• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

8 Device or 16 Device RDRAM for best OC Results?

i am not 100 % sure on this but most posts i read recommend this

<< RAMBUS PC 800 256MB RDRAM -16 CHIPS (SAMSUNG ORIGINAL DOUBLE SIDE) >>



hope this helps
 
The 16 device sticks will usually OC better than the 8 device sticks. This is because the memory chips are of lower density in the 16 device sticks. There's also the issue of latency, which 16 device sticks have more of than their 8 device counterparts. But when overclocking, the latency goes down nicely so the 16 device sticks are the better choice for overclocking (from what I gather).
 
I will have to differ. With a 8 device stick, there is a higher chance that each device on the stick will OC with the FSB. Likewise, if you increase the number of devices to 16, the probability of them all OCing is less than if the number were 8. And to comment on latency, that remains constant because each stick is running on a serial bus, thus making the latency independent among devices.

-x86
 


<< With a 8 device stick, there is a higher chance that each device on the stick will OC with the FSB. Likewise, if you increase the number of devices to 16, the probability of them all OCing is less than if the number were 8. >>


That's exactly what I was thinking. However, if you buy some good non-generic stuff, they would probably have good enough quality-control that 8 vs. 16 devices wouldn't really matter much. I'm no memory expert though so I could be wrong 😀
 
> I will have to differ. With a 8 device stick, there is a higher chance that each device on the stick will
> OC with the FSB. Likewise, if you increase the number of devices to 16, the probability of them all
> OCing is less than if the number were 8.

This would be true, if the higher-density chips on the 8-device RIMMs could overclock as well as the lower-density chips on the 16-device RIMMs. But they don't.. The higher density chips on the 8-device 256Mb RIMMs don't overclock nearly as well as the lower-density chips found in the 16-device 256Mb RIMMs.

If you must think of it in probabilities, think of it like this: a single high-density chip (as found on 8-chip 256Mb RIMMs) has perhaps a 80% chance of hitting PC1200 speed, while a low-density chip has a 95% chance of hitting PC1200 speed. That would give an 8-device 256Mb RIMM a 16.7% chance of hitting PC1200 speed, while a 16-device 256Mb RIMM would have a 44% chance of hitting PC1200, and a 8-device 128Mb RIMM would have a 66% chance of hitting PC1200.

Hope that clears things up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top