facebook rss twitter

Review: G.Skill RipjawsZ Sandy Bridge-E memory

by Tarinder Sandhu on 23 November 2011, 08:44 4.0

Tags: G skill

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qa76d

Add to My Vault: x

Final thoughts and rating

The purpose of this review, as with all other reviews, is to evaluate a product and to dole out buying advice. In that regard, G.Skill's 16GB (4x4GB) DDR3-1,600 kit scores well in all areas, offering rock-solid stability, mainstream performance and good value on an Intel X79 platform.

Yet through testing we've found a remarkable lack of real-world performance deviation when simply taking two of the modules out, leaving an 8GB kit - 2x4GB sticks - in the system. This is not to suggest that readers should purchase dual-channel kits for a Sandy Bridge-E system, for even 16GB of quality memory barely constitutes 10 per cent of the platform cost. But such is the on-chip cache of these monster processors, rising to over 12MB on the Core-i7 3930K, that the speed and capacity of the supporting memory is relatively unimportant for a wide range of consumer applications - their data-sets are gobbled by the chip's cache.

As an aside, Intel's memory architecture and cache design indirectly show why regular Sandy Bridge processors perform so well; they're tuned for running with two DIMMs.

Understanding the dynamic between Core-i7 3000-series chips and system memory is important when purchasing RAM. The real horsepower in the system is the chip, not the RAM, and so spending huge amounts of money on esoteric memory isn't ideal. It makes sense to go for mainstream RAM and, as such, ticking all the right boxes, we have little hesitation in recommending the £75 G.Skill 16GB kit.

Bottom line: the G.Skill RipJawsZ F3-12800CL9Q-16GBZL is a quality Core-i7 3000-series memory kit at an attractive price. There's little reason to spend more than £75 on SNB-E memory unless every last drop of performance matters to you.

The Good

No hassle plug 'n' play usage
Good value

The Bad

Greater capacity doesn't yield significantly more performance

HEXUS Rating

4/5
G.Skill RipJawsZ (F3-12800CL9Q-16GBZL)

HEXUS Awards


G.Skill RipJawsZ (F3-12800CL9Q-16GBZL)

HEXUS Where2Buy

TBC.

HEXUS Right2Reply

At HEXUS, we invite the companies whose products we test to comment on our articles. If any company representatives for the products reviewed choose to respond, we'll publish their commentary here verbatim.



HEXUS Forums :: 8 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
This platform seems so pointless and such a waste of money. Anything beyond a 2500k and some average speed RAM seems totally unnecessary, hell I'm still using an old phenom II with DDR2 and I see no reason to upgrade :)
MustardCutter
This platform seems so pointless and such a waste of money. Anything beyond a 2500k and some average speed RAM seems totally unnecessary, hell I'm still using an old phenom II with DDR2 and I see no reason to upgrade :)

That's only looking at it from your point of view, I understand it's total overkill for the casual user and would be simply for the e-peen extension :p, but it's overclocked prowess makes it attractive to anyone who does CPU intensive work. Basically if I can process my work faster I can improve the product or increase the output and charge more, so the value is justified.

cheers
brasc
Bandwidth tests based only on SiSoft Sandra are skewed. It appears only Sandra is able to provide for tangible benefit of three and four channel memory over dual channel. None of the other leading memory tests (i.e. AIDA, MaxxMem, etc.) provides evidence of bandwidth increase scaling with more then two DIMMs. Is it possible to add additional bandwidth benchmark for good measure?
maube try these in an AMD machine?
Can you add to this test?

How would the 8GB dual channel results compare to 8GB Quad channel 4 x 2GB of the same spec?

Something like, corsair-ddr3-vengeance-jet-black-pc3-12800-(1600)-non-ecc-cas-9-9-9-24-xmp-1.5v for example if G-Skill don't have a product at that point?