Balance between speed and timings?

[Goldfish4209]

After reading the article about overclocking the QX9650, it seems like timings are alot more important than I had thought.

Previously, I was thinking about getting my DDR2-800 corsair sticks up to 1200 or 1066, maybe with timings at 4-4-4-12 and that would be it. The FSB would run at 1600, hopefully.

So is it a better idea to have the memory run slower (1066) with tighter timings? I'm mainly going to be gaming (flight sim, bioshock, a blend of genres), so what should I lean more toward for better performance on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being tight timings, 10 being speed), timings or speed? Thanks in advance.

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Goldfish4209
So is it a better idea to have the memory run slower (1066) with tighter timings? I'm mainly going to be gaming (flight sim, bioshock, a blend of genres), so what should I lean more toward for better performance on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being tight timings, 10 being speed), timings or speed? Thanks in advance.

Absolutely YES.

 

[Billb2]

Absolutely YES.

You have no idea what you're talking about, ... Absolutely NO!

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: Billb2

Absolutely YES.

You have no idea what you're talking about, ... Absolutely NO!

Who the hell are you...?

And perhaps you could elaborate, and explain to the class, why you think so...?

 

[JustaGeek]

And can you tell me what that is...?

"Intel SE440BX-3, PIII 550 (@ 565)
MX440 275/332 (@ 350/400) and 3DFX Voodo 5 5500 160/160 (@180/180)
Two Opticals and 120 gigs (w/28gigs in RAID0) on 4 Maxstors"

You got your 550MHz PIII to 565MHz...? Wow, I could never do that!

And what's a "Maxstor"...?

 

[JustaGeek]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: Goldfish4209
So is it a better idea to have the memory run slower (1066) with tighter timings? I'm mainly going to be gaming (flight sim, bioshock, a blend of genres), so what should I lean more toward for better performance on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being tight timings, 10 being speed), timings or speed? Thanks in advance.

Absolutely YES.

@Goldfish4209

No matter what the other gentleman says, try to run your memory at lower frequencies, but tighter timings.

It should put less stress on the IC's, and allow them to run cooler, too.

And I would recommend running them at rated frequencies anyway (800MHz) - the bandwidth gain and the "real time" performance increase are minimal.

Good luck!

EDIT: A great thread to read

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: Goldfish4209
So is it a better idea to have the memory run slower (1066) with tighter timings? I'm mainly going to be gaming (flight sim, bioshock, a blend of genres), so what should I lean more toward for better performance on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being tight timings, 10 being speed), timings or speed? Thanks in advance.

Absolutely YES.

@Goldfish4209

No matter what the other gentleman says, try to run your memory at lower frequencies, but tighter timings.

It should put less stress on the IC's, and allow them to run cooler, too.

And I would recommend running them at rated frequencies anyway (800MHz) - the bandwidth gain and the "real time" performance increase are minimal.

Good luck!

EDIT: A great thread to read

I agree. There are a few situations where bandwidth helps, but it doesn't help enough to be worth the extra stress and heat. If you had memory rated to DDR2-1066 then it may be different, and I'd say run that speed if you can.

Now when you start talking about running DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 vs DDR2-800 5-5-5-15 there is very little real world performance difference. I've personally tested it and synthetics may show some gain, but all my games had the same FPS (within the margin of error from run to run).

 

[cozumel]

As a general rule better timings at a slower speed will improve performance. But of course it does depend on how slow is 'slower'. It is also dependant on your mobo, cpu and RAM as to what the best configuration will be for your rig. I suggest that you try different settings and test the results

 

[Goldfish4209]

Thanks, everyone!

 

[Billb2]

Originally posted by: JustaGeek

Originally posted by: Billb2

Absolutely YES.

You have no idea what you're talking about, ... Absolutely NO!

Who the hell are you...?

And perhaps you could elaborate, and explain to the class, why you think so...?

He asked "I'm mainly going to be gaming (flight sim, bioshock, a blend of genres), so what should I lean more toward for better performance on a scale of 1 to 10 (1 being tight timings, 10 being speed), timings or speed?

I answered "Yes.". Do you think "6" would have been a better answer?
As you and I know, there is no "right" answer.

****************************************************
And can you tell me what that is...?

"You got your 550MHz PIII to 565MHz...? Wow, I could never do that!
-------------------------
Yeah, It's an overclocked Dell. If you haven't been there, don't criticize.
After I mastered the AMD K* platform, not wanting to jump into C2D or QX quite yet (waiting for cheep 45nm stuff), I decided to try some "Old School" ovrclocking. It' a lot harder. I have a phase system for that computer, but it's going to get another CPU and motherboard first. High Hwbot rankings look pretty easy in that genre. I used to have a Hwbot world ranking for an FX57 on water, but that was a while ago. I've managed to get DDR memory up over DDR650 too. (http://valid.x86-secret.com/show_oc?id=112734) though two guys from Japan have seen DDR800 with TCCD sticks.

And what's a "Maxstor"...?

...a typo, thanks, corrected........
------------------------------

No flame war here. I Just didn't think the OP knew what he is asking. He didn't even mention sub-timings, so he still has a lot of learning to do before he can even ask the right questions....that's where he's at.