Under-clocking vs. Using motherboard speed

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
A

andipet

Reputable
Feb 12, 2016
4
0
4,510
Hi,
I have a motherboard that supports 1333 MHz. Which is more efficient: using under-clocked 1600 MHz modules or looking for 1333 MHz ones?

I will be using the system for scientific simulations--not necessarily graphically intensive but rather for number-crunching.

System details:
HP Z400 with Xeon W3580 Quad

Thanks a lot in advance!
 
Solution
Tradesman1
Either/or....whichever would be the sticks that run at 1333 with the best timings - i.e. if you have 1333/9 and 1600/9 then you could run the 1600 DRAM at 1333/8 normally which would provide an ever so slight performance boost - however if the 1600 is CL11, chances are it would run 1333 at CL10 which would be worse than the true 1333 sticks at their CL9 - the differences will be negligible
Sort by date Sort by votes
Tradesman1

Tradesman1

Legenda in Aeternum
Jun 5, 2013
67,883
40
126,960
Either/or....whichever would be the sticks that run at 1333 with the best timings - i.e. if you have 1333/9 and 1600/9 then you could run the 1600 DRAM at 1333/8 normally which would provide an ever so slight performance boost - however if the 1600 is CL11, chances are it would run 1333 at CL10 which would be worse than the true 1333 sticks at their CL9 - the differences will be negligible
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
A

andipet

Reputable
Feb 12, 2016
4
0
4,510


Thanks for your reply. It clarifies the problem. So I could go equally with something like GSkill Ripjaws 1333 or 1600 CL9. The latter are a bit cheaper on Amazon so I'm leaning toward those.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
A

andipet

Reputable
Feb 12, 2016
4
0
4,510


Cool! Bookmarked! -Thanks.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom