Low Latency, the lie... - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Overclocking and Modding
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 11-13-2004, 11:13 PM   #1 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 582
Default Low Latency, the lie...

after reading this new edition of pcworld i had put off for a while i read an article in it about low latency rams and the benefits there-of...

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,118372,00.asp

what bull, on average 2% increase and at max 4-5% in games... for a major jack in prices... anyone care to refute this? i dont mind being proven wrong in any way, is this all true? if so then im pissed at manufacturers even wasting time/money on making this stuff and charging us for it.
__________________

__________________

The World is my trashcan and i intend to fill it...
Leonidas is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 12:18 AM   #2 (permalink)
Wizard Techie
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,543
Default

I am honestly happy with ValueRam from Kingston, no major performance diffs with my friends computers who use higher grade memory.
__________________

__________________
15'' Macbook Pro
Intel Core 2 Duo 2.16ghz
x1600 128MB
1GB DDR2 SDRAM
Windows XP/Mac OSX 10.5


No longer a Guru of games...
GameGURU is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 12:52 AM   #3 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

I've been saying this for a long time now. The timings are only in nanoseconds so the difference between 3-3-3-8 and 2-3-2-6 can't even be noticed by humans. But it's not only that, but a lot more engineering is spent into designing those sticks to absolute quality whereas the valueram is more put together under basic standards. So you're paying for low latencies, the name, and the fact that more architecturally sound design has gone into it.
Nubius is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 12:56 AM   #4 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 582
Default

well i see it like this, if you can RMA the ram if its broken or breaks in normal operation then its all good
__________________

The World is my trashcan and i intend to fill it...
Leonidas is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 01:17 AM   #5 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

yeah but you can't continually RMA it if it breaks down. That article kinda brutalizes low latency RAM, but the last sentence is true. If you don't know what CAS is you don't need it generally. The high performance RAM is better served for overclocking purposes....so it's basically for those people. You will definitely get a better performance and higher OC with performance RAM than you will valueRAM.
Nubius is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 01:20 AM   #6 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 582
Default

well i can understand being as to overclock ram you lower timings or lose stability... but truthfully if i move my 2.5 down to 3.0 to up my FSB for overclocking i will gain more than i lose correct?
__________________

The World is my trashcan and i intend to fill it...
Leonidas is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 09:02 AM   #7 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,046
Send a message via AIM to 4W4K3
Default

i can tell the difference between 2-2-2-5 and 2.5-2-2-5 on my system...in more ways that one. Bootup time is slowed, Programs load slower, even benchmarks are affected. Makes a big difference for my system. Generally though you don't buy the RAM for the timings...that's just all you see. You bay the extra $75 because not only do those RAM chips run 2-2-2-5, they also overclock higher, have a greater bandwidth, run cooler. Value Ram is indeed fine for most users, and running looser timings won't make a difference if you're not really conserned about it...but i guarantee you it won't get 250+mhz with decent timings, and if it did it would take 3.#v and it would fry. I don't pay for the latency of the chips, that's just a side dish...i pay for overclockability and quality of the actual chips.
__________________
<marquee scrollamount=\"1\" scrolldelay=\"8\" direction=\"up\" width=\"400\" height=\"65\" style=\"font-family: Verdana; font-size: 8pt\">
Compaq Presario V5000 laptop
¯\\(º_o)/¯</marquee>
4W4K3 is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 11:48 AM   #8 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 582
Default

i dont see how it can improve bandwidth 4w4k3... and unless they have a heatsink attached i dont see how lower latency will run uniformly cooler... would you care to explain?

i still think the benefits are mostly in the head of the guy that dropped the extra 40-50 bucks and got his low latency...


also i ran some informal benchmarks on my comp running from 2-2.5-3.0 latency timings in 3dmark2001se... it increased roughly 100 marks each time, for an increase in performance of just about 1% between each latency time jump.
__________________

The World is my trashcan and i intend to fill it...
Leonidas is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 05:27 PM   #9 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,046
Send a message via AIM to 4W4K3
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Leonidas
i dont see how it can improve bandwidth 4w4k3... and unless they have a heatsink attached i dont see how lower latency will run uniformly cooler... would you care to explain?


You've obviously never heard of OCZ EB (enhanced bandwidth) then. Ram of lower latency usually runs on a lower stock voltage...usually.

Quote:
Originally posted by Leonidas also i ran some informal benchmarks on my comp running from 2-2.5-3.0 latency timings in 3dmark2001se... it increased roughly 100 marks each time, for an increase in performance of just about 1% between each latency time jump.
if you base your memory on 1 benchmark, then it really doesn't matter. and if you dont think 1% increase is worth an extra $40...then by all means stick with value RAM. it's your opinion, and a money saving one at that. but i prefer low latency high overclocking RAM over $40...which is my opinion. not trying to bash you.
__________________
<marquee scrollamount=\"1\" scrolldelay=\"8\" direction=\"up\" width=\"400\" height=\"65\" style=\"font-family: Verdana; font-size: 8pt\">
Compaq Presario V5000 laptop
¯\\(º_o)/¯</marquee>
4W4K3 is offline  
Old 11-14-2004, 07:44 PM   #10 (permalink)
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 559
Default

I also can tell the difference between slow timings and aggressive timings. Yeah it's only in nano-seconds.. However, if you are making thousands of memory calls all the time, those nano-seconds add up. Those nano-seconds are for each cycle, so the lower the nano-seconds the faster it will be for any program that aggressively uses the system memory.
__________________

ChaosBlizzard is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off




Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.