Suggestions for DDR Timings/MHz...

Sharky Forums


Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Suggestions for DDR Timings/MHz...

  1. #1
    Catfish WATYF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Smiling back at you...
    Posts
    151

    Suggestions for DDR Timings/MHz...

    OK... I just got some Corsair XMS3200 DDR (Supposedly that stuff is some of the best RAM out there.), and I need to know what timings to use.

    Obviously I'll be using CL2, but what about the others? Right now I just went ahead and set it to 2-3-3-7. Is that good enough? I'm looking for stability more than performance, but I want to squeeze a little more juice out of this RAM rather than just using the standard timings.


    Also... I got an Asus A7N8X and an XP2800+ (T-bred). Should I sync with the FSB, so that both the RAM and the CPU are using the same MHz (166)? Wouldn't that mean that I'm clocking my RAM down (from DDR400 to DDR333)? Is there an obvious benefit to syncing, or should I just run the RAM at DDR400 like it's supposed to, and leave the CPU at 166MHz?


    WATYF
    Core 2 Quad Q6600
    Asus P5B
    Antec P-150
    2GB Corsair XMS2-6400
    256MB GeForce 9700GT
    (2) WD Raptor WD1500ADFD
    Lacie Porsche 500GB External
    BENQ DW1650 16X DVD-RW
    Windows XP Pro

  2. #2
    Hammerhead Shark
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,330
    so i guess you missed the memo about corsair and the A7N8X not going well together most of the time?

    anyway.. synch usually gives better performance... even if the ram is rated higher.
    My Stuff (really outdated.. try HERE for now)
    Hardware: Abit KD7, XP 1700+ Tbred @ 146x15 @ 1.80Vcore, 1x512 + 2x256 Kingston DDR, ATI AIW 9700 PRO, Creative Soundblaster 5.1 Live!, 550watt Enermax PSU
    160GB Samsung hard drive
    Watercooling - Maze3, Eheim 1250, modified Super Cube radiator and heater core

  3. #3
    Hammerhead Shark
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Posts
    1,119
    running it sync offers better performance than async...try 6-2-2-2 for your timings.
    txforums.com If you're from Texas, check it out.

    Currently at 200x9 @ 6-2-2-2:
    Silver Aluminium Chieftec Dragon Case| Antec Truepower 430watt psu | Asus A7N8X Deluxe
    Athlon XP [email protected] | Corsair TwinX512-3200LLPT | Leadtek Geforce 2 Pro | ATI TV Wonder VE
    Western Digital 1000JB | Seagate 40gig Barracuda IV | Lite-On 48x/24x/48x | Toshiba 16x DVD-rom
    Sony floppy disk drive | Samsung Syncmaster 955df | Logitech Z-560 | SLK-800 with Smart Case Fan II

  4. #4
    Folding Team Member sapasion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Folding@Home
    Posts
    15,177
    Quite frankly though faster timings give better performance per Mhz of FSB it truly isn't a titanic leap to go from normal timings to your systems fastest ones. I'd rather take a high FSB with relaxed memory timings than a lower one with faster timings

  5. #5
    remember me? number1sixerfan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    8,578
    Fast timings are only justified in benchmarks. It's not worth the sacrifice of fsb mhz IMHO. If you can run your fsb high with fast timings, then that's great. But if you can't, then I suggest running with relaxed timings to reach a higher fsb.

  6. #6
    Hammerhead Shark
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,330
    yeah... but what are you gonna do with 215mhz FSB if it's not benchmarks?
    i personnally like the... "snappyness" (?) of fast ram timings...
    My Stuff (really outdated.. try HERE for now)
    Hardware: Abit KD7, XP 1700+ Tbred @ 146x15 @ 1.80Vcore, 1x512 + 2x256 Kingston DDR, ATI AIW 9700 PRO, Creative Soundblaster 5.1 Live!, 550watt Enermax PSU
    160GB Samsung hard drive
    Watercooling - Maze3, Eheim 1250, modified Super Cube radiator and heater core

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •