DDR2 8500 worth it?
- Thread starter RichieM
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 11 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 49
- Location
- South Wales
Not not really. Just get some ballistix PC6400 and overclock to PC8500 speeds.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Dec 2007
- Posts
- 1,319
- Location
- Nottingham
Will these reach pc8500 at C4 or would they need to be changed to C5?
I've just installed 4x1GB of the pc6400 and they were set at 5-5-5-18 i think. Not had time to change anything will be playing with the system tonight, overclocking.
I've just installed 4x1GB of the pc6400 and they were set at 5-5-5-18 i think. Not had time to change anything will be playing with the system tonight, overclocking.
PC8500 at CL4 is doubtful unless you want to really crank the voltage through them.
I am running 2 sets of ballistix at the moment...1 set is a 667mhz set and the other is 800mhz.
Both are running 550mhz 5,5,5,15 @ 2.2v
I am running 2 sets of ballistix at the moment...1 set is a 667mhz set and the other is 800mhz.
Both are running 550mhz 5,5,5,15 @ 2.2v
Yes it is, especially if you are planning on an E8400 or E8500. Although slower ram will get your cpu clock as high as possible, it won't be taking full advantage of the extra fsb available from the cpu. I think that is why we are seeing lower speed ram going so cheap at the moment. To take full advantage of E'series cpu's, 8500 or even 9600 ram is the way to go.
but a lot of "slower" rated ram can do well past 1066mhz
This is what my 667 and 800mhz mix are running at, and I have tested them stable @ 840mhz 4,3,3,4,20 2.2v as well
Did you read my post gurusan ? I said "Although slower ram will get your cpu clock as high as possible, it won't be taking full advantage of the extra fsb available from the cpu" All the E'series cpu's are rated at 1333fsb. So to take full advantage of that, you will need to get your fsb as near to that as possible. There is'nt ANY 667 ram that's going to get to 1333fsb.
Erm...you do realize that Intels use a QDR (quad data rate) FSB rating, so 333fsb is rated as 1333fsb.
In other words, you can run 667mhz memory at 1333fsb without overclocking the RAM at all!
In my pic I am running 560mhz, which means I would theoretically be able to take my FSB up to 2240mhz
Of course i do. But your ram in the pic is running at 1120, so how are you going to get it to 1333 ?
Erm, his ram is running at 560 which means when quad pumped it would run at 2240.
1600mhz means a REAL FSB of 400mhz.
1333mhz means a REAL FSB of 333mhz.
1066mhz means a REAL FSB of 266mhz.
800mhz means a REAL FSB of 200mhz.
His ram running at 560mhz is 160mhz faster than the LATEST processors running on a 1600mhz bus. Meaning he still has 160mhz of overclocking headroom (x whatever the processors multiplier is = CPU speed)
Last edited:
Yes..it can get quite confusing with all these 2x and 4x ratings.
Basically:
Intel Effective FSB = 4x the "REAL clock"
DDR Effective FSB = 2x the "REAL clock"
For example if I have a 333mhz REAL fsb clock and the memory is running at a 1:1 ratio with it...then the effective FSB clock would be 1333, and the effective memory clock would be 667mhz.
So my memory running @ 520mhz is actually running 1120mhz DDR, and would allow me to run my FSB to 560 or 2240mhz QDR
Basically:
Intel Effective FSB = 4x the "REAL clock"
DDR Effective FSB = 2x the "REAL clock"
For example if I have a 333mhz REAL fsb clock and the memory is running at a 1:1 ratio with it...then the effective FSB clock would be 1333, and the effective memory clock would be 667mhz.
So my memory running @ 520mhz is actually running 1120mhz DDR, and would allow me to run my FSB to 560 or 2240mhz QDR
Last edited:
My complete apologies guys. Of course you'r right. Although running an Intel rig now, i've spent so many years running AMD i'm used to ramspeed being "what it says it is". You would have thought after 4 months of running an Intel i would have realised by now that "the rules have changed" 
Still, did'nt stop my clock getting where it is now
One thing i would like to add though, in defence (although in hindsight). When my E8500 arrives, unless my ram is capable of running 550fsb+ it will limit my clock under phase. By that i mean 550x9.5=5.25ghz, so some of you may see where my thinking is on faster ram.
Mine do much the same, and like you i also do think they are worth it. One thing i will say though, is that at high ramspeeds, upping the Vdimm to reach 1200+ is not a viable proposition in the long run. At least if you don't want to be buying new ram every week or so.