P4 1.6a faster at fsb 133 (memory 1:1) or fsb 140 (memory 4:3)?

[PlatinumGold]

In your opinion which would be faster? running the FSB higher but a slower ram clock or running fsb a little slower but faster ram clock?

i got my P4 up to fsb 140 = 2240 Mhz, not bad for air cooled. i think it's the chip that limiting me tho, cause at 140 (4:3) ram is only at 210, at 133 (1:1) ram is at 266. so my ram has headroom. i think i would have to increase voltage to get mine above 140, but not sure i wanna even bother since i'll probably run it at 133(1:1) so hence the question.

which would be faster?

 

[jcmkk]

I would go with the lower clock, but higher ram speed. Most of the time, we aren't utilizing all of our CPU speed anyway, so I think that having faster memory speed would give you more of a benefit.

 

[PlatinumGold]

jcmkk

ya that's my thought too. just wondered what others thought. i will eventually benchmark this, just don't have time at the moment.

also w/ the lower cpu speed, won't the cpu heat less overall?

btw, i got it to 138 fsb w/ the 1:1 ratio. kinda makes the argument moot now.

 

[dbwillis]

Thats a good question.
I ran my 1.6a at 150x16 with the DDR at 4:3 (225mhz) but w/the fastest settings in the BIOS.
I also ran it at 144x16 with the DDR at 1:1 (28mhz) but w/the stock or SPD settings.
The 3dmark scores were higher with the 150x16, so were the SiSoft ones if I remember correctly (Id have to go home and check for screen prints I saved)

 

[PlatinumGold]

no additional thoughts?

 

[Slacker]

My chip made the choice for me, it does 2320mhz so I have the memory at 1:1 @145fsb for 290 ddr , but I have DDR333 memory, if I wanted to drop down to 2133 I could go back to 166=DDR333 but would only gain 43mhz memory and would lose 187mhz on the cpu, I am happy with 2320cpu/290memory

 

[MadRat]

Synchronous speeds are better than asynchronous. You remove alot of latency in the memory controller when you run the synchronous speeds.

 

[Mltsao]

I agree with MadRat

 

[PlatinumGold]

ya, i'm pretty sure synchronous is better. i think just comparing number of mhz isn't the best way to go here.

 

[Slacker]

To get to 166 at either 100 or 133 the memory ratio would be asynchronous, are you guys saying it is better to run 1:1 at 145 over 3:5 at 100?