$170 for 16GB of very overclockable DDR4-2666

Subject: Memory | May 26, 2015 - 06:22 PM |
Tagged: ddr4-2666, G.Skill, Ripjaws 4

The price may still sting a bit but honestly, it is only about a small premium over many 16GB DDR3 kits so the pricing on DDR4 is getting much better.  G.Skill's 16GB DDR4-2666 quad channel kit has timings of 15-15-15-35 and are fully XMP compliant so getting them out of the clamshell packaging may be the hardest step in installing them.  Of course many readers here, just like at Bjorn3D, are not going to be satisfied with the default settings which brings us to the overclocking results.  3048MHz @ 16-16-16-37 was perfectly stable in their testing at 1.35V and for those who don't mind the long term effects of upping the voltage to 1.4V there is more headroom left. 

View Full Size

"G.Skill has been churning out enthusiast memory that overclocks like nothing else we’ve ever seen. Pop a set of Ripjaws 4 into your dream machine and settle into the BIOS for an overclocking experience like you’ve never had!"

Here are some more Memory articles from around the web:

Memory

Source: Bjorn3D

May 26, 2015 | 10:33 PM - Posted by Kingkookaluke (not verified)

I don't see the benefits from a gamers point of view to upgrade/or back track to the E at this time. I'm curious as to what "Skylake" will offer.

May 26, 2015 | 10:37 PM - Posted by Kingkookaluke (not verified)

http://www.cpu-world.com/Cores/Skylake-S.html

May 27, 2015 | 12:09 AM - Posted by pdjblum

Thanks gskill. They have grown by leaps and bounds over the last five years by offering really good products at a very reasonable price.

May 27, 2015 | 01:04 AM - Posted by Shadowarez

Now we just need ddr 4 to mature to the point we start seeing the higher density's I don't me the insane 128gb but more like 16gb dimms. So 64gb would be easier to get then 8 8gb dimms.

May 27, 2015 | 11:26 AM - Posted by Penteract (not verified)

Well I'm not going to be thrilled with DDR4 until we start seeing more products at speeds closer to the maximum for the spec. Right now there just isn't much difference, for most desktop users, in performance.

Of course mileage may vary with AMD CPUs, which scale better with memory upgrades, and Skylake may better support faster memory since the memory controller is being moved off the chip.

May 27, 2015 | 04:52 PM - Posted by Anonymous (not verified)

Most applications running on the CPU are not memory bandwidth bound, so faster memory isn't going to produce much of an improvement. The latency doesn't actually change much. We are going to get better latency from some of the new memory types due to being able to keep more pages open. I wouldn't really bother buying super fast DDR4. I also wouldn't bother attempting to overclock it unless you are running an APU and you want to squeeze the last bit of performance out of it.

May 27, 2015 | 11:47 AM - Posted by BBMan (not verified)

I've used g.skills DDR2 to DDR4 and have not had an issue with them. They overcame some fussy motherboards other brands could not.

I actually own this set and am delighted. They handle overclocking smoothly. They are not the hot rock on the ice cap, but they'll suit the general DDR4 user just fine at a cost that I didn't find out of line with system memory.

That said, I have to wonder why system memory at any level isn't keeping up with the dramatic capacity increases we're seeing everywhere else.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote><p><br>
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.