What's more important, Timings or Frequncy?

[therock003]

When considering buying quality RAM what is of greter priority? Lower timings i.e. lower than 9-9-9-9 or extra frequenct, i.e. greater than 1600? From what would you benefit more, and increase overall performance and productivity?

Cause having both frequency above 1600 and timings lower than 9-9-9-9 is not an option. Unless not so far.

 

[aford10]

If you've got the bios to tweak the RAM, it's better to get the higher speed. You could manually lower the timings.

However, if the bios is limited, go for the lower timings. Chances are, if the bios is limited, the board isn't very high quality, which means the cpu/video card are probably of lower quality. The higher speed RAM is pointless then.

 

[therock003]

So it's more difficult to oc the speed than the timings? Well i havent purchased the mobo yet, but it's either going to be the asus rampage 2 extreme or the p6t6 workstation revolution, which both are top of the line i guess.

IS RAM tweaking a board issue? Sorry for my question but i'm new at all this.

 

[eagles453809]

go for the higher frequency...

 

[aford10]

The higher end boards usually come with more options in the bios. So I guess you could call it a board issue. Both of those boards should have the full gamut of options. Both are quality boards.

Those boards require DDR3. This would be my choice.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226030

 

[therock003]

I already got a 1600 Kit in mind,although with 9-9-9-9 timings, but you both suggested higher frequency and then manually handle the lower timings.

Your link is for 1600 but with lower timings. Isnt higher frequency what's preferred?

 

[hundredislandsboy]

In my experiece from Aquamark and 3DMark benchmarks, you'll get more of a spped increase with higher frequency than tighter timings, for example 667 at 4-4-4-12 is slower than 1066 at 6-6-6-18. Even if I leave my e8400 on stock to run 333 quad pumped to 1333 and match it 1:1 FSB ratio by lowering the RAM to 667 but with tighter timings, I'll get higher scores if set the RAM to run at 888 Mhz or higher with looser timings. But I notice there's also a sweet spot that if I push my RAM too high I miss the sweet spot and my bandwidth scores go lower although I'm talking less than half a percent. For example, on PCWizard I get better memory benchmark scores on 9 multiplier X 450 (RAM runs 900 MHz) than I do at 8 x 500 when RAM runs at 1000 Mhz. The higher the speed the more the resistance and you start to get diminishing performance.

If your current RAM and motherboard allows you to try experimenting by tweaking the RAM speed and timings, you'll see what I mean.

 

[therock003]

Does the same principles of what you're saying apply to DDR-3 memory as well?

 

[jsc]

It does, pretty much. However, you can fritter away a lot of time trying to optimize your memory timings.

 

[aford10]

DDR2 had more range of frequency's. Since the boards support DDR3, it narrows down the frequency options. I think the ones listed above are the best combination of high frequency, low timings, and acceptable price.

 

[therock003]

One more thing. Is the frequency listed the stock frequency ore the one that can be achieved via overclocking? For example if i ge these and install them on my computer will they start working ASAP at the frequency and timings listed? Or will it start working at some basic frequency waiting to be overclocked to reach the 1600?

 

[aford10]

If the native speed on the board and memory are both 1600, it SHOULD hit the ground running at 1600. However, it doesn't always happen. When you decide on your hardware and get it built, you can run cpuz to find out what it is running at.

Some boards do allow for an OC'd RAM speed above the native speed.

 

[knotknut]

A link for you:

http://www.thetechrepository.com/showthread.php?t=160