DDR-667 or DDR-800 RAM ?

[munisgtm]

i am planning to buy e4300 with p5b and i'll be overclokcing it mildy maybe like 2.4 or something.Question is that what RAM should i buy ? DDR-667 orDDR-800 or maybe DDR-667 Value RAM ?

Thanks in advance

 

[munisgtm]

anybody ?

 

[MarcVenice]

Even a mild OC will be able to run 1:1 with ddr-667, and most of the time valueram is as good as any. The price premium over better timed sets of ram isn't usually worth it, unless your going for the best, which you aren't, with a e4300.

 

[munisgtm]

i think you are right, i should go for the value ram...

 

[gobucks]

how much is the value ram? I've seen 2GB DDR2-800 kits for well under $100, and I even saw some DDR2-1000 from crucial for $105 after rebate, which is simply ridiculously cheap compared to a few months ago. Personally I'd grab at least DDR2-800, just in case you get a great overclocking e4300. plus, DDR2-800 can usually go well past its its rated speeds - my corsair XMS is supposed to run at DDR2-800 @ 5-5-5-12, but it runs up to around 1020 @ 5-5-5-10, so if nothing else you can run a memory divider to use some of that extra bandwidth. From what i've noticed, C2Ds seem to take pretty good advantage of extra memory bandwidth, even when it is running out of sync with the FSB.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Faster memory will be better in almost all ways. It helps alot of things to have faster memory. I think that if you can afford the little extra cash for quality cas4 DDR2-800 then go for it.

 

[magreen]

What are you all smoking?

The OP is talking about a mild OC of up to 2.4GHz. DDR2 667 valueram will take him to 3.0GHz w/o OC'ing the ram. He ain't looking to hit 3.6GHz so DDR2 800 is useless for him.

As for the memory multiplier, it makes almost no difference on a C2D. Using a multi to configure from DDR2 533 to DDR2 800 speeds gets you a whopping 5% increase in overall system performance on a C2D.

(btw, AM2 is totally different due to its integrated memory controller)

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: magreen
What are you all smoking?

The OP is talking about a mild OC of up to 2.4GHz. DDR2 667 valueram will take him to 3.0GHz w/o OC'ing the ram. He ain't looking to hit 3.6GHz so DDR2 800 is useless for him.

As for the memory multiplier, it makes almost no difference on a C2D. Using a multi to configure from DDR2 533 to DDR2 800 speeds gets you a whopping 5% increase in overall system performance on a C2D.

(btw, AM2 is totally different due to its integrated memory controller)

The benefit is still there though. I gain an average of 5fps, 3dmark went up 1000 points too.

It's not rediculous to tell someone to buy a good set of DDR2-800 when the price is so low. You can get 2GB of DDR2-800 from a reputable brand for $90.

 

[yuppiejr]

IMHO - the best mild overclock with a C2D e4300 and P5B is to run DDR800 w/ a 400 mhz FSB and 6x multi for 2.4 ghz. Keeps you in the optimal 1:1 RAM:FSB timing ratio within the RAM's rated specs as long as you keep the northbridge adequately cooled. You can then elect to push the FSB multi up one notch at a time to 2.8 and 3.2 ghz depending on how your processor behaves.

Take artificial benchmarks with a grain of salt - 1000 points on 3DMark is BS without proof OR based on a seriously outdated version of the app (like 3DMark01) The 3DMark06 numbers I saw showed less than a 13 point spread between same equipped C2D systems with 667 and 800 mhz RAM...

Also, a 5 FPS gain in a game you play often is only meaningful IF it's at a resolution you use with whatever combo of AA/HDR or Ansio you have enabled. The benchmark stats I saw were using 1024x768 resolution and comparing 100+ FPS numbers, at which point gaining or losing 5 FPS is totally meaningless. Memory latency's impact on gaming performance is going to fall far down the list of performance impacting itmes compared to RAM quantity and what graphics adapter you are using. At gameplay effecting framerates below 60 FPS, you MIGHT be talking about 1-2 FPS if all other system bottlenecks (primarily GPU) are out of the equation.

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articl...2duo-memory-guide.html

I'd say figure out what the max FSB you intend to use will be and buy RAM that will allow it without overclocking. If you're going to self limit to 333 mhz, go with 667 - if anything faster go with DDR2/800.

 

[cmdrdredd]

If memory doesn't help then why move to DDR3? Why sell DDR2-1066+ memory at all?

 

[yuppiejr]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
If memory doesn't help then why move to DDR3? Why sell DDR2-1066+ memory at all?

The DDR2-1066 product is targeted at overclockers, it's produced because there are folks out there who want to push past a 400 mhz FSB with RAM that's guaranteed to scale to their desired clockspeeds without being overclocked. The move to DDR3 is to utilize improvements in the northbridge memory controller in Intel chipsets and lack of long term scalability of current DDR2 parts to match Intel's future architecture plans.

The ONLY advantage in running RAM faster than the FSB of your C2D processor is a decrease in memory latency. In a C2D based system, the processor can only move data in and our of RAM as fast as the Northbridge/FSB clocks will allow - period. Since improved latency is the only major benefit you'd achieve by running RAM faster than your FSB, the same results by purchasing RAM matched to your desired FSB with lower latency characteristics. Running RAM at higher clockspeeds requires looser timings which ultimately negates any latency benefit it would provide compared with buying FSB matched RAM with better timings.

Seriously, read the article I linked in my first post and/or browse around Xbit's memory articles related to C2D - there's a lot of good data on this subject out there if you spend the time reading it.

Also - still waiting to see some screencaps or other proof of this 1000 3DMark score difference? Mind sharing what version of the app you were running? I'd like to test this myself out of curiosity and see if I can replicate your results.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: yuppiejr

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
If memory doesn't help then why move to DDR3? Why sell DDR2-1066+ memory at all?

The DDR2-1066 product is targeted at overclockers, it's produced because there are folks out there who want to push past a 400 mhz FSB with RAM that's guaranteed to scale to their desired clockspeeds without being overclocked. The move to DDR3 is to utilize improvements in the northbridge memory controller in Intel chipsets and lack of long term scalability of current DDR2 parts to match Intel's future architecture plans.

The ONLY advantage in running RAM faster than the FSB of your C2D processor is a decrease in memory latency. In a C2D based system, the processor can only move data in and our of RAM as fast as the Northbridge/FSB clocks will allow - period. Since improved latency is the only major benefit you'd achieve by running RAM faster than your FSB, the same results by purchasing RAM matched to your desired FSB with lower latency characteristics. Running RAM at higher clockspeeds requires looser timings which ultimately negates any latency benefit it would provide compared with buying FSB matched RAM with better timings.

Seriously, read the article I linked in my first post and/or browse around Xbit's memory articles related to C2D - there's a lot of good data on this subject out there if you spend the time reading it.

Also - still waiting to see some screencaps or other proof of this 1000 3DMark score difference? Mind sharing what version of the app you were running? I'd like to test this myself out of curiosity and see if I can replicate your results.

You do not always have to loosen timings to move up in Mhz...that's why my memory can do DDR2-1000 at the same latency it does at 800Mhz.

Also I read that artical some months ago then we came on here and had a long thread about memory speeds and timings using everything from P965 to 975x to 680i boards and the difference depended on the chipset. I can't find that thread now but I am searching, it seems to have been lost. The p965 boards always benefited more from faster memory vs timings, 680i bords the same except when you moved to 1T command rate which was faster than moving up in Mhz, and the 975x depended on timings more.

Why don't you go to xtremesystems.org and ask how memory bandwidth helps. They will always tell you that faster memory is better. Probably better than I can since my personal experience and results mean nothing...

Even if I gave a screenshot how do you know it isn't fabricated? There is no difference between posting a screenshot and you calling it fake and me posting numbers here and you calling it fake. I don't have to prove anything, I'm simply posting my opinion about memory speeds to someone who asked a legitimate question. I will always tell someone to buy the faster product given the option so as to never limit themselves. You don't know what they may do in the future, maybe they get a Quad CPU cheap somewhere and want to run DDR2-800. I have a strong feeling that a quad will consume much more bandwidth than a dual core.

 

[yuppiejr]

My objection to your posting "data" was simply that you were using your "1000 point 3dmark and 5 fps increase" to indicate a rather significant performance boost by running your RAM faster than your processor's FSB. I've done extensive reading on the subject, and the evidence I linked from the Xbit Labs site pretty soundly refutes what you're claiming. If you were seeing a 1000 point increase in almost any version of 3DMark and could document this it would be a MAJOR boon for people trying to tweak their systems and fly in the face of testing from a respected review site.

Honestly, I think you made it up in an attempt to support your point - which is why I asked for some shred of evidence to support your numbers which is obviously not forthcoming. I'm not going out of my way to trash you, however I think it's seriously unethical to post stats to suport a conclusion that you can't otherwise support and is outright FALSE so I called you out on it for that reason.

The bottom line is, running RAM faster than the FSB will provide a SLIGHT improvement to latency - however no matter how you dice it you cannot move data between the CPU and memory any faster than the NB link between the two even if one is running faster than the other. It's like getting stuck behind someone going 55 in a 65 MPH zone - your car is only going as fast as the car in front of you no matter how fast your car is capable of driving. What running the RAM faster than the FSB will do is add strain to the NB memory controller which may have a negative impact on stability which is why the better practice is to simply buy lower latency RAM rated for the speed you plan to run your FSB (x2 of course) and call it good.

Bottom line - as I said earlier, I think the OP's best bet for a mild overclock is to buy DDR2/800 RAM, then run 6 x 400 mhz FSB for 2.4 ghz - probably including some minor voltage tweaks and some sort of active northbridge cooling. I'd say stick with the value rated RAM (5-5-5-15, 5-5-5-12 or 4-4-4-12) but whatever floats his boat is fine.

 

[amenx]

The OP says he only wants to OC up to about 2.4ghz. Problem is, once you easily do 2.4ghz, you will quickly think 'how about 3ghz?' - or even higher. So on that basis - and do to the fact RAM is so cheap - makes sense to go 800 DDR2. I got my 667 RAM for around $200 (2gb) last September. Although it serves me well up to 3.2ghz, I most definitely would have gone 800 DDR2 if the price was as cheap as today.

 

[Xvys]

I would say buy the best ram you can afford. That is one area I wouldn't scrimp on. Even if you aren't going to o/c that much, having good ram is always a bonus. I bought 2G of new Crucial (10th Anniversary) DDR-667 ram on a EBay store clearance for pretty cheap. These are rated CAS 3-3-3-8 @ 333MHz. This ram runs fine at 525MHz with 4-4-4-10 timings. Crucial Ballistix is similar and costs not much more than value ram, today. Tip of the Day: DDR2 ram prices will be going back up fairly soon, buy now!

 

[magreen]

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
If memory doesn't help then why move to DDR3? Why sell DDR2-1066+ memory at all?

Bandwidth is going to help with Nehalem when Intel integrates the memory controller into the CPU. Just like I said that bandwidth on AM2 makes a major difference, it will also make a major difference with Nehalem. That's why Intel really cares about DDR3 at this time, for the future. At the moment with C2D, the high latencies of the off-chip memory controller masks almost any performance contribution of higher bandwidth.

Read this article: AT reports on overall system performance benefit of higher bandwidth. The whole article is great -- lots of info about C2D and X2 memory controller, etc.

(btw, cmdrdredd, is this the thread you were looking for? Core 2 Duo/DDR2 Memory Guide, Read Me First. )

 

[golem]

Bandwidth is going to help with Nehalem when Intel integrates the memory controller into the CPU. Just like I said that bandwidth on AM2 makes a major difference, it will also make a major difference with Nehalem. That's why Intel really cares about DDR3 at this time, for the future. At the moment with C2D, the high latencies of the off-chip memory controller masks almost any performance contribution of higher bandwidth.

Read this article: AT reports on overall system performance benefit of higher bandwidth. The whole article is great -- lots of info about C2D and X2 memory controller, etc.

(btw, cmdrdredd, is this the thread you were looking for? Core 2 Duo/DDR2 Memory Guide, Read Me First. )

So in general does that mean for X2, if you have to make a choice go for memory bandwidth instead of latency? For C2D, go for memory latency instead of bandwidth?

 

[996GT2]

RAM is so cheap right now that the difference between DDR2-667 valueRAM and DDR2-800 performance RAM is only about $5 or 10 dollars. On Newegg, I even saw a 2 GB Geil DDR2-800 kit for $51 AR! With prices like this, there is almost no reason to opt for the slower DDR2-667 when faster DDR2-800 is only a few dollars more, especially considering it will offer you more flexibility should you decide to increase your OC in the future.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: magreen

Originally posted by: cmdrdredd
If memory doesn't help then why move to DDR3? Why sell DDR2-1066+ memory at all?

Bandwidth is going to help with Nehalem when Intel integrates the memory controller into the CPU. Just like I said that bandwidth on AM2 makes a major difference, it will also make a major difference with Nehalem. That's why Intel really cares about DDR3 at this time, for the future. At the moment with C2D, the high latencies of the off-chip memory controller masks almost any performance contribution of higher bandwidth.

Read this article: AT reports on overall system performance benefit of higher bandwidth. The whole article is great -- lots of info about C2D and X2 memory controller, etc.

(btw, cmdrdredd, is this the thread you were looking for? Core 2 Duo/DDR2 Memory Guide, Read Me First. )

Not exactly. That was more of a "which sets use D9 and which don't?" type of thread. The One I'm looking for had everyone posting benchmarks from games, winrar, 3dmark, superpi etc etc with different memory speeds and different chipsets without changign the CPU frequency. It was easy to see that moving up in Mhz or lower in timings without changing the FSB or multiplyer would help some boards more than others (chipset dependant). I really wish I could find it.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: 996GT2
RAM is so cheap right now that the difference between DDR2-667 valueRAM and DDR2-800 performance RAM is only about $5 or 10 dollars. On Newegg, I even saw a 2 GB Geil DDR2-800 kit for $51 AR! With prices like this, there is almost no reason to opt for the slower DDR2-667 when faster DDR2-800 is only a few dollars more, especially considering it will offer you more flexibility should you decide to increase your OC in the future.

My point exactly. Always guy the faster option given the choise especially so when prices are low like now.

 

[hans007]

well i wouldnt say always get the faster option. but at the differences in prices now, i'd just get value ddr2-800.

i picked up a set from outpost for $49 after rebate. you barely save anything with 667 or they are the same price now. but i wouldnt say buy ddr2-1066 so always buy faster is nont smart.

 

[Zap]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Even a mild OC will be able to run 1:1 with ddr-667

The catch is... will your BIOS let you run 1:1 ratio? I've got two boards that won't when it detects an 800MHz FSB chip. One has a BIOS update though, that fixes it, but I haven't gotten around to it yet.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: hans007
well i wouldnt say always get the faster option. but at the differences in prices now, i'd just get value ddr2-800.

i picked up a set from outpost for $49 after rebate. you barely save anything with 667 or they are the same price now. but i wouldnt say buy ddr2-1066 so always buy faster is nont smart.

I didn't say fastest...I said faster option.

Everyone has a budget, but I tend to recommend buying the best you can within that budget. I don't condone buying "what works because you don't need more" when in fact we all want more, always.