Wichester with 4 sticks of RAM.

[imported_rod]

I have a 3200+ winchester, with the RAM in my sig. I want to buy another 2sticks of RAM since it's so cheap at the moment, but I'm sure prices will go up once AM2 comes out.

Now, the ram will only run a DDR333 (166MHz Mhz, which is 5:6 with the FSB) when running four sticks (that's what everyone has said). But if you increased the FSB to 240Mhz, wouldn't that bring the RAM up to DDR400 speed? {{ It would also give me the clock speed of a 3800+}}

Anyone know if this would work?

RoD

 

[stevty2889]

You could try it but there are no gurantees, since the winny doesn't support 4 sticks at DDR400..doesn't mean it's impossible, just not likely. You'll also run at 2T, and 4 sticks can actualy limit your OC a little too since it puts more strain on the memory controller.

 

[BoboKatt]

What killed me was the switch to 2T from 1T and the lower timings on the RAM ? I am sure many will agree here. I said screw it? sold my 4 DIMMS and bought 2 X 1024.

Your question though about raising the FSB? yes if you raise it and your CPU then naturally gets overclocked it will raise your RAM to 200 (DDR400) but it wont boot J. It?s not like you physically cannot set your RAM to 200mhz ? heck you can set it to anything you wont ? it?s not that the multipliers get all screwed up it?s just simply that with 4DIMMS it just wont work properly (if you have single sided DIMM modules maybe but not with what we normally have).

Anyhow in my case with the 4 DIMMS I was still able to OC my CPU at the time as long as my memory clock would stay low and by low I mean around 333DDR. I know for sure I could NOT run it at 400DDR on my Neo2 Plat (939 with an AMD64 X2 3800+) even with OCZ top of the line RAM no matter the voltage. I did get dual channel though.
However as stated before what I suffered most in performance was the timings issue and not the MHz from the RAM. A good way to test this is to run some benchmarks (that you rely on or simply time stuff if you want) and try with 2 DIMMS (so you know you can reach faster MHz for the RAM) and try running your RAM at 333 and then 400 and then mess around with the dividers and such). I never much improvement especially in real time tests. Depends I guess what is most important ? 2 GIGS of RAM or slightly faster timings.

 

[deadseasquirrel]

The absolute best idea is to get rid of your 2 sticks and buy 2 1GB sticks. However, like you said, if you get an amazing price on 2 more sticks, give it a try. I am running 4 sticks of Value junk (Corsair) on my DFI (which many say is impossible) and a 3000+ Winnie. Yes, it's at 2T, and yes, I couldn't quite get it back up to 400mhz with overclocking, but came close. However, the benefits of having 2GB of ram BY FAR overshadow any slowdown in ram speed and 2T (for gaming). Gaming benchmarks showed my gaming performance has stayed the EXACT same, except now I get no hitching in BF2 (or any other game).

 

[imported_rod]

(Thanks for replying so quickly. In general hardware, I seem to be waiting forever for replies.)

I'll try underclocking my ram to DDR333, and see what sort of performance hit i take.

I might just wait until i get a new CPU. I'm planning on getting a Dual Core this year. Would an X2 3800+ (2Ghz, 2x512KB cache) or an opteron 165 (1.8GHz, 2x1MB cache) be better? I'm leaning toward the Opteron, since the prices are almost identical.

RoD

 

[the cobbler]

Originally posted by: rod
I have a 3200+ winchester, with the RAM in my sig. I want to buy another 2sticks of RAM since it's so cheap at the moment, but I'm sure prices will go up once AM2 comes out.

Now, the ram will only run a DDR333 (166MHz Mhz, which is 5:6 with the FSB) when running four sticks (that's what everyone has said). But if you increased the FSB to 240Mhz, wouldn't that bring the RAM up to DDR400 speed? {{ It would also give me the clock speed of a 3800+}}

Anyone know if this would work?

RoD

well depending what revision your RAM is, it's either TCCD or BH-5. Both are one-sided sticks of RAM. Which means that if you get two more, all four sticks one-sided, it will default to DDR400 @ 2T.

only if the ram is double-sided will it default to DDR333 @ 2T

perhaps the most widely perpetuated "Stupid AMD Myth".

Winchester with 4xsingle-sided sticks= DDR400.

 

[imported_rod]

IS there any way to find out what mine is? Or is there any (preferably easy) way to check if it is single/double sided?

RoD

 

[frogger9]

I am running 2x1024, 2x512 Corsair Value Select on my K8N Neo2 board with a 3500+ Winchester. I've manually set the RAM to run at DDR400 and it runs perfectly (passes Memtest86 or Prime95). I did have to drop to 2T, but for what I'm doing with the machine having 3 GB RAM is much more beneficial than lower timings.

So it seems at least some Winchesters don't need to drop to DDR333 with 4 sticks of RAM. I guess it may just be luck of the draw on that point.

 

[imported_rod]

OKay, thanks.

Does anyone know where I can find some benchmarks of RAM speed/timings etc... on gaming? I tried running 3Dmark05 on my rig with the different ram speeds, but DDR400 2-3-3-6-1T was only 2.5% faster than DDR333 2.5-3-3-8-2T. I guess artificial tests dont really test it.

RoD

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: rod
OKay, thanks.

Does anyone know where I can find some benchmarks of RAM speed/timings etc... on gaming? I tried running 3Dmark05 on my rig with the different ram speeds, but DDR400 2-3-3-6-1T was only 2.5% faster than DDR333 2.5-3-3-8-2T. I guess artificial tests dont really test it.

RoD

Ram speeds and timings effect gaming only slightly (if any, depending on the game). It all depends on what settings you run at. If you play at high-graphical settings such as 1600x1200 resolutions, with AA and AF, you'll find that faster ram won't even give 1 fps more than slow ram. And an FX-60 won't provide more frames than an A64 3000+. See here for example.

 

[imported_rod]

If they're so unimportant, why do so many people have expensive high-speed low-latency ram?... I mean, i bought it becaus it was recommended as being better for gaming & overclocking.

RoD

 

[deadseasquirrel]

Originally posted by: rod
If they're so unimportant, why do so many people have expensive high-speed low-latency ram?... I mean, i bought it becaus it was recommended as being better for gaming & overclocking.

RoD

It is "better" for overclocking. With fast, good quality ram, you can overclock your CPU easier without the need for using dividers. However, it has been shown that on the A64 the use of dividers does not hurt performance. So, in effect, yes you can spend a lot of money on DDR500 low-latency ram and overclock your CPU with a 1:1 ratio. Or, you can buy the cheapest ram you can find, and overclock your CPU with a divider to achieve the same clockspeed that you could with the fast ram, except that the ram would not be running at a high clock speed.

The speed of ram and the speed of your CPU will really only make a difference in gaming when using low resolutions, at least on the latest games, and the trend appears to be that games will be more and more graphically intense. All this boils down to the fact that if you have $1000 to spend on your CPU/Ram/Video config (and you're mainly interested in gaming), you should spend the most you can on the video card. i.e. an A64 3000+ with 2GB of cheapie ram and a 7800GT SLI config is going to produce MUCH better results for less than $1000 than an FX-57 with 2GB of fast ram matched with a 256MB GTX, which all will cost WELL over $1000.

There's a lot of other variables, such as your motherboard, monitor (if you're forced to a lower res because of an LCD), what games you play, etc.

But, in general, if you're mainly interested in gaming, that's the way it is. Don't listen to anyone that tells you any different. Hell, don't even listen to me. Research some benchmarks (I linked to one earlier), read, and test for yourself. That article on X-bit even tested COD2 and FEAR at 1024x768. That's a res where usually CPU speed would make a difference. It doesn't in these games.