help with good 32gb of ram

[Thornton]

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

 

[Thornton]

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.

 

[Thornton]

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

 

[DeaconFrost]

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.

 

[pparks1]

dont forget though, caching a video in live time will go much faster, loading bf3, the intro part, will go faster in theory, programs like photoshop, will open up faster. pop an ssd in there for the apps i want to open fast and the ram will take the rest.

In theory, yes. Quantifiable with a stopwatch....highly unlikely. You will never know for sure without buying multiple sticks and testing them all, but I think you will be surprised to find out how little difference (if any) your RAM speeds are going to make.

i would love to say i dont care about speed, but this is another one of those moments, where i bet the real life testing was done only with games and internet page loading with a couple tests of how fast peoples applications load. im not exactly using things that are common household applications. im using over 6000 dollars of video equiptment that doesnt exactly load up emediatly, it can take as long as 60 seconds depending on how many apps i have open.

Very specialized and specific applications could take advantage. I don't know anything about your applications, so I cannot say for sure.

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

I would be shocked if you saw any.

 

[James7679]

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.

 

[pparks1]

Your biggest bang for the buck with your video editing will be the fastest CPU you can get and the fastest disk subsystem.

The speed of your RAM is going to be like a fart in a hurricane. It may still stink, but you aren't ever going to notice.

 

[Thornton]

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

 

[Thornton]

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

 

[James7679]

What's the budget on the new build? You could do something really crazy if your budget allows for it.

 

[Thornton]

What's the budget on the new build? You could do something really crazy if your budget allows for it.

not GREAT, what did you have in mind? my pay check is kindof strict, limiting my budget greatly. i was actually going to START with that asrock board, best p77 i could find based on reviews. and an i7 2600k or a 3700k, whichever feels better at the time, i want to wait to see reviews on the 3700k first though.

i am not hearing GREAT things about the 2011 socket vs the 2600k except for one 2011 i7, i believe it was about $1200, which is WAYYYYY out of my budget right now.

i need a really good computer, a drop dead powerful one, but i dont need the absolute best, i say this because when i build this i will be using multiple computers then for rendering.

but what where you thinking. i might be able to find a way to make it work still.

 

[James7679]

Well, my idea goes right out the window then. Most 3D rendering folks use setups similar to this one for large projects.

Newegg.com - ASUS Z9PE-D8 WS Dual LGA 2011 Intel C602 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 SSI EEB Intel Motherboard

x2 Newegg.com - Intel Xeon E5-2687W Sandy Bridge-EP 3.1GHz 20MB L3 Cache LGA 2011 150W 8-Core Server Processor BX80621E52687W

Newegg.com - G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series 64GB (8 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133 (PC3 17000) Desktop Memory Model F3-17000CL11Q2-64GBZLD

EDIT: @$5200, you'd need a pretty nice paycheck to justify it.

 

[OldMX]

OMG...64GB of ram...and i tought 16GB was a lot!!

But yes, if you need it go for it, simple as that.

 

[Thornton]

Well, my idea goes right out the window then. Most 3D rendering folks use setups similar to this one for large projects.

Newegg.com - ASUS Z9PE-D8 WS Dual LGA 2011 Intel C602 SATA 6Gb/s USB 3.0 SSI EEB Intel Motherboard

x2 Newegg.com - Intel Xeon E5-2687W Sandy Bridge-EP 3.1GHz 20MB L3 Cache LGA 2011 150W 8-Core Server Processor BX80621E52687W

Newegg.com - G.SKILL Ripjaws Z Series 64GB (8 x 8GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 2133 (PC3 17000) Desktop Memory Model F3-17000CL11Q2-64GBZLD

ahhhh, dual chip. ya that would be good. i dont think its gunna be best for me right now due to my budget and my lack of trust in the 2011 socket from reviews. although i like the idea.

i dont think it will be right for me this time. but i like it. maybe in a year or so if i have better pay. even then i think i will most likely use it in a farm. thank you for the idea.

i still think that a 3700k will be good for me right now, seeing as how im gunna super clock it with a noctua dh14 under my belt. allong with later this summer buying a gtx680 or 690, which ever is more recent at the time.

 

[DeaconFrost]

Aside from the higher cost, I am not aware of anything negative from the socket 2011 lineup. I guess it depends on how often you upgrade. If you don't plan on making amajor system change for several years, you might want to go 2011 and one of the lower chips. Then you can always drop in a higher end one down the road.

If you upgrade completely every couple of years, then you'd be okay with socket 1155...but you'll need more components at the next upgrade stage.

 

[James7679]

Aside from the higher cost, I am not aware of anything negative from the socket 2011 lineup. I guess it depends on how often you upgrade. If you don't plan on making amajor system change for several years, you might want to go 2011 and one of the lower chips. Then you can always drop in a higher end one down the road.

If you upgrade completely every couple of years, then you'd be okay with socket 1155...but you'll need more components at the next upgrade stage.

+1
I agree completely. There is nothing wrong with the 2011 chips. Dual processor is definitely where you want to be if you are doing serious 3D rendering. Maybe take a step back and analyze what you are doing. Like Deacon said, if you upgrade pretty regularly, start with a dual 1155 or 1366 system. Or go with the Dual 2011 build and opt for the lower end of that lineup for now.

 

[Thornton]

Aside from the higher cost, I am not aware of anything negative from the socket 2011 lineup. I guess it depends on how often you upgrade. If you don't plan on making amajor system change for several years, you might want to go 2011 and one of the lower chips. Then you can always drop in a higher end one down the road.

If you upgrade completely every couple of years, then you'd be okay with socket 1155...but you'll need more components at the next upgrade stage.

i was thinking i keep the 3700k 1155 socket, and wait a year so i can completely build another computer. its not that the 2011 is not as powerful. because this computer is for gaming also, some people say that it is not as fast.

i think i can keep this one for now, and when the time comes, i will trade out like im doing now, this way i have more computers to farm with, and im not spending allot of money all at once.

 

[pparks1]

@Thornton: It sounds like you have very intensive rendering needs and likely more than a typical enthusiast workstation. This is outside of my realm of expertise, so I don't really have anything more to offer. In the grand scheme of what you are trying to accomplish, buying an extra 16GB of RAM or going with faster RAM is not going to amount to very much from a percentage standpoint of your total bill. Sounds like you know better what you need than anybody else?

Out of curiosity, what is this work for? Is it your job or a hobby?

 

[DeaconFrost]

i was thinking i keep the 3700k 1155 socket, and wait a year so i can completely build another computer. its not that the 2011 is not as powerful. because this computer is for gaming also, some people say that it is not as fast.

Since you are comparing two different sockets, the processor will determine what is faster, not the socket design. If you use a high-end 1155 proc and a low end, budget 2011 proc, then yes, maybe the 1155 system would be faster. But, you'd have to compare overall benchmarks once you choose a proc for each motherboard socket type. You can't just make a blanket statement that socket 2011 is slower than 1155. The procs need to be compared, and then you need to factor in cost. Comparing the sockets is like deciding which car is faster...the red one or the blue one.

 

[Thornton]

@Thornton: It sounds like you have very intensive rendering needs and likely more than a typical enthusiast workstation. This is outside of my realm of expertise, so I don't really have anything more to offer. In the grand scheme of what you are trying to accomplish, buying an extra 16GB of RAM or going with faster RAM is not going to amount to very much from a percentage standpoint of your total bill. Sounds like you know better what you need than anybody else?

Out of curiosity, what is this work for? Is it your job or a hobby?

this work i do takes in money but it is not steady work. i make somthing, i sell it, simple as that. its not what i would considder worth the whole ammount of a dual chip, RIGHT NOW. i want a good computer, but having a farm is worth the money the money i would spend on the dual chip system. like i said. i think lots of small computer upgrades, then an eventual large upgrade will suffice for creating a good farm. and my naxt LARGE compute upgrade ill drop a couple thousand on for making a super computer