Was I right to lower my DDR frequency to get better FBS/DRAM ratio?

[rrosai]

I needed a software overclocking solution because I wanted to continue using my Asus SixEngine for its power saving/under-clocking features, and changing the bios settings disabled SixEngine. I really have no interest in rebooting my PC every time I want play a game or do some processor-intensive task.

After lots of dead ends, I finally got Setfsb to work for me.

I can get my E7200 from the default of 226.7(x9.5) up to exactly 332.9. 333.3 gives me BSoD.

I noticed in CPU-Z that my FBS/DRAM was 2:3 and wondered if the reason Setfsb wouldn't let me go as high as my bios was was that for some reason it automatically raises the DDR along with the FBS.

So I figured that if I lowered my DDR Frequency in the bios (I lowered it from 800 to the next lowest, 709), it would decrease the needless stress on my ram since according to my ratio the CPU was a bottleneck. The ratio is now 3:4.

I was only able to OC a couple of mhz higher in setfsb, btw, but is my assumption that since I'm forced to needlessly overclock my RAM speed in Windows that I should preemptively underclock it in the BIOS correct?

If so, should I lower it one step further to get even closer to 1:1?

Thanks

 

[henydiah]

if you have ram that is resistant to heat and high
frequency and stable it's a good thing.

And yes there is one thing about overclocking with the
FSB and overclock the multiplier is different. if you
want a high-frequency have to loosen the timming,
because the increase in FSB will trigger an increase
in frequency of ram. and a lot of ram that can not
stand the high frequencies, in addition to requiring
by adding voltage also gets hotter. and usually
in benchmark score oc FSB againts multiplier
result is higher oc FSB.

 

[jsc]

In a Core2 system, running at 1:1 will give you the most stability.

See my comments here:
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/266486-11-higher

 

[rrosai]

Best answer selected by rrosai.