RAM vs. Processor - Techist - Tech Forum

Go Back   Techist - Tech Forum > Computer Hardware > Overclocking and Modding
Click Here to Login
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 06-22-2005, 03:20 AM   #1 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 821
Default RAM vs. Processor

I know every part is essential when trying to get the very best results. However, what if you had to decide between these two options.

1) Processor running at 2.7 GHz with RAM running at 166 MHz.

2) Processor running at 2.2 GHz with RAM running at 200 MHz.

What is the better choice? I was just curious. If you had to pick one, what would give your system overall better performance? In one case, your processor is much faster than the other option, but your RAM lacks speed. However, in the other, your RAM will handle things fine, but your processor is slower.
__________________

__________________
AMD Athlon 64 3000+ socket 939 @ 2.3 GHz
MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum motherboard
EVGA GeForce 6800 GT
2 GB DDR 400 (PC 3200) (2 x 1 GB sticks) (Dual Channel)
DVD player and seperate DVD RW drive
Floppy Drive
80 GB Western Digital Hard Drive
500 watt power supply
Sound Blaster Audigy
Logitech 5.1 surround sound speakers
SAMSUNG SyncMaster 710T LCD monitor
Aspire X Navigator Case
Wayniac is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 04:16 AM   #2 (permalink)
Memberbot
 
Elbatrop1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,057
Default

I choose #1.

I was kinda intrigued by this question, so I started looking at the CPU charts on tomshardware. It turns out (from what I could tell) that the #1 combo gives slightly better performance.
__________________

__________________

Intel E6750...........PSN: ELBATROP
XFX nForce 650i Ultra
Patriot PC2-6400 8GB (4x2GB)
eVGA 9800GT
36GB WD Raptor
120GB SG
1TB SG
Logitech X-530
Samsung SyncMaster 931c
Samsung SyncMaster 750s
Windows 7 Home Premium 64
Elbatrop1 is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 04:49 AM   #3 (permalink)
Techie Beyond Description
 
Apokalipse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 14,559
Default

I would go for #1, lower the multiplier and raise the FSB/HTT so the RAM runs at 200 and the CPU stays at 2.7GHZ, or goes even higher if it will run stably
__________________
Apokalipse is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 05:27 AM   #4 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
aj2003's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,094
Default

it depends realy on wat the fsb of the cpu is. if the 2.7 has a fsb of 266 (which i doubt) that ram willsuit it fine, but if its higher than that the cpu will constantly be waiting for the ram to catch up therefore lowering its speed. Its the opposite for #2 because unless its a amd 64 it wont be running at a fsb/hht of 200. So your ram is always waiting for ur cpu ie making it less effective.
__________________
AMD x2 5000+ black edition at 3.3GHZ zalman cnps 9700-NT
Gigabyte GA-M57SLI-S4 motherboard
3072mb: OCZ ddr800 gold
2x 7800GTX in SLI for 20" viewsonic
OCZ 600watt power supply
www.angelic-accessories.co.uk - plug for my gfs site
aj2003 is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 06:24 AM   #5 (permalink)
True Techie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 162
Send a message via AIM to Nissanspecv04
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by aj2003
it depends realy on wat the fsb of the cpu is. if the 2.7 has a fsb of 266 (which i doubt) that ram willsuit it fine, but if its higher than that the cpu will constantly be waiting for the ram to catch up therefore lowering its speed. Its the opposite for #2 because unless its a amd 64 it wont be running at a fsb/hht of 200. So your ram is always waiting for ur cpu ie making it less effective.
good point, not thinking that deep into it I would jsut say number one
Nissanspecv04 is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 07:26 AM   #6 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,006
Default

Depends. Is it Intel? AMD? AMD 64? AMD XP? This stuff matters. If it were intel, I would choose more bandwitth. With AMD 64, I would go for more clock speeds.
Hacp is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 01:16 PM   #7 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 821
Default

Ah... I like all of the answers. I don't even remember what I was looking at anymore, but this question popped into my head, and it kind of caught me. I was thinking maybe number 1, but I just wasn't sure. It seems like a tough call to me. Either way, one is kinda waiting on the other, right? But then again, if you buy a processor at that speed and RAM at that speed, it shouldn't really be waiting. Like, if I bought a 3500+ and DDR400 RAM, then option two would work great. If I bought something with a stock speed of 2.7 GHz and DDR333 RAM, then would it run as great?

I think this type of question can be very tricky.
__________________
AMD Athlon 64 3000+ socket 939 @ 2.3 GHz
MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum motherboard
EVGA GeForce 6800 GT
2 GB DDR 400 (PC 3200) (2 x 1 GB sticks) (Dual Channel)
DVD player and seperate DVD RW drive
Floppy Drive
80 GB Western Digital Hard Drive
500 watt power supply
Sound Blaster Audigy
Logitech 5.1 surround sound speakers
SAMSUNG SyncMaster 710T LCD monitor
Aspire X Navigator Case
Wayniac is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 04:34 PM   #8 (permalink)
Monster Techie
 
majistic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,434
Default

That is a good question. I wouldn't go back to anything less than PC3200.
__________________
majistic is offline  
Old 06-22-2005, 05:02 PM   #9 (permalink)
Super Techie
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 420
Send a message via AIM to silence782
Default

Am I the only one that would choose number 2?
__________________
Still weak, I know, but getting better:
CPU: AMD AthlonXP 2500+
1.8GHz @ 333 FSB
512 DDR 2700
160 GB westerndigital hd
Dual booted with XP/Fedora Core 5
PCchips M848A mobo
nVIDIA GeForce MX 4000 video Card
Associate\'s Degree in Applied Computer Sciences.
A+ Certified for Hardware and Operating Systems. Network+ Certified
silence782 is offline  
Old 06-23-2005, 06:04 AM   #10 (permalink)
Ultra Techie
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 670
Default

if it was 2.3 instead of 2.2 i would go number 2. but eh... either way, i think a clock speed (if we're talking about an AMD here, hypothetically of course (multi of 16 anyone? )) increase of 500mhz would be noticably faster than 34Mhz on FSB :think: but hey, like apokalipse said, i would just go 2.7Ghz and clock it to from 166 to 200 problem solved
__________________

__________________
<img src=\"http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c62/HAVOC2k5/Sempron_Userbar.png\">
Raekwon 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 01:35 PM.


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