Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Memory › Dominators > Team Extreem
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dominators > Team Extreem - Page 16

post #151 of 349
Quote:
Hehe, I just caught your mistake Manual. It isn't x 10^9.... That is Gigahertz. It is x 10^6. Mega is million!
Whoops, looks like the Christmas holiday as affecting me also. See even I can make mistakes, and I don't hesitate to acknowledge when I am incorrect

Quote:
If what you say is correct, then why dont memory manufactors make DDR2-2000 kits with 10-10-15-40 timings, after all the 1200Mhz gain to todays standard is much more than a few timings (only 57 cycles extra latency than 3-3-3-9). But they dont do this.
They do not do this as they are incapable of doing so. This is why DDR3 is being released, to increase the clock speed while sacrificing latency.
Why do you think we have GDDR3/4 at 2200MHz+ in Graphics Processing Units? This is because the speed is required. This graphical memory has high latencies, but high speed. Therefore the Graphics Core is not starved of information.


@ CWell1337

Judging by what you are saying you still have a long leap to understand how computers actually work. You're response was very poor in terms of Computer Science, even though grammatically correct, it lacks the surrounding of engineering knowledge (no offence).

You are stating that Latency will overrule Clock Speed within 3D applications without testing a variety of applications, with a magnitude of settings, and hardware configurations. I myself have stated that it matters less than direct computation, I did not state that it has absolutely no effect on performance impact within 3D applications.

F.E.A.R. was not a good example to have used as it is based upon a strange engine. Memory is poorly accessed by the application, and therefore has limited stress bestowed upon it. Usually OpenGL applications will address the system stores more readily (back and forth), and this will in turn increase the need for Memory speed to continue data flow without the system halting as there is not enough information.

A long time ago where bus speed was not extremely high, latency mattered, as applications of that time were phased around the ability of the CPU and GPU, memory mattered only for storing data, and thus the need for super speed memory did not arise.
With the use of more Sophisticated Games the need for higher speed memory arises.

In the past you may have been able to counteract my statements by stating: "What if a Cache Miss occurs (or equivalent), and the CPU has to retrieve data from Main Memory?"*
Originally lower latency is required in case of this problem. However now with improved Micro-Code Pipelines, increased Cache Size and updated Branch Prediction this need is no longer required.

I myself do want higher Frame Rates in the Majority of games, therefore I have increased the memory speeds to 1066MHz (5-5-5-15) over 675MHz (3-2-2-8).

I have noticed frame rate increases within:

Quake 4
Half Life 2 Lost Coast (Benchmark)
Counterstrike: Source (Benchmark)
Prey
Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion
Battlefield 2
Age of Empires 3
Medieval 2: Total War
(Screenshots available upon request)
Only F.E.A.R. and BFME2 did not have an major FPS impact by changing the Memory configuration.

All of these applications written down have had frame rate increases by a minimum of 1% from increasing the clock frequency of the Memory.
F.E.A.R. even at 16xSSAA does not move around much, and stays at around the same level, which is most likely due to the coding of the application. To show these increases in frame rate I suggest you select a smaller resolution of 1024x768, and this will show moderate changes of the frame rate.

The next point I will stress upon many enthusiasts will be used to themselves.
Have you ever ran you're 3D application, but with other applications in the background?
Increasing the Memory speed will dramatically help with your 3D game if you have multiple applications open addressing the Memory.

To put it simply for you. The greater the speed the faster data can be transfered (in this manner). Therefore if you have two applications addressing Memory in let us say 2-4 (Row - Column, RAS/CAS apply) then the data can be transfered to them faster.

Say both application one and two want data at the same time. The Memory will have to send data to one first then to the second. If the memory is faster it can do this in a shorter time period, therefore the system speeds up. With lower latencies the Memory can address slightly faster, but then it has to take longer to transfer data. Transferring data takes a lot longer than just waiting for the Memory to acknowledge a command.
As I often run Windows Media player, keep downloads going and sometimes encode videos the Memory Speed wins again, regardless

* Originally CPU's used to have very little Memory Stores and poor Branch Prediction, this therefore resulted in the Central Processing Unit having to repeatedly access Memory. At the time Memory Speed was slow, as was the Bus speed, therefore there was no need to increase the Memory speed, and in truth doing so resulted to slow performance is you changed the latency timings. When the CPU misses a peace of data it goes "mental" and stops, waiting for the data to arrive. The faster the Memory latency the faster it can get hold of the data and send it to the CPU (as the bus speed was small).
Now days this problem rarely occurs, so latency matters less. Therefore it is logical to increase the clock speed of Memory, while increasing the latencies. In case you haven't noticed that is what is currently happening, even though it's half Marketing to have the fastest Memory, but they do see logic

Note: Graphics Card's have no inbuilt Cache technically in the Core, even though G80 has some in stages down it's pipeline. Therefore latencies are more irrelevant with Graphics Cards
post #152 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Manual View Post
They do not do this as they are incapable of doing so. This is why DDR3 is being released, to increase the clock speed while sacrificing latency.
Why do you think we have GDDR3/4 at 2200MHz+ in Graphics Processing Units? This is because the speed is required. This graphical memory has high latencies, but high speed. Therefore the Graphics Core is not starved of information.
Huge post, read it all. So changing a latency from 5-5-5-15 to 3-3-3-9 is an extra 12 cycles, which is the same as increasing by 12 cycles on the mhz side, which is only 12Hz higher. Therefore these too instances should be the same performance:

1. DDR2-800 Mhz at 3-3-3-9.
2. DDR2-800.000012 Mhz at 5-5-5-15.

Also why do manufactors make DDR2-533 and 667, 800 kits at low latencies (CL3) then?
Turismo
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E2160 @ 3.0GHz (BIOS 1.315v) (CPU-Z 1.272v) Abit IP35 "Dark Raider" ATI 512MB HD3850 (720/1800) 4GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair Force F60 + 640GB WD 2x250GB WD RAID0 Sony NEC 20x Dual Layer DVD±RW Windows 7 Ultimate 64 20.1' Belinea @ 1680x1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Corsair 450W VX 12V@33A CM690 + Zalman MFC1 Wolf King Trooper 
  hide details  
Reply
Turismo
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E2160 @ 3.0GHz (BIOS 1.315v) (CPU-Z 1.272v) Abit IP35 "Dark Raider" ATI 512MB HD3850 (720/1800) 4GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair Force F60 + 640GB WD 2x250GB WD RAID0 Sony NEC 20x Dual Layer DVD±RW Windows 7 Ultimate 64 20.1' Belinea @ 1680x1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Corsair 450W VX 12V@33A CM690 + Zalman MFC1 Wolf King Trooper 
  hide details  
Reply
post #153 of 349
Why do I even involve myself in this?

Sheesh! I should know better.
Roped In
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k P8P67 Pro Rev (3.1) @ B3 XFX Radeon HD 6950 XXX 16GB G.SKILL Ripjaws 9-11-9-28 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 X Callisto Deluxe 25nm 60GB Plextor PX-B910SA 4x Blu-ray DVD-RW Win7 64 2 x Samsung 275T+ 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Corsair HX10000 Antec 1200 Logitech G7 
Mouse Pad
Splatter Game Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
Roped In
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2600k P8P67 Pro Rev (3.1) @ B3 XFX Radeon HD 6950 XXX 16GB G.SKILL Ripjaws 9-11-9-28 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2 X Callisto Deluxe 25nm 60GB Plextor PX-B910SA 4x Blu-ray DVD-RW Win7 64 2 x Samsung 275T+ 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 Corsair HX10000 Antec 1200 Logitech G7 
Mouse Pad
Splatter Game Pad 
  hide details  
Reply
post #154 of 349
Quote:
Huge post, read it all. So changing a latency from 5-5-5-15 to 3-3-3-9 is an extra 12 cycles, which is the same as increasing by 12 cycles on the mhz side, which is only 12Hz higher. Therefore these too instances should be the same performance:

1. DDR2-800 Mhz at 3-3-3-9.
2. DDR2-800.000012 Mhz at 5-5-5-15.

Also why do manufactors make DDR2-533 and 667, 800 kits at low latencies (CL3) then?
Each latency is technically marked by a Nano Second Value, this value states the Wait period. With the increase in latency this period rises. As latency works within the Nano Second range, as does Clock Cycles, the values of latency do make a larger impact than what you have stated. If it can be mathematically calculated I do not know how calculate it at this present moment in time.

I will no longer intervene in this thread from this point
post #155 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Manual View Post
Each latency is technically marked by a Nano Second Value, this value states the Wait period. With the increase in latency this period rises. As latency works within the Nano Second range, as does Clock Cycles, the values of latency do make a larger impact than what you have stated. If it can be mathematically calculated I do not know how calculate it at this present moment in time.

I will no longer intervene in this thread from this point
OK fair enough. I not trying to argue with anyone though lol. I just want to know whats the fastest Dont we all?

So if you ever manage to calculate the difference, The_Manual, please let us know.

ty
Turismo
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E2160 @ 3.0GHz (BIOS 1.315v) (CPU-Z 1.272v) Abit IP35 "Dark Raider" ATI 512MB HD3850 (720/1800) 4GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair Force F60 + 640GB WD 2x250GB WD RAID0 Sony NEC 20x Dual Layer DVD±RW Windows 7 Ultimate 64 20.1' Belinea @ 1680x1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Corsair 450W VX 12V@33A CM690 + Zalman MFC1 Wolf King Trooper 
  hide details  
Reply
Turismo
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E2160 @ 3.0GHz (BIOS 1.315v) (CPU-Z 1.272v) Abit IP35 "Dark Raider" ATI 512MB HD3850 (720/1800) 4GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair Force F60 + 640GB WD 2x250GB WD RAID0 Sony NEC 20x Dual Layer DVD±RW Windows 7 Ultimate 64 20.1' Belinea @ 1680x1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Corsair 450W VX 12V@33A CM690 + Zalman MFC1 Wolf King Trooper 
  hide details  
Reply
post #156 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by OCZedd View Post
Huge post, read it all. So changing a latency from 5-5-5-15 to 3-3-3-9 is an extra 12 cycles, which is the same as increasing by 12 cycles on the mhz side, which is only 12Hz higher. Therefore these too instances should be the same performance:

1. DDR2-800 Mhz at 3-3-3-9.
2. DDR2-800.000012 Mhz at 5-5-5-15.

Also why do manufactors make DDR2-533 and 667, 800 kits at low latencies (CL3) then?
Lower frequencies can have tighter timings. That is why DDR and low speed DDR2 can have tighter timings than say PC-8888.
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 2500k ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 AMD 7970 16GB DDR3 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Intel 520 256GB SATA DVD Burner Windows 7 64 bit Deal U2410 
KeyboardPowerMouse
Adesso Mechanical Silverstone OP650 Logitech G700 
  hide details  
Reply
post #157 of 349
Thread Starter 
I am damn sure that The_Manual is 100% right in what he says. I think you all need to step back, stop arguing, and go do real testing yourself to see that you are wrong. The_Manual's statement about GDDR3/4 running at a high speed yet with looser timings clearly dominates anything about people saying that tighter timings at lower speeds are better than looser timings at high speeds.
MONOLITH
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6600 L631A871 eVGA 780i Dual G92 GTS's Corsair Dominator 2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB Lite-On LightScribe Win Vista SP1 BenQ FP241w 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saiktek Eclipse II Corsair HX620 Rocketfish Razer Copperhead 
Mouse Pad
Steelpad Qck Heavy 
  hide details  
Reply
MONOLITH
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E6600 L631A871 eVGA 780i Dual G92 GTS's Corsair Dominator 2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Samsung Spinpoint F1 1TB Lite-On LightScribe Win Vista SP1 BenQ FP241w 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Saiktek Eclipse II Corsair HX620 Rocketfish Razer Copperhead 
Mouse Pad
Steelpad Qck Heavy 
  hide details  
Reply
post #158 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by pauldovi View Post
Lower frequencies can have tighter timings. That is why DDR and low speed DDR2 can have tighter timings than say PC-8888.
Yes I know this, but forget tighter timings, The_Manual says higher freq is better.
Turismo
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E2160 @ 3.0GHz (BIOS 1.315v) (CPU-Z 1.272v) Abit IP35 "Dark Raider" ATI 512MB HD3850 (720/1800) 4GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair Force F60 + 640GB WD 2x250GB WD RAID0 Sony NEC 20x Dual Layer DVD±RW Windows 7 Ultimate 64 20.1' Belinea @ 1680x1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Corsair 450W VX 12V@33A CM690 + Zalman MFC1 Wolf King Trooper 
  hide details  
Reply
Turismo
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
E2160 @ 3.0GHz (BIOS 1.315v) (CPU-Z 1.272v) Abit IP35 "Dark Raider" ATI 512MB HD3850 (720/1800) 4GB Crucial Ballistix PC2-6400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Corsair Force F60 + 640GB WD 2x250GB WD RAID0 Sony NEC 20x Dual Layer DVD±RW Windows 7 Ultimate 64 20.1' Belinea @ 1680x1050 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Corsair 450W VX 12V@33A CM690 + Zalman MFC1 Wolf King Trooper 
  hide details  
Reply
post #159 of 349
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drax View Post
I am damn sure that The_Manual is 100% right in what he says. I think you all need to step back, stop arguing, and go do real testing yourself to see that you are wrong. The_Manual's statement about GDDR3/4 running at a high speed yet with looser timings clearly dominates anything about people saying that tighter timings at lower speeds are better than looser timings at high speeds.
Ok so you think DDR2-1000 5-5-5-15 is better than DDR2-800 4-3-3-10 in gaming??

It depends how SLOW the ram is. The Manual compared 675mhz ram to 1066mhz ram. Of course the 1066mhz is going to be faster. That's way too high of a jump. Compare my two options above.

You are a selective learner it seems. You are picking apart various things and not taking in ALL the information at once. Higher freq is not always better. I know this for a fact. It is only better if the speed outweighs the jump in timings.
Main Gaming Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.8ghz Asus P8P67 Deluxe Sapphire 7970 1200/1600 8GB GSKILL SNIPER 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
128GB OCZ Vertex 4 LG 24X SATA Windows 7 Pro x64 Dell 22/24/22 LCDs 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G110 Toughpower 1000watt 108A Corsair 800D Logitech G700 
Mouse PadAudio
SteelSeries QCK+ XFI XtremeMusic 
  hide details  
Reply
Main Gaming Rig
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
2500K 4.8ghz Asus P8P67 Deluxe Sapphire 7970 1200/1600 8GB GSKILL SNIPER 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
128GB OCZ Vertex 4 LG 24X SATA Windows 7 Pro x64 Dell 22/24/22 LCDs 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G110 Toughpower 1000watt 108A Corsair 800D Logitech G700 
Mouse PadAudio
SteelSeries QCK+ XFI XtremeMusic 
  hide details  
Reply
post #160 of 349
to me when i first read this thread it was more of an OMG look at me, rather than a, whos is better. Anything about the team's or what he doesnt think is right is dismissed quickly.
Kopisaurus
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500k @ 5ghz 1.395v Gigabyte P67A-UD3P-B3 ATI HD6950 2GB (flashed --> 6970) 16GB Gskill Sniper 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500gb WD Black / 2x 1TB WD Black RAID1 LG DVD/RW Super Multi Windows 7 Enterprise x64 ASUS ML239H 23" LED  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 (modded) Corsair TV750W V2 Lian-Li Lancool PC-K62B Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
Kopisaurus
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel 2500k @ 5ghz 1.395v Gigabyte P67A-UD3P-B3 ATI HD6950 2GB (flashed --> 6970) 16GB Gskill Sniper 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
500gb WD Black / 2x 1TB WD Black RAID1 LG DVD/RW Super Multi Windows 7 Enterprise x64 ASUS ML239H 23" LED  
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech G15 (modded) Corsair TV750W V2 Lian-Li Lancool PC-K62B Logitech G5 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Memory
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Memory › Dominators > Team Extreem