My timings are 2-3-3-7, and I suffer from no stability issues. Of course, my RAM is rated to do this. My point was several people in this thread spoke of tweaking in it resulted in insignificant performance gains. Just showing that in the right system 9-12% in my book is significant. "...but in my defense, it was dark, I was drunk, and it was delicious!"

0

Heropsycho Same timings as me, I'm running my CL2.5 DDR400 @ CL2 and synced with my FSB :D I can't say I notice any stability issues or huge performance gains lol :P Zee. AMD Athlon 2800+ barton @ 12.5 X 176 : 2200mhz 512Mb Corsair RAM MSI KT6 Delta mobo Leadtek AGP 6600 gt 128Mb 120Gb Seagate HDD

0

Yes, and as I said, it's got to be something like an Athlon 64 in order to see a significant performance gain. You and I don't gall in that category. I did benchmark it one time to see if it actually helped. I'm running a Barton at 200MHz bus along with my CPU on an Nforce2 Ultra 400 chipset mobo. I gained somewhere along the line of 1-3% going from 3-4-4-10 to 2-3-3-7. Considering I spent about $230 at the time for this RAM when I could have gotten CAS2 RAM for $150 then, it obviously wasn't worth it, and why I don't recommend to people generally to spend significant amounts of money to get low latency RAM. However, these days you can get CAS2.5 RAM for about the same as CAS3, so I do recommend CAS2.5. "...but in my defense, it was dark, I was drunk, and it was delicious!"

0

"My timings are 2-3-3-7, and I suffer from no stability issues. Of course, my RAM is rated to do this." You're really not "tweaking" your timings at all. I was referring to stability issues with RAM that doesn't have such good timings to begin with...like PC3200 with a rating of 3-4-4-8. Asus A7N8X-X 1800+ @ 8 x 210MHz 512MB PC3200 Asus Ti4800SE 128MB WinME/WinXP Pro

0

Heropsycho I looked a the figures and yes, 12% looks good. But, in real terms i.e. what "you" would see, as opposed to a benchmarking prog is not always worth the probs someone may have to achieve that. E.g. Say you lat can give you 60ns, on an increase of 12% that would raise that to 67.2ns, sounds great, but in real terms what you gain is 7.2ns, i.e. 7.2 billionths of a second gain. I know to the ram forcers that is worth it, I personally don't. I only have to go to hundreds of past posts to see that ram clocking is a major cause of sys instability. I know it can be done, I have done it in the past, and stability wasn't an issue. All I was trying to say was, is it worth the risk of instability for such a small gain? Other aspects of O/cing can and do give gains that have a more noticable effect. But each to there own. MMM, back to the beer :) nuff said. AMD64Bit 3800+ Socket 939 WinXP Pro. Nvidia:6800GT Dane Electronic Pro. Dual 1024MB 400MHz RAM Tagan 480Watt PSU: 28Amps on +12volt rail. Asus A8V Deluxe "WiFi" M/Board - Aquagate

0

Quicksilver, Read the link I provided. That was a 9-12% jump in performance in an actual game, not just in some theoretical benchmark. I understand the math behind all that stuff, but in the end, what I really want to know is how much does it actually help in real world applications. If my game can run 9-12% better due to tightening my RAM timings without reducing stability or damaging hardware, I see that as worth messing with, and incidentally, this is why we also overclock beyond manufacturers' ratings on CPU clock, bus speed, etc., isn't it? Jam, with respect of tweaking or not, I was merely pointing out that on some systems the reduced timings CAN yield a significant performance gain, so it may be a worthy pursuit, provided you have the right equipment (good quality RAM, even if it isn't rated to do better timings). If your RAM isn't rated to do so, manipulating the timings is a similar procedure as overclocking (change a timing, test, if it works, reduce it again, test, etc.), and is subjected to virtually the same risks (voiding of warranty, very small risk of permanent damage if done right, reduced system stability). "...but in my defense, it was dark, I was drunk, and it was delicious!"

0