Motherboard and RAM for 4790k?

[Sherako]

Please recommend parts on these guidelines: 8GB per stick, 2 channel, 4790k can support 1333/1600, can I use 1866? Or is it not worth it? Motherboard need 4 16x slots and idk what color scheme yet. What color scheme can I use for Windforce 290, 840 EVO, 4930k? What CPU cooler for 4790k at 4.5?

RAM EDIT: If 1600, 9-9-9-24, if 1866, 10-10-10-27

[X1XNobleX1X]

Please recommend parts on these guidelines: 8GB per stick, 2 channel, 4790k can support 1333/1600, can I use 1866? Or is it not worth it? Motherboard need 4 16x slots and idk what color scheme yet. What color scheme can I use for Windforce 290, 840 EVO, 4930k? What CPU cooler for 4790k at 4.5?

Budget?

 

4790k can support 1333/1600, can I use 1866? Or is it not worth it? 

 

You can use 1866, but it won't make much of a difference. 

 

 

 

 Motherboard need 4 16x slots and idk what color scheme yet. 

No 1150 motherboard can do 4 16x.

You will need x79 for that. 

In 1150, they use PLX chips, which increase latency and can only do 8x. 

 

Actually, even a X79 can't do 16X, 16X, 16X, 16X. Its limit is 16X, 8X, 8x, 8X. 

 What color scheme can I use for Windforce 290, 840 EVO, 4930k? 

 

Black and red?

Or Blue

 

 

 

 What CPU cooler for 4790k at 4.5?

You're not always guaranteed to go to a certain overclock. Though a water cooler such as the h100i would be great. 

[Bagmup]

Four x16 slots? You're out of luck. Pretty sure you're gonna have to go X79 for that. Unless you mean just 4, 16 PCI-e slots.

[Redliquid]

you wont really notice a difference between 1333/1600/1866 mhz on the ram i think.


Low profile: Corsair 8gb cl9 1333 mhz XMS3

High proflile: Corsair 8gb CL10 1600 mhz VENGANCE

[Sherako]

Four x16 slots? You're out of luck. Pretty sure you're gonna have to go X79 for that. Unless you mean just 4, 16 PCI-e slots.

What are some x79 chips?

[Akolyte]

Motherboard: http://www.gigabyte.co.nz/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4980#ov

 

This is about as good as it gets for a gaming motherboard.  And it supports 4 way SLI with 4 full sized slots.  Just it comes pretty expensive.  

 

For the RAM I recommend Corsair Vengnance Pro, its pretty good all round stuff.  If your not planning to overclock your memory the standard Corsair Vengeance is good stuff too. 

[X1XNobleX1X]

Four x16 slots? You're out of luck. Pretty sure you're gonna have to go X79 for that. Unless you mean just 4, 16 PCI-e slots.

I actually think he means 4, 16x PCI-E slots. 

[X1XNobleX1X]

What are some x79 chips?

4960x, 4930k, 4820k. 

[Sherako]

I actually think he means 4, 16x PCI-E slots. 

What other 16x slots are there?!?

[X1XNobleX1X]

What other 16x slots are there?!?

Do you mean the motherboard has 4 PCI-E 16X length slots?

Or 16x bandwidth for 4 way SLI/Crossfire. 

[Sherako]

Do you mean the motherboard has 4 PCI-E 16X length slots?

Or 16x bandwidth for 4 way SLI/Crossfire. 

Which ever one I can put in 4 290's and get 16x on all of them.

[X1XNobleX1X]

Which ever one I can put in 4 290's and get 16x on all of them.

No motherboard available can do that. 

It would be 16X, 8X, 8X, 8X.

8X is enough, though. 

 

That is with X79, not 1150. 

[Sherako]

No motherboard available can do that. 

It would be 16X, 8X, 8X, 8X.

8X is enough, though. 

 

That is with X79, not 1150. 

What can 1150 do? And what is a dualchannel 32GB 1600 9-9-9-24 Kit?

[X1XNobleX1X]

What can 1150 do? And what is a dualchannel 32GB 1600 9-9-9-24 Kit?

The Z97 XPower for instance, can do 8X, 8X, 8X, 8x using a PLX chip. (PLX chip, of course, introduces latency. )

Without a PLX chip, it's only 16X or 8X, 8X nativly. 

 

EDITl Dual Channel is 8Gb x 4 sticks. 1600 is the speed and 9-9-9-24 is the CAS latency. Lower the better. 

[Sherako]

The Z97 XPower for instance, can do 8X, 8X, 8X, 8x using a PLX chip. (PLX chip, of course, introduces latency. )

Without a PLX chip, it's only 16X or 8X, 8X nativly. 

 

EDITl Dual Channel is 8Gb x 4 sticks. 1600 is the speed and 9-9-9-24 is the CAS latency. Lower the better. 

I worded that wrong, I mean, what would you recommend (RAM)

[X1XNobleX1X]

I worded that wrong, I mean, what would you recommend (RAM)

This is what I use, not sure why you need 32GB, but it's there. 

http://www.corsair.com/en/dominator-platinum-with-corsair-link-connector-1-5v-32-gb-dual-quad-channel-ddr3-memory-kit-cmd32gx3m4a1600c9

[Judist]

The latency PLX chips introduce on modern z97 boards cannot be perceived by human senses.

I'm running an Asus z97-ws in SLI (board has room for 4 cards) and a 1ms BenQ monitor. The PLX switching is completed in nanoseconds. There is zero mouse/input/lag delay of any sort.

Also, PCI 3.0 bandwidth is gargantuan. Even 4x slots are usually faster than necessary.

PLX switching makes use of the fact that very few cards ever call for full 16x bandwidth. It's ever rarer for multiple cards to call for it at the same time.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Please recommend parts on these guidelines: 8GB per stick, 2 channel, 4790k can support 1333/1600, can I use 1866? Or is it not worth it? Motherboard need 4 16x slots and idk what color scheme yet. What color scheme can I use for Windforce 290, 840 EVO, 4930k? What CPU cooler for 4790k at 4.5?

RAM EDIT: If 1600, 9-9-9-24, if 1866, 10-10-10-27

 

4790k can support memory up to 3000MHz, so don't go by Intel's official spec list.

 

Since memory differences in price are minimal at this point in time, go with a nice 2400MHz kit, it will offer lower latency than an 1866MHz kit and a 1600MHz kit. Especially since your looking at 1600MHz kits that are Cas 9 and 1866MHz kits that are Cas 10 (which is bad for the frequency.)

 

Go with this kit: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820231673&cm_re=G.Skill_2400-_-20-231-673-_-Product

 

1600MHz kit @ Cas 9 has a latency of: 11.25ns

1866MHz kit @ Cas 10 has a latency of: 10.71ns

 

The 2400MHz kit @ Cas 11, which I recommended has a latency of: 9.2ns

 

Lower the latency, the better, and 2400MHz memory costs the same as it's slower counterparts. 

[patrickjp93]

What other 16x slots are there?!?

It sounded as though you said 16GB RAM slots (which don't exist except on server boards anyway with buffered/registered DIMMs.

If you aren't using the integrated graphics, go with 1600MHz and CAS 7. Usually you can tighten the CAS to 6 on G.Skill Trident X, which provides a better absolute latency score than anything up through 2400MHz RAM out of the box. I've never succeeded in tightening a stick of 2400, though I did pull it off on a 2133 Trident X pair.

[BiG StroOnZ]

If you aren't using the integrated graphics, go with 1600MHz and CAS 7. Usually you can tighten the CAS to 6 on G.Skill Trident X, which provides a better absolute latency score than anything up through 2400MHz RAM out of the box. I've never succeeded in tightening a stick of 2400, though I did pull it off on a 2133 Trident X pair.

 

1600MHz memory is outdated and old. People need to stop recommending 1600MHz memory with Haswell. Haswell has a superior IMC than Sandy Bridge. It can Handle memory up to 3200MHz frequency all day. The days of 1600MHz memory are over. 

[patrickjp93]

1600MHz memory is outdated and old. People need to stop recommending 1600MHz memory with Haswell. Haswell has a superior IMC than Sandy Bridge. It can Handle memory up to 3200MHz frequency all day. The days of 1600MHz memory are over. 

That is dependent on the board you use. If you're going with a mid-range board then the ceiling is somewhere around 2633MHz. 1600MHz with tighter timings is as good as 2400MHz if you do the math. Remembering DDR meants you take half the rated clock rate, we do the following:

1600MHz @ CAS=7    7/800 = 8.75ns absolute latency

2400MHz @ CAS=10  10/1200 = 8.33ns absolute latency  

That difference is not only nanoscopic, but disappears in non-memory-intensive applications (gaming)

 

Now, I have never failed to tighten a G.Skill Trident X 1600MHz 8GB stick rated for CAS=7 down to CAS=6 either in single or dual-channel mode. I have never seen anyone succeed at tightening any of the 2400MHz 8GB sticks rated for CAS=10 down to CAS=9. 

 

6/800 = 7.5ns, which is a far more significant difference, even though it will still barely show up in gaming.

If someone suddenly proves consistent tightening on 2400MHz sticks, then 9/1200 also = 7.5ns. Oh the horrors...2400MHz in fact CANNOT beat the 1600 MHz sticks unless someone can find a way to drop not 1 but 2 CAS from the current best sticks.

 

1600MHz is the sweetspot for both price and performance if you know what you're doing. If you have a top of the line board and can get 3200MHz RAM working on it with CAS <13, then you win (8.125ns at CAS=13, still worse than 1600@Cas=6), but you pay out the nose for miniscule performance gains.

[BiG StroOnZ]

That is dependent on the board you use. If you're going with a mid-range board then the ceiling is somewhere around 2633MHz. 1600MHz with tighter timings is as good as 2400MHz if you do the math. Remembering DDR meants you take half the rated clock rate, we do the following:

1600MHz @ CAS=7    7/800 = 8.75ns absolute latency

2400MHz @ CAS=10  10/1200 = 8.33ns absolute latency  

That difference is not only nanoscopic, but disappears in non-memory-intensive applications (gaming)

 

Now, I have never failed to tighten a G.Skill Trident X 1600MHz 8GB stick rated for CAS=7 down to CAS=6. I have never seen anyone succeed at tightening any of the 2400MHz 8GB sticks rated for CAS=10 down to CAS=9. 

 

6/800 = 7.5ns, which is a far more significant difference, even though it will still barely show up in gaming.

 

1600MHz is the sweetspot for both price and performance if you know what you're doing. If you have a top of the line board and can get 3200MHz RAM working on it with CAS <13, then you win, but you pay out the nose for miniscule performance gains

 

 

 

 

At the end of the day the 2400MHz memory still has the better latency and on top of that will provide more bandwidth. 1600MHz has a peak transfer of 12800 mb/s 2400MHz memory kit has a peak transfer rate of well over 17066 mb/s.

 

1600MHz memory is not a sweet spot for price to performance. 2400MHz memory costs the same as 1600MHz the price differences are negligible. A low CAS latency kit of 1600MHz memory is going to cost as much as a CAS 10 2400MHz kit. The 2400MHz kit will be better at everything in the end and still have the lower Cas latency.

 

The differences in gaming are apparent. Please don't make me post numerous benchmarks that disprove the fallacy that higher speed memory does nothing for gaming. Higher speed memory increases your minimum framerates and in the end increases your average framerates. Higher speed memory is also superior in every single computing task you can ever do on a computer. The slower memory will always come in dead last.

 

Stop being hard headed on the ancient 1600MHz memory. Take that bs to reddit. 

[patrickjp93]

At the end of the day the 2400MHz memory still has the better latency and on top of that will provide more bandwidth. 1600MHz has a peak transfer of 12800 mb/s 2400MHz memory kit has a peak transfer rate of well over 17066 mb/s.

 

1600MHz memory is not a sweet spot for price to performance. 2400MHz memory costs the same as 1600MHz the price differences are negligible. A low CAS latency kit of 1600MHz memory is going to cost as much as a CAS 10 2400MHz kit. The 2400MHz kit will be better at everything in the end and still have the lower Cas latency.

 

The differences in gaming are apparent. Please don't make me post numerous benchmarks that disprove the fallacy that higher speed memory does nothing for gaming. Higher speed memory increases your minimum framerates and in the end increases your average framerates. Higher speed memory is also superior in every single computing task you can ever do on a computer. The slower memory will always come in dead last.

 

Stop being hard headed on the ancient 1600MHz memory. Take that bs to reddit. 

Newegg, Amazon, Linus, and I would like to disagree with you on the benefits of higher speed RAM, and as for pricing, um, it's a 25% difference in cost.

 

Furthermore, the only time people have RAM being the bottleneck is when they aren't running in dual or quad-channel which games are optimized for. When you have an assumed double-bandwidth availability and that gets cut in half, well, duh things are going to run slower, but no game saturates dual-channel on 1600MHz as long as the CAS is where it should be. In fact games are developed well below the maximum theoretical thresholds of the data bandwidth simply because we'll never have a CAS of 1.

 

By the time the extra bandwidth will matter for GAMING, DDR4 will have matured to pubescence. 

[dizmo]

@patrickjp93 you need to post more often. I enjoy how informative they are. You really hash everything out. I think I've learned something from every thread you've posted in.

 

 

At the end of the day the 2400MHz memory still has the better latency and on top of that will provide more bandwidth. 1600MHz has a peak transfer of 12800 mb/s 2400MHz memory kit has a peak transfer rate of well over 17066 mb/s.

 

1600MHz memory is not a sweet spot for price to performance. 2400MHz memory costs the same as 1600MHz the price differences are negligible. A low CAS latency kit of 1600MHz memory is going to cost as much as a CAS 10 2400MHz kit. The 2400MHz kit will be better at everything in the end and still have the lower Cas latency.

 

The differences in gaming are apparent. Please don't make me post numerous benchmarks that disprove the fallacy that higher speed memory does nothing for gaming. Higher speed memory increases your minimum framerates and in the end increases your average framerates. Higher speed memory is also superior in every single computing task you can ever do on a computer. The slower memory will always come in dead last.

 

Stop being hard headed on the ancient 1600MHz memory. Take that bs to reddit. 

I'd legitimately like to see those benchmarks. Link away.

[BiG StroOnZ]

Newegg, Amazon, Linus, and I would like to disagree with you on the benefits of higher speed RAM, and as for pricing, um, it's a 25% difference in cost.

 

Newegg and Amazon are retailers, so no need to mention them there. Linus is a reviewer who isn't always right, nobody is. Besides haven't you seen his 2400MHz 64GB G.Skill review. The first things he says are the price differences are minimal.

 

25% difference in cost? Ok then explain this:

 

G.Skill Trident X Series 8GB 2400MHz - $84.99 - Timings - 10-12-12-31

 

G.Skill Ripjaws X Series 8GB 1600MHz - $89.99 - Timings - 7-8-8-24

 

25% difference in cost is a lie. The higher speed kit is cheaper.