Theoritically speaking, Which would be faster?

[AdamDuritz99]

I have a MSI KT3 board with an unlocked xp1800 and crucial 256mb pc2700 ram. There are about 3 ways I can set my system up that is tested and stable.

Setup A:
FSB: 147
Proc: 1691Mhz (147 x 11.5)
Ram clock: 147
Ram timings:2-2-5-2

Setup B:
FSB: 147
Proc: 1691Mhz (147 x 11.5)
Ram clock: 166
Ram timings:2.5-2-6-2

Setup C:
FSB: 166
Proc: 1660Mhz (166 x 10)
Ram clock: 166
Ram timings:2.5-2-6-2

What do you all think?

peace
sean

 

[Electric Amish]

C

FSB is everything.


amish

 

[Bovinicus]

I would try dropping the mem timings in setup a to 2-2-6-2 and raising the FSB/memory clock. I think you might be able to reach higher speeds without much, if any performance loss from that timing. More than likely you will gain a bit of performance from the extra FSB. Also, that timing shouldn't be set to 5 anyway. In the long run, it can cause corrupted data on the HDD. I didn't believe this either, until I got some corrupted data on mine. It is definitely not the disk surface, as I have scanned it flawlessly many times since then, and also had no data corruption. I prefer to go with synchronous FSB and memory clocks, as it raises performance slightly. So, if you don't like setup a, then go with setup C. You definitely won't miss the 31MHz in CPU clockspeed at all.

 

[joeryu]

C

always go for the highest FSB possible

 

[dszd0g]

C, in addition to the higher FSB it would be running synchronous with RAM which would decrease the latency if you hadn't had to increase the memory timings. That in itself probably cancels out having to raise the timings.

It does depend on what one is doing. Some things are completely CPU determined and then A or B would be faster and it wouldn't matter which.