Building a computer. My only options for the motherboard I want though is 2133mhz ram. Is that enough? Will 2133mhz ever be literally unplayable and if so when?
Like, does ram speed impact performance that much?
>>60957631
No.
>>60958228
>he says this, while posting in a chinese cartoon imageboard
>>60957814
I might just build around 15gig with 3000mhz in the end since I heard otherwise.
>>60958284
I don't know if your memeing but ram speed has so little impact on performance for everyday activities you shouldn't even worry about it.
>>60958238
Just report it. He's been spamming this for days.
>>60958314
Everybody talks about Ryzen getting a huge boost from RAM speed.
You always can download some.
- Buy enough to turn your PC on
- Invest in more storage for RAM
- Download all the RAM you need
Easy.
>>60958394
It does but mostly on dogshit optimized games which seems to be a growing trend unfortunately.
However it doesn't seem to matter on high resolutions above 1080p.
>>60958228
Wow, rude
>>60958314
meant 16, lol. So are you sure? 32 gig 2133 mhz vs 16gig? I'll have either a Ryzen or i7, with 1080 gtx
>>60958720
16 would be like 3000
>>60958591
>both clock over 60fps
What's the point of benchmarks again? Last time I checked not every game was some janky piece of shit like Counter Strike where the number of bullets you could fire was directly tied to how many frames per second you ran at. Infact I think that was literally just Counter Strike.
>>60958831
Yeah, you get diminishing returns after 60FPS but watch explode as they claim they can clearly tell the difference between 60 fps and 240 fps.
so i7 vs Ryzen 1700x, which wins out?
also, if I upgrade from 16 to 64gig of ram later on, will it make my computer run hotter or not?
>>60959198
R7 1700 or R5 1600 if you want the best bang-for-the buck. Both shit all over the i7 btw.
I heard the i7 performs higher on most games, though.
>>60958831
>mfw currently planning a new build just to play counter strike at 120+ fps