Overclock.net banner

Tighter timings vs. Higher frequency?

835 Views 6 Replies 7 Participants Last post by  xd_1771
I realize this idea has been gone over several times, but in my case, it might be a little different. I'm planning on buying this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16820231444) ram, because it runs 1600 MHz at cl6. Would it run faster at 2000mhz with timings near 7-10-8-27 (someone else's timings at 2133 MHz on an i7[I'm planning to run a 1090t]) or at 1600 MHz with timings of 6-8-6-24?
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Seems like I just read the same thread.

There is a large DDR3 comparison using different games/benches and running different brands of high-speed RAM from 1333-2000+ (each set at different speeds from low to high) that found 1600-1800 to be the best performance. I dunno if it was because of latency but 1800+ actually lost framerates in comparison. If I can find it again I'll post a link.
Even with my 1600 cas9 ram by changing to 1333 with cas7 i got improvements in framerates in vid games such as crysis and sc2

(i have 1090t)

Originally Posted by dixson01974
View Post

AMD likes low timing over speed.

really..tahts good to know.im in the market for a couple myself
See less See more
Tighter timings can often match or exceed the bandwidth/latency results of RAM at higher speeds (and higher timings) on AMD platforms; this is not the same for Intel, which responds more to speed increase.
  • Rep+
Reactions: 1
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.