F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Higher rated DDR4 3200 MHz with CAS 22 compared to an overrated version at 2400 MHz with CAS 17.

Higher rated DDR4 3200 MHz with CAS 22 compared to an overrated version at 2400 MHz with CAS 17.

Higher rated DDR4 3200 MHz with CAS 22 compared to an overrated version at 2400 MHz with CAS 17.

J
jshi40700
Member
67
01-21-2016, 06:56 AM
#1
The laptop is set to run at 2400 MT/s despite its specs, which suggests it isn’t utilizing the full rated speed. Adding another 4GB RAM could improve performance, but switching to a model with 2400 MHz and CAS 17 might offer better stability or compatibility. Consider the trade-offs between speed and reliability.
J
jshi40700
01-21-2016, 06:56 AM #1

The laptop is set to run at 2400 MT/s despite its specs, which suggests it isn’t utilizing the full rated speed. Adding another 4GB RAM could improve performance, but switching to a model with 2400 MHz and CAS 17 might offer better stability or compatibility. Consider the trade-offs between speed and reliability.

N
Nickolas_Z
Member
69
01-21-2016, 04:53 PM
#2
Review the laptop's BIOS for an XMP setting that could boost RAM performance to its full potential. Although DDR4 3200 CL22 is officially JEDEC approved, it’s worth verifying. Install CPU-Z and look at the "SPD" section. This will reveal the XMP profiles supported by your memory module. Also inspect the memory settings to see the current speed (1) and latency. Using two RAM sticks offers a significant advantage through dual-channel operation. Combining different modules results in the system using the slower of the two, balancing speed and stability. Depending on the latency you’re experiencing—say 2400 MT/s—this adjustment might noticeably improve performance. There’s a small chance compatibility issues could arise, but at such low speeds the likelihood is minimal.
N
Nickolas_Z
01-21-2016, 04:53 PM #2

Review the laptop's BIOS for an XMP setting that could boost RAM performance to its full potential. Although DDR4 3200 CL22 is officially JEDEC approved, it’s worth verifying. Install CPU-Z and look at the "SPD" section. This will reveal the XMP profiles supported by your memory module. Also inspect the memory settings to see the current speed (1) and latency. Using two RAM sticks offers a significant advantage through dual-channel operation. Combining different modules results in the system using the slower of the two, balancing speed and stability. Depending on the latency you’re experiencing—say 2400 MT/s—this adjustment might noticeably improve performance. There’s a small chance compatibility issues could arise, but at such low speeds the likelihood is minimal.

S
Sm1le6
Junior Member
46
01-23-2016, 10:17 AM
#3
According to Eigenvector, the clearest point about RAM is that combining two different speed sticks results in the slower one determining the overall speed. It's disappointing, but that's how things work.
S
Sm1le6
01-23-2016, 10:17 AM #3

According to Eigenvector, the clearest point about RAM is that combining two different speed sticks results in the slower one determining the overall speed. It's disappointing, but that's how things work.

S
Siked
Member
114
01-24-2016, 05:00 PM
#4
Thank you for your prompt reply. I’ll use CPU-Z first, then consider installing Windows as a virtual machine on your Lubuntu laptop. No one has tried this before with just 4GB of RAM. Perhaps someone else has an alternative Linux option?
S
Siked
01-24-2016, 05:00 PM #4

Thank you for your prompt reply. I’ll use CPU-Z first, then consider installing Windows as a virtual machine on your Lubuntu laptop. No one has tried this before with just 4GB of RAM. Perhaps someone else has an alternative Linux option?

L
Luu_Cii
Member
87
01-25-2016, 10:26 PM
#5
Your approach makes sense. The specs you mentioned align with what a 3200 MHz processor would be running at 2400 MHz, which is within typical expectations. Your budget laptop likely supports up to that frequency, so focusing on the 2400 MHz capability is reasonable.
L
Luu_Cii
01-25-2016, 10:26 PM #5

Your approach makes sense. The specs you mentioned align with what a 3200 MHz processor would be running at 2400 MHz, which is within typical expectations. Your budget laptop likely supports up to that frequency, so focusing on the 2400 MHz capability is reasonable.

A
anakindaur
Senior Member
576
01-27-2016, 07:42 PM
#6
I noticed your previous comment. I believe CPU-X could serve as an alternative to CPU-Z for Linux, though it lacks some advanced features. It doesn't display the "SPD" tab and shows a single stick value of 2400. I didn't find any XMP settings in my BIOS. My thought: I saw a compelling Kingston FURY Impact at my local webshop—8GB DDR4, 2666MHz CL15. That's CL15. My guess is it might run faster than my older 4GB stick at 2400, making it a smart choice. A solid idea?
A
anakindaur
01-27-2016, 07:42 PM #6

I noticed your previous comment. I believe CPU-X could serve as an alternative to CPU-Z for Linux, though it lacks some advanced features. It doesn't display the "SPD" tab and shows a single stick value of 2400. I didn't find any XMP settings in my BIOS. My thought: I saw a compelling Kingston FURY Impact at my local webshop—8GB DDR4, 2666MHz CL15. That's CL15. My guess is it might run faster than my older 4GB stick at 2400, making it a smart choice. A solid idea?