Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Memory › How much do timeings help?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How much do timeings help?

post #1 of 20
Thread Starter 
My RAM is running at 3-4-4-7 right now, and I was wondering how much performance increase I would see if I got it to say, 2-2-2-5?
post #2 of 20
I think you'd only see an increase in benchmarks. Im running 3-4-4-7 on my fx-55 and it's lightning fast so Im assuming you wouldn't see a whole lot of increase in real world applications. What are you running your ram at now?
Media Center Box
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
P4 3 GHz 775 Intel BFG 9600GSO 1GB DDR400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB SG 500GB WD DVD-RW XP MCE 20" Dell LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse Pad
Dell Antec 500W Generic 4D Steel 
  hide details  
Reply
Media Center Box
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
P4 3 GHz 775 Intel BFG 9600GSO 1GB DDR400 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
250GB SG 500GB WD DVD-RW XP MCE 20" Dell LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse Pad
Dell Antec 500W Generic 4D Steel 
  hide details  
Reply
post #3 of 20
Having tight timings on a AMD computer is like putting icing on the cake.

You could take the $200 it would take to buy the tight timings ram and see more of a gain with other upgrades but if you already have those upgrades you can really tighten the screws on your gaming if buy the low latency ram.

That really is the big question right now in AMD computers: do I go for faster MHZ RAM or do I go for tighter timings due to them being exclusive to each other when talking about 2 gigs of RAM?

I personally have been leaning to tighter timings then looser timings but more MHZ RAM.

AMD computers don't get their speed from RAM bandwidth, they get it from RAM efficiency. So in the end the 50mhz increase you get from doesn't equate to much real world performance but in benchmarking you will see a difference.

IMO, faster timings will not give you any benchmark performance, but it will make your games snappy and smoother when your moving the mouse around.
post #4 of 20
Thread Starter 
Well, I have two people telling me two diferant things, lol. Could one of the RAM gurus please answer this?
post #5 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoaDMTGguy
Well, I have two people telling me two diferant things, lol. Could one of the RAM gurus please answer this?

I believe Internal has it backwards. Tighter timings will give you faster times in benchmarks, but you won't see any difference in real world applications.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 Kentsfield DFI DK P35-T2RS eVGA 9800GTX 512MB G.SKILL DDR2-800 4x2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorKeyboard
160GB WD SATA2 Pioneer DVD-ROM Acer 22 in. Saitek Eclipse II 
PowerCaseMouse
PC Power & Cooling 750W Antec P182 Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 Kentsfield DFI DK P35-T2RS eVGA 9800GTX 512MB G.SKILL DDR2-800 4x2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorKeyboard
160GB WD SATA2 Pioneer DVD-ROM Acer 22 in. Saitek Eclipse II 
PowerCaseMouse
PC Power & Cooling 750W Antec P182 Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #6 of 20
On my rig running (everything else at stock) 3-3-3-8 I get 40 secs. in SuperPI. at 2-2-2-5 I acheve 38. It should add up to like 5 fps in games and such.
½
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD A64 3500+ Winchester DFI nF4 SLi-DR EVGA 7800GT OCZ 4000VX 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Maxtor 300Gb 16Mb Buffer Spinney one XP Pro SOYO LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Broken Somewhat OCZ PowerStream 520W None Old 
Mouse Pad
Pad? AHAAHAHAH 
  hide details  
Reply
½
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD A64 3500+ Winchester DFI nF4 SLi-DR EVGA 7800GT OCZ 4000VX 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
Maxtor 300Gb 16Mb Buffer Spinney one XP Pro SOYO LCD 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Broken Somewhat OCZ PowerStream 520W None Old 
Mouse Pad
Pad? AHAAHAHAH 
  hide details  
Reply
post #7 of 20
Since AMD has their memory controller on chip you will find much less difference in tighter ram timings than on an Intel system since the latency applies majorly to off chip transmission. AMD has the control transmission on the chip not the bridge interface so the stream is consistent on the AMD and not on the Intel.

Thus if you have an Intel system I would say that purchasing lower latency dram is important with price/performance potential and is not nearly as important on AMD systems with the memory controller on chip. Thus if you have the money and desire, why not? If you are looking for a fast gaming rig, then spend the money you save from value ram/low latency ram on a better graphics card.

R
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 #8 of 20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ropey
Since AMD has their memory controller on chip you will find much less difference in tighter ram timings than on an Intel system since the latency applies majorly to off chip transmission. AMD has the control transmission on the chip not the bridge interface so the stream is consistent on the AMD and not on the Intel.

Thus if you have an Intel system I would say that purchasing lower latency dram is important with price/performance potential and is not nearly as important on AMD systems with the memory controller on chip. Thus if you have the money and desire, why not? If you are looking for a fast gaming rig, then spend the money you save from value ram/low latency ram on a better graphics card.

R

Well put, lad.
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 Kentsfield DFI DK P35-T2RS eVGA 9800GTX 512MB G.SKILL DDR2-800 4x2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorKeyboard
160GB WD SATA2 Pioneer DVD-ROM Acer 22 in. Saitek Eclipse II 
PowerCaseMouse
PC Power & Cooling 750W Antec P182 Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
My System
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core 2 Quad Q6700 Kentsfield DFI DK P35-T2RS eVGA 9800GTX 512MB G.SKILL DDR2-800 4x2GB 
Hard DriveOptical DriveMonitorKeyboard
160GB WD SATA2 Pioneer DVD-ROM Acer 22 in. Saitek Eclipse II 
PowerCaseMouse
PC Power & Cooling 750W Antec P182 Logitech MX518 
  hide details  
Reply
post #9 of 20
Thanks for cleaning up my mess fellows.

Not to derail this thread more then I already have I have to ask:

So you guys are saying that higher MHZ in RAM will net you better GAMING performance then lower latency, lower mhz ram(500DDR vs 400DDR) due to the architecture that AMD has provided.

If you guys can, please read this anandtech article and let me know if I was reading it wrong cause I think they say what I'm saying.

Athlon 64 Revision E: Unofficial DDR500 Support
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...oc.aspx?i=2469
Here are the final words if you guys don't want to see all the benchmark timings and the intro page into the article.

"Based on the tests that we’ve seen here today, AMD’s reluctance to move to higher bandwidth DDR2 offerings makes a lot more sense. The plain fact of the matter is that at the current clock speeds at which the Athlon 64 and X2 line are running, most desktop applications see virtually no benefit from higher bandwidth memory. It is possible that server usage models may show a greater performance boost, but it is highly unlikely for a mission critical server to be equipped with anything that isn’t an officially supported standard - especially memory.

While some have been critical of AMD’s unwillingness to embrace DDR2 when Intel did, it would appear that the quest for more bandwidth simply wasn’t in AMD’s best interests. These Athlon 64 and X2 cores that we have here today are far better suited for use with low latency and lower priced DDR400 than anything that offers higher bandwidth.

Down the road, as CPU speeds and the sheer number of cores goes up, then higher bandwidth memories will definitely make much more sense. But for now, for the majority of the population, these new memory dividers won’t do much for you.

The performance improvements themselves aren’t tangible, but if you are trying to squeeze every last ounce of performance out of your system, then these new memory dividers offer you one more avenue to do so. If you have memory that can run at higher than DDR400 speeds without any reduction in latency, then by all means, explore the new dividers; just don’t expect them to change your life.

The one exception to the rule seems to be heavy multitasking scenarios. As we saw from our simple DVDShrink + Doom 3 test, when you run two very memory bandwidth dependent applications on a dual core processor at the same time, the benefits of these faster memory speeds really starts to show itself. We measured a 6.5% increase in performance in the aforementioned test, but next to no performance improvement in other lighter multitasking scenarios. As we continue to develop our multitasking benchmark suites, we will now start looking at how added memory bandwidth, made possible through these new dividers, changes the performance picture."


I want to have this cleared up in my mind, THX.
post #10 of 20
Anyone have anything to add to my reply??
You guys seems really quick to prove a person wrong, where do you go?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Memory
Overclock.net › Forums › Components › Memory › How much do timeings help?