Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

High-Density DDR3: Five Dual-Module 8GB Kits Compared

High-Density DDR3: Five Dual-Module 8GB Kits Compared
By

Power users have been maximizing memory almost since the beginning of personal computing, often attempting to make workstation-class programs run as well on home computers as they do on lab machines. Memory manufacturers gladly filled demand by producing non-ECC memory at server-sized capacities, easily reaching the 1GB per module capacity limit of DDR1 many years ago. That 1GB limit became the baseline for high-capacity DDR2 modules almost immediately after compatible platforms launched, and that technology’s 4GB per module limit was reached within a few years. With the trend set, many of us expected 4GB DDR3 performance modules to hit the market way back in 2007 and the maximum 16GB capacity to be reached soon. However, DDR3 capacities didn’t follow former trends.

We could speculate about how demand for increased capacities might have dropped off as user expectations reached a plateau with 1080p animations or 12 megapixel images, but that still doesn’t explain why, for nearly two years, DDR2 was the only option for most users who wanted really high memory capacities in their PCs. DDR3 users were forced to use four modules (dual-channel) or six modules (triple channel) to reach 8GB and 12GB capacities, and anyone who wanted 16GB or more had to wait over a year for the release of super-expensive 4GB DIMMs. Even as 4GB DDR3 modules for notebooks became common, desktop DDR3 users faced the fear of paying eight times as much to double their memory capacity.

The breakthrough came late last fall, when G.Skill introduced several high-density kits priced “only” four times as high as similar parts half the size. Other manufacturers gradually followed, and today we finally have several 8GB two-module kits that most high-end builders can afford.

Rated at CAS 9 and priced between $400 and $500, manufacturer-approved data rates of 1,333 and 1,600 MHz appear to be the only noticeable difference between these modules. Curious to find the highest-performance parts within this budget range, we tested each set to find out the true limits of its stability, both at lower-latency and higher-frequency settings.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 8 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 0 Hide
    psiboy , 4 February 2010 15:18
    Lets not forget 64 bit too eh Rab1d-BDGR ?
  • 0 Hide
    staalkoppie , 5 February 2010 16:27
    what are the timings they refer to... Can someone please explain what the are and how to interpret them?
  • 0 Hide
    waxdart , 5 February 2010 21:18
    I've got 2gb 4-4-4-12 DDR2 800 (PC2 6400).
    Say I've got a mother board that holds ddr2/3 - Would I see much of a change in frame rate if all the other parts stayed the same?

  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , 11 February 2010 20:56
    There is no real difference in speed with memory. This just increases performance for larger applications. You will see maybe a change of 1 or 2 fps in games. Is it really worth it? You must remember that the speed of the memory means that it accesses faster. But if the memory isn't always accessed, then it will make little real difference.

  • 1 Hide
    staalkoppie , 24 February 2010 16:33
    Rab1d-BDGRFrom: http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/foru [...] ad-postingFor more details try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAM#Operation_principle



    Thank you so much....really appreciated
  • 0 Hide
    gemmakaru , 28 April 2010 19:42
    Rab1d-BDGRA little footnote to anyone with triple-channel DDR mobos - if you are thinking of putting three of these kits into your machine for a whopping 24GB of RAM then make sure you are using Windows 7 pro/ent/ult - "Home premium" is limited to 16GB of RAM....If you're rich and/or crazy enough to spend that much on RAM then I'm sure the more expensive OS is small change. :-/


    Or Linux.
  • -2 Hide
    trooth , 13 May 2010 20:29
    Look at this loser company Patriot trying to attain credibility and status by charging more for their crappy produce.


  • 0 Hide
    mi1ez , 30 June 2010 02:24
    reported. for all the good it seems to be doing!