F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Latency

Latency

Latency

T
Tobuscus553
Junior Member
Find
28
12-05-2019, 09:30 PM
#1
When considering RAM, many believe 3600 MHz is preferable over 3200 MHz. However, adding latency into the mix changes the picture—does lower latency in a 3200 MHz chip matter more than higher latency in a 3600 MHz one for performance or speed? How does latency affect things overall? Is high latency a deal-breaker if your RAM has it?
Reply
Reply
T
Tobuscus553
12-05-2019, 09:30 PM #1

When considering RAM, many believe 3600 MHz is preferable over 3200 MHz. However, adding latency into the mix changes the picture—does lower latency in a 3200 MHz chip matter more than higher latency in a 3600 MHz one for performance or speed? How does latency affect things overall? Is high latency a deal-breaker if your RAM has it?

Reply
Reply
S
shovalmadmon
Junior Member
Find
5
12-07-2019, 08:44 PM
#2
Typically, reduced latency performs better. The issue here is that latency is often expressed in clock cycles, which means CAS 16 at 3200 MHz (10 ns) is identical to CAS 18 at 3600 MHz (10 ns).
Reply
Reply
S
shovalmadmon
12-07-2019, 08:44 PM #2

Typically, reduced latency performs better. The issue here is that latency is often expressed in clock cycles, which means CAS 16 at 3200 MHz (10 ns) is identical to CAS 18 at 3600 MHz (10 ns).

Reply
Reply
K
Konzah
Junior Member
Find
9
12-08-2019, 11:57 AM
#3
Choosing 3600 RAM can affect performance noticeably versus lower models like CAS 16. It’s important to consider how these differences impact your gaming experience. In my view, RAM choice really matters for smooth gameplay.
Reply
Reply
K
Konzah
12-08-2019, 11:57 AM #3

Choosing 3600 RAM can affect performance noticeably versus lower models like CAS 16. It’s important to consider how these differences impact your gaming experience. In my view, RAM choice really matters for smooth gameplay.

Reply
Reply
L
loltribo
Posting Freak
Find
870
12-09-2019, 01:20 AM
#4
It's generally hard to notice much unless you're looking closely (just a few frames per second at most). A range from 16 to 18 FPS is usually acceptable. I aim for a mix of performance, responsiveness, storage, and cost. I try to maximize the RAM I need, match the desired speed, and choose the cheapest latency that fits within my budget. Clearly, lower latency and higher clock speeds are better. In short, you want top clocks and minimal delay, but both become expensive at the very high end. The priority shifts based on the software you're using—some apps care more about lag than raw speed. You can find useful comparisons on YouTube, for instance videos by JayzTwoCents or Paulshardware showing game benchmarks.
Reply
Reply
L
loltribo
12-09-2019, 01:20 AM #4

It's generally hard to notice much unless you're looking closely (just a few frames per second at most). A range from 16 to 18 FPS is usually acceptable. I aim for a mix of performance, responsiveness, storage, and cost. I try to maximize the RAM I need, match the desired speed, and choose the cheapest latency that fits within my budget. Clearly, lower latency and higher clock speeds are better. In short, you want top clocks and minimal delay, but both become expensive at the very high end. The priority shifts based on the software you're using—some apps care more about lag than raw speed. You can find useful comparisons on YouTube, for instance videos by JayzTwoCents or Paulshardware showing game benchmarks.

Reply
Reply