Memory Dividers? Comparitive Performance Loss?

[ncasebee]

I'm planning on upgrading, and am thinking about purchasing a 3800+ AtholonXP Dual Core. I would have to overclock it to get the single core performance that I would want. However, I'm still confused on memory dividers and if they cause performance loss. Like in this scenario.

I overclock my 3800+ from 2.0Ghz to 2.2Ghz (Aka 4200+), and I divide my memory down to 200MHZ (DDR400) because of the HTT increase. Would my 3800+ be as fast as a 4200+ running DDR400. I don't care about memory speeds, all I want is CPU speed. I know that memory running at a none 1:1 is going to be running slower, but I don't want it fast. I just want my CPU to go up, and my ram to remain at 200MHZ (DDR 400.) I read something about, because it's not 1:1, there would be comparitive performance loss becuase of async. I've also read it's not as much as a problem with the Newere Atholon 64/X2 Lines.

Help me out a bit. Thx

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Running dividers on A64's doesn't give a performance loss. The only problem is finding the right combination of HTT,multi, and divider to get your ramspeed back to near 200mhz(DDR400)

On most boards the highest divider is 166 or 6:5, so in your example if you just increased the HTT to 220mhz to give you 220x10=2200mhz and used the 166 divider your ram would be running 180mhz or less. So to get your ram speed back up you would need to run something like 245x9=2205mhz, that way with the 166 divider your ram would be right around 200mhz.

 

[coomar]

isn't there the 9/10 (180) divider?

 

[McGeyser]

For DFI boards the 9/10 180 is available, I don't know about other MB's.

 

[Acanthus]

I personally like the 2:3 divider

 

[ncasebee]

So there is no performance loss when using dividers. So a 3800+ with DDR400 oced to 4200+ speeds with dividers will run like a 4200+ with DDR400 1:1. I'm actually thinking of approaching 4800+ speed with a boost to componsate for the increased cache. How many MHZ would it take to componsate for the increased cache? I read Anand's guide to OCing, and he mentioned something about a comparitive performance loss because of the CPU/RAM running async when using dividers, and using 1:1 is better. Yes of course running 1:1 is better because you have just overclocked your ram. But what if you didn't want to overclock your ram. See where I'm coming from. I wouldn't want to see a comparitive loss, like the scenario I mentioned at the beginning of this post.

I was looking at the DFI Ultra 4 Board. Does it lockdown PCI-E/AGP, so the overclock won't damage them? What is that setting called. All I want is to oc m CPU. I don't want any of the other components of the system oced or affected. I got the impression this was feasible through the use of dividers and AGP/PCI/PCI-E locks. Am I following correctly?

 

[Hacp]

There is no lock for PCI-E.....

 

[Acanthus]

Originally posted by: Hacp
There is no lock for PCI-E.....

PCI-E is not clamped on some motherboards.

There is a working lock on the DFI Nforce 4 series, i know that for sure.

On my system if i ran 300htt with the 2:3 divider, the only thing being stressed would be the mobo and cpu. I chose to run 310 which brought the ram closer to spec (it was something like DDR392 at 300)

 

[coomar]

get the dfi nf4, most of the people in this thread have one

 

[ncasebee]

So if there is a PCI-E Lock and PCI reg locks, and mem dividers. The only part of my system that will be overclocked will be the CPU? Correct? I wont be shortening the lifespan of any of the other components of my system? I don't upgrade my DVD/Hard Drive or Sound Card very often.