Quantcast

Maximum PC

It is currently Mon Dec 29, 2014 12:52 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Memory clock speed and FSB-What am I running at?
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 11:50 am 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
How do I know what my current setup is running the RAM at? I have a 2.4GHz 800FSB P4 CPU and my RAM is a measley PC2700 (or 333MHz effective) Corsiar XMS/Kingston X RAM. ( I have a 512 stick of each). I have my FSB to 220 for my clockspeed setting, bringing it to 2640MHz. Now, this increases the RAM clock speed right? So what it is running at effectively right now? How Do i find out? I can run the CPU at about 2.8GHz stably, and I'm pretty sure if I had something like 500 MHz RAM, that would give me the headroom to overclock to 3.4GHz. Am I right?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 11:59 am 
Celeron
Celeron
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Posts: 7362
Location: New York City
Quote:
Now, this increases the RAM clock speed right?


Yes.

Quote:
So what it is running at effectively right now? How Do i find out?


Look and see in your bios if you're running "1:1" or "6:5" or even "5:4" CPU:DRAM (something like that) dividers.

If you're running 1:1 dividers, your RAM is clearly "enthusiast" RAM and can hold up to 220 mhz, and a little beyond. If you're running 6:5 (or 5:4) dividers, then your RAM is running at a slower speed than your CPU's FSB, but it doesn't mean that it's not "enthusiast" RAM.

Quote:
I'm pretty sure if I had something like 500 MHz RAM, that would give me the headroom to overclock to 3.4GHz. Am I right?


Uhh, theoretically, no. You'd need somewhere around DDR560 RAM. (283 x 12 = 3396mhz)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 12:05 pm 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
i used to be able to run it at 1:1 wit ha 2.26 CPU that had 533 FSB, which i usually had OCed to about 2.7. now with this new 2.4 i have, its at 3:2 with all the CAS latencies as low as they can go. I've seen people overclock to 3.4 without any problems with this same proc and mobo I have. What could be hindering my OCign if it isnt the RAM? even if a RAM is designed for 500Mhz, that can be pushed a little too, right? the RAM could be OCed from the stock 500MHz to 560, provided it can handle that small OC of its speed right? and would that OC of the RAM automatically happen when i set the FSB to equal 3.4GHz on the CPU setting in the BIOS?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 12:22 pm 
Celeron
Celeron
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Posts: 7362
Location: New York City
Quote:
now with this new 2.4 i have, its at 3:2 with all the CAS latencies as low as they can go.


Ouch! 3:2 dividers are very heavy and if you've met your limit on these settings, then I'd advise you to stop overclocking, unless you want to go to 2:1 dividers. If you dont, i suggest you get some OC friendly RAM to go with the CPU.

Quote:
What could be hindering my OCign if it isnt the RAM?


If it's not the RAM, it's probably the CPU, which can be OC unfriendly.

Quote:
even if a RAM is designed for 500Mhz, that can be pushed a little too, right? the RAM could be OCed from the stock 500MHz to 560, provided it can handle that small OC of its speed right? and would that OC of the RAM automatically happen when i set the FSB to equal 3.4GHz on the CPU setting in the BIOS?


It varies from stick to stick, company to company. Going from 500 to 560 is not a small OC because you're still pushin an extra 30mhz.

And yes, the RAM speed grows as your FSB speed increases.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 12:33 pm 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
Well, I've managed to get to 2.82GHz with the 3:2 ratio and the CAS as low as they allow me to set them in the BIOS. At this clock speed, the only time I've EVER had any blue screens of death was while playing WC3, and that's not all the time either. I've heard some games dont take well to OCing anyway. I think I can keep pushing higher, but gaming (except for WC3) has not been a problem yet, and i havent had any "funny stuff" in the desktop yet. I used to have this same RAM as 1:1 with the old, 533FSB processor that I OCed without problems to 2.7 from 2.26 on an Asus board. Also with the CAS latencies at the lowest settings. As for an unfriendly proc, it's probably the best P4 proc to OC with there is right now. people have hit 3.4 with the stock cooling fan. I've also heard that Corsair is a good RAM company for OCing, and Kingston, I'm not sure, but its high performance RAM. The Kingston X series, they call it. What chances to what would you make if I want to hit 3.4? I just can't pinpoint what else it could be, besides RAM that s bottlenecking me. How do the other people do this with a stock fan? The only conclusion I can see is the RAM. I have the same board, I have a better cooling fan, I have the same processor, and RAM? I have no idea what they used, so I'm assuming thats what it is. Do you have any other ideas? And if you do agree that it is the RAM, what kind would you reccomend to me? I don't want to be partial, but I've had great experiences with the XMS corsiar that I've been using. (although it is expensive and I've been told that value select is no different than XMS series or any "higher quality series" wit the same specs)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:53 pm 
Celeron
Celeron
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 25, 2004 7:13 pm
Posts: 7362
Location: New York City
Quote:
Well, I've managed to get to 2.82GHz with the 3:2 ratio and the CAS as low as they allow me to set them in the BIOS. At this clock speed, the only time I've EVER had any blue screens of death was while playing WC3, and that's not all the time either. I've heard some games dont take well to OCing anyway. I think I can keep pushing higher, but gaming (except for WC3) has not been a problem yet, and i havent had any "funny stuff" in the desktop yet.


Have you stressed your processor yet? You should, as you're getting signs of instability from playing warcraft.

Quote:
I used to have this same RAM as 1:1 with the old, 533FSB processor that I OCed without problems to 2.7 from 2.26 on an Asus board. Also with the CAS latencies at the lowest settings.


Of course you did, the proc had a 133mhz fsb, and your RAM is rated at 166mhz.

Quote:
As for an unfriendly proc, it's probably the best P4 proc to OC with there is right now. people have hit 3.4 with the stock cooling fan.


I thought you were talking in general of "what could be the culprit if it isnt the RAM". However, it doesn't mean that all 2.4c's have the same overhead.

Quote:
What chances to what would you make if I want to hit 3.4? I just can't pinpoint what else it could be, besides RAM that s bottlenecking me. How do the other people do this with a stock fan? The only conclusion I can see is the RAM. I have the same board, I have a better cooling fan, I have the same processor, and RAM? I have no idea what they used, so I'm assuming thats what it is.


Again, it could be your processor (but it's probably not). It's like videocards, one might overclock way above stock, while another one might only squeeze out an extra 20mhz. However, I'm certain that ~95% of all 2.4c's can hit at least 3ghz.

As for the RAM, I suggest whatever that's capable of PC4000 or DDR500 - from a solid company like Corsair, Crucial, Kingston, Mushkin, OCZ, etc.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:15 pm 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
So, RAM is the most likely what's holding me back. Should I get PC4000 or PC4200 if I want to OC to 3.4 or 3.something ? I think 4200 is 533MHz...but I wonder if peopel have been able to hit 3.4 with PC4000 RAM...Anyone know?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:22 pm 
Thunderbird
Thunderbird
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2004 7:02 pm
Posts: 890
Location: Darkroom
you might be able to give your RAM some more room if you loosened the latencys on them. the tighter they are the lower the speed, so try loosen them up and give your RAM some headroom unless you really want to keep them tight.

also im pretty sure people have hit 3.4 on PC4000, like noob said, it depends from proc to proc, just gotta see what yours is capable of


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 7:21 pm 
Team Member Top 100
Team Member Top 100
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 8:16 pm
Posts: 387
Location: Illinois
Maybe I missed it, but did Xigz ever say what type of psu he is using.

A low wattage psu could be the reason he isn't achieving the results he is looking for.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:21 pm 
Contributing Writer
Contributing Writer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 8:09 pm
Posts: 9602
Location: Land of the Lounge Lizards
Xigz, your hunch is correct - your RAM is simply killing your OCing success and forcing you to run at 3:2 to garner any kind of 'success.' While all CPUs are not created equal, there's no way a 2.4C should be limited to a 240MHz overclock, and at 3:2 to boot.

With the right RAM, you should be able to push 3GHz territory, with 3.2GHz being moderately likely. 3.4GHz is asking a lot and will depend on your CPU, RAM, mobo, cooling, and OCing expertise.

I'm increasingly becoming impressed with OCZ's PC3200 Platinum Revision 2. At stock settings, it runs at 2-2-2-5, but the reviews are showing it overclocking like a PC4000 kit when the timings are relaxed. I haven't used them myself so I can't personally vouch for them, but do a google for some reviews. My recommendations would be to choose from one of these four depending on your budget and what you're willing to spend:

OCZ PC4400 Gold
OCZ PC4000 Gold Revision 2
OCZ PC3200 Platinum Revision 2
Crucial Ballistix PC4000


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 25, 2004 6:37 am 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
For a PSU I have an Antec 480W true blue PSU. I have 5 case fans running with a Zalmancu cooler with that 92mm fan on the CPU. I didnt know CAS latency tightening decreases OCability. And, if money was no issue for choosing which RAM i would want to use for my objective here, what would I go with? Ok theres OCZ...but waht about personal experiences with RAM? What would you reccomend based on personal use?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 25, 2004 8:15 am 
Contributing Writer
Contributing Writer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 8:09 pm
Posts: 9602
Location: Land of the Lounge Lizards
To address your first question, yes, tighter (lower) timings, can hinder your overclocking success. Loosening them will buy you some headroom, and depending on the RAM, so will a DDR voltage increase.

As for my personal experience on a P4C, I've used OCZ PC3700 Gold and OCZ PC4000 Gold, both revision 1. OCZ PC4400 Gold should have the most headroom, but that gets too rich for my blood. I've also read other member's experiences (whom I trust) with Ballistix and I would not hesitate to buy a kit. Again though, if money is taken out of the equation, PC4400 Gold would be the way to go.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:18 pm 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
I thought Corsiar was the best for this kind of stuff. Honestly you're the only person I've ever heard of talking so highly of OZC, however, it's been a hwile since I saw any BAD stuff, so maybe they're turning a new leaf, or I was just readig a particular string of reviews on ONE bad product...anyway, since I don't have the time to do the reasearch, what are the top brands out there that would work in addition to OCZ? And also would those different brands differ significantly in price and if so, is there a large performance difference in them because of it if at all?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:24 pm 
Contributing Writer
Contributing Writer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 8:09 pm
Posts: 9602
Location: Land of the Lounge Lizards
OCZ used to be a completely different company under different management. They've changed hands quite some time ago and if you can muster up some time on google, you'll be very hard pressed to find a negative review on either their Gold or Platinum line.

Other options include the usual suspects (in my personal order of preference):

Crucial Ballistix
Corsair XMS
Mushkin Hi-Performance (Black label)
Kingston HyperX

Some would throw Geil into the mix, but they are largely hit or miss. They're generally less expensive, but I'd highly recommend spending a bit more for more consistent performing brands.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:29 pm 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
I'll need two sticks because I have 1gb of memory, so it will be pretty expensive whichever I go with, so which would you say would be the best performance to cost ratio? Still keeping in mind that I want to have a realistic shot at hitting 3.4 GHz. Also, if you say tightening the latencies on RAM hinders OCing, is low latency RAM not as good for OCing? Does it mean that its better to run at the lower latencies that it is listed as? or does it simply mean it can HANDLE lower latencies better? I hope there's twin packs I can get for a discount :)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:30 pm 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
Xigz wrote:
I'll need two sticks because I have 1gb of memory, so it will be pretty expensive whichever I go with, so which would you say would be the best performance to cost ratio? Still keeping in mind that I want to have a realistic shot at hitting 3.4 GHz. Also, if you say tightening the latencies on RAM hinders OCing, is low latency RAM not as good for OCing? Does it mean that its better to run at the lower latencies that it is listed as? or does it simply mean it can HANDLE lower latencies better? I hope there are twin packs I can get for a discount :)


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2004 6:30 pm 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
I'll need two sticks because I have 1gb of memory, so it will be pretty expensive whichever I go with, so which would you say would be the best performance to cost ratio? Still keeping in mind that I want to have a realistic shot at hitting 3.4 GHz. Also, if you say tightening the latencies on RAM hinders OCing, is low latency RAM not as good for OCing? Does it mean that its better to run at the lower latencies that it is listed as? or does it simply mean it can HANDLE lower latencies better? I hope there are twin packs I can get for a discount :)


oops, double post! :oops: >_<

Edit: how did I pull off a triple post?


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 26, 2004 8:21 pm 
Contributing Writer
Contributing Writer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 8:09 pm
Posts: 9602
Location: Land of the Lounge Lizards
Xigz wrote:
which would you say would be the best performance to cost ratio? Still keeping in mind that I want to have a realistic shot at hitting 3.4 GHz.


PC4400 is going to you give the most realistic shot at hitting 3.4GHz, but I can't see justifying the $76 pricing premium over PC4000 (using Newegg's prices). If it were me (and I have done this) I would get the PC4000 Gold Rev2 and call it a day.

Xigz wrote:
Also, if you say tightening the latencies on RAM hinders OCing, is low latency RAM not as good for OCing? Does it mean that its better to run at the lower latencies that it is listed as? or does it simply mean it can HANDLE lower latencies better?


Short answer is misleading, so let me expound. At equal speeds (say two different PC4000 kits), the one that runs at lower latencies is a higher quality RAM. Generally speaking, once you loosen the timings on it, it should clock higher than the higher latency kit.

Where it gets tricky is comparing two different speeds of RAM. For simplicity sake, let's use the example of OCZ's PC3200 Platinum at 2-2-2-5 and OCZ PC4000 Gold Rev2 at 2.5-3-3-8. Despite appearing different at a glance, they're almost the same RAM. The PC4000 kit should be able to pull off 2-2-2-5 timings if you run it at PC3200 speeds. Likewise, the PC3200 Plats should have some overclocking headroom in them once those timings are relaxed (and indeed they do, according to online reviews). It's worth mentioning though that in most cases, you still shouldn't expect a high quality PC3200 kit to hit speeds quite as high as PC4000, but it can happen and the Platinums have been shown to pull it off. For heavy overclocks, the PC4000 still fares better though.

So what's the point of selling tight timed PC3200 and looser timed PC4000 when they're basically the same kit? The answer is both minute differences and advertised specs. The PC3200 is guaranteed to run at 2-2-2-5 at stock, whereas the PC4000 kit is not. Likewise, the PC4000 kit is guaranteed to handle it's advertised speed, whereas the PC3200 is not guaranteed for anything past a 200fsb (DDR400/PC3200). Different goals for different buyers.

Hopefully I've managed to address your question(s) in that long-winded post. If I've missed something, let me know :)

EDIT:
I don't think you've ever mentioned what motherboard you have. This will also be critical in setting overclocking expectations and could alter which RAM I would personally recommend.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2004 6:28 am 
Coppermine
Coppermine
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 6:24 am
Posts: 609
Location: Home
I have an Abit IC7-G MAXII And I've read many reviews with people hitting what I'm aiming for on this board with the same proc. Check out the specs on newegg.com or something. Lemme know what you think.


Top
  Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:01 am 
Contributing Writer
Contributing Writer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 8:09 pm
Posts: 9602
Location: Land of the Lounge Lizards
Nice! I don't need to check out the specs, I'm very familiar with your mobo. :)

You've a top of the line Canterwood on your hands, I'd be beyond shocked if you didn't see very favorable success in overclocking with better RAM. My recommendation stands.


Top
  Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 33 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group

© 2014 Future US, Inc. All rights reserved.