1:1 FSB : Ram ratio. Is it necessary for Q9550?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar



no reason it shouldn't, unless of course they discontinue them and supplies run short... but i don;t see that happening for at least a year

the q9550 just went down like $200+ in the past week, ima wait for the q9650 to hit the poor price range before i change my e4500 =P
 
That's where I'm at with my Q6600. I want the 9x multiplier for the overclock, but not for $559.99.
 
Well yes and no... Nehalem is going with an on chip memory controller, that way they can significantly lower memory latencies. If you look at the test results from even two years ago, regarding AMD's memory latency, you will see they still have the edge in this, mostly because of the built in memory controller. I also believe it has helped AMD stay alive in the server segment,
even if their processors are slower clock for clock. Reason why is the massive amount of memory being accessed.

So to answer your question... Intel's new chip (Should)will have the best of both worlds, a fast chip with equally fast memory latency.
 
"Umm Vertigon, you don't need DDR3 to run the E8400. If your going to run it stock, DDR2 667 is all you really need."

C'mon now grimmy since when did I say you did need it?

People, people, people.....I am in no way promoting DDR3, I am simply stating that the industry has a convention, sure alot of it serves advertising purposes but that's what the newbies are use to. The last review I read that put DDR2 against DDR3 had DDR3 in front by less than 5%.

Aside from all that I hope you got your problem sorted out hohyss.
 


While this is true I think that Phenoms L2 cache is not as fast as Core 2s L2 cache.

Nehalem will have a faster L3 cache than Phenom and unless that has changed, than Deneb.

I think its going to get interesting in the next few months when Nehalem gets released.
 


Sportsfanboy's statement was correct, yet you seemed to misread or misunderstand it judging by your "huh" response.



Jimmy also misread or misunderstood Sportsfanboy's statement judging by his reply.



You again indicate that Sportsfanboy has made a mistake.



You then link DDR3 RAM as your reasoning, but DDR3 generally runs at 2:1, and not 1:1 which is what the OP was asking about. To run DDR3 1333 RAM in 1:1 you'd have to overclock the FSB to 667mhz which, without reducing the multiplier on the processor, would result in a 6ghz clock speed (and would probably melt your northbridge before you even got close).



 
^The OP never states weather its DDR2 or DDR3 RAM and considering that he was talking about DDR 6400 which is the code for DDR2 800 and DDR3 starts at DDR3 1066 I just stated that a 1:1 is optimal for stability.

I currently have my Q6600 on a 333MHz FSB quad firing makes it a 1333MHz FSB and DDR2 1066 running at 667MHz dual channel giving it a 1333MHz FSB for a 1:1 ratio with the CPU FSB. Thats all I stated.

Now yes its impossible to get a 100% 1:1 ratio but you can get close.
 
I run my Q6600 with the same exact settings you do, though my ram is natively DDR2 800 instead of 1066, but I still run at at 667.

Sorry if I misunderstood but when I was going through reading the posts it looked to me like you were disagreeing with Sportsfanboy's comment about nobody running DDR3 1333 at 1:1.
 


OOOOHHHHH.. okay.

What newbies are used to.

😗 . o O (what evah... ya lets tell the newbies to buy the expensive stuff)
 
"You then link DDR3 RAM as your reasoning"

What I find interesting about your post uguv is that you quoted my other posts, other than my last one, where I say ".I am in no way promoting DDR3, I am simply stating that the industry has a convention"

This is interesting because you made your post 55 minutes after I made my last one, did you not see my last post, or did you simply not want to see it? Perhaps you need to make yourself feel clever but misrepresenting someone else.

I find amusement in some posts, I don't know why people think being able to divide the fsb speed into the memory spec is equivelant to einstein's E=mc2, but they do and I find it funny. In a recent post by a guy complaining about his cpu, I said he might have a chicken mcnugget stuck between the core and the plate. Now did I really mean that? You be the judge.

The way jimmysmitty refers to 1:1 is the industry convention. This is how the entire market refers to the 1:1 spec. Sure if you want to be a purist you could suggest that nothing really runs faster than the FSB, but this would be stupid and a dismissal of technological development. Memory has bandwith, cpu's have multipliers which both tie into the FSB speed. DDR2 has double the data rate or should I say it transfers data not only when the memory clock goes from low to high, but also from high to low. Hence my earlier post:

"Sure along the way there are things known as multipliers, clock cycles and quad pumping etc. If we chose to be silly about we could say our E8400 is really at 333 Mhz, along with our RAM at 333 Mhz, but we don't do we? "

So for the next insecure person who needs to misinterperet someone, I am talking about INDUSTRY CONVENTION, not the merits of DDR3.

If you'd like to talk about the merits of RAM like tCL, tRRD and IC's, start another post rather than waffling about a mute point.
 
Eerrrm, just a point about what people refer to as being "expensive" is a little subjective and often out of context. If your pov and can barely afford to eat, sure computer gear is expensive. If your machine makes your very comfortable living for you, then even some of the higher end equipment can still seem a "bargain". Sure we can argue about Dollar Vs Performance, but some people actually love computing and know they are going to stick with their workstation for a while.

". o O (what evah... ya lets tell the newbies to buy the expensive stuff) "

Just so you know I don't sell computer hardware or software, so I have no agenda in telling people to buy higher end gear, I advise them to buy good gear, not gear just because it's expensive. Are you pov grimmy? Sorry if you are but I am always going to buy the best I can afford, that's cos I worked hard enough to get an education and a worthwhile skillset people pay good money for.
 
Ok, I'll bite... Vertigon, Half of your posts in this thread have either been condescending, or insulting, all the while you were the one not capable of understanding plain english.

The ops question was if 1:1 was necessary for optimal performance, while clearly stating he will be using ddr2 800 ram. I believe I accurately addressed that question, and what I didn't, Computronix did (a lot more elegantly than me I should add).

I also find it laughable that in your ultimate ignorance you can say that my multiplying of a few factors makes me feel like Einstein. The way I explained it was with numbers and letters to make a point, so the guy asking the question could understand.

Get a grip
 


Says the guy:



You know what... just don't talk to me anymore. Please.
 
Sportsfanboy in your very first post you said:

"For example, no one with ddr3 1333 ram , are running 1:1. You would need a fsb of 666mhz, just isn't achievable with today's hardware. I wouldn't worry about getting 1:1, if you do great, if not, don't worry about it."

You make me laugh sportsfanboy:

"if you do great, if not, don't worry about it." ...lol

Some of the best overclockers around can't get a FSB that high and your saying "if you do great, if not, don't worry about it." ?????????????? to hoyss who doesn't even understand how memory spec works?



Since when has anyone in the ENTIRE industry claimed to be running DDR3 with an FSB of 666 at a ratio of 1:1 ? If you can show one official link advertising this I will applaud you. The reason no one but you suggests this is because this isn't the convention hohyss is refering to. This isn't the convention industry uses when it it refers to a RAM/CPU ratio of 1:1, and that is EXACTLY what hohyss is trying to understand.

Jimmy's explanation is good enough, and he is right, no need for me to go through it again unless you want me to explain bandwith x bit rate blah blah.

"all the while you were the one not capable of understanding plain english"

I think your the one that doesn't understand english or industry convention:

"Guys, DDR2 800mhz requires a fsb of 400mhz to get 1:1!

DDR2 1000mhz requires a fsb of 500mhz to run 1:1!

DDR2 1200mhz requires a fsb of 600mhz to run 1:1!

DDR3 1333mhz requires a fsb of 666 to run 1:1!

So your saying this is what industry talks about when it refers to RAM/CPU ratio's as being 1:1??????? Is this what hohyss is asking you????????? Where have you seen those numbers advertised????????? Who do you know that runs DDR2 1200 with a 600Mhz FSB or DDR3 1333 with a FSB of 667????????? No one, no where, no how. So why don't you simply admit you didn't grasp the question and lets move on.
 
actually I said in simple words: don't worry about 1:1 ratio, if you achieve it, great if not don't worry. I was referring to the the 800mhz ram that he very clearly was talking about. You again are having problems with the english language.

I used 1333 ram as an example, simply to put him at ease, so he wouldn't think going "true 1:1" was necessary. Again you take things way out of context.

Listen you can run 1:1 slower than the ram's rated speed, again I already said that in a post targeted towards Grimmy. You either forgot or didn't understand.

You are also not capable of putting things into perspective... The op has a 333 bus, yes? The op has ddr2 800mhz ram yes? The goal of this thread was to explain 1:1 to the poor guy that has run for his life, as to maximize his performance with the hardware he has. Running 1:1 with down clocked ram isn't doing that, and in my opinion and a lot of the what you think are know it all's on this forum, believe as well, as not really 1:1 as the ram is not at it's rated speed.
 


Actually I didn't quote your last response because it was just an effort to cover for your lack of knowledge about the subject.

Perhaps English isn't your primary language but you seem to lack the ability to comprehend what you are reading. You scoff at Sportsfanboy but his posts have all been acurate.

While Jimmy's post was accurate, it didn't do anything to counter Sfb's statement.

Sportsfanboy in your very first post you said:

"For example, no one with ddr3 1333 ram , are running 1:1. You would need a fsb of 666mhz, just isn't achievable with today's hardware. I wouldn't worry about getting 1:1, if you do great, if not, don't worry about it."

You make me laugh sportsfanboy:

"if you do great, if not, don't worry about it." ...lol

Some of the best overclockers around can't get a FSB that high and your saying "if you do great, if not, don't worry about it." ?????????????? to hoyss who doesn't even understand how memory spec works?
Click to expand...

This further illustrates your problems with reading comprehension. Sfb obviously meant that if he couldn't run his DDR2 800 ram at 1:1 in his last sentence and was no longer referring to DDR3 1333. He used the ddr3 1333 example to show that people do not always run RAM at 1:1.
Finally...


What the hell is a "mute point"? Did you mean moot point?
 
Perhaps English isn't your primary language but you seem to lack the ability to comprehend what you are reading. You scoff at Sportsfanboy but his posts have all been acurate.

While Jimmy's post was accurate, it didn't do anything to counter Sfb's statement.

ahahahaha finally the penny has dropped for you uguv and you have some idea of what I am on about. First you were saying:

"Jimmy also misread or misunderstood Sportsfanboy's statement judging by his reply. "
and now your saying Jimmys post was accurate lol.

Your SO transparently ignorant Uguv. Let me hit you with it one last time:

Sportsfanboy's numbers are accurate, but irrelevant to the accepted industry convention.
Jimmy numbers and convention are BOTH accurate.

I think the penny has dropped for him too:

"The op has a 333 bus, yes? The op has ddr2 800mhz ram yes?" lol

So if your running in multiples of 333 sportsfanboy, why are you argueing with me? Glad you finally realised. So no need to talk about DDR3 1333Mhz on a 667 FSB.......bwahahahahaha
 

:lol: . o O ( :pt1cable: )

That was a good laugh. 😀
 
"Running 1:1 with down clocked ram isn't doing that, and in my opinion and a lot of the what you think are know it all's on this forum, believe as well, as not really 1:1 as the ram is not at it's rated speed. "

Honestly sportsfanboy, I read that last bit 3 times and still don't know what your saying, I wonder if anyone does lol.

Ok hoyss, sorry about all the pointless dribble, just crank your FSB to 400Mhz, overvolt the cpu and northbridge slightly and that should do it. If you get a gigbyte board they have a great dynamic oc utility called CIA2 which saves energy when cpu power isn't required.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom