help with good 32gb of ram

James7679 said:

Here's the problem, you are using a motherboard from an HP build. I don't think that anyone here is going to tell you that the memory you want to buy will or will not work due to compatibility issues. Each manufacturer states what RAM is compatible with their motherboards. Your best bet would be to upgrade your MoBo, CPU and memory. There's a chance that the memory will work fine. Most cases the memory will just run as underclocked. But I am not telling you it will work without fault.

i know my mobo supports 1600ram and is able to support up to 16gb of it, this fits perfectly till i work on my new setup

DeaconFrost said:

Thornton said:

i could do 1600 ram, but i fear im not going to see ANY major speed increases from my unfortunate 1333 now.

We could say that for any speed RAM you wish to buy.

You are asking some basic questions, and then you are disagreeing and debating with what people telling you. Not to sound rude, but if you have all the answers and are so sure of the differences in memory...why are you asking us?

Benchmarks are benchmarks...regardless of how they are run. Games are often used because they stress a good portion of the system. What we are trying to tell you is that synthetic benchmarks will show a difference in memory speed, but that doesn't translate into real world increases. You are wasting your time and money if you think adding higher speed memory will really make a difference.

If you want to ignore us and throw away your money...that's up to you. We're trying to tell you how it really is, and save you some cash...not only in telling you that you don't need anywhere that much memory...but that you don't need high speed memory.

As for another of your questions, if you underclock memory, you can often run it at lower timings. However, as mentioned, this is all so someone can get another couple of points in a synthetic benchmark that serves absolutely no purpose. When I was a kid, those things mattered to be. I was young and dumb. Now that I'm an adult with real responsibilities, I want a computer that's fast for the purposes I use it for. I couldn't tell the the speed or timings of the memory I have in my primary system....because it makes very little difference. I have 12 GB, and it lets me do anything I want, including play any game or run several VMs.

In theory, the memory will underclock to the supported speed, but given that this appears to be an HP board, you won't have any control over the settings, which further proves the point you'd be wasting money.

In the end, it is your money. Most of us don't sit around wasting time running synthetic benchmarks to see if we can push our memory scores to be 0.0003% higher. My system can play any game and easily handle any video editing and ripping chores I give it...and I don't spend one second worrying about my memory speed or timings.

no, no, your right. its just very stressful at times trying to find what you need when you know you need speed and cant narrow down the margin at all. i dont know if im a little dissapointed at the fact that i am only about 70% sure what i need, causing me to want to go overboard so i cant mess up, or if its because im farily certain 1600s going to be JUST as much as i need NOW and i may need faster in the future. whether its possible to go faster or not.

DeaconFrost said:

Thornton said:

i could do 1600 ram, but i fear im not going to see ANY major speed increases from my unfortunate 1333 now.

We could say that for any speed RAM you wish to buy.

You are asking some basic questions, and then you are disagreeing and debating with what people telling you. Not to sound rude, but if you have all the answers and are so sure of the differences in memory...why are you asking us?

Benchmarks are benchmarks...regardless of how they are run. Games are often used because they stress a good portion of the system. What we are trying to tell you is that synthetic benchmarks will show a difference in memory speed, but that doesn't translate into real world increases. You are wasting your time and money if you think adding higher speed memory will really make a difference.

If you want to ignore us and throw away your money...that's up to you. We're trying to tell you how it really is, and save you some cash...not only in telling you that you don't need anywhere that much memory...but that you don't need high speed memory.

As for another of your questions, if you underclock memory, you can often run it at lower timings. However, as mentioned, this is all so someone can get another couple of points in a synthetic benchmark that serves absolutely no purpose. When I was a kid, those things mattered to be. I was young and dumb. Now that I'm an adult with real responsibilities, I want a computer that's fast for the purposes I use it for. I couldn't tell the the speed or timings of the memory I have in my primary system....because it makes very little difference. I have 12 GB, and it lets me do anything I want, including play any game or run several VMs.

In theory, the memory will underclock to the supported speed, but given that this appears to be an HP board, you won't have any control over the settings, which further proves the point you'd be wasting money.

In the end, it is your money. Most of us don't sit around wasting time running synthetic benchmarks to see if we can push our memory scores to be 0.0003% higher. My system can play any game and easily handle any video editing and ripping chores I give it...and I don't spend one second worrying about my memory speed or timings.

also dont forget, my post above does state the upgrades im making WITH this purchase, so it wont be an hp board for long

edit: the post above YOUR comment, not mine lol

Sorry if I came across as angry or nasty. That wasn't my intention. I have built well over 100 computers for all ranges of purposes. I don't say that to sound brash and be bragging. I say it as in I want the person to enjoy their computers I build for them. Sitting around rerunnning a benchmark all day isn't fun, unless you are a kiddie with nothing better to do. Playing a game is fun. Editing video from a family event and creating nice DVD/Blu-Ray discs for them is fun. Those are the types of things people enjoy using their computers for. All that time and effort put into memory timings, speeds, etc is all for nothing. You won't suddenly go from 30 to 60 fps in a game based on memory. Your rending time won't suddenly be 35 minutes as opposed to 2 hours with lower memory timings.

DeaconFrost said:

Sorry if I came across as angry or nasty. That wasn't my intention. I have built well over 100 computers for all ranges of purposes. I don't say that to sound brash and be bragging. I say it as in I want the person to enjoy their computers I build for them. Sitting around rerunnning a benchmark all day isn't fun, unless you are a kiddie with nothing better to do. Playing a game is fun. Editing video from a family event and creating nice DVD/Blu-Ray discs for them is fun. Those are the types of things people enjoy using their computers for. All that time and effort put into memory timings, speeds, etc is all for nothing. You won't suddenly go from 30 to 60 fps in a game based on memory. Your rending time won't suddenly be 35 minutes as opposed to 2 hours with lower memory timings.

thank you verry much for trying to help with this, even though i might be being a little bit of a hard A** about it.
believe me though, the editing im doing is much more than family videos, im talking about a computer, having to render a texture onto 4 million faces of an object, and know exactly how it needs to produce lighting and shadows. it takes a huge hit on your system, even the best one, which is why im so into this, im rebuilding my curent one and using old parts to farm the renders. the concept of farming was revolutionized my steve jobes when he made the iconic render server "PIXAR." which now would be considdered much like a render farm, what i do often requiers multiple PCs to get good FAST results. i will spend a week rendering a large model on 1 pc, a couple days on 2 or 3. so trust me when i say, these are NOT small tasks

James7679 said:

Being that you intend on a new build, your best bet would to just be patient. You aren't going to see any increase in performance at all with your current setup with the new memory. Also, if you are really using Professional level editing software and equipment, you NEED a SSD.

im trying to say video editing to keep it short, i should explain a little further to make sure we are on the same page...

3d development...
i spend 3 weeks making a fictional object that looks identical to real life in dirt detail. this takes a HUGE HIT.

Rendering...
the computer has to run through at LEAST 9 million lines of code to just produce the object alone, more likely 15 to 20 million if you considder texturing and lighting, and about 30million if you considder what it has to do, THIS is done on the cpu, CACHING THE INFORMATION WHILE IT IS RENDERING is done on the ram. this is why i am working on another build, is to make my current one a render farm.

green screening and object tracking...
often requiers large amounts of caching. it seems like its a small task, but if the video does not load fast enough, and you continue working on the project anyways, it can crash the application because you are moving as fast as it can cache the video.

mudboxing...
sculpting millions of faces in real time like it is clay. this seems like it would be done mostly on the fraphics card, when in reality, open cl is only covering the shading and the faces, when the actual act of sculpting is covered by the ram while the cpu is calculating the changes.

the only constant in all of these are the ram. im really trying to dumb this down to just "video editing" to keep it simple, but it is really hard to have people understand what you are truely doing. which i worrie may be affecting my findings in this thread