I've said this before and I'll say it again: WHY can no other manufacturer offer DDR3 like what OCZ was releasing when they were bringing their product line to a close? They offered 2000+MHz kits at CL7, with 1866 @ CL6 (was like 6-8-6 I think, I would have to check if anyone really cared to know). I was so sad that none of those turned up being available in the US as I would've bought some, even though I don't need any!

I might be mistaken, but while digging for the stock voltage on these KingMax Nano modules I came across finding that the JEDEC standards require ICs to be capable of operating at up to 1.9V. "Operating at" is what I feel to be the key words since to me it implies "running at that voltage while causing no damage". Now, two things about that make sense to me: First, the reason I looked for the voltage of that kit is it's a "2133MHz" kit with no mention of voltage, and I figured they were 1.6V (apparently 1.5V, according to XMP profile *shrug*), yet I was running them at 1.8-1.9V since my older OCZ Reaper HPC DDR3-1600 CL7 kit are the 1.9V variety. Second, one would expect that 1.9V through any DDR3 would run particularly hot (the Reapers, despite having a heatsink, run warm enough worthy of mention). As a matter of fact, these KingMax sticks running at 1600 1.9V are barely warmer than ambient, much to my surprise!!

Also, my Nanya-made modules (not just IC) overclock rather well. They are 1066 7-7-7 ECC and I maxed out the controller on my old 555BE at 1790MHz, 1.78V auto timings (resulting in 11-11-11 2T though), passing DOS MemTest 4.10 *shrug* Might be like what Ket told me when I bought them a year and a half ago, that ECC modules are quality binned chips and perform well, which indeed the did. They've got a thermal diode as well, maxing at only 37C (bare IC). I should shove them back in now that I've got a 1090T and see how much further I can push them lol

[/ramble]

Good job on the bluntness though, Ket I'm sure it's the case with most manufacturers, that after modules have been on the market long enough to get good enough word-of-mouth penetration, they drop back to lower quality ICs which barely make the grade :\

I still think all this BS with timings going sky high is killing the memory market. If OCZ can do it (high speeds, low timing and voltage), anyone can -_- 1866 CL9 isn't going to be any better than 1600 CL7. Equation to show that:
(img = link to further in depth article for anyone interested)

1600 CL7 = 8.75ns latency.
1866 CL9 = 9.64ns latency!
Even worse,
1600 CL9 = 11.25ns latency

What would it take to run CL9 and reach the same latency of 1600@CL7?
Well, 9*2000 = 18000. Divide by 8.75ns since we want the speed, and we are left with 2057 (1028.5MHz DDR)

Not to say there isn't more to it and that 1866 CL9 couldn't outperform 1600 CL9 due to... well technicalities beyond my knowledge lol (but I figure time = time and you can only do so much in a certain amount of that time, and no way around that when working on the same architecture)

[/rant]

[/post] haha