Okay, been digging around and seen several mentions made to the madshrimps article/review on the intel C2D not being as tied to ddr2 speeds as amd's. In a nutshell, its bench mark tests showed that either synergies of speed worked (pc4200) or pure power (pc6400). The gist was since pc4200 ddr2 equaled 1066mhz, and since a c2d running at std. 266 fsb = 1064, they were synergistic. Thus, pc4200 ran better than pc5300, since pc 5300 was asychrnous. However, pc 6400 ran better than all simply b/c is was fast as all get up, even beign asychronus. the article is here so as to give proper credit and allow all to see their methodology.
So, my question is if I plan on oc'ng at a "mild" (but I hope stable) fsb of 333 on an e6600 (not sure of mobo I'll buy), then this means 1332mhz, thus pc 5300 (667x2) should equal 1334mhz, or be in sync as madshrimps suggests is key.
Is this good logic or dumb? Anyone with experience? Would I thus be able to a few bucks and get good perofrmance? I've got half of my build ready, need to decide on mobo, cpu (likely e6600) and memory.
any insights appreciated.
curt j.
So, my question is if I plan on oc'ng at a "mild" (but I hope stable) fsb of 333 on an e6600 (not sure of mobo I'll buy), then this means 1332mhz, thus pc 5300 (667x2) should equal 1334mhz, or be in sync as madshrimps suggests is key.
Is this good logic or dumb? Anyone with experience? Would I thus be able to a few bucks and get good perofrmance? I've got half of my build ready, need to decide on mobo, cpu (likely e6600) and memory.
any insights appreciated.
curt j.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram