Cráb People

I did extensive testing with my rams running different timings and frequencies, and basically in terms of timing settings the only ones that makes any differens are the x-x-x and if you can run them in T1 or T2, the rest is neglectable. (T1 is close to impossible with more than 1 stick per channel btw.)

Also for clarification;
Lower timings = lower response time = better performance for gaming in general (apart from loadtimes )
High frequency = more bandwidth for bigger operations.

1066mhz and 1600mhz ddr3 made close to no difference at all in a gaming environment in my amd system.
They key was to overclock the internal northbridge and push really low timings with a low frequency (though obviously not the same for intel systems.)

5-5-5-16 @ 1333 made it purr like a kitten.

I tried that, and I Have 4GB of ram, but it kept giving low memory errors and had to revert to pagefile on disk when wow crashed due to out of memory issues.

I guess I can start with 3x2048 and go from there. Can always buy another set if it's needed.

Would also like to add that RAM speed overall is neglectable for gaming performance. The impact it has is very minor. Say you play your awesome game of fun at 60 fps, you would maybe get 63 fps from buying better sticks and tweaking them to the max. Only size really matters :>

In before that's what she said.

Changed memory to Corsair XMS3 TR3X6G1600C7 in post on the 3rd page (3x2048MB, 1600MHz, 7-7-7-20)

There was an article about this on tomshardware.com some time ago about this and the tests had some interesting results. I believe this was done on Vista though, 7 is quite a lot better optimized so I don't think it has such a big impact.. Especially not if you are running with an SSD.

Did you check out if the S-ATA controller on the MB is to your taste Mior? Would hate to see you get a controller that doesn't work well with your SSD.

Yeah it's fine.. the P6X58D-E has two 6Gbps SATA3 ports. Apparently only the 64GB version of the SSD had problems with Marvell chips.