Lower timings or faster speed for RAM?

2008-08-24 19:41:08

#1

Brasso: member; +1,549|6898

Currently my RAM (rated at 1066) is running at 880 MHz or something, but it's enabled me to drop my VCore substantially - well into the green zone now. I think I can clock the CPU higher as well. Timings were 5-5-5-15, or whatever was stock. Before I ran it at 1056.

I think I'm going to keep the speed low with stock timings. It just seems to work better overall, we'll see.

Actually forget about everything I said up there ^, just choose what you would pick. Lower timings, or faster speeds?

"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"

2008-08-24 20:09:47

#2

aimless: Member; +166|6393|Texas

Faster speeds. You will notice more of a difference if you chose faster speed over faster timings.

2008-08-24 20:15:32

#3

Brasso: member; +1,549|6898

800 MHz is really the standard though, I'll see how high the CPU can go and decide

"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"

2008-08-24 20:55:40

#4

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6465|Winland

I believe 800MHz 4-4-4-12 gives more bandwidth than 1066MHx 5-5-5-15

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2008-08-24 21:28:00

#5

The#1Spot: Member; +105|6807|byah

Freezer7Pro wrote:
I believe 800MHz 4-4-4-12 gives more bandwidth than 1066MHx 5-5-5-15

Although I cant explain why. I just know for a fact that MHz has a much higher impact than lowered timings even though both help. When i OC my ddr ram from ddr400 to ddr533 I had nearly a 20% increase in bandwidth with higher timings.

Last edited by The#1Spot (2008-08-24 21:29:26)

2008-08-24 21:39:48

#6

Dauntless: Admin; +2,249|7010|London

You might want to read this, although as the conclusion says not much can be drawn from it.

2008-08-25 00:53:05

#7

Sydney: 2λчиэλ; +783|7111|Reykjavík, Iceland.

I lowered my ram to match my bus speed and then tightened timings to 4-4-4-12, works like a charm.

2008-08-25 01:20:09

#8

.Sup: be nice; +2,646|6721|The Twilight Zone

Lower timings>speed

https://www.shrani.si/f/3H/7h/45GTw71U/untitled-1.png

2008-08-25 01:33:54

#9

Nappy: Apprentice; +151|6497|NSW, Australia

i have no idea what people are talking about when they get into all this ram timing and shit :S

2008-08-25 03:08:21

#10

Bertster7: Confused Pothead; +1,101|6849|SE London

Freezer7Pro wrote:
I believe 800MHz 4-4-4-12 gives more bandwidth than 1066MHx 5-5-5-15

Not the case. Not with any Intel CPUs. Some AMD CPUs did benefit massively from lower latencies, because of the onboard memory controller, maybe that's why you're getting confused.

The best speed is what matches your system bus best. It's all about linking the speeds together well so they're nicely synced. Not just jacking up the speeds loads.

2008-08-25 03:11:04

#11

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6465|Winland

Bertster7 wrote:
Freezer7Pro wrote:
I believe 800MHz 4-4-4-12 gives more bandwidth than 1066MHx 5-5-5-15
Not the case. Not with any Intel CPUs. Some AMD CPUs did benefit massively from lower latencies, because of the onboard memory controller, maybe that's why you're getting confused.

The best speed is what matches your system bus best. It's all about linking the speeds together well so they're nicely synced. Not just jacking up the speeds loads.

I saw a page a while ago, explaining all this perfectly. I'll try to find it.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

2008-08-25 05:58:36

#12

BlackKoala: Member; +215|6593

Freezer7Pro wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:
Freezer7Pro wrote:
I believe 800MHz 4-4-4-12 gives more bandwidth than 1066MHx 5-5-5-15
Not the case. Not with any Intel CPUs. Some AMD CPUs did benefit massively from lower latencies, because of the onboard memory controller, maybe that's why you're getting confused.

The best speed is what matches your system bus best. It's all about linking the speeds together well so they're nicely synced. Not just jacking up the speeds loads.
I saw a page a while ago, explaining all this perfectly. I'll try to find it.

Then why, when I used to bench, did higher speeds on looser timings give me better times and more bandwidth on nearly all the tests I ran?

I used to run Spi at over 1220Mhz on insanely loose timings because it gave me better times than I got at say 8 or 900Mhz with the tightest timings I could muster.

2008-08-25 06:08:41

#13

Freezer7Pro: I don't come here a lot anymore.; +1,447|6465|Winland

BlackKoala wrote:
Freezer7Pro wrote:
Bertster7 wrote:

Not the case. Not with any Intel CPUs. Some AMD CPUs did benefit massively from lower latencies, because of the onboard memory controller, maybe that's why you're getting confused.

The best speed is what matches your system bus best. It's all about linking the speeds together well so they're nicely synced. Not just jacking up the speeds loads.
I saw a page a while ago, explaining all this perfectly. I'll try to find it.
Then why, when I used to bench, did higher speeds on looser timings give me better times and more bandwidth on nearly all the tests I ran?

I used to run Spi at over 1220Mhz on insanely loose timings because it gave me better times than I got at say 8 or 900Mhz with the tightest timings I could muster.

Timings aren't as simple as we think. If I find that page, I'll post it for everyone to see. There were some quite unexpected things there.

The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP

BF2S Forums Lower timings or faster speed for RAM?

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

BlackKoala wrote:

Freezer7Pro wrote:

Bertster7 wrote:

Board footer