![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Any noticable difference from CL3 to CL2?
- Thread starter Rob94hawk
- Start date
If you want my honest opinion, from my testing, it does make a difference, but a very minute difference. I think this is one of those things everyone gets hung up on because they absolutely need CL2, although it really isn't showing much of a difference. It's like a bragging rights thing, I guess, but I've never seen any tests that show a big difference.
To answer your question, I'd get a gig, simply because more RAM is better, especially if your doing something on the PC that will use it...like graphics, or gaming.
To answer your question, I'd get a gig, simply because more RAM is better, especially if your doing something on the PC that will use it...like graphics, or gaming.
burningrave101
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2003
- Messages
- 11,825
The thing about test results is that benchmarks just show quick analysis. Tighter timings give you overall better performance on a larger scale. Which means if your doing video editing, gaming, data crunching the RAM with the CAS 2 timings is going to just keep moving further ahead of the CAS 3.
Benchmarks will show that timings are very important in that after the bandwidth needs have been met timings are what give the additional performance and not more bandwidth because programs can only use a certain amount and after that its useless. Some applications wont benefit from tighter timings at all at least as far as benchmarks show. Games and video work will though. Sure just a few hundred points or more in 3D Mark and other benches but thats usually the only difference between the processors like the A64's and Pentium 4's so to say those points aren't important just says its not important for that slight improvement in gaming from an A64.
Usually if the RAM is CAS 3 then the other timings aren't very good ither. Like 3-4-4-8 or 3-3-3-7 or something. All those missed clock cycles of waiting around for the data add up. Just not instantly like benchmarks will show.
Benchmarks will show that timings are very important in that after the bandwidth needs have been met timings are what give the additional performance and not more bandwidth because programs can only use a certain amount and after that its useless. Some applications wont benefit from tighter timings at all at least as far as benchmarks show. Games and video work will though. Sure just a few hundred points or more in 3D Mark and other benches but thats usually the only difference between the processors like the A64's and Pentium 4's so to say those points aren't important just says its not important for that slight improvement in gaming from an A64.
Usually if the RAM is CAS 3 then the other timings aren't very good ither. Like 3-4-4-8 or 3-3-3-7 or something. All those missed clock cycles of waiting around for the data add up. Just not instantly like benchmarks will show.
BillLeeLee
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2003
- Messages
- 13,486
A lower CAS latency is good for performance in games and other applications, but it's not the only important rating, it's just the most 'famous' of the memory timings (since RAM sticks usually come with a CL rating in the name.
It's also important to have good timings for RAS-to-CAS delay, Active Precharge delay, and RAS Precharge (for example, Mushkin Level II RAM is rated for 2-2-2-6 timings).
Also, AMD-based platforms are much more affected by timings, whereas the P4 platforms are less affected.
It's also important to have good timings for RAS-to-CAS delay, Active Precharge delay, and RAS Precharge (for example, Mushkin Level II RAM is rated for 2-2-2-6 timings).
Also, AMD-based platforms are much more affected by timings, whereas the P4 platforms are less affected.
Originally posted by afirawker
You said your using SDRAM, are you using Win98?? If you are then it wont handle anything over 512 properly and will struggle. But as long as you have XP or 2K your in the clear.
GL
He is using XP, its in hsi sig
ps ddr is sdram too