Name: LeBabouin Date: October 27, 2006 at 04:40:52 Pacific Subject: 800 MHz ram with a 2 X 2.66 GHz cpu OS: XP Pro SP2 CPU/Ram: Core2 E6700 / 2GB Model/Manufacturer: n/a
Comment:
Hi!
I bought a pair of twin ddr2 800 for my not yet oc'd Core2 E6700.
Later, I learnt I wouldn't get any advantage using a 800 MHz ram with a 2 X 2.66 GHz cpu and should run ram at 2 X 2.66 => 533 MHz.
Also I got high demanding games crashes when setting ram at highest speed in Bios, so I lowered the frequency at a the nearest lower speed.
But now I can read in this forum that only Core2 could take advantage of ddr2 800.
Could you please help me to understand this contradiction?
Thanks.
Asus P5W DHDeluxe RAID 0 Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 2GB DDR2 Twin2X 800MHz nVidia GeForce 7900 GTX GigaByte 3D Aurora case
What is the bus speed of your E6700? 1066MHz, correct? Which means the actual CPU bus speed is 266MHz. That means that your RAM should be at least DDR2-533 running at 266MHz. If you're gonna overclock, you'll need RAM that's capable of higher speeds than 266MHz...& you have it!
In other words what they are saying is you used the wrong type of ram to overclock.
DDR 800 is the correct type of ram for the Core 2 Duo in terms of memory bandith, but the overclocking that you wanted to do you should have bought DDR2 1066, because DDR2 1066 can go way beyond the 400mhz barrier of the DDR2 800 ram speed to a maxium speed of 533mhz which gives you plenty of room to overclock your ram.
No cpy made in the last year or earlyer is odd to overclock period. Well.. uless its a server pc or a meddia center one.. But thast about it! Even if he wont need the extra speed, running a faster cpu is always good if it is stable.
"PC manufacturers like Falcon have gotten them up to 3.4GHz w/ no vcore increase."
Actually the highest stable clock speed for a e6700 is 4.013 GhZ.
I think you may be confusing yourself with those DDR/DDR2 speeds ;-)
It is true the Core 2 technology sees a greater benefit from memory running synchronously with the Front Side Bus (FSB) - unlike the previous Pentium 4 and Pentium D design.
Consequently, for the Conroe CPUs with FSB of 1066 MT/s, the ideal memory speed is PC2-4200/PC2-4300. In some configurations, using PC2-5300 can actually decrease performance. Only when going to PC2-6400 is there a significant performance increase. While expensive DDR2 memory models with tighter timings do improve performance, the difference in real world games and applications is negligible.
Now unless the OPs post is somehow cryptic, I assume his possessing DDR2 800 memory as him having PC2-6400 sticks, this will still allow him to exploit the OC potential of his Conroe or even DDR2-900 (PC7200), afterall he's not going to end up using the lowest multiplier to attain the best overclock speed possible. In other words he wouldn't really need DDR2-1066 (PC8500) when it all said and done.
Well the post was direct to extremem overclocking, because people now of days will try to push those core 2 Duos 800mhz or higher faster then the standard settings. All the overclocking sites i've seen will take an E6300 and use DDR2 1066 and overclock the hell out of them.
"No cpy made in the last year or earlier is odd to overclock period. Well.. uless its a server pc or a meddia center one.. But thast about it!"
And what is so spectacular about literally the millions of chips within the last year or earlier that makes the desktop versions better overclockers than the server or media center variants - aren't they supposedly made from same oval silicon wafer?
If anything the server versions are better overclockers, because the are selected from the best cuts derived from a wafer, example being the Opterons using AMD as a case point.
"Even if he wont need the extra speed, running a faster cpu is always good if it is stable."
Again the individual chips are cut from the same wafer and the cost of the wafer is the same whether a chipmaker gets six chips or 60 chips from that batch, so maximizing yield potential is the key here and sometimes throttling a CPU stock multiplier a notch to drop say 266MHz, in order reduce the price and generate way more sales is an essential strategy to the CPU business.
To break that down the performance margin of a relevant example like the E6600 is not as big as the price difference between the two.
You can easily notice that the performance derivative disparity between the two CPUs is only 11%, but the price difference is almost 65%. May you'll now understand my point from earlier.
"All the overclocking sites i've seen will take an E6300 and use DDR2 1066 and overclock the hell out of them."
I agree, but between you and me - tell me honestly if you'd rather buy a cheapie E6300 and spend a ton on watercooling just to get barely what an E6600 will give you on air. Now you don't have answer that :-)
"And what is so spectacular about literally the millions of chips within the last year or earlier that makes the desktop versions better overclockers than the server or media center variants - aren't they supposedly made from same oval silicon wafer?
If anything the server versions are better overclockers, because the are selected from the best cuts derived from a wafer, example being the Opterons using AMD as a case point."
Lol... Look at your calindar an see when dual core cpus were invented bud... What makes them better to overclok is that with a .1GhZ oc you actually get .2 With .4GhZ oc like in my 4400x2, I en up getting nearly a GhZ of extra delicious speed. And if you thinck overcloking server pcs is good, your not using good reasuoning ^^
I really shouldn't be arguing with you because it's glaringly very unfair - not only do you know next to nothing about the subject at hand, you also seem to have a dificult time getting anything across.
You dont have to be a genious to understand very simple facts... On the other hand, you have to be pretty stupid not to undertand them :/ Fact #1 Dual core cpus were first available to the public in october 2005, a little over a year ago. Fact #2 New computer have dual core cpus Fact#3 Dual core cpus get more out of overclocking Fact #4 Sever computers should not be overclocked because... Well do I really need to explain?
P.S glaringly really isnt an impressive word incase you are wondering ^^
Well.. That prooves 2 things: -The only thing you have against me is spelling, simply because im almost always in a hurry -And you can not connect facts to actually make an argument. I never said I was a genious, I said you dont have to be one to figure out that overclocking server pcs is the stupidest thing you can possibly do.
Quit acting like you know more than you do because you don't, OK! And here is an excerpt from a thread you posted barely one week ago.
you: "...its kind of you to explain how the whole world works for me.."
jam: "I touched on a few possible issues, but you obviously don't wanna comment on them. A few weeks ago, you were totally clueless about overclocking. A couple of us in the O/C forum tried to help you out...now all of a sudden you're an expert?"
While I don't need to say more and I won't, it is in your best interest on the other hand to exercise your miranda rights ;-)
Ouch thats weak :/ Using jam as a shield :/ I wont comment on his post simply because he is a GENIUS. I made that post over a month ago, and overclocking really isnt that hard to learn even in such a short period of time.. I just wish you would stop avoiding the fact that you made an incredibly reatrded statement about how servers pcs should be overckloked...
"Dual core cpus were first available to the public in October 2005, a little over a year ago."
Wrong. Dual cores came out to the public in mid June of 2005. I still have my old newegg conformation copy that I printed out and saved and it says and I quote (June 28th @ 2:40pm in 2005.)
Here is some advices don’t debate Sabertooth the guy has a lot more experience then you do. So instead of debating him why don’t you learn from him, because right now he is just toying with you. If he really wanted to burry you he could do it with one post when it comes to pc hardware. Remember the old saying “Don’t poke a bear with a stick.”? Well you are doing just that when you are debating Sabertooth on a subject that he is far more knowledgeable about then you are. So instead of debating him learn from him, that’s how you become more knowledgeable in subjects by learning from people that have done it for years.
lol... what an amusing forum this is ^^ all you bring up are his and my reputation, and yet you have no fats to fight me with. I was off by 3 month on x2 release dates.. but is that really an error? Not like I read that form the internet, it comon knowlage to know when dual core cpus were first available.. Facts dont change no matter what you say about me or "sabertooth ^^" What am I going to learn from him? A day ago he told me to go overclok a server computer ^^ I wont post here anymore, maybe jsut have a read once in a while.. If you think saber has even midiocre knwlage of computer technology, you are crazy. There are some very well informed people on this forum, like for example jam.. He answers evey question you sk him correctly.. When he is not sure, he says im not sure. Pretty cool intelligent dude. Some others are pretty cool too. Saber is not. He is worng ans knows it, and yet he avoids facts and chooses to throw dumb piles of words at me.. Bye bye.
I have no fats? LOL, then what do you call me calling you out on that last statement then. You sure got me there.
Furthermore If you have to resort to fighting with someone then that proves that you no longer can hold up a quality debate. Which in return makes the other posters viewpoint more validated then yours.
"Fact #1 Dual core cpus were first available to the public in october 2005, a little over a year ago."
You made a fact like statement when it wasn't. When you said fact it sounded like you were proclaiming something with solid proof behind. This just further proves what Sabertooth has been pointing out to you all along in this post.
If it was common knowledge then why did you get it wrong in the first place?
There are quite a few knowledgeable regulars in these forums. I won't run down the entire list but Sabertooth, Cobra_R, & TMP-Man are three of the guys on it. I think we all know that Sabertooth could bury esc.gamer if he wanted to ;-)
But getting back to the main topic...the E6700 runs at 2.66GHz (10 x 266MHz) & DDR2-800/PC2-6400 runs at 400MHz. Sabertooth wrote in response #7 that "the Core 2 technology sees a greater benefit from memory running synchronously with the Front Side Bus (FSB)" which I take to mean 1:1 ratio is optimal. The DDR2-800 should provide plenty of headroom...I'm guessing at least 425MHz? So roughly 3.4GHz (8 x 425MHz)? That's not too shabby. I don't know how high you can push the FSB on these new boards, but unless you plan on going to the extreme, I don't see where PC2-1066 would be necessary, plus there's the cost factor to consider. 1GB (2 x 512MB) DDR2-1066 is roughly $100 more than 1GB (2 x 512MB) DDR2-800. If you compare 2GB (2 x 1GB), the price difference is quite a bit more than that. , 2GB DDR2-1066 at $350+ is more my entire system is worth...lol
I did run across this overclock of the E6600 though:
I wonder how stable a system would be over a long period of time, overclocked that high or nearly that high.
I would love to have that motherboard, but can't afford it now, may be by Spring of next year. Hopefully the motherboard allow seperate timings for the PCI bus because the FSB is very high. As you can see I am unfamiliar with the board, when I have time I will download a copy of the manual and read it.
Three months is a very prolonged window of assessment. If the system survives the harshest stress tests for three days non-stop without buckling - odds are, it won't buckle anytime afterwards, provided nothing dramatically unusual happens to the system.
Well I remember back in the old days that the 3 month rule was in effect with overclocking a system. Now of days you have a lot more options in the BIOS I guess to overclock a board to a T* and benchmark test software out the out the ying yang Tio speed up the stable or not process to a week instead of 2 or 3 months.
Give me a break man i'm old school overclocker 2.0, I still haven't made the upgrade to 5.0 yet. :)~
The information on Computing.Net is the opinions of its users. Such
opinions may not be accurate and they are to be used at your own risk.
Computing.Net cannot verify the validity of the statements made on this site. Computing.Net and Computing.Net, LLC hereby disclaim all responsibility and liability for the content of Computing.Net and its accuracy.
PLEASE READ THE FULL DISCLAIMER AND LEGAL TERMS BY CLICKING HERE
