New RAM Upgrade - Timings Issue

[azzav17]

Essentially, I had 2GB (2x 1GB) of Corsair DDR2 800MHz RAM in my machine, running at 2.1V with 4-4-4-12 timings and this has been stable for the last eight months. Now, I purchased some RAM which arrived yesterday, which is 2GB (1x 2GB) Corsair DDR2 800MHz RAM with timings of 5-5-5-12 at 1.9V, and I want to make it 4GB total.

So I kept the voltage at 2.1V and the timings still at 4-4-412 for all the sticks of RAM, and alas, I then had a BSOD as I try the Windows Performance Test on Windows 7 x64 Beta. Now, I read on the website before I purchased the new RAM, that it had been able to successfully run at 4-4-4-12 at 2.0V, so is it that 0.1V which my old RAM requires which is causing this, or it is a case of compatibility issue, or dare I say, faulty RAM?

Sorry for the wall of text and thanks in advance.

 

[Blain]

You can't make higher latency memory run at lower timings.
Back off the timings to match the slower memory. You'll probably be able to back the voltage down to 1.9v after that also.

 

[18 Is Number 1]

Did you raise your northbridge (MCH-Memory Control Hub) voltage? Mobos typically need more when running 4 sticks.

 

[azzav17]

Originally posted by: 18 Is Number 1
Did you raise your northbridge (MCH-Memory Control Hub) voltage? Mobos typically need more when running 4 sticks.

No, I will try that. But to Blain, I know you can make these Corsair modules run at lower timings, I've seen them put into practice. In fact, my 4-4-4-12 modules are default 4-4-4-18, but I lowered that and had it stable for all this time.

 

[Blain]

One question?
Have you seen the 5-5-5-12 modules that YOU own run at 4-4-4-12?

The bottom line is that you can play around with voltages until the cows come home, but you're not likely to have a stable system (running the mixed timing DIMMs), until to drop back the timings to match the slowest modules.

 

[azzav17]

Oh I see what you mean now mate. Well, what would I benefit more from, 4GB 800MHz at 5-5-5-12 or 2GB 800MHz at 4-4-4-12?

 

[Blain]

Timings are almost meaningless these days.
4GBs is way better than 2GBs of low latency, as long as your system needs plenty of RAM.

If you're just surfing and checking email, 2GBs is more than enough. But since you've already bought the extra... Use it and the slower timings and don't look back.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Blain
Timings are almost meaningless these days.
4GBs is way better than 2GBs of low latency, as long as your system needs plenty of RAM.

If you're just surfing and checking email, 2GBs is more than enough. But since you've already bought the extra... Use it and the slower timings and don't look back.

Just to reinforce this message - the things you would be doing (web browse, email, etc) such that an extra 2GB would not result in better performance (even with the resultant higher latency) are also the same things you would be doing which it would not matter whether you had total crap loose timings are nice tight low-latency timings.

Very few real-world applications are (a) small memory footprint, and simultaneously (b) latency sensitive.

In fact even among your more useless synthetic benches SuperPi is about the only one I can think of where extreme benchers go to lengths to buy small memory sized dimms (e.g. 512MB) and really endeavor to tighten up those timings to squeeze every last 0.1ns of latency out of the system.

This is not to say latency doesn't matter, it does and lower is always going to be better than higher, but if given the choice of more ram with looser timings or less ram with tighter timings the typical real-world computing environment will yield larger benefits to the user should the user opt to select the higher memory capacity with higher latency choice.

 

[azzav17]

Thank you, I'm gonna install those DIMM's again and relax the timings. I'm just a casual PC Gamer. I mostly play Football Manager and COD4, and I watch movies and films.

 

[Blain]

These days I look at memory timings, not so much as a measure of performance measure, but as an indicator of chip quality.
Especially if the low latency DIMMs are rating to run at standard voltage (DDR2 - 1.8-1.9v / DDR3 - 1.5v).

If DIMMs can pull off low latency without having to run jacked up voltages, you're assured of getting high quality modules most of the time.

 

[azzav17]

Just to clarify, as I am going to wait until tommorow to put in the new DIMM's again, will I see a performance boost when gaming in terms of loading speed? And the same for the OS. Because if the current lower timings will be faster, I'll just sell the new DIMM's on.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: azzav17
Just to clarify, as I am going to wait until tommorow to put in the new DIMM's again, will I see a performance boost when gaming in terms of loading speed? And the same for the OS. Because if the current lower timings will be faster, I'll just sell the new DIMM's on.

Do yourself a favor and just run the following simple test:

Keep the current dimms in your rig. Do a fresh system boot from cold shutdown. Play your game for a few minutes to get a feeling for how fast/slow it is.

Then reboot, go into your BIOS and adjust your memory times so they are intentionally slower than the current ram timings. Take it from 4-4-4-12 to 6-6-6-24 or something obnoxious like that.

Then do a cold boot and load your game with your now known slower ram timings.

If you notice a difference I'll call you a liar.

Well not really, I won't call you a liar cuz that would be mean, but the only differences you are going to notice are from your mind playing tricks trying to convince you it is slower.

But run the test, then you'll know with confidence that slower timings are not the end of the world.