Lowest price according to camelx3, with local stock going for >$360 without shipping factored in.
Temporarily out of stock, so this is a backorder, stock shouldn't take too long to come in.
Also a backorder, not a bad alternative to this if you prefer lower latency.
CamelCamelCamel.
Yeah it's a backorder, stock shouldn't take too long to come in.
I have to say the newer skylake cubi 2 plus looks like a far better performer. And the US rrp is $210 for barebones.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10282/msi-cubi-2-plus-vpro-sky…
Yes but no cup for the vpro ones
store in title!
No space lol, going to wait for mods to add it in
how about?
MSI Cubi Intel i3-5505U Barebone US213.11(~AU280) & Corsair 2x16gb DDR4 C13 US125.7(~AU$165)@Amazon
It's also possible to post a deal, mentioning the best offer, and mention ”+ more” in the title, then put details of the other bargains in the same posting (along with direct links to those items too)
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/wiki/help:deal_posting_guidelin…
No Memory, No HDD, No ODD, No Operating System, No keyboard, No screen, No mouse. What a bargain!
Its a shoebox
Why should any average consumer pay extra for slightly lower latency DDR4?
"CAS latencies are an inaccurate indicator of performance."
"true latency (ns) = clock cycle time (ns) x number of clock cycles (CL)"
"Which is more important: speed or latency? Based on in-depth engineering analysis and extensive testing in the Crucial Performance Lab, the answer to this classic question is speed."
"And CL ratings are an inaccurate, and often misleading, indicator of true latency (and memory) performance."
http://www.crucial.com/usa/en/memory-performance-speed-laten…
Basically, it seems that the Crucial is saying that you should not waste room in the title for latency. It's fine for a detail to include in the post, but given a choice between two sticks of RAM, go for the one with higher speed. The CL latencies will likely not even be accurate enough to inform the purchasing decision.
given a choice between two sticks of RAM, go for the one with higher speed
But RAM only comes in a few rated speeds. If you are buying 2133MHz RAM, then you are buying 2133MHz RAM.
In really general terms, "Faster RAM" is simply the same RAM but with slower timings applied. Or Visa-versa.
What I mean by that is that the fact that the "rated speed" is 2133 doesn't mean it wont go even faster (with higher latency settings applied) or slower (at tighter timings).
So, there is no point going for RAM that has a faster rated speed, but needs slower timings to get there.
There is also no point in getting 2133MHz RAM if your machine is running it at 1600MHz.
The timing tables inside the RAM Chips determine the timing latencies that will be applied at whatever speed you run the RAM at. These timing tables are what's important to examine, not the "Rated Speed" alone.
Put another way:
A) Only compare the specs at the MHz speed that you will be running the RAM at. That is what matters, not theoretical numbers.
B) given a choice between two sticks of RAM of the same Rated Speed, go for the one with lower latency at the MHz that you intend to run it.
C) given a choice between two sticks of RAM of the same latency (at your desired MHz speed), go for the one with higher Rated Speed. But it won't go any faster… it's just that the RAM willbe more suitable for subsequent upgrades.
D) given a certain speed and latency, choose the RAM with the lowest voltage. Often so-called "high speed" RAM needs a voltage boost to be stable, whilst the very best (and expensive) RAM will run high speed at low CL and do it at standard voltages.
E) You get a far more noticeable overall speed boost from spending your same $$ on a faster CPU (or better Graphics Card if gaming) than you will ever get from faster RAM.
Not sure whether you're posting about in general or the specific deal. I'm only talking about this specific deal. Most of the things you mentioned might only be useful for overclockers, not sure.
My point is in reference to the choice between two sets of RAM, as posed by the OP. Both are 32GB, 2133MHz. The one he posted (Corsair) costs $165, which is $13.50 more than the original deal (G.Skill) $151.50, which is 8.6% extra. The Corsair is listed as CL13, the G.Skill CL15. Despite this reported difference, my suggestion was, absent any further information, to purchase the G.Skill RAM. Because as mentioned above: "CAS latencies are an inaccurate indicator of performance." RAM speed on the other hand is important because it shows if the RAM is compatible with the motherboard, CPU or any other RAM in the system.
I note that the G.Skill deal is now out of stock, so I will report that deal accordingly.
Edit: Note that I would not spend $150+ without doing a bit more research. So actually I would not purchase either set absent any further information. But I would be strongly surprised to find any reports of a significant advantage to paying 8.6% extra in this choice.
Not sure whether you're posting about in general or the specific deal.
Just generally.
Most of the things you mentioned might only be useful for overclockers, not sure.
No, overclockers would not use default timings etc so none would really apply. They would use the fastest RAM in real life, not what was written on the stickers.
My point is in reference to the choice between two sets of RAM, as posed by the OP. Both are 32GB, 2133MHz
I didn't even check the second one - I was commenting only on your statement that I quoted, which was…
given a choice between two sticks of RAM, go for the one with higher speed.
Since the 2 sticks mentioned in this thread are identical speed 2133MHz, they will both go the same speed.
The Corsair CL13 is a teenie weenie bit tighter than the Gskill's CL15 however that will equate to almost no real world performance difference. Even if it did, I agree with you that it is certainly not worth paying $13.50 more.
HOWEVER, the CL difference at whatever the buyer's computer was going to run the chips at is what actually matters. The Corsair CL13 and Gskill CL15 might have the exact same timing for a machine that runs RAM at (say) 1600MHz, making the Corsair even worse value. However neither Corsair or Gskill 2133MHz sticks will run faster or better at 1600MHz as a stick that's rated for 1600MHz at a tighter timing (at 1600Hz) than these brands.
It's hard to explain in a post like this. But the general concept is illustrated by Corsair LPX 2133MHz which is C13, whilst the LPX 2666MHz is C16. These are almost certainly the exact same RAM and will run at the same timings (CL13) in a machine that runs the RAM at 2133MHz. So, in that case, the "faster rated" RAM is not faster at all.
Note: these comments are just generally, without searching to find the XMP profile info to confirm the actual data for particular models.
@llama: They might be the "same" RAM but Corsair binned them by testing them to the fastest speed. So on average, the 2666MHz will be better than the 2133MHz in terms of achieving the highest speed because they tested the chips to find out which ones were statistically "better", and put them in the 2666MHz. You can overclock the 2133MHz but you are more unlikely to reach the same speed as a 2666MHz.
I just bought the kogan deal intel NUC BOXNUC5I3RYH for $309, not that I'm complaining. Would've liked options rather than this being the only thing in budget.
I guess I've got mine now rather than when they fill in their back order though.
Corsair Vengeance LPX 32GB has just dropped to 5 bucks to $114.99 + $5.71 Shipping = USD$120.70 delivered. However AUD also dropped quite a bit last week so still ended up at AUD $164.
Looks like it's out of stock.