Lower FSB with Aggressive Timings or Higher FSB with Slower Timings

[Tanclearas]

Just trying to make a decision, and thought I'd get some feedback from others.

I've got some PC2700 memory that operates quite well with very aggressive timings when running at PC2100. It will work at PC2700, but the timings have to be adjusted down quite a bit. I'm running an AthlonXP 1600+, and will adjust the multiplier to get the CPU speed I need, but here is the question. Should I run at a higher FSB with slower memory timings, or keep the FSB low and the memory timings fast?

And please no "buy faster memory" responses. That just isn't possible right now.

 

[ManBOO YA]

why don't you run some benchmarks yourself and see whats faster?

 

[Tanclearas]

Cuz I'm lazy....

 

[Confused]

I'd say that running it at PC2700 (and the CPU likewise at 166MHz) with less aggressive timings WILL be faster than PC2100 (and the CPU at 133) with the fastest timings.

What is more important is higher throughput, rather than quicker seeks. It's like a car, if you have VERY fast 0-60 time, then that's all well and good, but in a long race you'll lose if you can't get past 100, but if you're a little slower to 60, but you can cruise nicely at 125, then you'll soon overtake and win the race


Confused

 

[Need4Speed]

higher FSB has much more affect on performance that lower Latency. so crank up the FSB and lower the timings

 

[ChampionAtTufshop]

Originally posted by: Need4Speed
higher FSB has much more affect on performance that lower Latency. so crank up the FSB and lower the timings

i agree
ive found this myself many times
dont worry about the cas settings too much, worry about the fsb

 

[HappyNic]

if I were to choose 133 mhz on cl2 or 166mhz on cl3 , I would mostly choose, 133mhz on cl2 becuse it seems to work more stable and faster for me since my cpu is also running at 133 mhz.

But if you can get it at 166mhz at cl2 or cl2.5, then by all mean do that.