"In FSX? No difference. RAM speed doesn't matter that much anymore when you're dealing in dualand tri-channel configurations, let alone when quad channel comes out later this year."What?Maybe someone is feeling bad about inferior hardware to make those kinds of statements? Of course it makes a difference! It just depends on how much is enough for what you want to spend vs the return.This isnt FSX, but it will give you an idea of what to expect in FSX - Memory test for SandyB:http://www.bit-tech....sandy-bridge/10

TechGuyMaxC is right, actually, and the link you yourself provided shows it:Crysis (Very High), avg FPS, CL9, 1,333 MHz: 43.7; 2,133 MHz: 44.7, i.e. an 800 MHz increase for a whopping +1 FPS! (with similar measly gains in the other games and Lynnfield/Nehalem CPUs.)Am I missing something?Cheers,- jahman.

Am I missing something?

To each his own, but as an enthusiest it all adds up, 2-5% here, 10-20% there etc. Why bother with that new heatsink that will take you from 3.8Ghz from the old one to 4GHz+ with the new one? Why bother keeping that OS trimmed and lean? what do you think that difference would have been say 1333 CL9 compared to 1600 at CL6 or 2000 at CL7? And so on...Taking full advantage of what hardware is available in the right combination with the right settings is the difference some of us look for, if thats not you, thats ok.

+1 freebird.

Funny stuff. Real world testing shows there is no meaningful difference between fast RAM and slow RAM in games. If you want faster RAM by all means go for it, but if you're on a fixed budget and you're sacrificing performance elsewhere you'd be better served with a faster CPU, faster GPU, SSD, more storage, better monitor, etc., etc.

I also +1 this although it is slightly contradicting my last +1. How about this, we should take advantage of what hardware is available, so long as there is no sacrifice in any other component.

Funny stuff. Real world testing shows there is no meaningful difference between fast RAM and slow RAM in games. If you want faster RAM by all means go for it, but if you're on a fixed budget and you're sacrificing performance elsewhere you'd be better served with a faster CPU, faster GPU, SSD, more storage, better monitor, etc., etc.

Can't agree with your statement, my extensive "real world testing" on FSX and all development of the FS serries has always indicated otherwise.Didn't know that now the topic was changed to fixed budget ( if that was the case I would have to agree on that point), dang I'm proved wrong again! LOL

Can't agree with your statement, my extensive "real world testing" on FSX and all development of the FS serries has always indicated otherwise.

You could probably say the same thing about any program written in a 3rd generation language or higher is effected by RAM speeds. But obviously testing shows otherwise....I also heard that some harddrives were faster than current gen SSDs. Silly thing about RAM being a storage device you never know what it's going to do..

1600mhz memory at CAS6 is faster than 2000mhz at CAS8

Thanks Gerard