Ram for i7 920 Rampage Extreme Mobo Tri Sli GTX275's OCed

[Mpyra]

So title pretty much says it all, i also need some PSU recommendations.

I hope to overclock the i7 920 to 4 ghz and i'm not sure about the gtx's yet.

Thanks

 

[saint19]

How much? What budget? What speed?

 

[Mpyra]

How much? What budget? What speed?

I only really care about Crysis Warhead performance right now, i am leading to believe that ram does not make much difference, but as i want to overclock my GPU's and CPU, I'm not sure if Ram would effect these processes or not.

So the minimum i cna get away with and no have performance compromised.

 

[saint19]

If you want the best, get this

This is a very good options price/performance and in OC are very good.

Or this if you want OC your RAM to the max.

 

[Mpyra]

If you want the best, get this

This is a very good options price/performance and in OC are very good.

Or this if you want OC your RAM to the max.

I had recently read that the Core i7 downclocks ram to 1066 as this is the max frequency it can deal with, is that false then?

Thanks.

 

[saint19]

50/50.

The i7-920 is DDR3 800/1066, but that doesn't mean that your RAM don't run at 1333 or 1600.

 

[chefboyeb]

You should get this
http://www.ewiz.com/detail.php?name=WB200UX6G8&title=Super-Talent-Chrome-Series-DDR3-2000-6GB-3x2GB-CL8-Triple-Channel-Memory-Kit
You can never go wrong with them... They're the best single investment i've made this year second only to my rack of ssds that i got for my raid setups... Low latency at high speeds at stock voltage means even lower ones at reduced speeds... And since you're looking for better timing, which is what i got from your post, this ones wouldnt disappoint...
On my rig, I have the I7-920 overclocked stablely at 4.34ghz and this memory at 1683mhz @ 6-6-6-16... @1600mhz even, it does 6-5-6-14 with a breeze... It doesn't get better than that.... Ciao!

 

[Mpyra]

Okay guys let me be a little more clear, i am building a machine for gaming, particularily Crysis, going by these benchmarks:

There is no difference between 3 GB in 32-bit and 3 or 6 GB in 64-bit, except that in 32-bit at 1980x1200(my res is 1980x1080) the 3GB outperformed the 6 GB.

Now, i may still go 64-bit because of this:

"There seems to be some confusion as to the limit in XP, but if memory serves me right this is how it goes.

Every piece of hardware attached to your computer uses part of the address space (32 bits wide in this case), the reason video cards are so famous is because they are the largest subscribers. Windows XP cannot use RAM that is not addressable after all the hardware have been assigned addresses which is the reason it varies.
That means a 1 GB video card takes 1GB out of the address space, not available RAM. The misconception may come from the fact that most video drivers reserve space for transfering data to the video cards in system RAM, and therefor may make it unaddressable to other applications."

If he saying what i think he's saying, then my suing 3x280's(for example) is going to use up 3 GB of the 3.5 GB that is addressable in windows 32-bit.

Could that then create a bottleneck on the entire system?

The might run well off of the 3 GB video ram, but then with only 500mb of system ram backing it up?

Could create a bottleneck?

 

[Mpyra]

This guys take on not needing ram that's faster than 1066MHZ is pretty good:

I have been saying this here forever:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/265249-30-help-needed-mobo-combo
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/263505-30-gigabyte-ex58-decreasing-problem
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/263598-30-ddr3-1600mhz-ex58-ud4p
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/264746-30-p55m-build-issues
Not only does Intel officially only support 1066 for the tri-channel 1366s:
SLBEQ 3.33 GHz I7-975 D0
SLBCJ 3.20 GHz I7-965 C0
SLBEU 3.20 GHz I7-960 D0
SLBEN 3.06 GHz I7-950 D0
SLBCK 2.93 GHz I7-940 C0
SLBCH 2.66 GHz I7-920 C0
SLBEJ 2.66 GHz I7-920 D0
and 1333 for the dual-channel 1366s:
SLBJG 2.93 GHz I7-870 B1
SLBJJ 2.80 GHz I7-860 N/A
SLBLC 2.66 GHz I5-750 B1
but, there appears to be no real advantage to running the memory faster:
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-scaling-i7,2325-5.html
it just:
uses more power
makes your memory hotter and more 'stressed'
makes your CPU hotter and more 'stressed'
makes it harder to achieve long-term stability...

If you are interested in the Intel docs, I've zipped 'em up here:
http://www.mediafire.com/?yzj5ggmyt4g

The only thing that appears to matter to these platforms is latency - and you pay for that, buying the RAM; here's a little tool that I've been working on:
http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/7632/0137b.jpg
It 'looks at' the listed latency at whatever claimed speed, converts it to 'likely latency' at 1066 in the 'adjusted' columns, and then, in the LV (latency value) column, 'weights' the average latency for 'bang for the buck'; notice that the entire 'spread' of average latency is 4.2 counts, and the median value, 8.1 is already reached by the fourth item, the $140 F3-12800CL8T-6GBRM - at that point you are paying $15 more (12%) to get to half the available range, but to get to the other half, the price differential rises to more than double the cost of the base entry (a whopping 108% increase!)

But i don't quite understand his chart...

 

[Mpyra]

 

[Mpyra]

Here is another interesting review:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-speed-tests,1807-8.html

There's a whole bunch of games tested, for some reason the DDR2 wins followed by the same two sets of 1333 and 1066 DDR3 ram.

What are those numbers by the side, i mean i think i know they are ram timings, but what exactly is that exactly?

 

[Mpyra]

Another review demonstrating ram mhz makes little or no difference on ram speed compared to timings:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/memory-scaling-i7,2325-7.html

 

[chefboyeb]

Your charts are pretty old, cos there's been advancements since... Yep... Timing makes a big difference, but keep in mind also that ram with high speed and low latencies, can be underclocked at very low latencies to seriously outperform some supposedly low speed ram also... Like i have ddr3 2000mhz @ 8-8-8-24 underclock at 1600 @ 6-5-5-14, better latency than 90% of ddr3 1600mhz or 1333mhz on shelves today...

 

[Mpyra]

Your charts are pretty old, cos there's been advancements since... Yep... Timing makes a big difference, but keep in mind also that ram with high speed and low latencies, can be underclocked at very low latencies to seriously outperform some supposedly low speed ram also... Like i have ddr3 2000mhz @ 8-8-8-24 underclock at 1600 @ 6-5-5-14, better latency than 90% of ddr3 1600mhz or 1333mhz on shelves today...

Wow, thanks i did not know that.

I have been thinking about getting some of this RAM:

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270534480851&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT

It's 1600 MHZ and CAS 8, although the other timings are not listed, i might assume that they are 8-8-8-24 as that seems to be the most common timings for CAS 8.

Do you think i could under clock this ram to get better timings on an Asus Rampage II Extreme motherboard?

Thanks.

 

[chefboyeb]

I'd gladly approve of a 1600 mhz cas 7, for better timing sake... The only cas 8 memory I'd do would be 2000 mhz cas 8, nothing more...