Ram latency from 11 11 11 28 to 9 9 9 24

[HristoBB]

Hey there guys! I have a FX 8350 with Asus Aura 970 Pro Gaming Aura motherboard paired with 2x8GB Samsung 1600mhz 11 11 11 28 Ram. I have a question tho. Will it make any difference if i try to lower the latency to 9 9 9 24 or it will be better to just raise the Speed to 1866 - 11 11 11 28 or 2133 - 13 13 13 35?
Which is better lower latency or higher clock speed? 
I'm not asking for better gaming experience just better overall system responsiveness and yes i do have SSD installed . 
 

[Sakkura]

Timings are not directly representative of latency, as they are counted in the number of clock cycles. 9 cycles at lower clocks aren't the same as 9 cycles at higher clocks.

 

In this case, 9 cycles at 1600 MT/s is 11.25 nanoseconds, 11 cycles at 1866 MT/s is 11.79ns, and 13 cycles at 2133 is 12.20ns.

 

Clocks thus tend to be a little more important than timings, but you want to find a balance.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

Both would help, it's a matter of finding a sweet spot between the two. Both Level1Techs and ThioJoe have videos explaining the relationship, and providing spreadsheets to compute combinations by yourself - I don't know the links from the top of my head, though.

 

Own experience with FX chips seemed to indicate that 2400CL11 and 2133CL10 were very close in a certain benchmark, with 1866CL9 not far behind. But can't say whether that benchmark was representative of real world experience at all (my intuition tells me that real life experience won't care all that much in the big scheme of things, but FX chips need all the help you can give them - and free performance is free ).