F5F Stay Refreshed Hardware Desktop Your newer 16GB RAM might not perform as well as your older one due to differences in compatibility or age.

Your newer 16GB RAM might not perform as well as your older one due to differences in compatibility or age.

Your newer 16GB RAM might not perform as well as your older one due to differences in compatibility or age.

D
D4rKSlayer95
Member
229
01-06-2016, 11:30 AM
#1
Hey there, I'm trying to figure this out. A few weeks back my Geil Pristine Series 8GB DDR4 2400MHz module (GP48GB2400C16SC) began acting up. It still functions, but every couple of days I get a random BSOD error. I'm really frustrated because I can't find a replacement and had to order a new 16GB GeIL EVO POTENZA (2x8GB) from stock. When it arrived, I installed it and ran MemTest86—no issues. Then I played games like Monster Hunter World and Witcher 3, but the FPS would drop to around 50-57. After swapping it out for the old 16GB, the FPS stayed steady at 60. I ran some benchmarks and saw that even with XMP enabled, the new RAM was slower than my old one. The timing and CAS latency matched perfectly, but the voltage stayed the same. Why is the new RAM so slow? Thanks for helping me sort this out!
D
D4rKSlayer95
01-06-2016, 11:30 AM #1

Hey there, I'm trying to figure this out. A few weeks back my Geil Pristine Series 8GB DDR4 2400MHz module (GP48GB2400C16SC) began acting up. It still functions, but every couple of days I get a random BSOD error. I'm really frustrated because I can't find a replacement and had to order a new 16GB GeIL EVO POTENZA (2x8GB) from stock. When it arrived, I installed it and ran MemTest86—no issues. Then I played games like Monster Hunter World and Witcher 3, but the FPS would drop to around 50-57. After swapping it out for the old 16GB, the FPS stayed steady at 60. I ran some benchmarks and saw that even with XMP enabled, the new RAM was slower than my old one. The timing and CAS latency matched perfectly, but the voltage stayed the same. Why is the new RAM so slow? Thanks for helping me sort this out!

M
medalolo
Junior Member
34
01-06-2016, 03:34 PM
#2
It might be because of the low quality control for this item. That's my best guess, at least.
M
medalolo
01-06-2016, 03:34 PM #2

It might be because of the low quality control for this item. That's my best guess, at least.

R
Rumcyk
Junior Member
11
01-06-2016, 05:07 PM
#3
You can't rely on userbenchmark results. I'd suggest conducting actual in-house tests, like running PiMod or AIDA64 Cache benchmarks. Use the existing memory, record performance metrics or screenshots, then repeat with a different memory setup.
R
Rumcyk
01-06-2016, 05:07 PM #3

You can't rely on userbenchmark results. I'd suggest conducting actual in-house tests, like running PiMod or AIDA64 Cache benchmarks. Use the existing memory, record performance metrics or screenshots, then repeat with a different memory setup.

X
xJoshua_
Junior Member
2
01-06-2016, 05:38 PM
#4
Benchmarking userbenchmark might be extremely unreliable. I wouldn't worry about the outcomes.
X
xJoshua_
01-06-2016, 05:38 PM #4

Benchmarking userbenchmark might be extremely unreliable. I wouldn't worry about the outcomes.