Kingston recently introduced an addition to its HyperX line of memory called ‘HyperX blu’. This memory is meant for entry level gamers and PC enthusiasts, which to menas means it’s more of a ‘value’ line but yet offer the performance you’ve come to expect from HyperX. I can tell you though that the blu performs just as well as the regular style HyperX and just costs a little less. The kit I have for review today is the Kingston HyperX blu 1600Mhz 2x2gb kit that runs at Cas 9 on Intel XMP settings at 1.65v. So I’ve put it up against two other HyperX kits, a standard kit that runs @1600 and the LoVo kit that runs @1866 for comparison. I also did some overclocking of course and this kit hit 2000Mhz very easily, a very respectable and stable overclock. Read on and see for yourself how it performs..
Specifications:
HyperX blue 4GB kit 1600MHz DDR3
KHX1600C9D3B1K2/4GX
Kingston proudly introduces HyperX blu, a new line of reliable memory ideal for the entry level gamer or PC enthusiast.
HyperX blu features a new streamlined clipless design. Its heatspreaders provide thermal performance at an improved price point.
4GB 1600MHz DDR3 Non-ECC
(Kit of 2) Intel XMP
HyperX = DDR3-1600 CL9-9-9-27 1.65V
Default = DDR3-1333 CL9-9-9 1.5V
Price: $123.00
Unboxing:
So it’s two sticks of ram in a plastic case like is the norm for Kingston packaging.
The HyperX logo is there and under it is the new ‘blu’ logo.
Here’s a few more shots:
Installation, Performance, Comparison
Well you see what the new blu looks like, here’s the other two kits I mentioned earlier:
The kit normally runs at Cas9, but without any changes it will run happily at Cas8. In fact as I type this the kit is running at 1600Mhz doing Cas8 in my main computer.
Here’s the stock CPU-Z settings and the Cas8.
Of course I had to do some overclocking, at first I pushed it up to 1866Mhz, I hit that with no problem, no additional voltage either.
So after I ran my tests I decided to push it even further and again it was easy this kit hit 2000Mhz with no problems.. I know the limit my my Corei5 CPU, and it’s 210Mhz.. I can’t got over that, no matter what I do.. so I stopped at at very respectable 2000Mhz. Not bad for just bumping up the FSB as it were..
So we can get a nice overclock out of it, but how does it perform..
I ran some tests at the stock 1600, then at 1866 and then again at 2000Mhz.
During all of the tests I only overclocked the ram and tried to keep the CPU near the stock 2.6Ghz so we would know how just how the ram performs and the results won’t be skewed by a higher clock speed that is normally related with overclocking.
The test results in the charts are for those three tests, then for the LoVo at 1600 and 1866 and then the regular HyperX at it’s stock 1600Mhz.
We’ll start with calculating Pi to 1 million places, I used HyperPi for this test.
It looks to me at both 1600 and 1866 the blu kit performs better.
Let’s jump to Cinebench, I ran both version 10 and the new 11.5
Here’s the information from the Cinebench site as to what the results mean:
Main Processor Performance (CPU)
The test scenario uses all of your system’s processing power to render a photorealistic 3D scene (from the viral “No Keyframes” animation by AixSponza). This scene makes use of various different algorithms to stress all available processor cores.
In fact, CINEBENCH can measure systems with up to 64 processor threads. The test scene contains approximately 2,000 objects containing more than 300,000 total polygons and uses sharp and blurred reflections, area lights and shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and much more. The result is given in points (pts). The higher the number, the faster your processor.
Graphics Card Performance (OpenGL)
This procedure uses a complex 3D scene depicting a car chase (by renderbaron) which measures the performance of your graphics card in OpenGL mode. The performance depends on various factors, such as the GPU processor on your hardware, but also on the drivers used. The graphics card has to display a huge amount of geometry (nearly 1 million polygons) and textures, as well as a variety of effects, such as environments, bump maps, transparency, lighting and more to evaluate the performance across different disciplines and give a good average overview of the capabilities of your graphics hardware. The result given is measured in frames per second (fps). The higher the number, the faster your graphics card.
Here we see the blu kit falls in between the other two at 1600mhz, and falls behind the LoCo kit in the OpenGL test, but in the CPU test it seems the blu kit helps the performance along a lot.
No chart for Cinebench 10, here’s the results for OpenGl and screen shots:
blu @1600: 7964
LoVo @ 1600: 8031
HyperX @1600: 8030
blu @1866: 8053
LoVo @ 1866: 8148
blu @ 2000: 8191
LoVo @ 2000: 8653
Then let’s check out the old standby SiSoft Sandra.
First is Cache and Memory Test:
Benchmark the processors’ caches and memory access (transfer speed).
Results Interpretation
Cache/Memory Bandwidth (MB/s) – higher results are better, i.e. faster memory bandwidth.
Speed Factor (MB/s) – lower results are better, i.e. less difference between processor cache speed and memory speed.
Not bad at all from the blu…
Next is the Memory Bandwidth test:
Benchmark the memory bandwidth of your computer
Results Interpretation
Integer Memory Bandwidth (MB/s) – higher results are better, i.e. faster memory bandwidth.
Float Memory Bandwidth (MB/s) – higher results are better, i.e. faster memory bandwidth.
Again not bad at all from the blu…
Finally we have the
Memory Latency Test:
Benchmark the latency (response time) of processors’ caches and memory
The latency of caches is measured in processor clocks (i.e. how many clocks it takes for the data to be ready) as it is dependent on the processor clock speed.
The latency of memory is measured in nanoseconds as it is typically independent on processor clock speed.
Results Interpretation:
Latency: Lower is better
Speed Factor: Lower is better
Again, we got the same positioning.. that LoVo kits costs quite a bit more than the blu, and even the regular HyperX kit costs more than the blu.
Not bad performance at all from the new blu from Kingston.
If we go and check prices for these kits I tested and compare them.
Kingston HyperX blu 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin 1600MHz DDR3 KHX1600C9D3B1K2/4GX
Price: $123.00
Kingston HyperX 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1600 KHX1600C8D3K2/4GX
Price: $133.99
Kingston HyperX LoVo 4GB (2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR3 SDRAM DDR3 1866 KHX1866C9D3LK2/4GX
Price: $203.00
We see this blu kit is actually the cheapest kit, but yet it performs very well, right on and even sometimes better than the more expensive kits. I’d say that’s a pretty good value…
Conclusion:
So the new blu HyperX is apparently some good stuff, it performs well, overclocks easily and can run at lower timings if you want it to.
What more could you ask from a set of ram, other than low price, but the HyperX blu has that too coming in at the lowest price of the kits I tested. I checked NewEgg and it’s one of the lower priced kits they’ve got in stock.
Pros:
+Overclocks well
+Great performance
+Runs at Cas8 1T with no adjustments
+Inexpensive
Cons:
-I couldn’t find any….
Ratings
Overall: 5 out of 5
Performance: 5 out of 5
Aesthetic: 5 out of 5
Build Quality: 5 out of 5
Disclosure: http://www.bonafidereviews.com/disclosure-policy/
