AMD Radeon RG2133 Gamer 16GB Memory Kit Review - PAGE 1

An extra 50 fps in Battlefield 3 simply by switching the type of RAM your using or are you comparing 16GB against only 8GB modules? Either way, I'm very skeptical on that one.

Yes the comparison did have an 8GB kit in the mix, however the review did include 16GB kits.

But still, a 50% performance boost in BF3? RAM speed usually makes a very small difference in gaming, but here the G.SKILL Ripsaw running at the same speed is outperformed by 50 fps. Something is amiss.

All of our benchmark are run a total of three times then we take the average from those three runs and that is the score given.

You should look into your other configs maybe, because you should not be getting anywhere close to a 50% performance change. Anand tested the differences between 1.6Ghz and 2.4Ghz RAM across a couple of games and the difference was within 1% between the fastest and slowest types of RAM. It was with a Sandy Bridge setup, but that shouldn't matter. This definitely doesn't seem right, especially when you don't even change RAM size or speed with a couple of the other configs. If the numbers are still legit, you should figure out why and let us all know so we can try to build our systems around that because just changing one type of 16GB 2133Mhz RAM to another should barely effect, if at all, the end result.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4503/sandy-bridge-memory-scaling-choosing-the-best-ddr3

I will do that this weekend and let everyone know the results.

Load of crap

You're missing some really basic information from your review.

Are all the kits that are unmarked 16gb? You differentiated some 8gb kits but left others with no notation of what size they are or what configuration (ex: 2x8gb, 4x4gb, etc...) On the test setup page none of them are differentiated at all when it comes to capacity. It may not be 100% necessary, as all the other kits can be looked up, but it is a nice courtesy to readers.

What settings are you playing the games at? You don't have to go into much detail because most games come with presets that you can use but the whole idea of a review is to give the reader an idea of how a certain setup will perform at whatever the selected settings may be. If you throw that to the wind there's really no point in benchmarking at all.

I don't believe the massive performance increase is caused by the ram.
What catalyst drivers were you using for each of the RAM tests? This is also important information to have when using gaming benchmarks as there can be large increases in performance over time, especially if early drivers were shoddy at best.
Compared to your Gskill Trident 32gb 2400mhz review the slight bump in processor speed, from the 2600k to 3770k, and some possible catalyst updates could explain the performance gap.
Is there any particular reason why this set was kept out of the Radeon review for comparison? Other than the RG2133 it is the latest RAM review. Surely it's not in the same price range but you could also say that for the 8gb kits compared to the 16gb kits.

They just aren't.

One thing that might help is making it clear what speeds you arw runningthe amd ram at. I guessing 2600mhz because of the setup timings listed. It would be helpful to see a comparison of how they do at stock 2133mhz. That might aslo be why some ppl aren criticizing the resaults. I can say from experience with the 2 dimm kit of 16gbs that therw is a decent difference from some other kits. They are also very overclockable. Got mine to 2400 with very little trouble.

Full of it !!!!

Not Legit ! ! !

Was the AMD test performed at (by mistake) 2600 MHz with time of 12-13-13-32 2T instead of 2133 MHz 10-11-11-30 2T ? This would perhaps provide an explanation of the large 50 fps for battle 3 testing?