Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Lower multiplier even worth it? Check it out!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Lower multiplier even worth it? Check it out! - Page 2

Poll Results: Is it beneficial to lower the multiplier on your CPU?

 
  • 39% (16)
    Yes, definatley gives me more performance.
  • 19% (8)
    Yes, but not for the above reason.
  • 12% (5)
    No, too hard to find my best overclock.
  • 2% (1)
    No, but not for the above reason.
  • 26% (11)
    I have no clue.
41 Total Votes  
post #11 of 46
Thread Starter 
Nice... +1 for stock multipliers... Now I still wonder why so many people have them lowered?

Quote:
Originally Posted by TaiDinh View Post
I feel I am more stable at x7 over x8 stock multiplier, but I really don't know the reason why.
The data reveals that your not though... where do you get this feeling??
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklight115 View Post
Nice... +1 for stock multipliers... Now I still wonder why so many people have them lowered?
Where I think the performance increase come from is that the RAM runs faster because of higher FSB. If I run my RAM faster, I fold faster.
Main
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 3570K ASRock Z77 Pro3 Galaxy 560Ti G.Skills DDR3 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
WD Cavier 250GB + SimpleTech 320GB EXHDD Windows 7 x64 Samsung 19" SyncMaster 940BW OCZ 600w GameXStream 
Case
COOLER MASTER Centurion 5 
  hide details  
Reply
Main
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i5 3570K ASRock Z77 Pro3 Galaxy 560Ti G.Skills DDR3 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
WD Cavier 250GB + SimpleTech 320GB EXHDD Windows 7 x64 Samsung 19" SyncMaster 940BW OCZ 600w GameXStream 
Case
COOLER MASTER Centurion 5 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaiDinh View Post
Where I think the performance increase come from is that the RAM runs faster because of higher FSB. If I run my RAM faster, I fold faster.
The RAM may run faster, but people are actually loosing performance based on what this guy says...

***From the sticky guide above "Overclocking with NB straps in mind"
"People are confused (misinformed) as to what ratio is optimal for system performance. When looking at the bandwidth in terms of MB/s, your memory needs to be operating 2 times as fast as the CPU's FSB in order to match the CPU's L2 bandwidth."

Therefore, with a higher FSB, the RAM has to run faster, and they may not be able to run even a 3:2 ratio, as opposed to the recommended 2:1 stated in the sticky...

Now, with a higher multiplier it is easier for the memory to run at these speeds, to flood the bandwidth. So, the question still remains, why do people lower the multiplier. So far, I have only come to one solid answer. In rare cases, it allows the FSB to go up higher with a lower multiplier increasing the CPU speed, as stated by Phillipjos.

How? I don't know...
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 46
I simply keep my multiplier at a point where I am getting a desired FSB combined with a desired CPU speed. So yes, lowering the multiplier less than the max can definitely be beneficial. *(but not always).

I'm running at 3.2GHz right now (400x8). It would be pointless to run at 355x9 to achieve the same CPU speed, which would be underclocking my RAM's max speed at 1:1. I say, If your FSB can handle it, do it.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz (lapped) EVGA 780i SLI FTW @ 1600MHz FSB 2 x EVGA 8800GTX 768MB (SLI) @ 625/1500/2000MHz 2x2GB G.Skill PC2-8000 PQ @ 800MHz (linked to FSB) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x160GB WD RAID 0, 750GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 LITE-ON 20X SATA DVD/CD RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Viewsonic VA2702w 27" LCD 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Value 100 (beer magnet) Corsair TX 750W Cooler Master ATCS 840 Logitech SBF-90 (cheapest one on Newegg) 
Mouse Pad
Some kinda rubber thing (beer magnet) 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz (lapped) EVGA 780i SLI FTW @ 1600MHz FSB 2 x EVGA 8800GTX 768MB (SLI) @ 625/1500/2000MHz 2x2GB G.Skill PC2-8000 PQ @ 800MHz (linked to FSB) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x160GB WD RAID 0, 750GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 LITE-ON 20X SATA DVD/CD RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Viewsonic VA2702w 27" LCD 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Value 100 (beer magnet) Corsair TX 750W Cooler Master ATCS 840 Logitech SBF-90 (cheapest one on Newegg) 
Mouse Pad
Some kinda rubber thing (beer magnet) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 46
Thread Starter 
But why do you want the higher fsb?
I see you have the DDR2 800 RAM. You could be running a better FSB:RAM ratio, which could also give you higher benchmarks, plus have more stability, running stock multiplier. How do you know it is worth it?

Sorry to be a pest
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 46
You're not being a pest. I have my FSB matched exactly with my RAM's rated max speed. So my timings are tight on my RAM, and I'm at a 1:1 ratio as well.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz (lapped) EVGA 780i SLI FTW @ 1600MHz FSB 2 x EVGA 8800GTX 768MB (SLI) @ 625/1500/2000MHz 2x2GB G.Skill PC2-8000 PQ @ 800MHz (linked to FSB) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x160GB WD RAID 0, 750GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 LITE-ON 20X SATA DVD/CD RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Viewsonic VA2702w 27" LCD 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Value 100 (beer magnet) Corsair TX 750W Cooler Master ATCS 840 Logitech SBF-90 (cheapest one on Newegg) 
Mouse Pad
Some kinda rubber thing (beer magnet) 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz (lapped) EVGA 780i SLI FTW @ 1600MHz FSB 2 x EVGA 8800GTX 768MB (SLI) @ 625/1500/2000MHz 2x2GB G.Skill PC2-8000 PQ @ 800MHz (linked to FSB) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x160GB WD RAID 0, 750GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 LITE-ON 20X SATA DVD/CD RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Viewsonic VA2702w 27" LCD 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Value 100 (beer magnet) Corsair TX 750W Cooler Master ATCS 840 Logitech SBF-90 (cheapest one on Newegg) 
Mouse Pad
Some kinda rubber thing (beer magnet) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 46
Thread Starter 
But your not flooding your CPU L2 cache with your memory bandwidth, so you could be loosing more performance with the higher FSB than you are gaining.

Also, as I previously mentioned, you are loosing stability, which although is small, is pointlessly lost because of your multiplier. You could have the same CPU speed with higher stability with higher multiplier.

I guess I'm trying to ask if you really know that a higher FSB weighs out its own negative aspects.

Oh yeah, and about the tight timings... Read this, it is also from the sticky above...
Simply comparing memory latencies with considering the speed at which the memory is running those latencies is silly. This is because the overall latencies in nano-seconds is derived from dividing your total latencies in cycles by how many cycles your RAM can complete in one second. This gives you latencies per operation in seconds.

For example:

DDR2-800 does 800,000,000 cycles per second. Latencies of 4-4-4-12 add up to 24 cycles per operation of latency. Divide 24 cycles of latencies by 800,000,000 cycles and you get 30 nano-seconds worth of latencies per operation. However, DDR2-1000 with latencies of 5-5-5-15 also net you the same 30 nano-seconds of latencies per operation (30 / 1,000,000,000).

However, even though both settings have the same latencies. DDR2-1000 @ 5-5-5-15 is better than DDR2-800 @ 4-4-4-12, this is because DDR2-1000 has more data throughput when compared to DDR2-800.

Now, it is also a common myth that a system will be faster when it is "synced" (i.e. in a 1:1 ratio as apposed to a 5:4 ratio) with the processor. This is simply not true (or there is no substantial evidence to prove that it is true). Most people who will claim this and provide benchmarks are often missing a variable that would explain the difference in performance.

A few quick benchmarks proves this:

FSB = 200
Mutliplier = 9
CPU Speed = 1.8Ghz

@ 1:1 DDR2-400 Memory bandwidth = 3224MB/s
@ 2:3 DDR2-600 Memory bandwidth = 3774MB/s
@ 1:2 DDR2-800 Memory bandwidth = 4047MB/s
I think what he is saying is that a higher memory mhz is always top priority over latencies... meaning a better ratio outweighs better timings.

I'm pretty sure I read that elsewhere too.
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklight115 View Post
But your not flooding your CPU L2 cache with your memory bandwidth, so you could be loosing more performance with the higher FSB than you are gaining.

Also, as I previously mentioned, you are loosing stability, which although is small, is pointlessly lost because of your multiplier. You could have the same CPU speed with higher stability with higher multiplier.

I guess I'm trying to ask if you really know that a higher FSB weighs out its own negative aspects.
Flooding my CPU L2 cache with memory bandwidth? Sorry, you lost me there.

My FSB is totally stable, OCCT (demanding) for 2 hours - stable. My motherboard is completely capable of running at least 400FSB no problem. Ask anyone about that one.

Why would I want a lower FSB and run at an off-kilter FSB:RAM ratio when I can sync them and run my RAM at full potential?
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz (lapped) EVGA 780i SLI FTW @ 1600MHz FSB 2 x EVGA 8800GTX 768MB (SLI) @ 625/1500/2000MHz 2x2GB G.Skill PC2-8000 PQ @ 800MHz (linked to FSB) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x160GB WD RAID 0, 750GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 LITE-ON 20X SATA DVD/CD RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Viewsonic VA2702w 27" LCD 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Value 100 (beer magnet) Corsair TX 750W Cooler Master ATCS 840 Logitech SBF-90 (cheapest one on Newegg) 
Mouse Pad
Some kinda rubber thing (beer magnet) 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz (lapped) EVGA 780i SLI FTW @ 1600MHz FSB 2 x EVGA 8800GTX 768MB (SLI) @ 625/1500/2000MHz 2x2GB G.Skill PC2-8000 PQ @ 800MHz (linked to FSB) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x160GB WD RAID 0, 750GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 LITE-ON 20X SATA DVD/CD RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Viewsonic VA2702w 27" LCD 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Value 100 (beer magnet) Corsair TX 750W Cooler Master ATCS 840 Logitech SBF-90 (cheapest one on Newegg) 
Mouse Pad
Some kinda rubber thing (beer magnet) 
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 46
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Choggs396 View Post
Flooding my CPU L2 cache with memory bandwidth? Sorry, you lost me there.

My FSB is totally stable, OCCT (demanding) for 2 hours - stable. My motherboard is completely capable of running at least 400FSB no problem. Ask anyone about that one.

Why would I want a lower FSB and run at an off-kilter FSB:RAM ratio when I can sync them and run my RAM at full potential?
Sorry, edited too late. Read above thread. You still want your RAM running at full potential, but the lower FSB lets it... well see the tests above? I'm not really sure what it lets it do, it just performs better!
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
Smilodon
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
e4400 @ 2.9Ghz EVGA 650i Ultra ATX MSI 8800GTS 640 2x1GB G.Skill DDR2 800 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Seagate Barracuda 320Gb Vista 32bit 32" LCD (Vizio) Logitech G15 
PowerCaseMouse
Corsair HX520w Raidmax Smilodon Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by blacklight115 View Post
Sorry, edited too late. Read above thread.
Did you not notice that I'm running my Memory at it's max rated speed?

If I wanted to go higher with RAM, I'll probably OC my processor a little more by increasing the FSB. I seriously think running at a ratio, in my case, would be taking the easy way out from achieving a synchronous FSB:RAM. Besides, 680i chipsets can achieve 450FSB+ with decent cooling. I could up it to a multi of 9, which in my case would be Ideal if I could get my CPU at 3.6GHz (still working on this one), and my RAM would again be running at max rated speeds at a 1:1 ratio.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz (lapped) EVGA 780i SLI FTW @ 1600MHz FSB 2 x EVGA 8800GTX 768MB (SLI) @ 625/1500/2000MHz 2x2GB G.Skill PC2-8000 PQ @ 800MHz (linked to FSB) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x160GB WD RAID 0, 750GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 LITE-ON 20X SATA DVD/CD RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Viewsonic VA2702w 27" LCD 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Value 100 (beer magnet) Corsair TX 750W Cooler Master ATCS 840 Logitech SBF-90 (cheapest one on Newegg) 
Mouse Pad
Some kinda rubber thing (beer magnet) 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Q6600 G0 @ 3.6GHz (lapped) EVGA 780i SLI FTW @ 1600MHz FSB 2 x EVGA 8800GTX 768MB (SLI) @ 625/1500/2000MHz 2x2GB G.Skill PC2-8000 PQ @ 800MHz (linked to FSB) 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
2x160GB WD RAID 0, 750GB Samsung Spinpoint F1 LITE-ON 20X SATA DVD/CD RW Windows 7 Ultimate x64 Viewsonic VA2702w 27" LCD 1920x1080 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Value 100 (beer magnet) Corsair TX 750W Cooler Master ATCS 840 Logitech SBF-90 (cheapest one on Newegg) 
Mouse Pad
Some kinda rubber thing (beer magnet) 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Intel CPUs
Overclock.net › Forums › Intel › Intel CPUs › Lower multiplier even worth it? Check it out!