1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

2-2-2-5 at ddr400 or 3-2-3-6 at ddr520?

Discussion in 'Memory' started by Gommsta, 8 Jun 2006.

  1. Gommsta

    Gangster

    Joined: 5 May 2006

    Posts: 480

    Hi,

    Running an X2-4400 at 2600 (260 x 10) and using Corsair XMS Pro 3500LL.

    Would it be more beneficial to run at 2-2-2-5 1T at DDR400 or 3-2-3-6 1T at DDR 520 for this type of system?

    I think Stock is 2-3-2-6 at DDR438.

    Cheers
     
  2. str

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 2,738

    AMD 64 always runs asyncronous even with memory at 1:1. I don't have any experience of such good ram but from what I've read DDR520 with CAS 3 probably won't be enough to beat the DDR400 at CAS 2.

    Maybe SuperPI 1M will show you the difference so give that a try on both settings and post back with the results. :)
     
  3. Gommsta

    Gangster

    Joined: 5 May 2006

    Posts: 480

    Hey tried super pi with both.

    2-2-2-5 ddr 400 gave 32.781 seconds
    3-2-3-6 ddr 520 gave 31.984 seconds

    Is this applicable to real world stuff?

    Does CAS make a huge difference? Highest I can get CAS 2.5 is about 250 Mhz
     
  4. str

    Mobster

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 2,738

    That's a good result for DDR520 at CAS 3. I wasn't expecting such a good showing in SuperPI.

    For gaming performance you could try a benchmark in Doom 3 or another game that relies on high CPU speed and low memory latency.

    I'm still relatively new to AMD 64 systems so I can't really say much else but hopefully someone with more knowledge/experience will be able to give some advice on the differences between DDR400/tight timings and DDR500+/loose timings.
     
  5. HangTime

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 25 Oct 2002

    Posts: 28,151

    Location: Hampshire

    Personally I'd go for the DDR520. While latencies are important on the A64 they are not the be-all and end-all as some would have you believe.

    As an example a while back I did some tests (using Quake3 at 640x480 to focus on cpu/memory performance) and found that 2.5-3-3-6(?) DDR470 was faster than 2-2-3-6(?) DDR423. I can't test CAS3 because my Twinmos RAM hates it.

    The bottom line it depends on each persons setup and how much extra FSB they can get by relaxing their timings - best thing is to test as you have done and choose the fastest option.
     
  6. Dutch Guy

    Capodecina

    Joined: 18 Oct 2002

    Posts: 24,563

    Location: Amsterdam,The Netherlands

    Some games like memoryspeed, others like tight timings but the difference between them is under 10% in almost all situations so it really doesn't matter all that much.

    But out of the choices you have I would run at DDR520 as the timings are still quite good, normally RAM needs to run at 3-4-4-8 at >DDR500
     
  7. Jay_t

    Hitman

    Joined: 19 May 2005

    Posts: 714

    Location: The Lake District

    I tend to go for the tight timings as I find it gives windows a nice zippy feel. You are bound to get conflicting advice on this subject though. :p
     
  8. Gommsta

    Gangster

    Joined: 5 May 2006

    Posts: 480

    I'll bench a few games and get back to you guys. Thanks for your help so far.
     
  9. Street

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 17 Jan 2005

    Posts: 7,817

    Location: Liverpool

    Have you tried CAS 2.5? See if you can get a happy medium between the two?
     
  10. Cyber-Mav

    Capodecina

    Joined: 30 Jul 2005

    Posts: 14,399

    Location: Midlands

    im just shocked someone can actually notice the difference timings make in general windows use :eek:
     
  11. w3bbo

    Man of Honour

    Joined: 14 Nov 2005

    Posts: 10,663

    Location: Up North

    I have noticed absolutley no difference running xp with 2 gig 3500LL 2-3-2-5 to 2 gig gskill @3-4-4-8. 3dmark06 scores were higher with the gskill running @ above timings @280mhz(1:1) than running the 3500LL's @220 mhz(/166). So I would choose slacker timings with a higher bandwidth.

    Oh and the 3500LL's will not run 438 stock, they run @ 400 unless you increase the fsb by 17 ;). I found the 3500's to be excellent memory but would not clock higher than 446 (223@2-3-2-5) without using a divider and even then it had to be a 166 divider coz they didn't work well with a 180 divider. Even relaxing the timings failed to increase stability. I recommend putting 2.8v through them as this was a sweet spot for my set.
     
  12. Gommsta

    Gangster

    Joined: 5 May 2006

    Posts: 480

    Ok, well by stock I meant the DDR438 2-3-2-6. (actually did DDR440 and 220x10 on the cpu). Everything else I agree with you although i've had them stable 260 at 3-2-3-6 for over a week (Memtest, Prime, SnM etc).

    I'm finding in general that things are marginally quicker using relaxed timings and a higher fsb. Only talking 1 fps if that. Makes you wonder whether its worth spending all that money on quality RAM at all. I guess it depends on what revision you get.

    Bit disillusioned but hey ho. Lesson learned!

    Cheers everyone

    Gommsta
     
  13. SameSuspect

    PermaBanned

    Joined: 7 Jul 2005

    Posts: 711

    Location: Suffolk

    i was about to ask a similar question

    520 at 3-3-2-5 or 430 at 2.3.2.5
     
  14. GoRedwings19

    Hitman

    Joined: 30 Jun 2006

    Posts: 779

    Location: Cardiff

    So what would be an ideal choice. The 3500LL and overclocking to run at 500mhz or Mushkin Redline XP?

    Both are fairly pricey. But I feel they would be an upgrade over my corsair value select. Don;t get me wrong I find the value select fairly good value and performs well at the price point but I am trying to squeeze more speed out of my system and I think my memory is holding me back.