Archive Home arrow Reviews: arrow Memory arrow Kingston HyperX Genesis 16GB DDR3-1600

Kingston HyperX Genesis 16GB DDR3-1600 E-mail
Reviews - Featured Reviews: Memory
Written by David Ramsey   
Friday, 30 December 2011
Table of Contents: Page Index
Kingston HyperX Genesis 16GB DDR3-1600
Closer Look: Kingston HyperX Genesis
Testing and Results
Synthetic Tests
Application Tests
Final Thoughts and Conclusion

Testing & Results

Testing Methodology

For comparison against the Kingston HyperX Genesis 1600MHz memory kit, I rounded up several other new quad-channel memory kits. All kits comprised four 4GB DIMMs for a total of 16GB of memory. There was one DDR3-1333 kit, a high-performance Corsair DDR3-1600 memory kit with tighter timings, a (very expensive) Kingston HyperX Genesis DDR3-2133 kit, and the Kingston HyperX 1600MHz kit that's the subject of this review. I ran all the memory kits at their XMP profile speeds on an Intel X79 Express system using an ASUS X79 Sabertooth motherboard and an Intel Core i7 3960X processor running at its stock clock speeds.

For this test I used three synthetic benchmarks to measure memory performance, and three application-based benchmarks to assess real-world performance.


Test System

  • Motherboard: ASUS X79 Sabertooth
  • System Memory
    • Generic DDR3-1333 9-9-9-25
    • Corsair Vengeance LP DDR3-1600 8-8-8-24
    • Kingston HyperX DDR3-1600 9-9-9-27
    • Kingston HyperX DDR3-2133 (XMP Profile 2) 11-12-11-30
  • Processor: Intel Core i7-3960X
  • Video: AMD Radeon HD6850
  • Operating System: Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

Test Software

  • AIDA64 1.85.1600
  • SiSoft Sandra Lite 2011.10.17.79
  • Euler 3D 2.2
  • Blender 3D Rendering
  • Handbrake 0.95

Let's start with the synthetic testing...



# Overclocking results?Anusha 2011-12-30 03:32
No overclocking results?
Report Comment
# DITTOkzinti1 2011-12-30 11:00
Where are the overclocking results? Without them this review does nothing more than say that the memory works.
If it cannot be OC'd then the memory is of very low quality, thus, that is how I will think of Kingston Memory from now on. Not overclockable according to Benchmark
Report Comment
# RE: DITTODavid Ramsey 2011-12-30 14:02
Since even large increases in memory frequency make virtually no real-world performance difference (look at the results for this memory compared to Kingston's own DDR3-2133 memory in the charts in this review), I normally don't bother to overclock memory unless it's specifically targeted at that market-- say, Corsair Dominator memory or Kingston's own HyperX T1 memory.

Memory overclockability was more important back in the days when raising the FSB was the only way to overclock the CPU. These days, Intel processors either have unlocked multipliers or locked-down BCLKs (like Sandy Bridge) and almost all AMD processors allow multiplier overclocking. Granted, X79 does bring back a limited BCLK adjustability, but again, it's just not going to make any real difference. Granted, some people just like to see how high their memory benchmark scores can be...

I also disagree that "if it cannot be OC'd then the memory is of very low quality." Overclocking is never guaranteed and is dependent on the motherboard as well as the memory; just because I could take (for example) this memory to 1800MHz at 9-8-9-22 is no guarantee at all that you could. High quality memory runs at its specs (XMP if so equipped) reliably; there's really no other criterion that makes sense.

If you're interested in real world performance improvements (as opposed to benchmark scores), concentrate on overclocking your CPU and video card.
Report Comment
# RE: RE: DITTOAnusha 2011-12-30 16:08
what if you are geting them for AMD APU based system? Memory frequency affects the GPU performance significantly.
Report Comment
# RE: RE: RE: DITTODavid Ramsey 2011-12-30 17:46
Any cites? Unfortunately I don't have an AMD APU-based system to test with...
Report Comment
# RE: RE: RE: RE: DITTOAnusha 2011-12-30 17:57
Report Comment
# RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: DITTODavid Ramsey 2011-12-31 13:27
Interesting...I'll keep that in mind, since it appears as though higher memory frequencies can indeed bump the graphics performance of AMD Fusion processors (although it didn't seem to do anything for the integrated GPU in Intel procs).

Note, though, that they were using Corsair Dominator memory, which will typically have more overclocking headroom than this stuff.
Report Comment

Comments have been disabled by the administrator.

Search Benchmark Reviews

Like Benchmark Reviews on FacebookFollow Benchmark Reviews on Twitter