RAM Mhz vs RAM Cas latency
RAM Mhz vs RAM Cas latency
They’re both terrible... consider it that way. For Intel CPUs, use 2666 if they’re 10th or older; switch to 3200 for 11th gen or newer—but both are subpar. With AMD, pick 3200 since frequency matters more than latency on those chips. But aim for as low a latency as possible at that speed. High frequency helps more when dealing with large amounts of random data. Latency mainly slows you down when you’re reading small pieces repeatedly; if you send big chunks, the CPU waits longer for the RAM to be ready, so faster RAM speeds improve overall performance. Older CPUs are less affected by speed, while newer Intel models seem to prefer higher numbers. AMD’s Ryzen benefits especially from high clock rates—ideally 3600 MHz, though 3200 works fine. Latency should ideally stay between 16 and 18 for best results.
Don't waste money on a powerful CPU when excessive RAM can damage its performance.
I’m struggling to locate a store that carries 3200MT/s CL22 for desktops. The best options seem to be laptop SODIMM and server RAM with ECC, which unfortunately have poor latency. As mentioned, this slow RAM can severely impact CPU performance, and I’m not sure there’s a significant cost difference between 3200MT/s CL16 and higher speeds. Also, even though GPU prices are dropping, saving on RAM won’t help you upgrade to a better GPU.
This is a bad idea. You're basically going to knock the CPU down one performance tier with such low quality RAM. In that case, unless you're saving $50+, it can't be worth it, as you can't go up more than one performance tier for a CPU with that savings. You haven't said what your use case is, but unless it's for a rendering box that literally won't do anything else, cripplingly bad latency RAM is not a good way to go. Basically any other use case benefits from lower latency RAM.