x2s3w4

Aaahhh I gotta respond to this first.
I have this RAM also and while it is great RAM for you to get it to 2000Mhz you'll have to have your FSB at 500. Are you saying you run your q6600 at 500FSB? That must be some chip there.....

Back on topic.
If you are going for quad core I don't think you'll benefit from DDR3. The DDR2 cell shock that blameless posted are great.

RussianGrimmReaper

No you don't... You can set a divider, that's why you can run DDR2-800 with a stock 1333 FSB CPU.

__________________

chessmyantidrug

I'm beginning to toy with the idea of getting an E8400 or E8500 instead of a Q6600 or Q6700. I've read most games don't take advantage of four cores so I think it might be wiser to go with a dual-core chip I can overclock faster to get better performance.

If I went with an E8500 overclocked to 4.75 GHz, I believe the FSB would be 500 MHz. From what I've read about RAM, my money would be best spent on DDR2-1000 memory. I'm pretty sure anything better than that would yield minimal performance gains. I believe the E8400 equivalent would be a 4.5 GHz overclock.

If I went with a Q6700 overclocked to 4.0 GHz, I believe the FSB would be 400 MHz. From what I've read, my money would best be spent on DDR2-800 memory. I believe the Q6600 equivalent would be a 3.6 GHz overclock.

Which route would you suggest?

Blameless

An E8500 @ 4.75GHz would require 500+ dollars of CPU cooling (good water cooled TEC at the minimum) to remain stable 24/7. For most, 4.75GHz is not anywhere near a realistic clock.

4GHz out of a Q6700 is also not easy, certainly not impossible, but not often 24/7 viable on air.

1:1 ratios are only advantageous on NVIDIA chipsets. Running higher ratios are by no means a waste. In fact, in most cases on Intel chipsets, because of the rapidly loosening tRD values, 400-450MHz FSB will often match, or even exceed, the performance of higher frontside bus speeds, if the final CPU speed is similar.

Running 400MHz FSB with 500MHz (DDR-1000) memory is not a waste at all. The 4:5 and 2:3 ratios are some of the best on Intel DDR2 setups.

As for dual-core vs quad core, most games do not make good use of four cores, and this trend will probably continue for at least another half-year. There are exceptions, but they are rather few.

SlicketyRickety

Why is everyone in the stone age still, DDR3 is the new wave jump on if you have the money. I mean i work 44 hours a week and make a nice paycheck so why would i go buy DDR2, Im not flaming anyone in here but i dont see why if money isnt a problem you would go with crap DDR2. Ok good DDR2 can run as good as DDR3 so what about good DDR3? I would read up more before you take the opinions of all these people in the stone age. Flame away all you budgeters. I say save an extra few bucks and go full DDR3.

PS im running my DDR3 @ 1600 FSB linked and Synced 7-6-5-20-cr1 (2 x 1GB) with vista and never had a problem i play crysis AoC. and rip through loading screens.

__________________
.................................................. ...................Gr33nMachine

Blameless

Even if I had millions of dollars oozing from every pore, I would find DDR3 hard to justify at this time.

Why spend more than you need to for similar performance? I guarantee you, that the 110 dollar motherboard and 70 dollar ram in my main system would give indistinguisable performance to the setup you've got, all other things being equal. Actually, I'm fairly certain the gaming performance of my main setup (which can be built for less than 1,000 bucks total), is superior to the system in your sig at 1680x1050 or below, and very similar at 1920x1200.

Upgrading for the sake of staying at the leading edge, without tangible benefit, is foolish.

When I need DDR3 for nehalem of AM3, it will be a quarter the price per GB now, and it will be faster than what's available now. That's when I will buy.

SlicketyRickety

Wow, .....

__________________
.................................................. ...................Gr33nMachine

CL3P20

..Making 'mis-leading' statements without any proof of your own is even more-so foolish. You dont even have DDR3.. its not like you are going to know the least bit about the possible latency decrease you WILL experience with most all mid-high grade ddr3 kits now-days.

Other than irrelevant flame's.. If you have got RAM latency below 50ns for 24/7 use.. then my hats off to you..

PS- 3 commands/cycle at the same latency as 2 commands/cycle is faster. <- Period

__________________
CL3P20's Folding stats

Playing Koi- My Ink-Log
My photo albums

build log->780i DICE rig: 780i, Patriot SSD- pending, ViperJohn's SPP block, cas3 Dom's, Element 600W, 80GB 'Cudda', MCP355

Blameless

I have read many reviews of various DDR3 memory, and seen even more threads from DDR3 users on this forum. This is what my statements have been based off of.

My statements are accurate, and if you doubt them, I am perfectly willing to match any of my ddr2 sets against your ddr3 to see how much of a difference their really is.


I have at least three sets of DDR2, of different makes, none over $70, that are capable of this, 24/7:



The thread I originally posted that image in (http://www.overclock.net/3959424-post70.html) contains at least a few other examples of users who have DDR2 at near that performance.

And you have the audacity of calling my statements misleading?

DDR1, DDR2, and DDR3 all transfer twice per clock. None of them transfer three times perclock.

DDR3s overriding advantage is the higher clocks it is capable of. This combined with the looser timings equals marginally better latency, sometimes.

CL3P20

Thanks for the links! That is just what this thread needed 2pgs ago.

I never said I doubted the achievable latency of any RAM, yours or mine. Just attempting [however badly] highlight that the faster speeds, and especially bandwidth will make a difference. I would consider DDR3 for a high-end Q4 workstation, that requires some excessive bandwidth for some 24/7 computing.

My mistake on-> , thanks for the correction.

As for a comparison test: I think it would be nice to be able to see two rigs; one, ddr2 and one ddr3, using the same cpu's and 2x gpu's... for some SuperPi comparisons and in-game tests. Lower latency should achieve the lowest Pi time.. but the highest bandwidth, might pre-vail with a dual-GPU setup.
Unfortunately its very hard to find two such similar systems.. But I will gladly read through any reviews you might have spotted on the subject, if they are relevant.

__________________
CL3P20's Folding stats

Playing Koi- My Ink-Log
My photo albums

build log->780i DICE rig: 780i, Patriot SSD- pending, ViperJohn's SPP block, cas3 Dom's, Element 600W, 80GB 'Cudda', MCP355