ddr2-667 vs ddr2-1066 real world difference

[taz23340]

HI all,

i've been reading up on the board for a few days and on the net to see the performance difference when upgrading memory and I do not seem to find an answer to my quetion.

first thing is I am building a somewhat budget pc with mild gamer/ multitasking database/ movie watching needs.

so far i have decided on

case-cm690

board-p5k-e asus

proc-e6750

dvdrw - sata samsung 20x

video card - 8800gt

hard drives- i have two sata 300 wd caviars already.

im looking power supply needs and memory

im going up from a 478 socket p4 3.4ht, 1 gig ddr400, 256mb 1600pro, abit vt7, build. i hated the board and the aopen case.

i find its getting slow playing games like far cry at max, nfs carbon, and so on.
i like to decrypt dvds and mp3s as i have 700 cds and 200 dvd's at home to put on pc.

my question for this section of the board, is memory. im understand that the 1:1 fsb:dram section of bios with a 1333 proc is for ddr2-667. and i can get ddr2 667 very cheap here in montreal.
However i can also get 2x1gb kit crucial ballistic pc8500 for 109$
how much of a difference will i notice running xp. I do want to be able to go to vista 64, wont go to vista 32, in the future.
now if i get two gb 667 and then two when its even cheaper when i get vista 64, what application will i notice a difference if i had gone to 1066?

i do want to overclock, as i know this proc can go to 3gig without a voltage upper. im just afraid to up voltage, with having to check the pci e voltage and all that, im a p***y when it comes to that, dont have the money to dish out another grand after i buy all this.


any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[BrutalDawg1]

if your not OC'ing at all = 667 is fine
if you are OC'ing get the 1066

 

[skittle]

Note that the samsung isnt the fastest dvd ripper around (mainly a firmware issue), but it is still the best dvd burner/cd ripper around.

 

[Hatman]

if your not OC'ing at all = 667 is fine
if you are OC'ing get the 1066

Cant see the logic behind that, mind explaining it?

Dont get 667, or 1066, 800 is so cheap now its a decent upgrade.

 

[taz23340]

well i do want to reply, but from what i see and understand, with a 1333 proc 1:1 will only need a fsb of 333 so 667 is needed.

if i go up to 400fsb i need ddr2 800 and that gives me a proc of 400*8 3.2 with a slight voltage, even though im iffy with upping voltage. havent touched that yet.

but i do have a zalman 7700 cpu cooler so i should be good.

now 1066 crucial ballistic is said to go up to fsb of 600 easily if i go 1:1 would that not be a very high cpu? 600 * 8 is like 4.8 dont think i could get that high.

now my question really is. if i go to 3.2 and stay 1:1 ill get 800, what benefit would i get if i changed the ratio and used 1066, will i really see any real life difference?

 

[boner]

hell yeah

 

[tlmck]

You would be wasting your money going beyond DDR2 800 for OC in IMO. If no overclock, 667 ram is fine.

 

[taz23340]

can you go in to detail for your "hell yeah" 2 or 3 fps is not a difference for me. real world,
also from the proc i have to either a 6750 or an amd 6000+, i would notice a huge difference no?

 

[zenmaster]

DDR2-667 will allow for a FSB of 333
DDR2-800 will allow for a FSB of 400
DDRs-1066 will allow for a FSB of 533

Memory Can be OC'd beyond their stated rates.
The degree to which they can varies from module to module.
If you are new at OCing, it may be best to get RAM rated close to the speed you want since that will be one less thing to worry about when OverClocking.

The E6750 by default runs @ 2.66Ghz with a FSB of 333.
To Increase the Speed of the CPU, you need to increase the FSB.

A FSB of 400 will get the CPU to 3.19 Ghz.
Normally This CPU can hit much higher.

A FSB of 450 will get a Speed of 3.59.
This is getting close to a reasonable OC.
Also, Many DDR2-800 Chips can hit this speed if you shop carefully.

A FSB of 500 will get a Speed of 3.99Ghz and hitting higher with the CPU will be quite difficult.

Any Higher FSB is definitely not recommeded unless you are a hard-core Overlocker. Even 500FSB is likely pushing it. The limit will likely be somewhere close to a 450FSB.

 

[zenmaster]

In summary, DDR2-800 is likely your best option.
DDR2-667 is not much cheaper than DDR2-800, but is much more limiting.

DDR2-1066 is likely far more than you will need.

 

[taz23340]

thanks for the explanation.
anyone know if the p35 would work when penryns are at 1600bus, 400 quad pumped?
would be cool if i could have the oportunity to go to a better proc with the same board and memory.

 

[jsc]

In summary, DDR2-800 is likely your best option.
DDR2-667 is not much cheaper than DDR2-800, but is much more limiting.

DDR2-1066 is likely far more than you will need.

zenmaster is right.

The advantage of faster memory is the lower timings it can use. Although ymmv, usually memory can be operated one speed bin higher (DDR2-667 to DDR2-800 or DDR2-800 to DDR2-1066) by increasing the memory voltage or timings.

How much difference do slower memory timings make? In my experience, not much - measureable only in benchmarks. The overall increase in system performance due to CPU OC'ing will more than compensate for the slightly lower memory performance.

An example (my system):
eVGA 680i motherboard
E6600
DDR2-1000 Crucial Ballistix (in hindsight, way over spec'd) operating at 2.1 volt

I easily reached 3.3 GHz (367 MHz FSB) with an AC Freezer 7 Pro. Default memory timing was 5-5-5-15-2T. I was able to get the memory timing down to a stable (24 hour Orthos run) 3-3-3-7-1T. Memory i/o increased 6%.

With a TR Ultra 120 Extreme (upgrading to C2Q soon), I reached 3.6 GHz. Had to increase the memory timing to 4-4-4-12-1T. Anything less was not quite stable. Orthos crashed at 4-4-4-10 after 18 hours.

I also tried 450 MHz with a CPU multiplier of 8. 4-4-4-12 still works. I pick up another 8% or so in mem i/o but my MCP temp jumps past 80 deg. C.

I figure that I probably couldn't run much lower that 3-3-3-6 at the stock 2.4 GHz. The FSB increase from 266 Mhz to 400 MHz more than compensate for the slightly slower memory timing. The 50% CPU OC is noticeable. The results of all the memory tinkering only shows up in benchmarks.


And I get a bit of satisfaction that I have a stable, highly optimized system with the components that I have