• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

difference between 5:4 and 1:1...

O

ozziegn

The man behind the curtain...
Joined
Jan 13, 2001
Messages
17,533
okay, I just upgraded my RAM and it looks like I'm gonna be able to run my previous 236FSB (5:4) on my new RAM but this time it looks like the RAM is handling it at 1:1.

so my question is, what kind of a difference is there supposed to be on an 800FSB P4 (2.8C) between 5:4 and 1:1 ratios?
 
Originally posted by ozziegn
okay, I just upgraded my RAM and it looks like I'm gonna be able to run my previous 236FSB (5:4) on my new RAM but this time it looks like the RAM is handling it at 1:1.

so my question is, what kind of a difference is there supposed to be on an 800FSB P4 (2.8C) between 5:4 and 1:1 ratios?
Click to expand...



probably higher memory bandwidth...im not too sure what that does performance wise...
 
for example, a few 3dmark shots with mildly oc'ed video.
cpu is 2.8c @ 3.5g / 250fsb at all times.

mem 1:1 2-2-2-6 22001
mem 5:4 2-2-2-6 21513
mem 1:1 2.5-4-4-8 21152
 
As long as you're running dual channel, I believe lower bandwidth and tight latency is a good idea. markku's numbers are surprising though... at the same timings, the 1:1 is slower than 5:4? That's not right....
 
Originally posted by KevC
As long as you're running dual channel, I believe lower bandwidth and tight latency is a good idea. markku's numbers are surprising though... at the same timings, the 1:1 is slower than 5:4? That's not right....
Click to expand...

There's no way that could be right, if timings are kept the same. If you're running at 2-2-2-6 at 400DDR and 500DDR, the 500DDR should always be the better performer. Correct me if I overlooked something in the article, but those scores just aren't right if timings are the same.
 
If u look closely enough, last and lowest score is with 2.5-4-4-8 timings :)

Originally posted by KevC
markku's numbers are surprising though... at the same timings, the 1:1 is slower than 5:4? That's not right....
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top