DDR RAM timings

Heh, this is actually a fun thread first thing in the morning.

Tell me about it, I've been researching this for five hours. :-)

From
what I have read you are looking at a 3-4% difference in performance,
only you can decide if the cost justifies the boost.

For that insignificant amount of gain, no, I wouldn't say it's worth it.

Then again, your
Mobo might not even use this setting, some appear to be futzing with the
timings to get dual channel stable on a wider variety of 400 mhz parts.

Good point, I wondered the same thing. I really have to say it's guess-work
whether my motherboard will run at 2-2-2-6-1. I may spend the fortune on
the fast RAM and find out it doesn't run, then end up losing 15% in
restocking fees if I decide to return it.

Take with as many grains of salt as deemed neccessary...

Absolutely.

Thanks.

~ Adrian ~

---
"A lie gets halfway around the world before
the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

Here's a link to an article at Anandtech about memory and the new 875/865
chipsets. Maybe you can draw a conclusion from the
http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.html?i=1828

"Adrian" wrote in message
...
Heh, this is actually a fun thread first thing in the morning.

Tell me about it, I've been researching this for five hours. :-)

From
what I have read you are looking at a 3-4% difference in performance,
only you can decide if the cost justifies the boost.

For that insignificant amount of gain, no, I wouldn't say it's worth it.

Then again, your
Mobo might not even use this setting, some appear to be futzing with the
timings to get dual channel stable on a wider variety of 400 mhz parts.

Good point, I wondered the same thing. I really have to say it's
guess-work
whether my motherboard will run at 2-2-2-6-1. I may spend the fortune on
the fast RAM and find out it doesn't run, then end up losing 15% in
restocking fees if I decide to return it.

Take with as many grains of salt as deemed neccessary...

Absolutely.

Thanks.

~ Adrian ~

---
"A lie gets halfway around the world before
the truth has a chance to get its pants on."
Sir Winston Churchill (1874-1965)

"Manda Luyong" wrote in message
. ..
Here's a link to an article at Anandtech about memory and the new 875/865
chipsets. Maybe you can draw a conclusion from the
http://www.anandtech.com/memory/showdoc.html?i=1828

Thanks, I'll take a look.

~ Adrian ~

---
"The power of accurate observation is frequently
called cynicism by those who don't have it."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

"Telcontar" wrote in message
...
Adrian wrote:

Is there a significant difference between:

"400MHz settings: 2-2-2-6-1 (CAS Latency 2)"
...and...
"400MHz settings: 2-3-2-6-1 (CAS Latency 2)"

?

I've a *really* vague idea on the differences but is it worth $30 of a
difference per module? I'd say not. I'm unsure on the difference
between
the "2" and "3".

~ Adrian ~


Heh, this is actually a fun thread first thing in the morning. From
what I have read you are looking at a 3-4% difference in performance,
only you can decide if the cost justifies the boost. Then again, your
Mobo might not even use this setting, some appear to be futzing with the
timings to get dual channel stable on a wider variety of 400 mhz parts.

Good point, but we need to clarify something. Actually, one would indeed see
a 3-4% gain, but that would be going from, say, 3-3-3-6-1 to 2-2-2-5-1.
Going from 2-2-2-6-1 to 2-3-2-6-1 may not even be measurable to any
appreciable degree of accuracy. Secondly, the performance increase would
reflect only *memory* benchmark performance, not overall system performance
(as measured, for example, via PCMark 2002's memory test). The overall
system performance would be even less.

Only you can decide if that's worth $30. If both modules are made by the
same manufacturer, then I would say not. If, OTOH, one is made by Kingston
and the other by Corsair (for example), then the debate turns from one of
raw speed to one of superior overall *quality*... and that *is* something
for which I would pay more.

As for myself, I'd much rather get a slightly less capable CPU so that I
could afford a very high quality power supply and memory.

Good point, but we need to clarify something. Actually, one would indeed
see
a 3-4% gain, but that would be going from, say, 3-3-3-6-1 to 2-2-2-5-1.
Going from 2-2-2-6-1 to 2-3-2-6-1 may not even be measurable to any
appreciable degree of accuracy. Secondly, the performance increase would
reflect only *memory* benchmark performance, not overall system
performance
(as measured, for example, via PCMark 2002's memory test). The overall
system performance would be even less.

I see.

Only you can decide if that's worth $30. If both modules are made by the
same manufacturer, then I would say not. If, OTOH, one is made by Kingston
and the other by Corsair (for example), then the debate turns from one of
raw speed to one of superior overall *quality*... and that *is* something
for which I would pay more.

Both are made by Kingston, HyperX modules. I have the choice of picking the
2-2-2-6-1 module for $130, or, the 2-3-2-6-1 for $100. I think the
difference wouldn't even be noticeable, myself. I'm just wondering, on my
875PBZ whether picking the fastest module (2-2-2-6-1) would end up in it
being recognized as a 2-3-2-2-1 anyway? If so, then I've spent extra money
for nothing.

As for myself, I'd much rather get a slightly less capable CPU so that I
could afford a very high quality power supply and memory.

Agreed.

~ Adrian ~

---
"The power of accurate observation is frequently
called cynicism by those who don't have it."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

The only thing that extra $30 would buy you is bragging rights.

Absolutely. Not being an extrovert, I'd sooner have the extra $$$ in my
pocket and use the money wisely on something else.

You'd never
even be aware of the difference in day-to-day usage.

Yes, you're right. I highly doubt I'd notice the difference either. I
think if you sat down with a benchmark tool and analyzed the numbers with
the different modules of RAM, you'd see a difference.

My present HyperX PC2700
RAM runs at 2-2-2-5-1, but I'm hard pressed to see any real difference
between
that and the 3-3-3-7-? of my previous sticks.

OK, thanks. You've helped me make up my mind. I just didn't know if there
would be a mindblowing difference or not. And as I said, if I did get the
pricey RAM, my motherboard may not even like it.

~ Adrian ~

---
"The power of accurate observation is frequently
called cynicism by those who don't have it."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

"Adrian" wrote in message ...
The only thing that extra $30 would buy you is bragging rights.

Absolutely. Not being an extrovert, I'd sooner have the extra $$$ in my
pocket and use the money wisely on something else.

You'd never
even be aware of the difference in day-to-day usage.

Yes, you're right. I highly doubt I'd notice the difference either. I
think if you sat down with a benchmark tool and analyzed the numbers with
the different modules of RAM, you'd see a difference.

My present HyperX PC2700
RAM runs at 2-2-2-5-1, but I'm hard pressed to see any real difference
between
that and the 3-3-3-7-? of my previous sticks.

OK, thanks. You've helped me make up my mind. I just didn't know if there
would be a mindblowing difference or not. And as I said, if I did get the
pricey RAM, my motherboard may not even like it.

~ Adrian ~


Certain *faster* memory settings may actually slow the system down.
You *may* see better results at 2-2-2-6-1 or 2-3-3-7-1. Here is some
info http://www.mushkin.com/mushkin/pop-up/latencies.htm

Mainly I'm referring to

"Any tRAS setting lower tRCD + CAS + 2 cycles will allow the memory
controller to close the page "in your face!" over and again and that
will cause a performance hit because of a truncated transfer that
needs to be repeated. Along with those hassles comes the
self-explanatory risk for data corruption. That one is not a real
problem as long as the system is kept running but in case it is shut
down and the memory content is written back to the hard disk drive,
the consequences can be catastrophic. For the drive, that is. "

Eric

stay away from Hyper-X when using this board! I mean it....the bios
can not handle it. More then likely the memory will be noticed as 2700
333mhz and not 400mhz! and if you try and flash the bios or change the
settings from the 2-2-2-6-1 you are going to be asking for trouble.
Just remember that if you do change the settings and the system
refuses to boot kill ALL power (even the battery) and hope that it can
reset itself. Also be patient when doing this since it can take some
time to reset. Otherwise check with Intel and see what they recommend
for compatible ram ....or try an different board)



(Eric Witte) wrote in message . com...
"Adrian" wrote in message ...
The only thing that extra $30 would buy you is bragging rights.

Absolutely. Not being an extrovert, I'd sooner have the extra $$$ in my
pocket and use the money wisely on something else.

You'd never
even be aware of the difference in day-to-day usage.

Yes, you're right. I highly doubt I'd notice the difference either. I
think if you sat down with a benchmark tool and analyzed the numbers with
the different modules of RAM, you'd see a difference.

My present HyperX PC2700
RAM runs at 2-2-2-5-1, but I'm hard pressed to see any real difference
between
that and the 3-3-3-7-? of my previous sticks.

OK, thanks. You've helped me make up my mind. I just didn't know if there
would be a mindblowing difference or not. And as I said, if I did get the
pricey RAM, my motherboard may not even like it.

~ Adrian ~


Certain *faster* memory settings may actually slow the system down.
You *may* see better results at 2-2-2-6-1 or 2-3-3-7-1. Here is some
info http://www.mushkin.com/mushkin/pop-up/latencies.htm

Mainly I'm referring to

"Any tRAS setting lower tRCD + CAS + 2 cycles will allow the memory
controller to close the page "in your face!" over and again and that
will cause a performance hit because of a truncated transfer that
needs to be repeated. Along with those hassles comes the
self-explanatory risk for data corruption. That one is not a real
problem as long as the system is kept running but in case it is shut
down and the memory content is written back to the hard disk drive,
the consequences can be catastrophic. For the drive, that is. "

Eric