Advantage/disadvantage running CPU asynchronously with faster RAM?

[brigden]

I'm currently running a 2700+ with 512MB of PC2700 at the default speed of 333Mhz. I've just purchased a 1GB kit of PC3200, and I was curious to know if I would see any performance gain/loss when running the RAM asynchronously at 400Mhz...

 

[bobsmith1492]

From what I've heard, asynchronous ram even though running at a higher rate decreases performance on an AMD system.

 

[johnjkr1]

Like bob said, asynch is not the best performing option for athlon XP's.

 

[HardWarrior]

In synch is the way to go for best performance on XP's.

 

[grrl]

I've been wondering about that. So, then why do so many people do the XP2500+ to 3200+ overclock? How do the effects of OCing balance out the asynchronous memory?

 

[Connoisseur]

well most ppl who do that overclock have PC3200 ram or overclock their PC2700 modules so they run synchronously. I hear hynix modules (like those found in Kingston PC2700 can achieve this overclock).

 

[bobsmith1492]

Usually the 2500 to 3200 overclock goes like this:

The 2500 stock has a 333 FSB. The 3200 has a 400 FSB with the same multiplier. All you have to do is run the 2500 with some DDR 400 (nicknamed pc3200), and the FSB runs synchronously with the ram at DDR400. Voiala (er, spelling?) - a 3200 proc.

 

[grrl]

Originally posted by: bobsmith1492
Usually the 2500 to 3200 overclock goes like this:

The 2500 stock has a 333 FSB. The 3200 has a 400 FSB with the same multiplier. All you have to do is run the 2500 with some DDR 400 (nicknamed pc3200), and the FSB runs synchronously with the ram at DDR400. Voiala (er, spelling?) - a 3200 proc.

So there is no problem ramping up the FSB of the processor as well as the core speed? For whatever reason I was imagining that only the core was OCed, but not the bus.

SYA: Viola

 

[DKlein]

I have a 2500+ and some 2700 RAM, I could only get the 2700 up to 352 so instead of running it asynch at ~300 with the processor at 202, I upped the multiplier and got it back in synch (11.5x176 if I remember correctly). I guess this might not be an option though, depending on when you got your CPU.

 

[Markfw]

unless you go into bios and force the bus to 400, it will only run at 333 anyway. The PC3200 (not a nickname BTW) is the speed the ram is capable of, not what it runs at.

 

[XBoxLPU]

I am currently running an XP 1700 @ 2ghz ( 200X10 ) but the memory at 133 because of the PC2100 ram I have. I had bought 256 Kingston PC3200 for the machine but the motherboard didn't like it...


Seti times are right under 3hrs and thats all the machine does so I am happy with it

 

[NatBone]

Hi,

I just stumbled upon this as I'm contemplating buying some new ram.

My Kingston Value PC3200 is giving me trouble with my MSI K7N2-Delta. I have an Athlon 2800 Barton and I've got the mobo at 333 FSB. I tested the ram sticks individually with MS mem tester and they've both failed repeatedly.

So, I decided to order some top quality ram from Mushkin and I saw the 3500 and 4000 speeds. I'm not planning on o'clocking as it's too hot here (just hit 120 F yesterday). So, if my very limited understanding of this thread is correct, I shouldn't go over 3200 with my ram? Or is even 3200 too much and I should go down in speed?

Thanks,

Bob

 

[Bovinicus]

Having the increased memory bandwidth may be beneficial in applications that are bandwidth intensive. However, if the current amount of bandwidth coming from memory is sufficient, then it is going to hurt performance a little bit compared to the synchronous setup.

I would try to run the faster memory at a lower clockspeed, but with more aggressive timings.