Spindrift
Spindrift
Started Topics :
33
Posts :
1560
Posted : Sep 12, 2008 23:50
|
Quote:
|
On 2008-09-12 21:28, Dharma Lab wrote:
Quote:
|
Anyways - back to the subject. So, latencies are more important as bandwidth is enough. But does a DDR2 800 @ CL4 perform better than say, DDR3 1600 @ CL7? Supposedly, since the throughput speed is doubled, the latency relative to data flow is smaller, it should mean better performance.
|
|
Good question, I'm not entirely sure. However, how often is your RAM speed the bottleneck? Probably never. It'll usually be the disk drive, or bus latencies, or something else that is limiting the process, not the RAM speeds. I don't feel DDR3 costs are worth it at all, especially when DDR2 is so cheap these days.
|
|
How often is the RAM latency the bottleneck?
Obviously the RAM that can keep up with your FSB will be faster...otherwise people would stick to old RAM since the lower speed the lower latency.
Also...if you RAM doesn't run 1:1 with the FSB that will introduce latency as well. For example when overclocking it's said it's no point overclocking the RAM less than 3:2 since any performance gained from the speed increase will be lost from not running in sync with the FSB.
If you plan to overclock getting RAM that can run faster than FSB can be worthwhile, otherwise it's not.
Getting RAM that is slower than the FSB will decrease performance...both throughput and latency.
So basically...just get RAM that can run 1:1...if that's too expensive I would say you are looking at a CPU over your budget.
  (``·.¸(``·.¸(``·.¸¸.·`´)¸.·`´)¸.·`´)
« .....www.ResonantEarth.com..... »
(¸.·`´(¸.·`´(¸.·`´``·.¸)``·.¸)``·.¸)
http://www.myspace.com/spindriftsounds
http://www.myspace.com/resonantearth |
|
|
|
