nuff ram?Post Date: 2007-11-24 |
Post Reply
|
| Author | |
Hump
Newbie
Joined: 02 Nov 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 18 |
Quote Reply
Topic: nuff ram?Posted: 24 Nov 2007 at 1:01am |
|
I was lucky enough to get a 245BW monitor yesterday. I have made most of my configs with the expectation of using my soon to be purchase on a 22" monitor. My question is will the 8800gt 512 be a good performing card/ enuff vram for my 24" monitor using 2gig 800mhz ram, 2.4 quad or should I step up to 2gig 1066 mhz ram? and maybe the 768 acs3 card? 512/ 2gig 800mhz vs. 768 acs3/2gig 1066mhzAlso, is there really that much improvement to warrant the cost to upgrade in these 2 areas?
Thanks
Hump
|
|
![]() |
|
skyR
Newbie
Digital Storm Apprentice
Joined: 08 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2220 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 Nov 2007 at 1:05am |
|
8800GT is good enough and you don't need faster ram unless you plan on overclocking. The performance difference between 800 and 1066 will be barely noticeable.
Edited by skyR - 24 Nov 2007 at 1:06am |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
Genero
Newbie
Joined: 09 Nov 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 18 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 Nov 2007 at 10:52am |
|
Does faster ram help with overclocking cpu or memory? Will it make a noticeable difference if overclocking cpu only?
Edited by Genero - 24 Nov 2007 at 11:24am |
|
|
Extreme TJ-09 Case
eVGA 680i A1 Rev Intel Q6600 @ 3.0 4GB DDR2 Corsair Dominator 1066MHz nVidia 8800GT 512MB SilverStone 750W PSU SB X-Fi Fatal1ty Vista Home Premium 64 bit |
|
![]() |
|
Tyler Lowe
Newbie
Joined: 14 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 0 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 Nov 2007 at 11:58am |
|
I'm not 100% sure I understand the first part of your question. RAM is system memory...
Faster RAM helps to run CPU overclocks to higher speeds. Even if you can't make use of the full speed of the RAM, which can be the case when using 4GB for instance, using something like 1200MHz RAM will allow you to reduce RAM latency by tightening the timings up at a lower than max rated speed.
|
|
![]() |
|
Gary
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29 Nov 2007 at 5:44pm |
|
After speaking with a rep yesterday, and reading this and the previous thread, I'm a little confused about RAM speeds and efficiency. What I thought I heard was that it was best to match FSB speed and RAM speed to avoid bottlenecks in processing. Am I close ?
|
|
![]() |
|
skyR
Newbie
Digital Storm Apprentice
Joined: 08 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 2220 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 29 Nov 2007 at 5:49pm |
|
Yes, it is best to have 1:1 with the ram speed and processor FSB.
The processor FSB is quad-pumped so a processor with a rated FSB of 1333MHz is actually 1333 / 4 = 333MHz and DDR2 is duo-pumped so the speed of 800MHz is actually 800 / 2 = 400MHz. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
Gary
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 29 Nov 2007 at 11:24pm |
|
Thanks skyR for the reply. I'm not very techincal, and the reason I'm asking is that I'm in the process of specing 2 computer systems, which at first I thought one would be a dual core processor and one a quad, but both might end up being quad. So concretely, if I chose to go with the Q6600 processor, which runs at a FSB of 1066, I think you're sort of saying that going with the 2 gig 1066 ram option is over kill. What would be the optimal ram speed ? If I understand your reply, the FSB on this processor is actually running each processor component at roughly 267. So the 667 dual channel RAM speed would break down to 333, and be more than enough ? Your opinion on this is very much appreciated.
Also, as long as I have your attention, I'm going to be in the area (about 10 miles away from your shop) on Friday, December 6. Can I stop in and discuss final specs and order my computers ? I'd still have them shipped back to my home or office.
Thanks, I more than appreciate the help.
|
|
![]() |
|
commast
Senior Member
Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 262 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Nov 2007 at 12:34am |
I have to disagree slightly with SkyR here. 1066 mhz is 1066 mhz regardless of how it get there. If you don't plan to OC or upgrade your CPU in the near future then go with the 800 mhz RAM, otherwise go with the 1066 mhz. 800 mhz DDR2 ram run at 200 mhz (800/4=200) 1066 mhz DDR2 ram run at 266 mhz (1066/4=266). DDR2 fetches 4 chunks of data off the module per cycle, it's akin to fetching a chunk of data from ram at 800 or 1066. 1066 mhz ram is rated for 8.5 GB/s, while 800 mhz ram is rated at 6.4GB/s. Edited by commast - 30 Nov 2007 at 12:35am |
|
![]() |
|
Gary
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Nov 2007 at 2:56pm |
|
Thanks commast. I'm still a little fuzzy on all this. I think I'll stop in and let the folks at DSO explain it to me with pictures and arrows and circles and such. Then I'll decide what exactly to order. I'm not at this point intending to OC the machines, nor upgrade them. I'm assuming that the configuration I choose will sufficiently attack any of the applications I will be using. Mostly large data sets, graphics and CAD. I know, I'm probably the only non-gamer here. But a reliable, fast, stable machine is what I need for work. It puts a roof over my head, food on the table, etc.
|
|
![]() |
|
commast
Senior Member
Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 262 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 30 Nov 2007 at 6:43pm |
You're not alone
|
|
![]() |
|
Tyler Lowe
Newbie
Joined: 14 May 2008 Online Status: Offline Posts: 0 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Dec 2007 at 12:48am |
|
I'm still working through RAM too. It gets pretty difficult to keep up with, at least for me.
Synchronous Dynamic RAM, if I follow along with the articles I've read, transfers information in bursts to the CPU's cache, and courtesy of being in synchronization with the CPU, the memory controller is able to do this without the CPU actually having to wait for that information to begin the next set of instructions.
Double Data Rate SDRAM allows for that, but adds the bonus of being able to send and recieve data at both the rising and falling edges of each clock cycle, so you get double the information exchange.
This is where they start to lose me. When we get to DDR2SDRAM. My understanding is that DDR2 is "multiplied" DDR, meaning that DDR2 RAM at 1066MHz is in reality 533MHz DDR with a 2 times multiplier. So this means that I am sending and recieving 2 pieces of information at both the rising edge and falling edge of each clock cycle for a total of 4 pieces of information each cycle. This is done in 64 bit chunks, right?
Ok, I *think* I have an idea of what is going on up to this point. Now for the $10k question... how is the memory's bandwidth calculated from here? I mean, I assume you need to know the size of the "chunks" of information transacted, and the speed at which this is happening (memory speed in MHz), and at some point, the latencies have to come into effect, since those timings represent clock cycles between access of rows and columns of memory banks within a RAM chip.
Soooo..... How do we arrive at a bandwidth of 6.8 GB/s using 800MHz DDR2?
And just to be a complete pain (mainly cause I'm good at that
Jeez my head is starting to hurt.
|
|
![]() |
|
commast
Senior Member
Joined: 11 Oct 2007 Online Status: Offline Posts: 262 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 01 Dec 2007 at 1:21am |
|
Tyler, now, i am getting a a headache too
Let say that at a Data rates of 1066 mhz the theoretical bandwidth is 8.5 GB/s right ? For the 800 mhz ram the bandwidth is 6.4GB/s right ? Now if we divide the data rates with the theoretical bandwidth (800 mhz/6.4GBps) you will have 125mhz per cycle. Same thing for 1066 mhz/8.5GBps. Don't ask me why 125 and not another number because i don't know
Edited by commast - 01 Dec 2007 at 3:16pm |
|
![]() |
|
Post Reply
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions ![]() You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You can vote in polls in this forum |