i understand (correct me if I am wrong), that the memory most closely matched to the FSB of a C2D processor is 533 memory, as it runs syncronously in dual channel with the 1066 C2D memory bus.
i can understand that 800 memory will work well, as it is half again the speed of 533 and therefore fits with the multipliers nicely and thus is not 'inefficient' in its dealings with the CPU, and yet has much greater bandwidth due to its increased speed.
apparently, 667 memory is the worst of the three (if one is not overclocking) as it does not fit in with the standard one or half mulitpliers available to the memory bus.
here comes the question:
if my assumptions above are correct, then obviously 800 memory is the best choice. but, if i am not going to O/C the processor and cannot afford 800 memory would i be better to get 533 memory in preference to 667 provided the latency is the same in both?
i want a C2D precisely because it is a low-power design and will fit nicely into a passively cooled HTPC, so O/C'ing is of no interest.
many thanks
R3MF
i can understand that 800 memory will work well, as it is half again the speed of 533 and therefore fits with the multipliers nicely and thus is not 'inefficient' in its dealings with the CPU, and yet has much greater bandwidth due to its increased speed.
apparently, 667 memory is the worst of the three (if one is not overclocking) as it does not fit in with the standard one or half mulitpliers available to the memory bus.
here comes the question:
if my assumptions above are correct, then obviously 800 memory is the best choice. but, if i am not going to O/C the processor and cannot afford 800 memory would i be better to get 533 memory in preference to 667 provided the latency is the same in both?
i want a C2D precisely because it is a low-power design and will fit nicely into a passively cooled HTPC, so O/C'ing is of no interest.
many thanks
R3MF
Facebook
Twitter