Originally Posted by pox02
1600mhz 7 8 7 20 its not faster then 2133?
More MHz is nearly always better.
If you want to compare those latency numbers like the 7-8-7-20 you mentioned, you need to divide by the MHz. You would for example compare 7 divided by 1600 with 9 divided by 2133, then look for what's smaller and that's the "better" one.
The thing is just that this is only the performance for the very first piece of data when reading or writing. Even if 2133 MHz ends up being technically slower with regards to that, it will catch up if your CPU reads or writes longer stretches of data. The increased bandwidth from 2133 MHz is worth more than any possibly lower latency the 1600MHz kit might have.
So, if that 7-8-7-20 was 1600 MHz RAM, if you translate that to 2133 MHz speeds, it's the same latency as this (but it's not possible to have fractions for those numbers in practice):
9.3 - 10.7 - 9.3 - 26.7
That's calculated like this as an example:
20 / 1600 * 2133 = 26.7Edited by deepor - 1/12/15 at 1:48pm