Opinion - Memory Specs (performance wise)

Hi, what's your opinion of the following memory specs?

Model: Veritech DDR2 800
Dram: 400MHz
CAS LAT: 5.0 clocks
RAS to CAS DELAY: 5 clocks
CYCLE TIME: 16 clocks

Is it poor, or medium performance wise?

The reason asked is although PC runs well, the ram is the lowest in regards to "Vista performance tool".

All the other hardware performance is higher rated ie. E4500, 7600GT, WD SATA HD, etc.

4 answers Last reply
More about opinion memory specs performance wise
  1. That's fine IMO. (in case of no OC)

    You're running E4500, that's 2.2GHz with FSB800 (am I right?). So you're running at 2:1 here (DRAM to FSB). Which is OK. There's no point in upgrading to higher speed (let's say 1066) at the moment.

    How much do you get in those performance rating?
  2. Vista performance rating is 4.8 which is rated by the lowest rating item of hardware, ie memory "in my case". (all hardware at stock - no OC).

    My memory question was in regard to timings - mainly.

    I mean u can get faster ram in DDR2 800.

    Just wondered if a higher spec ram (still DDR2 800 but with faster timings), would do any improvement,

    although no improvement is required as games, eg. GRAW run great with details set at max with no OCing involved.

    These E4500's and 7600GT's are great :)
  3. The WEI tool in Vista is a general guide, rather than a serious benchmark. It measures total throughput for each subsystem, rather than the speed of any single component. Not a bad approach from a "Total System Performance" point of view, but as anyone can tell at a glance it's far from anything you could consider precise.

    As I inferred: In the case of memory, the score you are seeing is a measure of how much data flows through that entire subsystem. Tighter timings would help some, sure. But from that 'total throughput' point of view your Front Side Buss speeds are going to have much more influence over this score than the clock/timings of your DIMMS. For Example, a 400 (1600 Mhz) FSB and DDR2 800 at 1:1 will max the score at 5.9. While running even 1066 RAM on a 266 (1066) FSB will get you a score in the high 4's~low 5's.

    In the general sense, though, your setup is fine. Though the retentive types would try to tighten the timings some.
  4. Agree with scotteq here .. :)

    Well, IMO tighter timings (lower latency / higher spec) RAM will help increasing performance, esp. if you're doing some really memory intensive applications like image/video editing. But in case of normal gaming, I don't think you'll notice the difference.

    Personally I don't care with those Vista rating :) My laptop got overall performance score 3.0 (due to it's NVIDIA Go6150 onboard graphic), and my friend's got score 4.3 (w/ Intel onboard X3xxx). But in actual performance, my laptop performs better (w/ better response feeling) than his.
Ask a new question

Read More

Memory DRAM Performance