When it comes to memory overclocking, there are several ways to approach the issue.  Typically memory overclocking is rarely required - only those attempting to run benchmarks need worry about pushing the memory to its uppermost limits.  It also depends highly on the memory kits being used - memory is similar to processors in the fact that the ICs are binned to a rated speed.  The higher the bin, the better the speed - however if there is a demand for lower speed memory, then the higher bin parts may be declocked to increase supply of the lower clocked component.  Similarly, for the high end frequency kits, less than 1% of all ICs tested may actually hit the speed of the kit, hence the price for these kits increase exponentially.

With this in mind, there are several ways a user can approach overclocking memory.  The art of overclocking memory can be as complex or as simple as the user would like - typically the dark side of memory overclocking requires deep in-depth knowledge of how memory works at a fundamental level.  For the purposes of this review, we are taking overclocking in three different scenarios:

a) From XMP, adjust Command Rate from 2T to 1T
b) From XMP, increase Memory Speed strap (e.g. 1333 MHz -> 1400 -> 1600)
c) From XMP, decrease main sub-timings (e.g. 10-12-12 to 9-11-11 to 8-10-10)

There is plenty of scope to overclock beyond this, such as adjusting voltages or the voltage of the memory controller.  As long as a user is confident with adjusting these settings, then there is a good chance that the results here will be surpassed.   There is also the fact that individual sticks of memory may perform better than the rest of the kit, or that one of the modules could be a complete dud and hold the rest of the kit back.  For the purpose of this review we are seeing if the memory out of the box, and the performance of the kit as a whole, will work faster at the rated voltage.

In order to ensure that the kit is stable at the new speed, we run the memory test within OCCT for five minutes.  This is a small but thorough test, and we understand that users may wish to stability test for longer to reassure themselves of a longer element of stability.  However for the purposes of throughput, a five minute test will catch immediate errors from the overclocking of the memory.

With this in mind, the kit performed as follows:

F3-2666C11D-8GTXD – 2x4 GB rated at DDR3-2666 11-13-13-35 2T 1.65 volts

Adjusting from 2T to 1T: Passes Linpack
Adjusting from 2666 to 2800: Passes Linpack
Adjusting from 2800 to 2933: No Boot
Adjusting from 11-13-13 to 10-12-12: Fails Linpack

It should be noted that overclockers are getting very good results from these high end G.Skill kits – the fact that I was able to push this kit from 2666 C11 to 2800 C11 with nothing more than changing the memory strap is great.  G.Skill inform me that a lot of these kits will do 10-12-12 with a small voltage increase as well, taking performance a stage higher.  In fact, as part of my hobby of competitive overclocking, I have got this memory to 2950 MHz C11-13-13 by pushing some more voltage into the kit.

I wonder if this means that there may be recourse for manufacturers to release kits with a 1.75 volt profile, especially if it pushes the performance a little.  Then again, it is still debatable if the majority of users will see the performance increase.

Rendering and Throughput Conclusions
Comments Locked

28 Comments

View All Comments

  • Denithor - Monday, October 29, 2012 - link

    Seconded.

    While it's kinda nice to know the RAM companies CAN produce this level of product, for 99.999% of even your audience (the true computer geeks) these products are a useless waste of cash.

    I would much rather see more in depth reviews of other components, RAM speed is just so unnecessary in the overall performance of the system.
  • Tech-Curious - Friday, November 2, 2012 - link

    I think reviews like this one are useful precisely because they show, in exhaustive detail, that high-performance RAM is wasteful.

    Granted, a lot of us don't need in-depth reviews to know that, but FWIW, I'll toss this article in my bookmark folder and link it whenever I need to demonstrate to someone that they should buy cheaper RAM.
  • mpdugas - Monday, October 29, 2012 - link

    Jeepers, why all the hate?
  • Gen-An - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link

    No idea. If it's not for some people, fine, move on. Why they even bother wasting their time reading and replying to a review on a product they feel is "pointless" is beyond me.
  • Beenthere - Monday, October 29, 2012 - link

    Unless people have more money than brains no one really should be paying a premium for RAM with a frequency higher than 1866 MHz. as there is nothing of substance to be gained from it - as countless tests with real applications confirm. The bogus RAM tests that exaggerate the benefits of higher frquency RAM may dupe the gullible, but those with more PC knowledge know better than to be deceived.
  • saturn85 - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link

    add a folding on cpu benchmark should be great.
  • Gen-An - Tuesday, October 30, 2012 - link

    Ugh, you got the single-sided sticks with Hynix H5TQ4G83MFR. Most enthusiasts prefer the double-sided sticks with Hynix H5TQ2G83CFR ICs as they have more headroom than their 4Gbit counterparts. On the other hand, I have a kit of 4x4GB Trident X 2666 and I can't run all 4 sticks at 2800 C11 with stock voltage, though I haven't tried binning the sticks individually. People hate the Trident X 2400C10 sticks when they're single-sided Samsung.
  • Beenthere - Sunday, February 17, 2013 - link

    Only gullible sheeple think paying hundreds of dollars for RAM that offers no tangible improvement in system performance is a wise decision.

    Quote:

    "Moving up to 2666 C10 obviously has the advantages of the lower command rate."

    Hint: C10 is NOT the Command Rate which is either 1T or 2T

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now