For a ultimate gaming rig... DDR2 800 or not?

[Unikfreak]

Ok, I'm thinking about getting the Kingston HyperX DDR2 800MHZ but I was reading another thread on the forum about games and it seems that 667 will be just fine. So should I put the money on the 800 or save and get 667. Games will be my #1 thing on my computer.

Thanks!

 

[Mondoman]

Hard to tell w/o knowing the details of your system. Please list brand & model name/number for every component, especially CPU, MB, gfx board.

 

[Crashman]

Corsair 5400C4 overclocks to 800, so you get both...

 

[Unikfreak]

Hard to tell w/o knowing the details of your system. Please list brand & model name/number for every component, especially CPU, MB, gfx board.

Soon to be

Conroe E6700
ASUS P5B Deluxe Wifi (might change it)
eVGA 7950GX2
4 gig ??? ram
2 Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 320Gig RAID 0
1 WD Raptor 150Gig (system drive)

And the rest is quite irrelevant for the memory question .

 

[deathbybubba]

Ok, I'm thinking about getting the Kingston HyperX DDR2 800MHZ but I was reading another thread on the forum about games and it seems that 667 will be just fine. So should I put the money on the 800 or save and get 667. Games will be my #1 thing on my computer.

Thanks!

I read something about needing expensive ram for a conroe system somewhere and it was a resounding no. Sure having it will increase your benchmark scores but when it comes down to gaming you won't see the performance edge. They also said that 667 is the worst speed because you can't make it run synchroniously with the fsb. 533 did better in games then the 667 stuff and 800 took the crown in benchmarks because of the extra bandwidth. Can't remember where I read it I think mayby wusy posted it.

 

[ED3]

Hmmm, I asked this same question about a week ago and I still haven't got any replies, got a bunch of views. Any advice on how to get my posts responded to?

 

[fredgiblet]

If you have an Athlon 64 X2 then buy the 800 (CAS 4 if you can afford it, CAS 3 if you are super rich)

If you are using P4 or C2D then check your FSB and buy the same speed as your FSB and buy the lowest CAS you can afford.

 

[bigsby]

If you have an Athlon 64 X2 then buy the 800 (CAS 4 if you can afford it, CAS 3 if you are super rich)

If you are using P4 or C2D then check your FSB and buy the same speed as your FSB and buy the lowest CAS you can afford.

What he said.

Also, you don't need 4 gigs of ram. Getting 2 gig sticks, they are slower, and getting 4 1gig sticks, you have to bring it to 2t timings often. 2 gigs is enough for games these days.

 

[deathbybubba]

If you have an Athlon 64 X2 then buy the 800 (CAS 4 if you can afford it, CAS 3 if you are super rich)

If you are using P4 or C2D then check your FSB and buy the same speed as your FSB and buy the lowest CAS you can afford.

yes, but just because it say fsb 1066 doesn't mean it's running 1066. It is quad pumped so you are actually running fsb of 267. If you plan on ocing. Over clock your fsb to 400 and get ddr2 800 ram (remember double data rate) and make sure it's dual channel (that will make it effectivly match your fsb) in short

stock
mobo runs 267 quad pumped to 1066
ram runs 267 ddr makes it 533, dual channel make 1066

oc
mobo at 400 quad pumped to 1600
ram at 400 ddr 800 dual channle 1600

that is how it was explained to me so don't quote me on that

 

[rwpritchett]

I read something about needing expensive ram for a conroe system somewhere and it was a resounding no. Sure having it will increase your benchmark scores but when it comes down to gaming you won't see the performance edge. They also said that 667 is the worst speed because you can't make it run synchroniously with the fsb. 533 did better in games then the 667 stuff and 800 took the crown in benchmarks because of the extra bandwidth. Can't remember where I read it I think mayby wusy posted it.

Here ya go bubba:

Intel Core 2: Is high speed memory worth its price?

You're welcome

 

[atomicplayer]

about the post of Deathbybubba (he didnt want us to quote him)

If you have your fsb at 267, yes your ram runs at 533 but it not 1066 if its in dual channel. Dual channel only "double" the bandwidth to 128 bits. We could say it feels like 1066 mhz, but in fact its still 533.

and you dont have to overclock to use ddr2 667, 800, 1066, etc. You can apply a ratio (cpu:ram of 4:5, 2:3, 1:2 respectively and all of that can be choosed in the bios and should not be confounded with 5:4, 3:2 and 2:1 which slow the memory down instead)

 

[Unikfreak]

Finish reading the review that rwpritchett posted as a link and that line along struck me the most...

So it doesn’t matter much what memory speed/timings you buy, the value line will suit the Intel Core 2 system just fine, but do keep one thing in mind, as in our testing we found performance actually decreases a bit going from PC4200 (533) to PC5300 (667)

8O wow... I mean, wow. Getting cheaper memory (533 vs 800) will get me better overall performances?!?? Anyway, I wasn't thinking about playing games below 1600x1200 with full AA, full AF on, etc so I guess it's true. Memory isn't worth paying 600$ since the GPU does most of the work.

 

[rwpritchett]

Now hold on there, the bandwidth that you get from 800 outweighs the disadvantages of running asychronous with the FSB and therefore results in better memory performance than 533 running synchronous.

The real lesson here is that intel chips don't absolutely need super fast memory like AMD. It's nice to have, but you won't notice a big difference. If you're on a budget, go with 533 but if you can afford it go with 800.

 

[derek2006]

about the post of Deathbybubba (he didnt want us to quote him)

If you have your fsb at 267, yes your ram runs at 533 but it not 1066 if its in dual channel. Dual channel only "double" the bandwidth to 128 bits. We could say it feels like 1066 mhz, but in fact its still 533.

With 128 bits it sends the data 2 times faster. On 64 bits it would take 2 clock cycles to send the same info. So with dual channel it is 1066mhz effective.

 

[deathbybubba]

yes, the extra bandwidth helps with performance. The latencies didn't, so having that 600 dollor ram that run at 800 with a cas 3 isn't going to perform in real apps (no benchies here) better then those with a cas 5 costing around 200 or less.

 

[atomicplayer]

about the post of Deathbybubba (he didnt want us to quote him)

If you have your fsb at 267, yes your ram runs at 533 but it not 1066 if its in dual channel. Dual channel only "double" the bandwidth to 128 bits. We could say it feels like 1066 mhz, but in fact its still 533.

With 128 bits it sends the data 2 times faster. On 64 bits it would take 2 clock cycles to send the same info. So with dual channel it is 1066mhz effective.

you can see it like that but, a mhz has nothing to do with 64, 128, 256 bits, etc... In fact, you gain ~30% in performance with dual channel, because data is transfered in 128 bits. But it doesnt make the signal faster, its still 533 000 000 pulses/second.

 

[derek2006]

In theory you are supposed to have 2x the bandwidth. But ya in the real world you will get like 30% or less.

 

[doordand]

Corsair XMS2 DDR28500. 1066MHz. Nuf' said.

 

[atomicplayer]

now you talk about real ram !

and not only you get 1066 mhz, but also the disadvantage of being asynchronous is less than with ddr2 667 or 800, because a ratio of 1:2 is applied, which is faster to calculate for the memory controller than 4:5 and 2:3

 

[Unikfreak]

Corsair XMS2 DDR28500. 1066MHz. Nuf' said.

I really might get 4 gig of 1066MHz.

Like I've stated, right now, it's on paper. I'll be changing my entire computer soon but I try to get all the info I can. But I won't be doing major upgrades after that, this is why I want a computer that will become mid-range in 2-3 years (meaning 2/3 games won't play smoothly... lol)

So any input I can get is really appreciated (to everyone in this and other threads I've done!)

 

[drider]

been extensively researching all available pro reviews/mags/sites for new high end build of my own, for the last 5 weeks.

Consensis is:
Sweet spot for amount of memory for recent/current games on a high end rig (assuming mem matched to other rig params) is just now moving from 1 Gb up to 2 Gb. For instance, 2 vs 1 is really noticeable in Oblivion, probably in Prey (per review writers, and one geek pal who is doing a lot of Oblivion).

However, 4 Gb is a waste for gaming for now. The perf bottlenecks for next 2+ years will not be main mem if you've alrady got 2 Gb.

So save yourself ~250 bucks, put a 1 Gb stick in each of 2 slots. In 2 years, if you need it, you can fill the other 2 slots for ~$150 (less if you can find some reliable used).

Put an Accelo on your VGA instead.

drider

 

[atomicplayer]

thats right, 2 gig is perfect for a new rig. and you will still stay with empty slots for further upgrades.