HI, iam running A8N-Sli Deluxe with AMD FX-55. I wanted to know which speed selection AND memory capacity is best for overclocking on such configuration. Do you think OCZ memory dimms are the best for overclocking?!?!
WHICH SPEED DO YOU RECOMMEND?!?!
- Thread starter Panorama
- Start date
OK, but why do people put higher frequency Mem Dimms like installing PC4000 on A8N-sli? Does this improve performance? OR maybe somehow i am wrong. This motherboard supports upto PC3200/400mhz?
The higher rated RAM (PC4400 exc.) is just guaranteed to run at that speed. It will run at normal PC3200 (or whatever your bus is) until you start to OC. The OCZ, while rated at PC3200, will easily overclock to 250 and beyond (300 is pretty likely).
If i put PC4400 on Asus-Sli which states that memory Dimms running at PC3200 fq are supported. Will it overclock higher than PC3200?
Yes, it will, it just depends on where you FSB is set. lets say your FSB is at 250Mhz your ram will be at DDR500.
Yes. When you overclock your FSB, you are overclocking everything in your saystem, including the RAM. If the RAM can't handle the overclock, it will become instable. If the RAM is rated at a higher speed (PC4400), it is guaranteed to run up to that speed, and probably a little higher.
regular ddr3200 may not be able to run at ddr500 speeds and be stable, the pc4400 most likely would, thus a better oc potential if you care to run ram at 1:1
No board can state that it supports higher than PC3200, because no JEDEC specifications exist above that. As said before, higher-rated stuff is just PC3200 guaranteed to run at higher speeds. In most cases you can overclock the RAM. Just remember that it isn't the rating itself that matters, but the chips and PCB on the RAM (2-2-2-5 @ PC3200 signifies TCCD chips, which overclock well; the same chips are often used in CL2.5 PC4400).
This all said, you don't need to run 1:1 with an A64 (see here). Save money and get 2x512MB of value RAM.
This all said, you don't need to run 1:1 with an A64 (see here). Save money and get 2x512MB of value RAM.
Yeah i understand. I meant is there any overclocking difference between Dimms with higher frequency. In simple terms can one go higher than the other, coming to the point will PC4400 overclock higher than PC3200 Or will it be the same?
GuitarDaddy
Lifer
- Nov 9, 2004
- 11,465
- 1
- 0
Unless a future bios fixes the issue. This board won't run ram stable over about 245 in most cases. I would wait and see before I bought anything rated higher than DDR500. Right now the PC3200 TCCD chips are the optimum for this board.
One last question has anyone here installed Dimms higher than PC3200/400mhz on A8N-Sli Deluxe and does it push OC limits.
If money is not an object and you want the best, OCZ PC3200 platinum revision 2. Serious monies though.
If your MoBo will only go upto 2.8-2.9v, then you're probably "safer" going with PC4000 or above if you plan to overclock. I know the new TCCD chips are great, but there's no guarantee that those will hit DDR500 and above at default voltages if they are rated at PC3200.
Zebo
Elite Member
- Jul 29, 2001
- 39,398
- 19
- 81
Safe bet is modules with TCCD (like OCZ rev2 but you can save $ with PDP and PQI). They clock 2-2-2 at PC3200 and can run PC4800!!!
In the middle from about 210-260 Ballistix is fastest cause it allows for tightest timing in that range.
Just depends where you see yourself overclcoking.
In the middle from about 210-260 Ballistix is fastest cause it allows for tightest timing in that range.
Just depends where you see yourself overclcoking.
I can put up a higher Fq Dimms like DDR 500+, all i need is conformity that it overclocks better than DDR 400 (ON A8N-Sli) someone who already exprienced this can tell me much better. Just want to make a best possible decision.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
- Jun 30, 2004
- 15,993
- 1,645
- 126
The AMD enthusiasts tend to experiment more with divider settings that depart from 1:1.
I follow some assumptions that were part of my curriculum during a 1990's computer architecture and organization course. The machine is a pyramid that has high-speed, low-volume, high-cost storage at the top (CPU registers), and relatively low-speed, high-volume, less-expensive storage at the bottom (hard drives and optical). Buffers and caches open bottlenecks between fast and slow levels. Hence, L2 cache. If your memory is fast to begin with, you should need less L2 cache to bridge the gap, but "more is better", anyway. This is one reason I am carefully moving toward the idea of a Prescott with C0 stepping and 1 Mb of L2 for over-clocking, as opposed to a Northwood with only half the L2. since I was able to run the memory at the flat-out spec of DDR500 with a 2.4C Northwood, but I can only run it now (in a practical sense) with a 3.0C at DDR480, I'm thinking the processor is my limitation, and my mobo's ability to unlock the Prescott C0's multiple should give me even greater flexibility.
With this in mind, I focused my money on GUARANTEED memory speed, hoping for a stable 1:1 configuration, so I bought some insurance with EL "Gold" DDR500 as opposed to taking my chances with the Platinum rev. 2 OCZ's.
It is nice to have low latencies, like 2, 2, 2, 5, but myths have been dispelled about the importance of CAS, and OCZ has implemented some features that increase bandwidth anyway with looser latency settings. Further, slower speeds and tighter latencies yield proportionately less gains in performance than slightly looser latencies and higher speeds, so again, I didn't plan on running my memories as DDR400 or even DDR433 -- hoping for something between DDR480 and DDR533. SiSoft Sandra proves it: I have an "edge" with DDR480 over DDR400 CAS 2.0 -- just not a "proportional" edge matching the proportional increase of system-bus speed in Mhz.
You have a range of viable options, and choosing one versus the other leaves you with more or less flexibility to do something else. I am the last person to say "throw money at it and it will be better." But in order to have optimum flexibility, you cannot always put the price-factor at the top of your priority "pyramid" (ha).
I follow some assumptions that were part of my curriculum during a 1990's computer architecture and organization course. The machine is a pyramid that has high-speed, low-volume, high-cost storage at the top (CPU registers), and relatively low-speed, high-volume, less-expensive storage at the bottom (hard drives and optical). Buffers and caches open bottlenecks between fast and slow levels. Hence, L2 cache. If your memory is fast to begin with, you should need less L2 cache to bridge the gap, but "more is better", anyway. This is one reason I am carefully moving toward the idea of a Prescott with C0 stepping and 1 Mb of L2 for over-clocking, as opposed to a Northwood with only half the L2. since I was able to run the memory at the flat-out spec of DDR500 with a 2.4C Northwood, but I can only run it now (in a practical sense) with a 3.0C at DDR480, I'm thinking the processor is my limitation, and my mobo's ability to unlock the Prescott C0's multiple should give me even greater flexibility.
With this in mind, I focused my money on GUARANTEED memory speed, hoping for a stable 1:1 configuration, so I bought some insurance with EL "Gold" DDR500 as opposed to taking my chances with the Platinum rev. 2 OCZ's.
It is nice to have low latencies, like 2, 2, 2, 5, but myths have been dispelled about the importance of CAS, and OCZ has implemented some features that increase bandwidth anyway with looser latency settings. Further, slower speeds and tighter latencies yield proportionately less gains in performance than slightly looser latencies and higher speeds, so again, I didn't plan on running my memories as DDR400 or even DDR433 -- hoping for something between DDR480 and DDR533. SiSoft Sandra proves it: I have an "edge" with DDR480 over DDR400 CAS 2.0 -- just not a "proportional" edge matching the proportional increase of system-bus speed in Mhz.
You have a range of viable options, and choosing one versus the other leaves you with more or less flexibility to do something else. I am the last person to say "throw money at it and it will be better." But in order to have optimum flexibility, you cannot always put the price-factor at the top of your priority "pyramid" (ha).
I was looking at OCZ gold series PC4400 as said above they have compartively lower latencies against OCZ PC3200 but provide much higher Fq. My personal opnion is that PC4400 will definetly OC higher than PC3200 but i am still not completely sure about it of whether it is compatible or if it is will it OC better than PC3200!
Note by OCZ: ***Currently, only the Asus P4C800 Deluxe and P4C800-E Deluxe are qualified for use with PC-4400 Gold Edition memory due to high FSB requirements not achievable by other boards.
Note by OCZ: ***Currently, only the Asus P4C800 Deluxe and P4C800-E Deluxe are qualified for use with PC-4400 Gold Edition memory due to high FSB requirements not achievable by other boards.
why do i get the feeling we are talking to a brick wall.
pc3200 ram rated at 2-2-2-5 can more than likely do pc4400 at 2.5-3-3-7
pc4400 ram is pretty much at its limits and is just basically guaranteeing that speed.
pc3200 ram rated at 2-2-2-5 can more than likely do pc4400 at 2.5-3-3-7
pc4400 ram is pretty much at its limits and is just basically guaranteeing that speed.
Assuming..
PC3200--->PC4400
PC4400--->PC5500
I have something like this in mind but i dont know whether this works out well.
higher is always better.
I really should have gotten even more than PC3500, but at least I am comfortable in OCing that it could be well within spec depending on how far I go.
I really should have gotten even more than PC3500, but at least I am comfortable in OCing that it could be well within spec depending on how far I go.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 18K
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter