RAM setting? CL? speed?

[NEVERwinter]

I am using a KT333 mobo, which one is better for DDR setting:
133MHz, CL2 or 166MHz, CL2.5?

thanks

 

[VSEKH]

Currently there are no AMD CPUs that run in 166 mhz(until the 2700+ and 2800+ come out), so 133Mhz in CL2 mode will be better and faster.

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: VSEKH
Currently there are no AMD CPUs that run in 166 mhz(until the 2700+ and 2800+ come out), so 133Mhz in CL2 mode will be better and faster.

Technically yes. 🙂
But regardless of that, 166MHz at CL2.5 would be faster than 133MHz CL2.
It could be possible to get a processor to run at 166MHz FSB by modding the bridges on the processor for a lower multiplier. I did that to some 100MHz FSB T-birds to allow them to run on a 133MHz bus. For example, a 700MHz chip would try to boot at 7x133 = 933MHz; it couldn't do it long enough for the BIOS to kick in to implement the new multiplier, so I hard-modded the bridges for a 5.5 multiplier = 733MHz. Slightly overclocked, and on a faster bus.🙂

 

[sechs]

So, if you're not going to void your warranty by overclocking, the 133, CL2 setting is better?

 

[Jeff7]

Originally posted by: sechs
So, if you're not going to void your warranty by overclocking, the 133, CL2 setting is better?

If the FSB is going to stay at 133, then lower timing settings are better - if the RAM can handle it.

Void the warranty? Hah! 😀
Probably the only hardware I have that keeps its warranty is the HD. Everything else has been overclocked, opened, tweaked, improved, or destroyed. 😉

A thought just occurred - don't some motherboards let you run the RAM at a different speed than the CPU's bus speed? If that is the case, stick some PC2700 in there, run it at 166MHz, and keep the CPU bus at 133MHz. Not as big a performance boost as running both at 166MHz, but the warranty stays in effect.🙂