Need opinion about RAM
-
I need some opinions before getting a RAM stick in a few weeks' time. Would you get a
i. DDR2-533
ii. DDR2-667
iii. DDR2-800
stick, considering that
1. all of them cost around the same price,
2. you are currently on a motherboard with a FSB of 533 Mhz,
3. there is already an 1 GB DDR2-533 RAM stick sitting inside the box,
4. you will be upgrading to a Q6600 in the *foreseeable future*,
5. and the DDR2-533 model has an average CAS latency of 4, and the other two has a CL5.
Point #4 would be the most important factor as I want to save $ and put the RAM sticks into use after the upgrade.
All opinions are welcomed, though please keep the flaming to the minimum in any case there is a need to.
-
Stick with the 533.
-
can your current motherboard support Q6600?
if i were u, i wont be buying any of them.
reason: most Q6600 quad 4 motherboard in the future uses ddr3 rams
however, if thats a need, or it is a must to buy one, get a 533mhz one -
DDR2-533 if you want to save $ and on latency. best if you can get a same 1gb stick from same manufacturer.
-
No, I will be upgrading my mobo as well.Originally posted by manyu882:can your current motherboard support Q6600?
if i were u, i wont be buying any of them.
reason: most Q6600 quad 4 motherboard in the future uses ddr3 rams
however, if thats a need, or it is a must to buy one, get a 533mhz one
And currently most Quad-core compatible mobos support both DDR2 and DDR3 RAMs. So compatibility is not much of an issue here. -
Regarding $, I have checked and these three models cost around the same currently.Originally posted by abao:DDR2-533 if you want to save $ and on latency. best if you can get a same 1gb stick from same manufacturer.
Latency-wise, 533 is lower, but the maximum bandwidth is lower as well. And I have read a few threads related to 533 CL4 vs 667 CL5 and some benchmarks show that the latter performs better. But there are other mixed opinions on this as well. So I'm kinda confused and need some pros here to show me the light.
And yea, I will be getting from the same manufacturer (Kingston). But I'm looking at the 2GB models (going cheap as well, to my surprise). -
I have managed to find this paragraph from a wiki article which I vaguely remember reading it a few months ago. It says that for Quads, 533 is actually better than 667 as it matches the FSB speed.
But then, it says this:
Unlike the previous Pentium 4 and Pentium D design, the Core 2 technology sees a greater benefit from memory running synchronously with the Front Side Bus (FSB). This means that for the Conroe CPUs with FSB of 1066 MT/s, the ideal memory speed for DDR2 is PC2-4200 or PC2-8500 (twice the speed of PC2-4200). 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.[48]
Optimally, the memory bandwidth afforded should match the bandwidth of the FSB closely. The AGTL+ PSB used by all NetBurst processors as well as current and medium-term (pre-QuickPath) Core 2 processors provide a 64-bit data path. Current chipsets provide for two DDR or two DDR2 channels.
**Table**
On jobs requiring large amounts of memory access, the quad-core Core 2 processors can benefit significantly[49] from using a PC2-8500 memory, which runs exactly twice as fast as the FSB; this is not an officially supported configuration, but a number of motherboards offer it.
The Core 2 processor does not require the use of DDR2. While the Intel 975X and P965 chipsets require this memory, some motherboards and chipsets support both the Core 2 and DDR memory. When using DDR memory, performance may be reduced because of the lower available memory bandwidth.
So does it mean that if I'm getting Q6600 soon, I should go ahead with DDR2-800 instead? Is anyone able to comment on this article?
Only when going to PC2-6400 is there a significant performance increase.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Q6600#Synchronous_memory_modules -
http://www23.tomshardware.com/cpu_2007.html?modelx=33&model1=877&model2=871&chart=417
not sure whether this helps, but its a comparision of processors/ their ram settings and the achieved memory results -
Got OC or not? No OC no need get fast RAM, 667 one can already
-
There has been mixed results. Some has got fast PCs using RAM which have high CL, while some complained it's a little slow.
Some has the reverse results...
I'll stick to 533...
Or just get all 3 sticks and test. -
Hmm...but wouldn't the memory bandwidth become a limiting factor?Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:There has been mixed results. Some has got fast PCs using RAM which have high CL, while some complained it's a little slow.
Some has the reverse results...
I'll stick to 533...
Or just get all 3 sticks and test.
And off-track a little, which HDD manufacturer do you prefer? Seagate or Hitachi? -
define the time duration for your future.Originally posted by LatecomerX:No, I will be upgrading my mobo as well.
And currently most Quad-core compatible mobos support both DDR2 and DDR3 RAMs. So compatibility is not much of an issue here. -
I'm getting the CPU + mobo either on late February or early August this year.Originally posted by manyu882:define the time duration for your future. -
By February that time X48 chipset would have arrived already.By around August, DDR3 should be somewhat mainstream already, at least for the Quad Core motherboardsOriginally posted by LatecomerX:I'm getting the CPU + mobo either on late February or early August this year. -
For some motherboards, especially the slightly older ones.Originally posted by LatecomerX:Hmm...but wouldn't the memory bandwidth become a limiting factor?
And off-track a little, which HDD manufacturer do you prefer? Seagate or Hitachi?
My preference is Seagate. -
Hmm, your point is?Originally posted by orionlight:By February that time X48 chipset would have arrived already.By around August, DDR3 should be somewhat mainstream already, at least for the Quad Core motherboards -
Get a DDR2 667 and sell away your RAMS and upgrade to DDR3 when you get a new mobo sometime later.I think quite hard to find DDR2-533 because alot of shops took them off the rack already
-
Just wondering, what is the reason for choosing DDR2-667 over DDR2-800? There are still quite a number of stores selling DDR2-533 afaik.Originally posted by orionlight:Get a DDR2 667 and sell away your RAMS and upgrade to DDR3 when you get a new mobo sometime later.I think quite hard to find DDR2-533 because alot of shops took them off the rack already
And regarding DDR3, I have read a few articles on it for the past few months and it seems like it would be better to stick with DDR2 for this year at least in terms of performance and price, more of the latter. Well, unless a 1GB of DDR3-1333 drops below for $100 or something from the current price of $400 - which I don't think would happen in a year's time. -
ah ic, get the 800mhz than since no much price diff. dont need concern too much on frequency unless you are the type of percent that overclocks your system la.Originally posted by LatecomerX:I'm getting the CPU + mobo either on late February or early August this year. -
So does it mean that the clock speed of a RAM has very little impact on performance for the newer motherboards?Originally posted by ndmmxiaomayi:For some motherboards, especially the slightly older ones.
My preference is Seagate.
And for your preference for Seagate, is it due to its reliability, warranty, performance or other factors? (or even all of the above?) Mind sharing some personal experience with these HDDs?
For me, I didn't like Seagate because it died on me years ago. I was using it as an external HDD and malfunctions during disk writes quite regularly, which would require me to switch it off and on and re-transfer the files. Then came the day when it happened thrice for a file transfer, then I got bloody impatient with it and switched on and off repeatively for a few times. A loud beep followed and I was stunned. Off and on again, it just beeped. I just went cursing for about 10 minutes before I was able to face the fact that all my data had just went six feet deep.
Maybe that HDD was an exception and I was unlucky or something - I don't know. But that experience left me with a really bad impression of Seagate.