Introduction, Specifications, and Pricing
Not that long ago, Kingston sold off their HyperX name to another company; it only makes sense that they come out swinging, staying relevant, and keeping their name in the heads of all of their previous customers. With that said, it makes complete sense that Kingston refresh their current and future lineups to reflect the massive change in naming that we are all used to seeing. Taking that a step further, while we have had many a HyperX RAM kit come through the lab, it has been forever since I have seen Kingston on the heat spreaders or even the packaging, for that matter.
Even near the end of the DDR4 lifecycle, where DDR5 is optional right now with Intel, once the new AMD stuff releases, DDR4 will be phased out when it comes to the latest and greatest tech. However, even though DDR5 is all the rage in the info circles, there are many users out there on older systems or those trying to bring an older system to life again, and having current options is nice to see versus trying to pick through the old stock and hoping for the best. In that vein, Kingston is showing us their latest set of DDR4 from their Fury line, which may not seem spectacular when compared to many of the older B-die kits out there, but as you will see, it is plenty for the average user and leaves us a little fun to be had as well.
Many of you may have seen a few Fury kits, and you may have also seen some Fury Beast kits, and you may have also even seen some Fury Beast RGB kits, but they were all under a previous extension of Kingston. Even though our gut says the remaining ICs in manufacturers' hands are not the best pick of the litter, we have been surprised in the past with the tuning, allowing some of these newer DDR4 kits to contend with some of the "better kits" out there. We are eager to see what Kingston has for us in the results we will be showing you shortly.
The Kingston Fury Beast RGB we have are just one of many options. Kits start at 2666 MT/s and top out at 3733 MT/s, with capacity ranging from a single 8GB stick to 128GB kits, and CAS latency ranges from 15 to 19 as you move through the five speed options. Out of those options, we have the KF432C16BBAK2/16, Kingston DDR4 at 3200 MT/s CAS16. The remaining codes tell us the kit is black, and it consists of two sticks, which total 16GB in density. Kingston takes the Henry Ford approach with color options, from what we can tell. All options currently are black but come with a brushed or hairline finish, exposing the aluminum underneath for the Fury name to pop, where all other information is either painted on or found on the product sticker.
With our set of Fury Beast RGB, we not only get the initial XMP profile, where this memory will load the OS with 3200 MHz 16-18-18-36 showing in CPU-Z, and at 1.35V to allow the kit to do so, there is a second option. Kingston loads a second XMP profile, which delivers the Fury Beast RGB into Windows at 3000 MHz, but this time with 15-17-17-36 timings and still requires 1.35VDIMM to run with this profile. Even though this kit comes with a thermal range, we saw nothing near 70°C in testing, so only the harshest environments will have an issue with this thermal range. We also know that this is the shortest of the Kingston RGB DDR4 available, where it stands 41.2mm tall. Lastly, Kingston offers a full lifetime warranty to back its products.
We have noticed that DDR4 pricing is currently quite good, putting decent kits in the average budget range. With that in mind, when we went to look at what it takes to get this kit to our door, seeing it listed for less than $100 was a good start. At $96.95, compared to many of the other kits we see available to us, it is a touch on the expensive side, considering we can get similar kits at nearly $60. It does take $65 to get a decent RGB set, but that does not add much to the value this early in the game. Even though we fully realize there is a premium associated with this kit, maybe overclocking and test results will show why you should choose Kingston and their Fury Beast RGB over some more affordable options.
Packaging and Kingston FURY BEAST RGB
Packaging for this Kingston kit is the same as we are all used to, with the clear plastic shell used as the anti-static measure, with a sticker wrapping around the packaging to keep it sealed. The sticker clearly shows Kingston as the manufacturer of these Fury Beast RGB sticks, and along with the name are RGB Sync systems that work with this kit. To the right, we see AMD and Intel notations and mentions of the FURY CTRL software and RGB inclusion.
Flipping the packaging onto its face, we can see the product information in the top half of the sticker. We see all of the specifications mentioned earlier to be true, with little more than where they are assembled as new information.
Fresh out of the plastic, we can see the highly stylized heat spreaders on the kit, but we will get to that soon. Now, let's cover the warranty and installation guide that accompanies the kit to ensure you know how to use RAM with a motherboard, where to go, and who to contact should you have an issue and need support. On top of that, Kingston sends a sticker along so that you can help spread the name.
Now that we are closer to the Kingston Fury Beast RGB, we can see more detail in the styling of the Fury Beast heat spreaders. Notches on the left match those at the top, and the chunky bit in the middle of the spreaders go along with the shapes found near the diffuser bar. Along with all of the styling cues, Kingston paints their name, the BEAST and DDR4 on the right side, but the FURY name is made of exposed aluminum, which is visually close to the painted bits look, but has with a reflective quality the rest does not deliver.
As to the product sticker on the reverse, there isn't much more than the product model number, the serial number, and the voltage required, which are made in Taiwan. We would like to see the kit specifications as well, but it is found in other locations, and Kingston will not try to pull anything by not displaying the XMP information here.
The top of the sticks offers a diffuser bar, as most RGB RAM does, but rather than being flat, it is just as stylized as the heat spreaders. There are chunky bits and angular sections to match the overall design bits of the aluminum wrap over the bar, adding "segments" of lighting to the otherwise open area. Kingston adds the FURY name to the diffuser bar to ensure anyone who visits knows what you are running in the system.
When it comes to the view most will have of this Fury Beast RGB, something along these lines is what you will see on many 4-slot motherboards. We love that they put the sticker on the proper side of the kit so as not to be seen while in use, and the doubled look at the diffuser bars is a step up from what many manufacturers offer.
As we do, we lean on Thaiphoon Burner for the IC information of the kit in hand, and it did not disappoint here. We find a set of Samsung ICs placed onto this Kingston kit, and they are specifically K4A8G085WD-BCRC, which are Samsung D-die 17nm chips. At the bottom, we can also see that our previous XMP profile information is intact and available for use.
Those who want a similar kit in a mainstream solution will find the appearance much as we have here. At this time, we are using ASUS software for RGB control, and the color matching is on point for those who prefer modes of colors over the standard solid color options. You can always opt to grab the FURY CTRL software, but it is yet another suite to have to monitor with possible conflicts to arise down the line.
Even when the Fury Beast RGB is packed into the slots next to each other, they are still just as visually striking as they are with the gap between them. Honestly, a set of four would look stunning on a motherboard, but when it comes down to using our motherboard sync, we are pleased as punch. We did try FURY CTRL but found nothing there that we could not do with other means.
Test System Details
To obtain the AMD CPU-Z screenshots, you will see directly following this image, and this is the system we used to do it, as well as in attaining the results seen in the following pages. Thanks go out to Corsair, ASUS, and GIGABYTE for supporting this venture. Detailed specifications of the system can be found below.
Once installed and the CMOS cleared, we took a trip into the BIOS and enabled the first of two XMP options. Once into Windows, we see that our Kingston Fury Beast RGB is running as described, and it is currently at 3200 MHz with 16-18-18-36 1T timings. To accomplish this, the VDIMM changed to 1.35V, and SOC was at 1.064V.
After another CMOS clear, we went back into BIOS and enabled the second XMP option, changing how the Kingston Fury Beast RGB runs. Now, the RAM is at 3000 MHz, and the timings changed to 16-17-17-36 1T, using identical voltages to the first XMP image above.
As we do, we attempted to look for any flexibility left in this RAM, and with our AMD system, we came up empty within the bounds we set for testing. When attempting to reduce the timings, we got BSODs or a lack of post ability, and while we did see 3266 MHz in Windows, we could not pass all of the tests.
Chad's AMD DDR4 Dual-Channel Test System Specifications
- Motherboard: ASUS Crosshair VIII HERO Wi-Fi - Buy from Amazon
- CPU: AMD Ryzen 9 3900X - Buy from Amazon
- Cooler: Corsair H150i PRO - Buy from Amazon
- Video Card: GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER Gaming OC 8GB - Buy from Amazon
- Storage: Corsair Force MP500 480GB NVMe - Buy from Amazon
- Case: Thermaltake Core P5 TG - Buy from Amazon
- Power Supply: Corsair RM750x 750-watt - Buy from Amazon
- OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64-bit - Buy from Amazon
To obtain the Intel CPU-Z screenshots, you will see directly following this image, and this is the system we used to do it, as well as in attaining the results seen in the following pages. Thanks go out to Corsair, ASUS, and GIGABYTE for supporting us here too! Detailed specifications of the system can be found below.
As we expected, with the same steps as we always take, we find that the Fury Beast RGB jumps right to its advertised specs with the first XMP setting. 3200 MHz of speed with 16-18-18-36 2T timings are not a problem for this kit with our Intel system. For those who want voltage information, VDIMM is at 1.35V, and our board picks 1.312V for the VCCIO and 1.152V for the VCCSA.
The second XMP option will slow things down a touch, but again, as expected, it just works out of the box. This time we are at 3000 MHz with 15-17-17-36 2T timings, and the voltages to do this do not change from the initial XMP setting above.
We attempted to run this kit with reduced timings, but that did not get us far. We were able to run CAS15, but any other change to the timings resulted in BSODs and various Q-codes. It may not be much movement, but we will let the charts sort out its worth.
We also looked for any additional speed, and we could find a touch more love in this aspect. 3333 MHz with 16-18-18-36 2T timings was the best result we got with stability. We did see 3400 MHz in windows, but using 1.45VDIMM, 1.3100 VCCIO, and 1.1550 VCCSA got us the results in these last pair of CPU-Z screenshots.
Chad's Intel DDR4 Dual-Channel Test System Specifications
- Motherboard: ASUS ROG Maximus XII Apex - Buy from Amazon
- CPU: Intel Core i7 10700K - Buy from Amazon
- Cooler: Corsair iCUE H150i Elite Capellix - Buy from Amazon
- Video Card: GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER Gaming OC 8GB - Buy from Amazon
- Storage: Intel SSDPEK1W120GA
- Case: Thermaltake Core P3 - Buy from Amazon
- Power Supply: Corsair RM750 - Buy from Amazon
- OS: Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64-bit - Buy from Amazon
Right out of the box, enabling the first DOCP option, we find the Fury Beast RGB hanging in there with some of the other 3200 MHz kits in the chart, with a 48194 MB/s throughput in AIDA64 read performance. You will take a 2988 MB/s penalty using the second DOCP option, but it is nearly 1500 MB/s behind the Nighthawk RGB with the same speed.
Write performance is a slightly different tune. Using the first DOCP setting, we jumped above all other 3200 MHz options in the chart at 47019 MB/s, which is only 63 MB/s better than the DYNA 4SLT Orion but still better. The second DOCP setting takes us nearly to the bottom of the chart, with a 2948 MB/s deficit from the first DOCP setting, and is even over 100 MB/s behind the Nighthawk RGB again.
Copy performance in AIDA64 is the realistic measure of the three to indicate typical system performance, and the results we have do not bode well for this Fury Beast RGB and our AMD system. While the Fury Beast RGB is playing in line with the other 3200 MHz kits in the chart, the 43327 MB/s results using DOCP are still not great. The same is said for the second DOCP option, as it fails to compete with others of similar speed.
Using timings like 16-18-18-36, we did not expect stellar latency, and the results in this chart proved our guess correct. DOCP(1) hits 80ns of latency right on the nose. Considering the drop of speed and timings not getting much better overall, seeing 82.9ns for the DOCP(2) run isn't horrible. As we can see, it can get worse.
Using the Physics portion of 3DMark Fire Strike shows the Fury Beast RGB near the bottom of the chart again. With only 70 points between both runs, neither of the scores is impressive, especially once you start looking where the other 3000 and 3200 MHz kits are placed.
PCMark seems to have some odd results, but we confirmed this to be repeatable after multiple runs. At 3200 MHz, the DOCP(1) setting delivers a last-place result. However, the 3000 MHz DOCP option allows this kit to jump six places, landing where we expected both runs to place, but using them as advertised for this suite will not get you the best results.
Considering all things, speed, timings, sub timings, we are not shocked that other 3200 MHz options do slightly better here, but that 456.266 time is not all that bad to compress near 8GB of data. If you are stuck using the second DOCP setting, expect a slightly slower run, which came out to nearly ten seconds slower than the first run, and considering it is slower than the two kits on either side of it, we cannot complain much about these times.
Cinebench R15 puts a hammering on the DOCP(1) setting when initially looking at that score, but it is better than other similar kits that placed higher in other metrics, so that is a bonus in itself. However, if you want the highest score from this kit, Cinebench prefers the second DOCP option, which nets a higher score than the faster option of this Fury Beast RGB.
Handbrake seems the fairest to the Kingston Fury Beast RGB, placing it where it is expected to land. Only the T-create turned in a better time at 3200 MHz, and both DOCP options for this kit place Kingston well above others we assumed may have been higher in this chart, going by what we saw in the previous charts.
Right out of the box, we cannot complain about the XMP(1) results, as the 45380 MB/s does outpace a 3600 and 3200 MHz kit. However, the XMP(2) results are less than impressive, and they are to scale but not remarkable. We were able to get a little boost from dropping the CAS to 15, worth four points over XMP(1), but adding a touch more speed is where these Fury excelled, swinging way above their weight class, raising the score nearly 1600 MB/s over XMP(1).
Those XMP(1) results for write performance are poor, any way you slice it. It closes in on the Nighthawk RGB but cannot hang with it, and using XMP(2) is worse yet. Changing the timings did not help much, but that 2300 MB/s increase in the chart with just 133 MHz more speed is an impressive figure.
A trend seems to be developing where Kingston keeps finding itself at the bottom of our charts when it comes to XMP performance, and while better than a 2666 MHz kit, that is about all we can say. Reduced timings did worse this time, but running them at 3333 MHz puts them into a range we expected the XMP results to land.
If you want to compare latency with friends, the Fury Beast RGB does well in that respect, at least once paired with this Intel system. By far not the lowest in the charts, but even with fair latency numbers across all options of running these sticks, lower latency does not always translate into better results.
The physics portion of the 3DMark Fire Strike test likes this RAM on our Intel rig. We cannot complain about either of the XMP scores, as they are better than expected after seeing what AIDA64 had for us. However, if you plan to tune this kit, you will take a penalty in many 3DMark tests, not just this one specific run.
PCMark 10 tends to rank RAM oddly compared to other tests, and we see more of the same with these Kingston sticks. XMP(1) results are not horrible, but we are a bit shocked to see XMP(2) do that much better than XMP(1). Reducing timings was of no joy when trying to improve the scores, but adding some speed shows a slight advantage.
Finally, a chart that makes sense and lines up as one would expect scores for each run to line up! With a baseline of 496.313 seconds to complete the task using XMP(1), the 11.4-second slower result from XMP(2) usage is not out of line. Reducing timings is only slightly faster for every 8GB of data compressed, but if you want to increase speed as we did, you can gain back seven seconds for every 8GB of data over the out-of-the-box figure.
Again, when we run Cinebench, the results end up everywhere. XMP(1) turned in the worst result of the kit, and while we expected XMP(2) to do worse, it got a better score. Both options of overclocking this kit resulted in a better score, but both methods run head to head with half a point difference between them.
What we find in this chart is shocking. With AMD, the results were right in the mix of where they should have placed, but on the Intel rig, just about anything else we tested did better. XMP results are barely worth a mention, and the fact that clocking this kit does virtually nothing is just strange at best.
From the moment we saw this kit while having flashbacks to other solutions with similar names, under a different brand, Kingston made the right move after selling the widely known name of the majority of their gear aimed at the mainstream gaming crowd. If we were in their shoes, we would do the same thing, rebrand the hell out of the offerings, and stay as relevant as possible.
With our Fury Beast RGB, we did get a stunning-looking product, with all sorts of styling and visual cues to keep even the most discerning eye busy. The diffuser bar does a great job of eliminating hot spots while still allowing for good intensity levels. The black brushed aluminum on top of black PCBs is a nice touch, leaving the Fury name exposed from the heat spreader. Keeping with Samsung ICs is also nice, even if they are D-die. Many customers trust the IC manufacturer, and so that is another plus. On paper, the Fury Beast RGB seems ready, willing, and capable, which they are, but not in the ways we expected.
The biggest issue we see overall is the placement in our charts. Out of eighteen charts, there are only five or six times where if we were Kingston, we would be proud of what we put out, compared to the similar kits in our charts. Let us do the math for you. That is a 33% success rate in all of our testing. When we look at things like that, it takes the ending of a review out of our hands.
As much as we could go on and on about how slick these look, and there are multiple XMP/DOCP profiles, there is some flexibility to play around with overclocking. With or without the FURY CTRL software, there is no RGB mode or thermal reading that will change the fact that if you want bang for the buck when it comes to performance, this is not the kit to do that. Keep in mind that we realize that many kits released this late in the DDR4 game will no longer have the choicest ICs. Still, there is an expected level customers want at 3200 MHz CAS16 sticks, and we feel these do not deliver what is expected from a kit with these specifications.
There is yet one last nail to help seal this box for Kingston: the cost. As we mentioned earlier, there is a lot to love visually, but is that worth a 30% increase in price over another comparable kit? That $65 range is hot right now for RGB 3200 C16 kits of DDR4, and with everything we have seen here, we see no real reason to want to spend more for this kit over another. As much as we wanted this to be a runaway success for Kingston, it appears not to be the case, and if our money were going into DDR4 at this time, we would look for another option.
The Bottom Line
As well built and as stylish as they are, Kingston's Fury Beast RGB does not stack up to expectations in performance. The fact that the cost is so high does not help, and to be blunt, we would pass on these if it were our money being doled out to get them.