Low Multiplyer/FSB increase vs Increase Multiplyer/FSB Lower

Just want a clean fight on this topic because everyone tells me Lowering Multiplyer and increasing FSB and VCore is better than slightly increasing FSB and maxing out the Multiplyer and not touching the Vcore

Maybe you arent understanding what people are trying to say or maybe I am not understanding you. Lowering the CPU multiplier and the RAM speed (100,133,166,200) while maxing out your FSB tells you what is the MAX FSB your mobo will support. Lets say it's 278mhz.

Then you run your RAM speed at a 1 to 1 ratio with your FSB and it will tell you what your MAX RAM speed is. Lets say it's 242mhz.

Then you restore your stock CPU setting to whatever it is (lets say it is 10) and you get 2.42Ghz. If it is not stable then you would have to either lower the mutiplier or up the voltage. Am I right CHIPDEATH?

If we take your question at face value (meaning either method results in the same clockspeed), then no, it will not always yield the best results. Why? If you run your RAM at super high clock speeds to match your FSB, you will most likely have to loosen your timings and your command rate. You may find you have fast RAM that just doesnt perform better than slower RAM with better timings.

If you are trying to encode video, I would take higher speeds over tighter RAM timings. If you are gaming then go for super tight timing. But that is just my opinion. Others will most likely take tighter timings no matter what I imagine.

It just does not seem like the original question was answered!

So, is it better to run a high FSB lets say 400 and lower multiplier like 7 or a lower FSB like 300 and higher multiplier like 9?

Both will give me around 27-2800 but which is better direction to go?

Or is it all about the memory that you have?

I have a e6600 and I guess it ran at a FSB of 266 and multiplier of 9, so based on that it seems like a lower FSB and higher multiplier is default (stock voltages).


Thanks,
Macpeteo