You can in most cases if BIOS support OC CPU but not the RAM. Some RAM OC better than others.
RAM for a UD3P
Going to be getting a UD3P next week and want to know what RAM is good for OC'ing my q66. I guess I should ask first, will RAM hither my oc'ing "experience" or does it really not matter? This will be my first time overclocking anything besides a gpu so just want to get things straight.
![]()
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Quote:
Good to know. You just saved me some moneyz
![]()
+1 for everyone
Originally Posted by ltulod  those will do then.
|
+1 for everyone
3
Quote:
I would pass on those Look at the specs, they are rated for 2.0v at 1066 with cas7. Those have to be the worst timings on a 1066 kit I have ever seen.
Quote:
I run that kit in my Girlfriend's build and the best I can get out of them is DDR2 930. So you could run up to a 465 FSB and run the ram 1:1.
Originally Posted by BlackOmega Check these OCZ Fatal1ty's out. 2 x 2GB 30.99 after mail in rebate, free shipping. |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al plants Corn I have these right now. Will they be sufficient for what I'm doing? |
2
Quote:
I think those G.Skill 800 kits can reach about 930; at least thats what they get to from my own experience. Of course there are no OC guarantees.
Originally Posted by -n7- 9x400 = 3600 MHz. You can do that at your RAM's rated specs. I'm sure your G.Skill will at least DDR2-900, which means in no way will it be holding back your overclock. |
Quote:
No not of the CPU speed, but rather the FSB speed. It is the clock speed for which the CPU speed (using the CPU multiplier) and ram speed (using the memory divider) are based on. So a 400 FSB with a x9 multi puts the CPU at 3.6GHz. Then running a 3:4 divider (4/3 = 1.33) with the 400 FSB gives you 533MHz, which in DDR2 speeds (533 x 2) is 1066.
Originally Posted by Al plants Corn So the point to RAM speed is to have it be a multiple of your CPU MHz? Does it have to be this way or is it to just make things "more efficient"? |
Quote:
At 1;1 the NB cant run as tight a tRD which has a huge impact on ram performance. For example, If I run 1:1 at 468 FSB (DDR2 936), I can not set my tRD any lower then 10. This gets me a latency (using Everest) of 63.9ns. But when I run 5:6, I can run tRD of 7 and get latency of 52.9ns. So running 1:1 doesnt net me the best performance at all.
As for the 1066 kits, they tend to run Cas5 up to a respectable 1080 - 1100. IDK what kind of performance gain if any you qwould get running 1150 Cas6. I just dont think it is worth it at that point.
Originally Posted by t_russell You can run it synchronously in a 1:1 Ratio which technically the most efficient or you can run it Asynchronously at some other divider for a higher speed. As the speeds are increased you have to loosen the timings(which slows thing down) to achieve stability. It is all a testing game. Trying different settings to find out which works best for you. Most people run their RAM with a mild OC but keep the timings as close to stock as possible. |
As for the 1066 kits, they tend to run Cas5 up to a respectable 1080 - 1100. IDK what kind of performance gain if any you qwould get running 1150 Cas6. I just dont think it is worth it at that point.
Quote:
Sorry, when you said 1:1 was most efficient, I assumed that would imply it meant better performance in that context. I only want the readers to understand that 1:1 does not give the best performance since many seem to think so from other posts they have read.
Originally Posted by t_russell I didn't say it would. I said it was in sync with the system clock and therefore technically more efficient. Best performance rarely comes from most efficient. |
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
