DDR2-800 for q6600 and DDR2-1000/1066 for e8400?

[asintu]

Is this the general idea when choosing memory? If so, then why? q6600 has a fsb of 266 and ddr2-800 has fbs of 400..isn't the memory overkill? Won't the memory run at 266 anyways assuming a non-overclocked q6600?

 

[LOUISSSSS]

people buy ddr800 (400mhz) ram for the Q66 because most people can only get it to 9 x 400 anyway and most people dont even get to there.

people get 500/533mhz ram for the e84 because they think the e84 can get above 9 x 400mhz and they dont want to deal with RAM overclocking.

 

[asintu]

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
people buy ddr800 (400mhz) ram for the Q66 because most people can only get it to 9 x 400 anyway and most people dont even get to there.

people get 500/533mhz ram for the e84 because they think the e84 can get above 9 x 400mhz and they dont want to deal with RAM overclocking.

so if you're not overclocking a q6600 would'nt it be a waste to buy ddr800 since it will only run at 266?

 

[Yellowbeard]

A quad core can take advantage of some extra bandwidth which you would see with the DDR800 vs 667. It's not going to be a huge difference but, every little bit counts. DDR800 is dirt cheap right now so it makes almost no sense to buy 667 anyway.

 

[LOUISSSSS]

Originally posted by: asintu

Originally posted by: LOUISSSSS
people buy ddr800 (400mhz) ram for the Q66 because most people can only get it to 9 x 400 anyway and most people dont even get to there.

people get 500/533mhz ram for the e84 because they think the e84 can get above 9 x 400mhz and they dont want to deal with RAM overclocking.

so if you're not overclocking a q6600 would'nt it be a waste to buy ddr800 since it will only run at 266?

yea..it would for the most part, be a waste

although some people say no, u can run it in async mode and run your ram at 400mhz, but that would yield u MINIMAL performance increase

if not overclocking, any ddr2 633 (266mhz) would be great

 

[Yellowbeard]

Well, my points are that;

A: A quad CAN in fact use the extra bandwidth so it is not a waste and.....

B: When a 2 x 1gb pair of DDR800 is $30 in some places and 2 x 2gb of DDR800 is much less than $100, there is no logical reason go buy DDR533 or 667.

So, the same exact logic does not apply to a quad as compared to a dual core. But, if not OCing the CPU, there won't be "HUGE" differences in either case.

 

[Tweakin]

Another issue might be the fact that most DDR-800 could be tightened up in the timings area if running at a lower bus...snappy is happy!

 

[DSF]

All of the above responses are reasons that people go with DDR2-800.

1) It's readily available, and generall only slightly more expensive than lower speeds, if it all.

2) It's useful for the overclocking headroom, especially for lower-multiplier processors. (But even for higher multipliers.)

3) I hadn't heard about quads making greater use of available bandwidth. If the processor runs on a 1066 frontside bus, meaning it makes 1066 transfers per second, I don't see how the number of cores has anything to do with that. But I'm no expert in that area.

And just a side note, RAM running on a 266 MHz frontside bus is running at DDR2-533, not 633.