what in the hell you are talking about before you go posting wrong information. 5.1 all core is the most it can do eh?

Why is mine running at 5.2 and has also run at 5.3?

Do your research before you post. Seriously.

...and LOL @ the downvote. Done responding to you now. Better things to do than argue with AMD fanboys. You should at least go buy one though bro... you seem to know more about AMD than you do Intel, I'll give you credit for that.
Bruh
 
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
[....] I went with the Ripjaws 64GB (2x32) 4000mhz CL18 modules because it was literally a $30 difference over the 3600 modules... so minimal performance increases aside it wasn't a big enough price gap for me to say no to the higher speed.

MSFS2020 loves fast ram so that was another reason in going with 4000mhz... LOL
You didn't read the thread carefully, as I said:
"[....] I opted for a HyperX Fury 128GB @3600MHz kit. C18, though.
In terms of price is only slightly more expensive than the Corsair LPX 64GB @4000MHZ kit I tried to get [....]

[....] I've been waiting for over 2 months already, and I'd say this kit is more than enough for my needs anyway.
Nothing else available (here where I live) [....].

In the end, what really matters for me is the amount, rather than the speed.
Sculpting, rendering, data processing, virtual machines....this is what I'll use my RAM for, for the most part.

Maybe I've reiterated the concept way too many times already, but my current system (GPU excluded) is already 10 years old.
Anything above an i7 920 and DDR3 RAM would most likely dazzle me.

Anyway, if the performance gap is minimal between 3600 and 4000MHz (I understood it is), I doubt MSFS2020 will gain anything different.
Or maybe I'm missing something, there? =o
 
Jan 21, 2021
22
1
15
0
[....]
Most i9 10900k can do 5.1 all cores, but with uncontrollable thermal and high voltage.
[....]
It's true that the "silicon lottery" is a thing, when overclocking, but I believe 5.3GHz is perfectly within the capabilities of any i9 10900K. Unless you won the lottery of the opposite, and you got the worst possible, that is.

The issue with the temperatures becomes a thing when you pressure the CPU with Prime95 tests, and even then I doubt a good 360 AIO liquid cooling system wouldn't be able to handle the heat and avoid the down-throttling.

At least, this is what I've read around the Internet, by browsing through several overclocking articles featuring stability tests.
By all means feel free to correct any possible misconception.
 
It's true that the "silicon lottery" is a thing, when overclocking, but I believe 5.3GHz is perfectly within the capabilities of any i9 10900K. Unless you won the lottery of the opposite, and you got the worst possible, that is.

The issue with the temperatures becomes a thing when you pressure the CPU with Prime95 tests, and even then I doubt a good 360 AIO liquid cooling system wouldn't be able to handle the heat and avoid the down-throttling.

At least, this is what I've read around the Internet, by browsing through several overclocking articles featuring stability tests.
By all means feel free to correct any possible misconception.
5.3ghz is possible on some 10900k but is uncommon.
some can do 5.2ghz
and most can do 5.1ghz

The chip runs hot and gulps down power even in stock.
https://siliconlottery.com/collections/all/intel-i9-10900k
There is a reason a validated 5.1ghz 10900k costs 860$...
Yes, silicon lottery marks up products for validation first, and then for how good it is, so say, they take around 40-60$~ for validation
A 5.1ghz all core i9 10900k is worth 800$..
Dunno why that guy talks about how much of an AMD fanboy I am. I actually perfer intel, and am super pumped for 11th gen, but AMD is just better right now, no contest aside from the low end, where AMD doesn't have a zen 3 cpu.


Anyway, this discussion is done.
Thread closed.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY