Tighter timings vs. Higher frequency?

835 Views 6 Replies 7 Participants Last post by xd_1771, Apr 7, 2011

gregory121295

Discussion Starter · Apr 6, 2011

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?

Save

1 - 7 of 7 Posts

2thAche

· #2 · Apr 6, 2011

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.

Save

ZixacunX

· #3 · Apr 6, 2011

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)

Save

dixson01974

· #4 · Apr 6, 2011

AMD likes low timing over speed.

Save

shajack

· #5 · Apr 7, 2011

Quote:

Originally Posted by dixson01974

AMD likes low timing over speed.

really..tahts good to know.im in the market for a couple myself

See less See more

Save

B NEGATIVE

· #6 · Apr 7, 2011

i have just found this out myself....hard to reach good timings with high ram clocks.

Save

xd_1771

· #7 · Apr 7, 2011

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.

Save

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.

Top Contributors this Month