Is 800 mhz DDR2 as fast as 1066 with a Q6600???

weber1557

Junior Member
Mar 21, 2008
10
0
0
Hi Guys.

I'm building a new system soon and I'm getting a Gigabyte DS3L board that accepts 1066 memory (and a Q6600). I've heard that I won't see any performance improvements with 1066 memory over 800 mhz memory.

Does anyone know if this is true? Why? Is the Q6600 or the P35 chipset a bottleneck?

I'm not into overclocking (at least I havent been in the past). I just want a super stable, relatively quick system but obviously don't want to spend extra money if I won't see any differance.
 

Acanthus

Lifer
Aug 28, 2001
19,915
2
76
ostif.org
It would pretty much be a correct statement that theres no real advantage.

Youll gain 1% or so here and there, i think winrar is the only program that benefits more than the margain of error on benchmarks.

You can see here that even DDR2 400 and DDR2 1066 arent that far apart in performance. Ignore the sandra and superpi tests as they dont in any way represent real performance.
 

QuixoticOne

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2005
1,855
0
0
On Intel CPUs the memory speed doesn't make too much difference in overall application performance.
Pretty much DDR2-800 will be all you need, and DDR2-800 is the sweet spot for price/performance.
DDR2-1000 or DDR2-1066 costs a lot more for no real advantage.

The thing that DOES give you reason sometimes to buy those faster RAMs is to overclock the *CPU*.
The p35 and most other chipsets cannot have a RAM clock that is LESS than the CPU clock.

So if your CPU has a maximum x8 multiplier, say, and you want to get to 4000MHz on the CPU, that needs a base clock of 500 because 500x8=4000. Since a 500 MHz base clock going into the DDR2 would be actually the same as DDR2-1000 (since DDR2 doubles the clock) you'd need DDR2-1000 (PC2-8000) to be guaranteed to hit 500 MHz for both the RAM and CPU clocks.

The Q6600 = x9 maximum multiplier, and so with DDR2-800 (400 MHz stock rating guaranteed) RAM that'd be a 400 MHz RAM clock guaranteed and so 400 MHz would be the CPU base clock so 400x9=3600MHz max. overclock for the CPU without overclocking the RAM or buying faster RAM.

3600 is a decent overclock for a Q6600, so therefore 400 MHz RAM is a decent choice for the Q6600. Not everyone gets to 3600 on a Q6600, and to do so you'd need a high end heatsink and relatively expensive motherboard with heatpipe cooling for the PWMs and Northbridge etc. etc. so it starts to cost more money for RAM and heatsink and motherboard to really go beyond that and it is not at all guaranteed your CPU would even go to that point much less beyond it.

Even if you had all the right hardware and 500 MHz PC2-8000 RAM, it is seldom that you'd get a Q6600 to run past around 444Mhz (4000 MHz CPU), so really you'd probably be able to OC your decent DDR2-800 memory up to the max. the CPU/motherboard could handle anyway and thus not need PC2-8000 RAM to get the max. OC of the CPU.

If you bought today, and wanted PC2-6400 4GB (2x2GB kit) I'd get this:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820220227
for $57 after a $20 rebate it is quite decent memory at a rock bottom price.

Patriot Extreme Performance 4GB(2 x 2GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model PDC24G6400ELK - Retail

* Cas Latency: 5
* Features: Bladed aluminum heat shields to improve module stability RoHS Compliant EPP Ready
* Heat Spreader: Yes
* Recommend Use: High Performance or Gaming Memory
* Model #: PDC24G6400ELK
* Item #: N82E16820220227
* Return Policy: Memory (Modules, USB) Return Policy

5-5-5-12 timings @ 800 MHz.



 

weber1557

Junior Member
Mar 21, 2008
10
0
0
Thanks Quix...

No wonder I've never been into overclocking...way too confusing.

So my fsb is actually running at 266 and DDR2-800 is actually running at 400 right? So if I wanted to OC just a little, the memory would not be a bottleneck?

It used to be better to run the fsb and memory at the same frequency (syncronous, 1:1). Does it matter any more?

The memory you suggested has 5-5-5-12 timing. Would 4-4-4-12 timing be any faster (in the real world)? It's about $20 more.
 

Jest3r

Member
Jan 18, 2008
85
0
0
If it's only $20 more, I'd get lower latency ratings. No personal experience, but I've heard good things.
 

DSF

Diamond Member
Oct 6, 2007
4,902
0
71
In the real world you probably won't notice a difference. Also, if you're running the RAM at DDR2-533 (which would be 1:1 with a stock Q6600) you should be able to ratchet the timings down to 4-4-4 or even 3-3-3 anyway.
 

QuixoticOne

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2005
1,855
0
0
Originally posted by: DSF
In the real world you probably won't notice a difference. Also, if you're running the RAM at DDR2-533 (which would be 1:1 with a stock Q6600) you should be able to ratchet the timings down to 4-4-4 or even 3-3-3 anyway.

QFT. This is very true.

(A) Everything at stock settings:
CPU = 266x9 = 2400 ; RAM = 400 @ 3:2 RAM:CPU multiplier 5-5-5-12

(B) Easy (suggested) Overclock I'd suggest with a P35 chipset MB or comparably good other one -- only needs a good (better than Intel's) CPU heatsink / paste, a modestly decent OCing motherboard with a good heatpipe or fan on the Northbridge/PWM heatsinks; runs the DDR2-800 RAM at stock speed/timings:
CPU = 333x9 = 3000 ; RAM = 400 @ 6:5 RAM:CPU multiplier 5-5-5-12

(C) Synchronous overclock; RAM at stock settings, CPU very slightly overclocked; motherboard's clock running fairly fast but not too bad; CPU is really typically capable of a decent bit more speed than this with a good heatsink / motherboard, so in terms of overall performance the above non-synchronous OC would probably be faster, though this one would be easier on the CPU heating if you are trying to get by with a weaker CPU heatsink:
CPU = 400x7 = 2800; RAM = 400 @ 1:1 RAM:CPU multiplier 5-5-5-12

(D) Faster synchronous overclock, your CPU needs a very good cooler, and the CPU may or may not work at this speed; you'd probably have to bump Vcore up a bit to get it stable --
CPU = 400x8 = 3200; RAM = 400 @ 1:1 RAM:CPU multiplier 5-5-5-12

Obviously you could continue with either (C) or (D) above 400 MHz so you'd be OCing the RAM a bit (maybe between 400 and 450 is often possible if you back off on the timings to 6-6-6-18 or something and maybe raise the RAM voltage to 2.1 or 2.2 depending on the DIMM). Then you'd get that stable with memtest while using the CPU locked at x6 to make it go slow so you know it'll be pretty stable, then see if you can manage x7 on the CPU above 400 MHz.. if that works you can try for x8 on the CPU or stick with x7 and go higher in frequency so both the RAM and CPU will speed up.

Typically with DDR2-800 when your CPU is at a base frequency significantly less than 400 (e.g. 333 or 266) you'd want to run the RAM:CPU multiplier so the RAM goes as fast as the RAM can even with the lesser CPU clock. Once you get a fair bit over 333 on the base clock you switch to running 1:1 CPU:RAM since the RAM is approaching its stock settings even with the straight CPU base clock and efficiency is best that way and your lowest possible next higher CPU:RAM multiplier probably is too fast for the ram to be stable at.

Always start out at stock frequency / timings / voltages, no "automatic" overclocking enabled in the BIOS, CPU fans on full speed, verify stability with the free memtest86 boot CD for 12 hours. You can also then run a CPU stressor like Prime95/StressPrime2004 if you want to and have Windows available without too much installation hassle to make sure the CPU is good too at its full load.
http://memtest.org/
http://mersenne.org/
http://sp2004.fre3.com/download.htm

Once it's all good at stock speed lock the CPU at x6 or its minimum multi and raise the base clock to something over 400 @ 1:1 CPU:RAM until your RAM is going faster than
its stock speed while the CPU is not overclocked due to its locked low multiplier. Use stock RAM timings/voltage. Memtest for a few hours and make sure the RAM is working at your OC'ed speed. Then go back and see if you can get the CPU stable at x7 or x8 or x9 at this speed and get a good CPU + RAM OC at the same time.. it's just about compromising between the best (max) stable RAM clock and the best stable (max) CPU clock given the fact you only have 2-3 choices as to what the CPU speed will be at a given clock depending on whether it is x6, x7, x8, or x9 of that clock.

 

QuixoticOne

Golden Member
Nov 4, 2005
1,855
0
0
Yeah the FSB = the base clock x4 so 266x4 = FSB 1066, or 333x4 = FSB 1333.
Basically just ignore that and treat everything in terms of the base clock.

DDR2 doubles the clock you feed it in terms of its data transfers so 400 MHz in = DDR2-800.
Just keep that in mind to realize the stock clock of your RAM is really one half of your DDR2-XXXX number and then you can work with a clock number that is consistent for both CPU and RAM.

It is necessary / desirable to run 1:1 CPU:RAM once the CPU clock gets about as high as the RAM can go since there's no option to run the RAM slower than the CPU clock, only options to boost the RAM higher than the CPU clock through that multiplier.

At clocks a lot less than the RAM can handle, it's best to use the multiplier so the RAM goes fast and the CPU goes slow. Or as the other fellow said you can find some zone in there where you underclock the RAM frequency but run it 1:1 at faster timings than the RAM is specified for relative to its stock frequency..
So maybe DDR2-800 with stock 5-5-5-15 will do DDR2-667 at 4-4-4-12 or whatever.
I'm sure DDR2-1066 would do DDR2-533 @ 3-3-3-9 or so but one wouldn't find that a worthwhile investment typically. You can always try to push the timings faster by one notch from 5-5-5-15 to 4-4-4-12 and see what you get if you're going a fair bit slower than the RAM's spec'd frequency. Memtest.

But overall now you see why DDR2-800 is a good overclocking match to a Q6600 since you have a good zone where the CPU is overclocked to a level you might well reach while staying within the zone the RAM can handle.

Originally posted by: weber1557
Thanks Quix...

No wonder I've never been into overclocking...way too confusing.

So my fsb is actually running at 266 and DDR2-800 is actually running at 400 right? So if I wanted to OC just a little, the memory would not be a bottleneck?

It used to be better to run the fsb and memory at the same frequency (syncronous, 1:1). Does it matter any more?

The memory you suggested has 5-5-5-12 timing. Would 4-4-4-12 timing be any faster (in the real world)? It's about $20 more.

 

weber1557

Junior Member
Mar 21, 2008
10
0
0
Hey thanks Quix! Awsome info guys...I think I'm finaly starting to get this stuff.

One more question if you don't mind...can you recomend a good overal system benchmark program that I could use to verify all this stuff when I start playing around with it?