wats better?

MichaelZ

Senior member
Oct 12, 2003
871
0
76
which of these are best?

2,3,2,5
2,3,2,6
2,3,3,5
2,3,3,6

is it at all possible for 2,3,2,5 to be slower than 2,3,3,6 ?
 

THUGSROOK

Elite Member
Feb 3, 2001
11,847
0
0


2,3,2,6
2,3,2,5

2,3,3,6
2,3,3,5


dont bother with 5, at least on an intel rig.
in some cases 7 or even 8 will be fastest.
youd need to do your own testing tho to find out.

:)
 

stardust

Golden Member
May 17, 2003
1,282
0
0
Here's a good guide

Yeah, I have to admit, THG isn't my favorite source, but that guide is pretty easy to understand and quite extensive
 

MichaelZ

Senior member
Oct 12, 2003
871
0
76
:beer: i'll check em out later. thanks.

i noticed that running 2,3,2,5 wasn't quite as fast as when i had 2,3,2,6. was a bit curious so gonna have to do some testing to see which is best for me rig.
 

Soulkeeper

Diamond Member
Nov 23, 2001
6,732
155
106
yeah those timings are so close it would be difficult to tell the difference

2-2-2-5 was slower than 2-2-2-6 and even 2-2-2-7 in most cases on my systems
2-3-2-6 should be great

i believe they say to add the cas to the ras and add two to get the last number
 

MichaelZ

Senior member
Oct 12, 2003
871
0
76
some good advice ppl. 2,3,2,6 is indeed faster than 2,3,2,5.

mem bandwidth according to SIS sandra went up by 100 and PCmark mem score went up to 9950. nearly broke the 10k mark. *sigh* woulda been awsome if it did go over 10k. ;)

thanks a bunch.