Here are a few of my results...
- 3930K @ 4.5Ghz (usually 4.8)
- Rampage 4 Extreme
- 16GB G.Skill Ripjaws Z DDR3 2133 9-11-10-27
- EVGA GTX 670 FTW 2GB @ 1326/7460
- Samsung 830 256GB SSD (OS/Sys/Apps)
- WD Blue 320GB (Music/Video)
- HGST 7K500 320GB (Apps)
- WD RE3 1TB (Games)
- Creative Titanium HD
- LG/Hitachi Slim DVD-R/W
- NZXT HALE90 850W PSU
- TRIPP-LITE ISO-BAR-4 ULTRA Line Conditioner/Surge Suppressor/Voltage Regulator
I used the above system for the below tests, with all clocks identical with just the RAM changing. The system is watercooled so no drops in Kepler Boost or anything like that.
(RAM SPEED + TIMINGS - AVERAGE FPS - MINIMUM FPS - MAXIMUM FPS)
All tests done in 1080p using a Dell P2212Hb connected via DL-DVI-D, all game settings set at maximum unless otherwise noted.HALF-LIFE 2 EPISODE 2
(CPU @ 3.4Ghz, GPU @ Stock FTW Speeds)
1600 6-7-7-19 - 198.5 - 131.8 - 233
1600 9-9-9-24 - 191.3 - 124.9 - 219
1866 8-8-8-24 - 204.1 - 137.7 - 242
2133 9-11-10-27 - 217 - 147.1 - 259
2133 9-10-9-26 - 226 - 154.3 - 266
2360 9-12-10-29 - 231 - 159.7 - 283
Half-Life 2 and it's countless derivatives (mods, etc) all seem to be CPU Bound at this point, as I see a perfectly linear relationship between a CPU's speed and FPS.FAR CRY 3
(CPU @ 4.5Ghz, GPU @ 1326/7460)
1600 6-7-7-19 - 52.2 - 26.1 - 93
1600 9-9-9-24 - 50.8 - 24 - 86
1866 8-8-8-24 - 54.1 - 27.9 - 96
2133 9-11-10-27 - 57.4 - 31.1 - 105
2133 9-10-9-26 - 58.7 - 33 - 107
2360 9-12-10-29 - 60.2 - 35.5 - 108
The biggest thing with FC3 is the increase in smoothness. The slower memory feels choppy at times, such as when you get into a firefight. The faster memory never has this problem. Also, with 2133 and above, I get zero texture "pop in", yet it's present with lower memory speeds.
I did recordings of 9 games, 11 benchmarks, and timed start up/shutdown/opening (Firefox with 25tabs/Photoshop/Paint.Net/Chrome
with 25tabs,and a half dozen other things), and a few other things.
There is not a single instance in which the 1600 9-9-9-24 didn't come in dead last. The differences ranged from "benchmark-noticeable" to "Wow that's a huge improvement".
I simply don't recommend getting 1600 when the option for faster memory is there, especially if you have an IVB platform. The tests above are X79, and I have done the same tests on a 3770K + GA-Z77X-UP7, 3770K + Maximus 5 Extreme, 3570K + Extreme6 (for Ivy), a 2700K + Maximus 4 Extreme-Z, 2600K + G3.Sniper3, 2500K + Extreme9 (for Sandy), a Phenom II X4 980BE + ASRock 990FX Fatal1ty, 1100T + Crosshair V Formula-Z, 960T + 990FX Sabertooth R2.0, 1090 + M5A99X, 965BE + Gigabyte 990FX UD5(UD7, can't remember), and 8350 + Crosshair V Formula, 8130 + Sabertooth, 6100 + Extreme6, 4100 + Extreme3.
These have been over the course of 16mo, and variables change, not all systems had all tests run (most only had 2-3 games and a few benchmarks), and it's not a controlled experiment. Still, the results are only compared against the results from the same system, so they are perfectly valid.
Every single system wanted the fastest memory possible, although the Phenom II systems had to be controlled for timings by ensuring that the actual latency in ns was better than the prior test (which means most of the Phenom II tests are more about timings for a given speed than speed itself, although 1800 7-8-7-26 was always the fastest, beating 1600 6-7-6-19 by 9.3% on average).
I will try to get the rest of the results all compiled on a single spreadsheet...