• 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.

The Trade-Off -- Massive OC or Memory bandwidth?

Unperson

Unperson

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 2, 2000
Messages
1,826
I am currently running an Athlon64 3000+ Venice core CPU. This thing is simply a beast when it comes to OC. It can do 2.4GHz without even the slightest increase in voltage (runnin stock now) and shows no signs of instability. Even in my relatively warm room running Prime95 Torture Test it doesnt' seem to go above 45C (using Zalman CNPS7000ALCU cooler). I can probably even get it up to 2.5 or higher. There is a trade-off though. My RAM (Corsair Value DDR400) and MB are not able to handle high memory speeds. The MB manual says that if you are running 4 sticks of double-sided RAM, you can not run it at more than 333MHz -- this seems to hold true as 200MHz was somewhat unstable without a bump up in voltage. The problem is that to run the 3000+ at 2.4GHz, I have to run the HTT at 266MHz (x9). At this HTT, I can either get the RAM to run at 133MHz or 220MHz, nowhere in between. So my question is, is it worthwhile to do the OC at this speed and have slower RAM (it is running in Dual Channel, clocks in on SiSoft Sandra at 3090MB/S), or would a more conservative OC with RAM running at higher speed be more worthwhile? I may as a test try setting the RAM to very aggressive timings and see if I can get some more juice out of it.
 
It kind of depends.. You should prolly benchmark your apps/games both ways to see what gives you better performance.. F@H, and any encoding (audio, divx, etc) will most likeley prefer the higher cpu oc.. Games are prolly a different story.. They might prefer the higher mem throughput and lower latencies.. Or a compromise somewhere in the middle.. You really should benchmark the apps YOU use most often to find out for sure.. Hope it helps..
 
I guess I'll have to find a good benchmark test for BF2 and see how it turns out. When I get some results i'll post them -- i'm sure i'm not the only person who's had to make this decision.
 
Pyromaneyakk said:
I am currently running an Athlon64 3000+ Venice core CPU. This thing is simply a beast when it comes to OC. It can do 2.4GHz without even the slightest increase in voltage (runnin stock now) and shows no signs of instability. Even in my relatively warm room running Prime95 Torture Test it doesnt' seem to go above 45C (using Zalman CNPS7000ALCU cooler). I can probably even get it up to 2.5 or higher. There is a trade-off though. My RAM (Corsair Value DDR400) and MB are not able to handle high memory speeds. The MB manual says that if you are running 4 sticks of double-sided RAM, you can not run it at more than 333MHz -- this seems to hold true as 200MHz was somewhat unstable without a bump up in voltage. The problem is that to run the 3000+ at 2.4GHz, I have to run the HTT at 266MHz (x9). At this HTT, I can either get the RAM to run at 133MHz or 220MHz, nowhere in between. So my question is, is it worthwhile to do the OC at this speed and have slower RAM (it is running in Dual Channel, clocks in on SiSoft Sandra at 3090MB/S), or would a more conservative OC with RAM running at higher speed be more worthwhile? I may as a test try setting the RAM to very aggressive timings and see if I can get some more juice out of it.
Click to expand...


had a similar problem, use A64 tweaker it will give you access to the 150 and 183 divider which may help
 
With my 3500+ venice 11x230 with lower memory speed was faster than 10x250 with a higher memory speed in almost every sisoft test except memory bandwith of course. But, the memory bandwith difference was so marginal compared to the results of the other tests I just kept it at 11x230 because its just quicker that way. I'm not sure about in games but I would guess the difference would be like 1-5fps for what you want to do.
 
I'd go with the higher cpu overclock. Memory speed really isn't that important, but you should be able to get it close to stock 200mhz speed.

your 266mhz HTT with a 5:6 Memory divider (166mhz) = 221mhz which is faster then stock 200mhz. (DDR so times 2)

If your ram can't run 221mhz then with the 2:3 divider you'll be slower then stock at 177mhz but you can play with timings to make the ram a bit faster. Try 2-2-2-6 or something.

If you get your cpu to run faster say with more voltage and maybe more chipset voltage maybe you get to 300mhz HTT. Then use a 2:3 Memory Divider (133mhz) = 200mhz which is same as stock DDR400 ram.
 
I'm pretty much getting the same results as the OP.

Stock voltages
Venice 3000+ E6 @ 2.43ghz
Corsair VS 1GB @ 221mhz

I can't push it anymore unless I change the divider because my memory seems to top out at 221mhz despite any voltage increase.

If I change the divider a notch lower, can't remember what it is, I can only get another 70mhz out of the CPU. Looks like I def need new memory since that's holding me back.
 
infiniti029 said:
Looks like I def need new memory since that's holding me back.
Click to expand...

For another 70mhz? Seems like you're pretty much at the sweet spot if your processor can't handle more then another 70mhz..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top