RAM Q: return the 6400 i ordered & get 9200 instead?

[pepperg]

i am putting together a gaming rig, and want to future proof it as best as possible so it'll last as long as it can before i need to switch out any parts. so, to that end, here's yet another question about my soon to arrive components...

i ordered the following RAM: CORSAIR XMS2 2GB (2 x 1GB) 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 (PC2 6400) Dual Channel Kit Desktop Memory Model TWIN2X2048-6400

apparently, the EVGA 122-CK-NF68-AR LGA 775 NVIDIA nForce 680i SLI ATX Intel Motherboard & Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 2.4GHz LGA 775 Processor Model BX80557E6600 are both really receptive to overclocking, and someone whose opinion is pretty informed gave me the following feedback:


"would have bumped up the RAM to 8500 or 9200. Then spin the CPU up to where it should run at 2.8 with 8500 and 3.0 with the 9200.

The 8500 or 9200 will benitift you if you like to OC. It allows you to overclock with plenty of head room for the RAM to run. Example 6400 runs at stock speeds of 200 mhz. Which is the default setting. The 9200 can run at 200 but is made to run at 250 to 300 (milage veries on which brand, voltage and timings) Anyway you can OC the 6600 to speeds of 2.8 to 3.0 and the RAM will just be starting to performe. 6400 RAM will only allow you a 215 OC then you need to loosen the timings and it becomes unstable. So all that said "if" you are going to be OCing "spin" the CPU up to its potential then you will need RAM that will get it there."

so i am wondering if it would be worth my while to return the RAM i did order (not even arrived yet) and get 9200 RAM so i can overclock more effectively in the future. also wondering what kind of price increase i'd be looking at.

thanks!

 

[John_C]

I gave you my opinion in your other post, but the key is to understand the timing ratios and the bang you can expect to get for your buck at various ratios. While overclockers often like to squeeze that last little bit of performance of our every portion of the system, be aware that many of the memory tweaks that receive a lot of attention here result in performance gains in the single digits in % terms.

 

[misry]

Your friends feedback was an opinion. I've been lead to understand from posters more informed about tweeking the Intel platform than I that 667Mhz RAM, (What is that, 5700?), is the way to go and you mess with the multiplier.

My RAM is 6400 and my clock is at 250. I'm running at 4-3-3-8 1T. So I think you might want to take his advise with a grain of salt.

 

[pepperg]

so in other words, it isn't really that big a deal?

i will end up oc'ing the system, probably when it needs it in a few years time to help me squeeze out additional fps in current games at that point. so, if his advice is accurate as far as the 8500 or 9200 RAM being better for me then at that point for OC'ing, i might consider it. if this RAM is significantly more expensive though, i probably won't change what i have got.

 

[Valtiel]

DDR2-800 will get you to 400 Mhz FSB (but depending on the model you would probably be able to overclock it higher)
current highest FSB at stock is 266
an E6600 at 400 FSB would run at 3.6Ghz which is quite high (50% overclock)
I don't think a whole lot of people make it to 3.6Ghz with an e6600 but they get really close (3.4-3.5 depending on some other factors) and then even if you did make it to 3.6 or beyond you could overclock your RAM and it would be fine.

In short DDR2-800 would be fine. CL4 if you want to be safe.