Is DDR2 800 worth it for gaming?

[Italicized]

I'm debating whether or not to just get DDR2 667 over DDR2 800 to save money. From what I've seen, the performance difference in games is around 3-5%, but I just wanted to see if anyone else has done a comparison and noticed a difference.

That and which is more important for gaming, lower latencies or more RAM (e.g. 4 GB's over 2GB's)? I'm thinking 4GB's of DDR2 667 will benefit me more than 2GB's of DDR2 800, but if i'm wrong let me know.

Thanks!

Nevermind. I found this review

http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/memory/ddr2/2006/p965-ram-oc/ramchart-lg.png

 

[Roguestar]

The speed the memory runs at is determined by your FSB and the ratio it runs with the memory. If you're running, for example, a 266 FSB (stock) E6600 and your memory in 1:1 ratio with that, it'll run at 533 regardless of whether you paid for 667 or 800 memory. The difference is only apparent whenever you start overclocking; better memory will handle higher speeds whereas others will crap out earlier.

 

[ForumMaster]

often, more ram is better then faster RAM. you should only get DDR2-800 if you're going to overclock. DDR2-667 should be fine though.

 

[Roguestar]

What's up, Opera-using buddy?

/derail

 

[jlbenedict]

DDR2-533 is all you need, if you do NOT overclock.

What is the market like on DDR2-533 though? Is it slowly fading out, since eventually Intel CPU's will run a higher FSB, stock?

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
DDR2-533 is all you need, if you do NOT overclock.

What is the market like on DDR2-533 though? Is it slowly fading out, since eventually Intel CPU's will run a higher FSB, stock?

The market for DDR2-533 is just fine. There are almost no CPU's that run higher than that (default/stock). It will be around for a long time.

 

[hurtstotalktoyou]

I'd go with DDR2-667. The price premium over DDR2-533 is minimal (maybe $5 per DIMM), and DDR2-667 is highly overclockable (67%). For example, you can get an E6300 to 3.1 GHz without pushing your memory beyond 667 MHz, but only 2.5 GHz if you're limited to 533 MHz memory.

DDR2-800 is only advisable, in my opinion, under one of two conditions: you have a super-high-end system out of which you want to squeeze every ounce of performance; you're planning on taking an E6300 *well* beyond 3.1 GHz (not possible without an expensive heatsink/fan). The vast majority of folks would not fall into either group.

 

[Genx87]

I think it also depends on the OS you are planning to use. I have heard XP will only recognize 3GB of memory unless it is the x64 version?

x64 Vista wont have this restriction.

 

[Italicized]

Yeah, i plan on upgrading to Vista and I heard it recommends I have at least 2GB's so I'll get 4GB's just to be safe.

It seems like DDR2 speed doesn't really to show signs of improvement until beyond DDR2 800 and even then it can be less than 10 frames.

So do you guys think that 4GB's of DDR2 533 will be better than 2GB's of DDR2 800?

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: Italicized
Yeah, i plan on upgrading to Vista and I heard it recommends I have at least 2GB's so I'll get 4GB's just to be safe.

It seems like DDR2 speed doesn't really to show signs of improvement until beyond DDR2 800 and even then it can be less than 10 frames.

So do you guys think that 4GB's of DDR2 533 will be better than 2GB's of DDR2 800?

It depends; do you have a use for 4gb's of ram? Do you need the DDR2-800? Are you overclocking? If you're overclocking, you'll need something more than DDR2-533 or you'll have to setup memory dividers to get the slow stuff to play nice.

I have 4GB's , but I'm not a gamer nor do I care for overclocking. I'm a Vmware junkie, and the more memory, the better for Vmware.

 

[Aosh]

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
It depends; do you have a use for 4gb's of ram? Do you need the DDR2-800? Are you overclocking? If you're overclocking, you'll need something more than DDR2-533 or you'll have to setup memory dividers to get the slow stuff to play nice.

I have 4GB's , but I'm not a gamer nor do I care for overclocking. I'm a Vmware junkie, and the more memory, the better for Vmware.

I'm looking to get 4GB for my next rig. How much did you pay for all that RAM?

 

[jlbenedict]

Originally posted by: Aosh

Originally posted by: jlbenedict
It depends; do you have a use for 4gb's of ram? Do you need the DDR2-800? Are you overclocking? If you're overclocking, you'll need something more than DDR2-533 or you'll have to setup memory dividers to get the slow stuff to play nice.

I have 4GB's , but I'm not a gamer nor do I care for overclocking. I'm a Vmware junkie, and the more memory, the better for Vmware.

I'm looking to get 4GB for my next rig. How much did you pay for all that RAM?

I had to go look at my order history on Newegg

I purchased my 4GB back in February; Corsair ValueSelect, DDR2 533 (Two, 2gb dual channel kits) for $359.98.

Looks like it is currently $208 and some change as of right now, for the same 2gb package.

 

[Xarick]

Um.. I am confused because according to intels site if your processor system bus runs at 1066 then your ram should run at 800. So wouldnt it be better to run 800 so that you can get the full benefit of 800?

"Note
Regardless of the DIMM type used, the memory frequency will either be equal to or less than the processor system bus frequency. For example, if DDR2 800 memory is used with a 533 MHz system bus frequency processor, the memory will operate at 533 MHz. The table below lists the resulting operating memory frequencies based on the combination of DIMMs and processors."

Text

so since the fsb of the proc is 1066 you should be able to run 800 at 800 as opposed to only running 533.

 

[motorbikeking1]

what table? that links to this page.

 

[Xarick]

sorry.. I fixed it

 

[TruePaige]

Mmm the more recent Core 2 Duo intel chips run a 1066 FSB, so it's not overkill to pick up DDR2-800 IMO.

 

[Italicized]

Why is this ram only at 1000? Shouldn't it be at 1066?

http://www.tankguys.biz/ddr2-55515-1000mhz-p-1647.html

fixed link

 

[Roguestar]

Originally posted by: Italicized
Why is this ram only at 1000? Shouldn't it be at 1066?

http://www.tankguys.biz/ddr2-55515-1000mhz-p-1647.html

fixed link

Because few people will run their RAM at 1000Mhz. If you're thinking it needs to run at the same speed as the FSB don't forget that the 1066 speed is quad-pumped (carries 4 bits instead of 1) and therefore the real speed is 266. To run your memory at 1000Mhz most people would need to run their FSB at 400 and use a 4:5 ratio.