Ram and CPU overclockabilty - Page 2 - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Overclocking and Modding
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 08-17-2005, 11:04 PM   #11 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 77
Default

Well with the money that I will be saving on the ram I think that I should be able to get the 3200. I guess I will just have to wait and see how the money situation pans out. Thanks.
__________________

__________________
3200+ Venice @ 2.7
Patriot 1GB (2 x 512MB) @ DDR490 3-4-3-8
DFI LANPARTY UT nF4 Ultra-D
eVGA Geforce 6800GT @ 450/1.17
Antec TruePower 2.0 TRUECONTROL II-550w
rcr9521 is offline  
Old 08-17-2005, 11:13 PM   #12 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

hell I was almost wanting to sell my 3200 so I could get a 3000 in hopes that it OC'd better lol.....that's what memory dividers are for after all

Put your CPU up at 340HTT or something and have your memory divider so it does still wind up at 260 or whatever divider options you have gives you.
__________________

Nubius is offline  
Old 08-17-2005, 11:37 PM   #13 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
idiotec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,748
Default

I guess that's true, 1:1 really isn't that important with AMD? I know I have read that it isn't, but I have a hard time believing it

If you really don't loose performance using dividers, then yeah, I guess it doesn't matter :bald:
__________________

BE HEARD - Techonvent
DS3 | E6400 - 3.2GHz 24/7 | 2GB OCZ PLat. PC6400 | 6800GT | Zippy 460W
What the world needs is more geniuses with humility, there are so few of us left.
idiotec is offline  
Old 08-18-2005, 12:04 AM   #14 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 1,946
Default

Ya it seems that 3000 is the weakest link in your system, but i guess you can oc it, and upgrade in a year; everything else is kickass, but to save you some money:

Heres a cheaper priced but aewsome/quiet case:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16811129154

Oh and i really like this mouse as most gamers do and its 20$ cheaper.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16826104151

So if you did that you could get a 3200, or reconfigure again and get the 3700 sandiego would be sweet.

Oh you may want to get a larger hard drive, or add another later.
__________________
LIAN LI PC-7B PLUS II
OCZ MODSTREAM 520W
P4 3.2
2GB KINGSTON
EVGA 6800GS PCI-E
ASUS P5GD1
WD CAVIAR X2
LG DVD BURNER X2
vaderpro is offline  
Old 08-18-2005, 03:12 PM   #15 (permalink)
Junior Techie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 77
Default

Vaderpro thanx for the suggestions with the case and mouse. I think that I might go with that mouse because I have also heard good things about it. That case looks pretty sweet too. However, I was planning on mounting my heater core on the bottom of the case and with it being divided like that it would require a little more modding to get good airflow.

I have a 250gb hard drive in my current computer that I will be putting in the new one.

Well I think that I might go with the 3200+ just so I will have the extra multiplier in case I will need to use it.

And I always thought that it was the best to have a 1:1 ratio. Is this not true with the 64 cpus or does it not make a noticeable difference?

Nubius I will be willing to take that 3200 off your hands if you are trying to get rid of it. What do you say $50 sound pretty good?
__________________
3200+ Venice @ 2.7
Patriot 1GB (2 x 512MB) @ DDR490 3-4-3-8
DFI LANPARTY UT nF4 Ultra-D
eVGA Geforce 6800GT @ 450/1.17
Antec TruePower 2.0 TRUECONTROL II-550w
rcr9521 is offline  
Old 08-18-2005, 08:10 PM   #16 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

Quote:
Nubius I will be willing to take that 3200 off your hands if you are trying to get rid of it. What do you say $50 sound pretty good?
Ehh, no, it's a $200 CPU....technically $190 now since it's been out a few months, but the 3000 venice is $150 so why would I sell a 3200 for $50? Beyond that, I don't think I'm going to go through the hassle of getting the 3000...I had thought about it, about a month ago, but I think now I'm going to try and sell my 6800GT to a friend here in town and cut my losses, get the PCI-E version and get the Ultra-D board instead of this DFI NF3 board that sucks.

vaderpro - the 3000 isn't a 'weak link' in his system...it would be if he left it at stock but I assume being that the thread says 'ram and cpu OCability' that he's going to OC it.

Rcr and Idiotec - No 1:1 isnt important to some degree...it's important if you're down at stock PC3200 levels, and it was of course more important for the K7 generation of AMD processors but not so much anymore.

Suppose you get the 3000 and stock it's 200x9 = 1.8GHz....aright, now lets suppose your RAM OC's up to DDR540 speeds...270MHz....Now lets suppose you know your CPU can hit 2.7GHz (this is all hypothetical of course, just follow along for a bit) well 270x9 is only 2.430GHz....

this is where the 1:1 isn't important...you use a divider so you can get your HTT up to where it needs to be for your CPU to be running 2.7GHz...in this case it'd need to be 300....So you'd need to set your HTT to 300 for 300x9 = 2.7GHz, then you'd need a memory divider so that it only runs the memory at 270MHz and not 300...

Don't get me wrong...of COURSE if you could run both the RAM and CPU at 300MHz that'd be nice...but it's not so much because you NEED to run it at that, but rather you'd get a helluva lot more memory bandwidth at 300MHz over 270MHz obviously....but when the system is running up at that high 1:1 isn't important as both your CPU and RAM are running incredibly fast and efficient as it is.



With the older K7 boards maxing out at 400FSB then it'd be a serious bottleneck to say...have a 400FSB CPU but only putting in PC2700 RAM...it'd just be killing your CPU...but in a scenario with the CPU running 300HTT with an overall speed of 2.7GHz and your RAM running at DDR540 it doesn't hurt it one bit.
Nubius is offline  
Old 08-18-2005, 08:55 PM   #17 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
idiotec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,748
Default

Quote:
Suppose you get the 3000 and stock it's 200x9 = 1.8GHz....aright, now lets suppose your RAM OC's up to DDR540 speeds...270MHz....Now lets suppose you know your CPU can hit 2.7GHz (this is all hypothetical of course, just follow along for a bit) well 270x9 is only 2.430GHz....

this is where the 1:1 isn't important...you use a divider so you can get your HTT up to where it needs to be for your CPU to be running 2.7GHz...in this case it'd need to be 300....So you'd need to set your HTT to 300 for 300x9 = 2.7GHz, then you'd need a memory divider so that it only runs the memory at 270MHz and not 300...
So, with the A64, considering your same scenrio, if you had the x10 multi, you could go 270x10 1:1 and have both RAM and CPU maxed. If that was the case, would there be a performance difference at 270x10 1:1 over 300x9 using a divider to get RAM to 270? Or is the difference in performance just so small it really doesn't matter?

I know the 1:1 get's emphasized more on Intel, is this due to the lack of onboard memory controller?
__________________

BE HEARD - Techonvent
DS3 | E6400 - 3.2GHz 24/7 | 2GB OCZ PLat. PC6400 | 6800GT | Zippy 460W
What the world needs is more geniuses with humility, there are so few of us left.
idiotec is offline  
Old 08-19-2005, 07:12 PM   #18 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Nubius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,600
Default

Quote:
So, with the A64, considering your same scenrio, if you had the x10 multi, you could go 270x10 1:1 and have both RAM and CPU maxed. If that was the case, would there be a performance difference at 270x10 1:1 over 300x9 using a divider to get RAM to 270? Or is the difference in performance just so small it really doesn't matter?
Well....another factor would be the Link speed multiplier that gives the board it's overall bus...if you had it at 270 then you would use a link speed multi of 3x.

270x3 = 810 x 2 = 1620 (His board would naturally be a 2000HTT board...with 270 as you can see it'd be 1620...which wouldn't be a huge drop in performance or anything like that, I'm just pointing some things out)

Now if he was using 300...he'd also be using a link speed multi of 3x, so 300x3 = 900 x 2 = 1800 overall HTT...so 'technically' the 300 with a memory divider would perform better than the 270 at 1:1, however in terms of actual noticeable performance...I don't believe you'd ever notice it...maybe, MAYBE within some benchmarking programs, but even then I believe it's rather miniscule to the point that there'd be no point in even considering it a 'gain in performance'

Quote:
I know the 1:1 get's emphasized more on Intel, is this due to the lack of onboard memory controller?
I'd say that's probably the best assumption...the way the intel memory works is closer to the AMD K7 (AMD-XP) generation....of course at that time the Intel was much better than the K7 because it had a lot more memory bandwidth, but they still utilize the memory controller in the chipset which is currently why they are lacking behind AMD in terms of memory controllers and memory bandwidth (IMO)

AMD did a damn fine job of integrating that memory controller as it made a substantial increase in memory bandwidth and as you've also noticed, allowed the focus of 1:1 being a necessity to decrease.
__________________

Nubius 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 09:00 PM.


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