Thursday, November 10th 2011

Exceleram Unveils 32 GB Quad-Channel DDR3 Memory Kit for Sandy Bridge-E

German memory maker Exceleram is among the first to release quad-channel DDR3 memory kits, in time for Intel's Core i7 "Sandy Bridge-E" processor platform. Sandy Bridge-E processors pack a massive four-channel DDR3 integrated memory controller, and require at least four DDR3 modules to perform optimally. The kit released by Exceleram features in its "Grand" series, and totals 32 GB in size, spread across four 8 GB modules. These modules run at DDR3-1333 MHz speed, with timings of 9-9-9-24, and DRAM voltage of 1.5V. Exceleram did not give out pricing details, but you should be able to buy one of these in time for your big fat Sandy Bridge-E build.

Source: TechConnect Magazine
Add your own comment

29 Comments on Exceleram Unveils 32 GB Quad-Channel DDR3 Memory Kit for Sandy Bridge-E

#1
bear jesus
The article title made me very happy but then 1333mhz made me sad :laugh:

I know with quad channel there is already a bunch of bandwidth but surly for such a high end platform 1600mhz and higher would be more suitable?
Posted on Reply
#3
InnocentCriminal
Resident Grammar Amender
I'd like to have 32GB of DDR3.

Ymmmmmm!
Posted on Reply
#4
HossHuge
by: bear jesus
The article title made me very happy but then 1333mhz made me sad :laugh:
Positive than negative

by: Red_Machine
9-9-9-24 on 1333MHz? Laaaaaame.
Negative

by: InnocentCriminal
I'd like to have 32GB of DDR3.

Ymmmmmm!
Positive

What programs use 32GB of memory?
Posted on Reply
#5
jagjitnatt
by: HossHuge


What programs use 32GB of memory?
None. Unless one's goal is to fill up memory. Seriously.

32 GB is overkill. Quad channel too sounds overkill before 2013. SandyBridge Dual channel platform performs better than 1st gen Core i7's Triple channel.

Memory companies should be focusing on lowering the latency a little. 9-9-9-24 is too high
Posted on Reply
#6
bear jesus
by: HossHuge
Positive than negative


Negative


Positive

What programs use 32GB of memory?
:laugh: well that is because i have mixed feelings about it.

But my want of silly amounts of RAM are geared more towards RAM drives and VM's than any normal program use as 32gb just for normal use would be a total waste.
Posted on Reply
#7
pantherx12
by: InnocentCriminal
I'd like to have 32GB of DDR3.

Ymmmmmm!
Snap! Don't even care about the 1333 mhz, sure It could run @1600 with some voltage increase :D

Will be able to switch off virtual memory for sure with 32gb :D
Posted on Reply
#8
DanTheBanjoman
Señor Moderator
by: jagjitnatt
None. Unless one's goal is to fill up memory. Seriously.

32 GB is overkill. Quad channel too sounds overkill before 2013. SandyBridge Dual channel platform performs better than 1st gen Core i7's Triple channel.

Memory companies should be focusing on lowering the latency a little. 9-9-9-24 is too high
And the lower latency/higher speeds are not overkill? How much of a difference do those things actually make?
Posted on Reply
#9
InnocentCriminal
Resident Grammar Amender
by: DanTheBanjoman
And the lower latency/higher speeds are not overkill? How much of a difference do those things actually make?
Not enough to warrant the price increase. Saying that, with RAM so cheap atm, this kit should hopefully be easily accessible... to a degree.

I'd love to have a fat wad of RAM in my rig, especially now that I'm re-educating myself in Photoshop and Première.
Posted on Reply
#10
Sihastru
I would like a 64GB kit. Thank you.
Posted on Reply
#11
Red_Machine
64GB? Pfft. Vista Ultimate supports 128GB.
Posted on Reply
#12
buggalugs
Yep this is just too much ram for the average person. I'm planning on a 4x2Gb kit or maybe a 4x4Gb kit at most.

With 32Gb of ram, some people will be surprised to see a default Windows installation taking up 70Gb+ of hard drive space, when usually it takes up around 20Gb. If you have a 120Gb SSD thats bad news.

32Gb of ram means a 32Gb hibernation file in windows, and a humungous page file. Sure , you can turn these off or move them but if you need hibernation its a problem.

Unless you're running a virtual machine or are running something that needs that much ram its better to stick with a sensible amount like 8Gb-16Gb, or get a large hard drive to match.
Posted on Reply
#13
shb-
Who puts page file on SSD anyway? thats definitely not wise.
Yea, 32gib is little to much ram, but just a little : ].
Posted on Reply
#14
repman244
by: buggalugs
Yep this is just too much ram for the average person.
SB-E isn't for the average person so you are in the wrong thread.

Seriously, just because a few of you can't even fill 4GB doesn't mean that nobody needs it.
And from my experience (going from 4GB to 8GB) Windows itself benefits from it. Win 7 automatically takes more RAM and runs faster than running on 4GB.
And once you have 8GB it doesn't seem much and you fill it up quite quickly, and so you start looking at 16GB or more.

Same could be said about SSD's, once you have it you only want a faster one and you never want a HDD again. Overkill or not!


Also I much rather have more RAM and see that OS uses more than having everything on HDD/SDD.
Posted on Reply
#15
TiN
Why most guys with negative comments are not smart enough to realize, that in today environment no need to have crazy memory-intensive applications to benefit from big amount of RAM in system? Normal people never run just single application at time, even simples office computers or gaming station have more than 10 applications sharing same memory space. Windows, torrent downloader, some background tasks, browser (Opera or Firefox can easy eat few GBs when you have lots of tabs, as I do :D), some IM crap, image viewer, photoshop maybe. 1GB here, 1GB there, and viola, hello my swap to harddrive and slowmo.
People worry about their 100MHz more overclocking on CPU but don't mind to wait for swapping while running some stupid 2200mhz 2x2GB 7-7-7 memory set :nutkick:

That's not real, you say? :D

Well, that's what i run today evening on home PC :D



I know, i'm kind of power user, most people don't have VMWare WS for freebsd and Solidworks CAD on their daily rigs, but rest software is just normal, photoshop with some photos from DSLR, Lightroom for RAW processing, Opera with 20-25 tabs, IM, some network crap.

P.S. that's P67 with 2600K, and yes, 4x4GB of most cheap memory I could get, working at DDR3-1333. Still LIGHTYEARS faster than 2000mhz 2x4GB kit with such loading.
Posted on Reply
#16
n-ster
If you are looking for faster than 1333 on an 8GB module, you'd be looking at stupidly higher prices!

Now if this kit could bring the 8GB modules to a more reasonable price, 64GB here I come! xD
Posted on Reply
#17
Jizzler
Nice.

8GB is my bare minimum, and won't go less than 16GB next time. 32GB isn't such a large number any more.
Posted on Reply
#18
buggalugs
by: TiN
Why most guys with negative comments are not smart enough to realize, that in today environment no need to have crazy memory-intensive applications to benefit from big amount of RAM in system?

That's not real, you say? :D

Well, that's what i run today evening on home PC :D

.
Thanks you proved my point.:laugh: You are a power user with Virtual machine and you have open just about all your programs and you only used 10Gbs lol.

90% of socket 2011 owners will be gamers, Virtual machine users is like 3% and people who need lots of ram maybe 5%, so I stand by the comments that for most users 8-16Gbs is plenty.


by: repman244


Seriously, just because a few of you can't even fill 4GB doesn't mean that nobody needs it.
.
Thats silly comment considering I made exceptions for users who NEED that much memory.

I never said no-one needs that much memory.

by: buggalugs


Unless you're running a virtual machine or are running something that needs that much ram its better to stick with a sensible amount like 8Gb-16Gb, or get a large hard drive to match.
Maybe read the whole post before commenting.
Posted on Reply
#19
n-ster
by: buggalugs
Thanks you proved my point. You are a power user with Virtual machine and you have open just about all your programs and you only used 10Gbs lol.

90% of socket 2011 owners will be gamers, Virtual machine users is like 3% and people who need lots of ram maybe 5%, so I stand by the comments that for most users 8-16Gbs is plenty.
Most gamers will go 1155 and most VM users and other stuff will go 2011... I'm a gamer that likes to have options to VM etc, so I'll be going SB-E
Posted on Reply
#20
buggalugs
by: n-ster
Most gamers will go 1155 and most VM users and other stuff will go 2011... I'm a gamer that likes to have options to VM etc, so I'll be going SB-E
LOL, if you think there are more VM users than Gamers on socket 2011(or socket 1366) you are way off the mark. Even if you include ALL platforms VM users is like 3% gamers is like 90%.
Posted on Reply
#21
n-ster
I didn't say there weren't going to be more gamers, I said most gamers are going to 1155 and most heavy users or VM users are going to go LGA 2011

and yes, I think that if you include servers, LGA 2011 will not have 50+% gamers (ie majority)

By gamers, I mean people who use their computers for gaming (heavy or medium) and basic tasks (browsing, office, minor photoshop etc) that an average user might do
Posted on Reply
#22
buggalugs
That may be true if you count all gamers, but there is still way more gamers than VM users on socket 2011.

And most of the users who use VM on socket 2011 are just hobbyists and home enthusiasts playing around for fun.

Actually, most users of VM, people who are professionals and commercial users, or critical system users , will use xeon systems because they need other enterprise features like ECC memory. They wouldnt mess with home consumer socket 2011.
Posted on Reply
#23
JrRacinFan
Served 5k and counting ...
I could see an effective setup with 32GB, 8GB for a Ramdrive, 2GB or 4GB for Supercache.
Posted on Reply
#24
AsRock
TPU addict
by: JrRacinFan
I could see an effective setup with 32GB, 8GB for a Ramdrive, 2GB or 4GB for Supercache.
Shiii you could run GTA 4 from ram lol. Just see to see how it works out :P.. I have a ramdrive program here that will allow you to boot a ISO image to a ramdrive.

I'd try it just for kicks lol.. even more so how they prices are getting lately.
Posted on Reply
#25
n-ster
by: buggalugs
That may be true if you count all gamers, but there is still way more gamers than VM users on socket 2011.

And most of the users who use VM on socket 2011 are just hobbyists and home enthusiasts playing around for fun.

Actually, most users of VM, people who are professionals and commercial users, or critical system users , will use xeon systems because they need other enterprise features like ECC memory. They wouldnt mess with home consumer socket 2011.
I believe, just like 1366, the socket will be shared with the Xeon... Why limit yourself to VM user? I'm talking about non-gamers vs gamers on the whole 2011 socket, including servers
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment