Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Dual Channel memory vs. clock speed?

Last response: in Overclocking
Share
Anonymous
a b } Memory
a b K Overclocking
October 19, 2004 2:32:43 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

On my Shutte AN35N Ultra I can oc my 2100+ to 2.17 (217x10) with my 2 sticks
(256 each) of pc3200 ram in single-channel mode.

However, in dual channel mode, it gets unstable past 200 and the highest I
can get is 200x10.5.

My question is, which is better: 2170 w/single channel memory, or 2100
w/dual-channel memory?
Anonymous
a b } Memory
a b K Overclocking
October 19, 2004 2:32:44 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

come on you have to know that 70 MHz you wont see performance increase its
only common sense to use the dual channel.
"Key-Bored" <f@home.com> wrote in message
news:fwXcd.82657$Ot3.23850@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> On my Shutte AN35N Ultra I can oc my 2100+ to 2.17 (217x10) with my 2
> sticks (256 each) of pc3200 ram in single-channel mode.
>
> However, in dual channel mode, it gets unstable past 200 and the highest I
> can get is 200x10.5.
>
> My question is, which is better: 2170 w/single channel memory, or 2100
> w/dual-channel memory?
>
Anonymous
a b } Memory
a b K Overclocking
October 19, 2004 2:51:07 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"Key-Bored" <f@home.com> writes:
>On my Shutte AN35N Ultra I can oc my 2100+ to 2.17 (217x10) with my 2 sticks
>(256 each) of pc3200 ram in single-channel mode.

>However, in dual channel mode, it gets unstable past 200 and the highest I
>can get is 200x10.5.

>My question is, which is better: 2170 w/single channel memory, or 2100
>w/dual-channel memory?

Most folks with typical applications seem to see well under 10% gain with
dual channel memory, maybe somewhere between 5 and 7% seems typical.

Most folks who don't have some sort of stopwatch to measure the difference,
or who don't put two systems side by side so they can visually subtract the
two times, will likely never notice any gain less than 30%, and only be
able to notice something that small for a very short period of time.

If you don't believe that it would be easy for someone to set up a carefully
controlled experiment to test whether you can dependable detect <30%. Let
you look at the system, send you outside, toss a coin to either speed it up
or not, bring you back in an hour and ask you to look at it and decide.
Repeat that a few times and you will probably have a lot less appreciation
for the people who are going crazy to get an extra 4% out of their system.

In one case I actually had a user who did not notice a 90% increase in
speed, when they were not given any hints that this was what they were
supposed to be looking for, but that was likely a special case.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b } Memory
a b K Overclocking
October 19, 2004 2:51:08 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"Don Taylor" <dont@agora.rdrop.com> wrote
> Most folks who don't have some sort of stopwatch to measure the
> difference,
> or who don't put two systems side by side so they can visually subtract
> the
> two times, will likely never notice any gain less than 30%, and only be
> able to notice something that small for a very short period of time.

I agree for regular apps.

In gaming, it could help a borderline performing simulation alot.

--
Ed Light

Smiley :-/
MS Smiley :-\

Send spam to the FTC at
uce@ftc.gov
Thanks, robots.
October 19, 2004 6:27:18 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Try a web search for modified BIOS for the AN35N. This sounds like a timing
issue with the memory controller in dual channel mode. There might be some
one out there that has a modified BIOS for this MB that will allow you to OC
in dual channel mode and possibly go a little higher than 217 provided that
your memory and processor will allow it.

"Key-Bored" <f@home.com> wrote in message
news:fwXcd.82657$Ot3.23850@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> On my Shutte AN35N Ultra I can oc my 2100+ to 2.17 (217x10) with my 2
> sticks (256 each) of pc3200 ram in single-channel mode.
>
> However, in dual channel mode, it gets unstable past 200 and the highest I
> can get is 200x10.5.
>
> My question is, which is better: 2170 w/single channel memory, or 2100
> w/dual-channel memory?
>
October 20, 2004 10:09:37 AM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

"homeboi" <softwarez198410@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aVYcd.1756$7N5.13593@news1.mts.net...
> come on you have to know that 70 MHz you wont see performance increase its
> only common sense to use the dual channel.

Bad advice. First of all its 170MHz, not 70. Which is an 8.5% speed
improvement. There's no way dual channel gives an 8.5% speed improvement,
so go with the higher FSB and forget dual channel.

Chip

> "Key-Bored" <f@home.com> wrote in message
> news:fwXcd.82657$Ot3.23850@twister.nyc.rr.com...
>> On my Shutte AN35N Ultra I can oc my 2100+ to 2.17 (217x10) with my 2
>> sticks (256 each) of pc3200 ram in single-channel mode.
>>
>> However, in dual channel mode, it gets unstable past 200 and the highest
>> I can get is 200x10.5.
>>
>> My question is, which is better: 2170 w/single channel memory, or 2100
>> w/dual-channel memory?
>>
>
>
October 20, 2004 12:37:22 PM

Archived from groups: alt.comp.hardware.overclocking.amd (More info?)

Depends on the app/game. I'd go for the dual channel so you could run your
CPU a little cooler as well.
--


"I don't cheat to survive. I cheat to LIVE!!"
- Alceryes

"Key-Bored" <f@home.com> wrote in message
news:fwXcd.82657$Ot3.23850@twister.nyc.rr.com...
> On my Shutte AN35N Ultra I can oc my 2100+ to 2.17 (217x10) with my 2
> sticks (256 each) of pc3200 ram in single-channel mode.
>
> However, in dual channel mode, it gets unstable past 200 and the highest I
> can get is 200x10.5.
>
> My question is, which is better: 2170 w/single channel memory, or 2100
> w/dual-channel memory?
>
!