Review: Kingston HyperX Predator DDR3-1,866 memory

by Tarinder Sandhu on 13 November 2012, 10:00 3.0

Tags: Kingston

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qabo2f

Add to My Vault: x

Final thoughts and rating

...we'd encourage Kingston to take another look at the retail position and adjust pricing accordingly.

Kingston's revised HyperX Predator line enacts a new range of enthusiast-orientated DDR3 memory suitable for both AMD and Intel's latest desktop platforms.

It fills all the common speeds and capacities expected of quality memory, rising up to 2,666MHz, but we feel that some of the higher-speed kits use looser timings than the competition.

The reviewed set, a pair of 8GB DDR3-1,866MHz sticks, provide a reasonable uptick in performance over cheaper, slower DDR3-1,600 memory, though the benefits of using double-density modules aren't apparent in our benchmarks.

Huge drops in DRAM chip pricing means that system memory has increasingly been sold on a lowest-price basis, even from big-name manufacturers, and this is where the £110 Kingston set ultimately suffers.

The same quality of memory - and most manufacturers use the similar underlying Hynix chips - can be purchased for around £75, leaving Kingston in an uncomfortable position. Superior construction and rock-solid stability can only mask a 10 per cent premium, we feel, not the near-50 per cent witnessed here.

Though we're loathed to use pricing as a stick to beat a manufacturer with, in this instance we'd encourage Kingston to take another look at the retail position and adjust pricing accordingly.

Bottom line: a high-quality set of DDR3 memory compromised by a currently untenable price.

The Good

Superb construction
Solid performance

The Bad

High price
Module height may be an issue

HEXUS Rating

Kingston 16GB HyperX Predator DDR3-1,866

HEXUS Where2Buy

The reviewed memory is available here.

HEXUS Right2Reply

At HEXUS, we invite the companies whose products we test to comment on our articles. If any company representatives for the products reviewed choose to respond, we'll publish their commentary here verbatim.



HEXUS Forums :: 8 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
Seems even lower speed corsair RAM still pulls ahead on a lot of the tests. I think ill stick to corsair.
very happy to see tthat hexus using a far better platform with intergrated graphics - the AMD A series APU`s respond well to faster ram , far more than the intel kit
I think I will stick to Samsung green low profile RAM sticks and overclock the heck out of them!

More seriously I thinkk Kingston have completely lost the plot here. It is not that the RAM is bad, it is just overpriced, over-engineered and outperformed.
Of course, the sad thing about using FM2 for all the tests is that the IMC doesn't scale as well as Intel's, so you don't get to see the differences above 1333MHz in the synthetic benchmarks due to the limitations of the APU.

OTOH, IGP gaming is pretty much the definition of a real world test where memory bandwidth is the limiting factor, so the FM2 platform makes inherent sense as a real world metric of the difference between speed grades of RAM…

I suppose it'd be too much to ask that synthetic tests were done on the Intel rig and gaming tests on the AMD rig….? :hexlub: :mrgreen:

Interesting, but not unsurprising, to see the 16GB capacity made no difference in gaming compared to 8GB, but I'd love to know if RAM capacity would make a difference at the lower end - it'd be fascinating to see 2GB v 4GB v 8GB in an IGP gaming test…
Corsair sticks all the way!