• 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.

Anyone got a chance to read this??? EPOX USERS PLS READ!

i think there was a thread about this memory timing on epox board--either on this forum or other forum--do a search..
final opinion was the best settings is 16 8 8 2 6 2 2 or 8 8 8 2 6 2 2.
 
I get the best performance form the above settings. The suggested "safe" settings of 8882622 made Prime 95 crash immediately, while the ones I mentioned above will run it endlessly...
 
how bout posting the voltages if they are adjusted from the default settings to achieve running the memory at these timings
i am having difficulty running these saettings and getting 3dmark2001 to run stable...sandra will run however....but it bothers me that 3dmark wont
 
3DMark2K1 wouldn't run completely on my GF DDR with everything non-overclocked. I don't even bother with that program any more. I can run Q3 and UT for over 24hrs, so I am satisfied in the integrety of my system in 3D apps. Also, Prime 95 and CPU Stability test 6.0 will run as well...screw Mad Onion...
 
Okay...lemme get this straight...i want stability and performence...i'm OCing and i want the best timings to OC well. I'm thinking it's the 8882222...but what's the advantage over the 8882622? What's the downside of the 8882222?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top