Can I clock DDR333 at DDR200 speeds in an nForce and get better performance using CAS2?

[CZroe]

I know dual channel DDR is useless if the memory is just as fast as the FSB and you aren't using the extra bandwidth for integrated video. But what about underclocking for lower latency? If I build a Barton system, and I buy and use dual-channel DDR333 or DDR266 I will still have ample bandwidth for the CPU when running at DDR200 speeds but from what I hear I will be much more likely to reach CAS2 instead of 2.5 (Seemingly the lowest CAS latency DDR333 modules are rated at).

Is there anything wrong with this idea? It seems like no one using an nForce2 would need to buy expensive memory if DDR200 is better

 

[Krk3561]

Can I clock DDR333 at DDR200 speeds in an nForce and get better performance using CAS2?

simply put, no.

 

[pillage2001]

Why not just do DDR333 at cl2?? If you've got good RAM, I'm pretty sure you can do cl2. You can DDR200 speed if you underclock it but why choke the bandwidth??

 

[CZroe]

Choke?! If the Athlon XP's bandwidth is matched at single-channel DDR333, then it's exceeded and in fact extra bandwidth is WASTED when using dual DDR200 with it (if you are not using integrated video). I don't think CAS2 DDR400 exists and TRUE CAS2 DDR333 is EXPENSIVE and practically non-existant from what I hear. I AM talking about saving money here

 

[pillage2001]

Originally posted by: CZroe
Choke?! If the Athlon XP's bandwidth is matched at single-channel DDR333, then it's exceeded and in fact extra bandwidth is WASTED when using DDR200 with it if you are not using integrated video. I don't think CAS2 DDR400 exists and TRUE CAS2 DDR333 is EXPENSIVE and practically non-existant from what I hear. I AM talking about saving money here

Crucial DDR333 can do 222 5 1T at 333Mhz and it's only 73 bucks in Newegg I think. Is that too much??

 

[CZroe]

Originally posted by: pillage2001

Originally posted by: CZroe
Choke?! If the Athlon XP's bandwidth is matched at single-channel DDR333, then it's exceeded and in fact extra bandwidth is WASTED when using DDR200 with it if you are not using integrated video. I don't think CAS2 DDR400 exists and TRUE CAS2 DDR333 is EXPENSIVE and practically non-existant from what I hear. I AM talking about saving money here

Crucial DDR333 can do 222 5 1T at 333Mhz and it's only 73 bucks in Newegg I think. Is that too much??

Crucial is PREMIUM. If that's the case why buy DDR333 when using dual channel you could get by with half that?

Isn't non-Crucial DDR266 dirt cheap?

BTW, what capacity is that price?

 

[pillage2001]

With all those bogus RAM out in the martket. I would suggest sticking with Crucial and that stick I was talking about is 512mb. I can get it for 58 bucks but not promised to be Crucial. 80% of the case, people were gettign Crucial sticks from them.

If the bandwidth is matched and there's no need for extra, why did they implement DDR400 or DDR333 when you can get away with DDR200??

 

[CZroe]

Originally posted by: pillage2001
With all those bogus RAM out in the martket. I would suggest sticking with Crucial and that stick I was talking about is 512mb. I can get it for 58 bucks but not promised to be Crucial. 80% of the case, people were gettign Crucial sticks from them.

If the bandwidth is matched and there's no need for extra, why did they implement DDR400 or DDR333 when you can get away with DDR200??

Well the Prescott will need dual DDR400 to get maximum bandwidth but I'd expect to get much more value out of slower sticks in dual channel with an Athlon. Guess not

 

[chilled]

Originally posted by: pillage2001
Crucial DDR333 can do 222 5 1T at 333Mhz and it's only 73 bucks in Newegg I think. Is that too much??

Crucial DDR266 does 2-2-2-5 at 333MHz on my MSI K7N2-L and its even cheaper

 

[txxxx]

Most decent branded DDR does, my Nanya 512MB 333 runs at 2225 1t 333 , and so does my Infineon. They cost £45~ each.