Core 2 Duo memory overclocking?

[rogue1979]

I've been out of the loop for awhile, so I hope my questions don't sound too dumb.

1. When overclocking a C2D on a high front side bus, couldn't you get a nice overclock with cheap memory by using a memory divider to slow down the memory speed?

2. Would this affect overall performance by more than a few percent?

3. Is the cas latency a big deal? Is overall memory speed more important at
the high cas latency timings of DDR2?

 

[Shimmishim]

http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=28&threadid=1966035&enterthread=y

1. Only the 680i/650i and RD600 boards allow for lower dividers. All 965 and 975x boards only have 1:1 or higher dividers.

2. No. I think the average user wouldn't notice the difference.

3. No. Bandwidth is usually most important while ocing on the c2d's...

 

[rogue1979]

Wow, no memory dividers for Intel Chipsets on Core 2 Duo boards!

That's kind of a backwards step in technology.

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[DrMrLordX]

The Intel chipsets do have memory dividers, but they only allow you to run your memory faster than 1:1.

 

[bobsmith1492]

Yeah, they still have dividers, but you can only divide by numbers less than 1 -> meaning you can only multiply. Seems strange to me, but you can always go with a 6400 or 4300 with a big multiplier and still use cheap ram. Kinda ironic how that works; you need the cheap processor to make use of the cheap RAM for overclocking...

 

[n7]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
Wow, no memory dividers for Intel Chipsets on Core 2 Duo boards!

That's kind of a backwards step in technology.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Not really.

Dividers are more of a backwards step in technology IMO, & considering manufacturers design CPUs to be run at stock speeds, why would they care about slower dividers?

Intel chipset-based mobos have dividers, just the opposite way of what you are thinking.

Instead of 5:4 or 3:2, it's 4:5 or 2:3, etc, so RAM can run faster than CPU, & since Intel's architechture loves bandwidth, that makes sense.

AFAIK, the only reason lower than 1:1 divider became so popular is because of AMD's on die memory controller, which pretty much negated the need for uber fast RAM.

That all being said, for those of us who like cheaper RAM, there is now the nice option of the E4300, which can do insane overclocks with cheaper DDR2-800 :thumbsup:

 

[Shimmishim]

Originally posted by: rogue1979
Wow, no memory dividers for Intel Chipsets on Core 2 Duo boards!

That's kind of a backwards step in technology.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Huh?

I said 1:1 or higher!!! maybe my wording was funny.

I shoulda said 1:1 and higher dividers

 

[rogue1979]

Originally posted by: Shimmishim

Originally posted by: rogue1979
Wow, no memory dividers for Intel Chipsets on Core 2 Duo boards!

That's kind of a backwards step in technology.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Huh?

I said 1:1 or higher!!! maybe my wording was funny.

I shoulda said 1:1 and higher dividers

I meant no backwards dividers

I see no reason to omit lower dividers, it just makes the hardware overall more compatible.

 

[murphyslabrat]

Has anyone ever heard of something called "dual channel"? You can even underclock RAM and, with dual-channel, still get decent performance. Not to mention being able to tighten up the timings.
That's why you should use <1:1 RAM dividers!

 

[StopSign]

Originally posted by: murphyslabrat
Has anyone ever heard of something called "dual channel"? You can even underclock RAM and, with dual-channel, still get decent performance. Not to mention being able to tighten up the timings.
That's why you should use <1:1 RAM dividers!

This has to be a joke...

 

[The I]

Originally posted by: rogue1979

Originally posted by: Shimmishim

Originally posted by: rogue1979
Wow, no memory dividers for Intel Chipsets on Core 2 Duo boards!

That's kind of a backwards step in technology.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Huh?

I said 1:1 or higher!!! maybe my wording was funny.

I shoulda said 1:1 and higher dividers

I meant no backwards dividers

I see no reason to omit lower dividers, it just makes the hardware overall more compatible.

I don't understand this. I run my memory on a lower devider easy enough with my P5w DH - I just use one of the memory settings that was 'meant' for using ddr2 533 on stock speed when I run at a 25% oc and get ddr2 667...

 

[stevty2889]

Originally posted by: Shimmishim
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview...atid=28&threadid=1966035&enterthread=y

1. Only the 680i/650i and RD600 boards allow for lower dividers. All 965 and 975x boards only have 1:1 or higher dividers.

Not entirely true..the P5W DH allows setting for 400mhz DDR-2, so it does have one divider that runs the mem at less than 1:1...

 

[StopSign]

Originally posted by: The I

Originally posted by: rogue1979

Originally posted by: Shimmishim

Originally posted by: rogue1979
Wow, no memory dividers for Intel Chipsets on Core 2 Duo boards!

That's kind of a backwards step in technology.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Huh?

I said 1:1 or higher!!! maybe my wording was funny.

I shoulda said 1:1 and higher dividers

I meant no backwards dividers

I see no reason to omit lower dividers, it just makes the hardware overall more compatible.

I don't understand this. I run my memory on a lower devider easy enough with my P5w DH - I just use one of the memory settings that was 'meant' for using ddr2 533 on stock speed when I run at a 25% oc and get ddr2 667...

That's because you're using 975. 965 doesn't allow lower dividers.

 

[The I]

Originally posted by: StopSign

Originally posted by: The I

Originally posted by: rogue1979

Originally posted by: Shimmishim

Originally posted by: rogue1979
Wow, no memory dividers for Intel Chipsets on Core 2 Duo boards!

That's kind of a backwards step in technology.

Thanks for clearing that up.

Huh?

I said 1:1 or higher!!! maybe my wording was funny.

I shoulda said 1:1 and higher dividers

I meant no backwards dividers

I see no reason to omit lower dividers, it just makes the hardware overall more compatible.

I don't understand this. I run my memory on a lower devider easy enough with my P5w DH - I just use one of the memory settings that was 'meant' for using ddr2 533 on stock speed when I run at a 25% oc and get ddr2 667...

That's because you're using 975. 965 doesn't allow lower dividers.

Ahh, that makes sense I guess since the 975 was made for the first 1066 fsb pentium with not to much high-bandwidth ddr around. I find it a bit strange though that the 1066 fsb / ddr 533 divider wouldn't be available though, since that's the one with the same (theoretical) bandwith on memory and fsb. But thanks for enlightening me.