Would P4 1.6A to P4 2.6C make a difference in gaming?

[PureBooYah]

Originally posted by burningrave101
Nowhere in my response did i say what he said. He said it doesn't matter which you say 3:2 or 2:3. I said that its improper to say it backwards but that i understand he just had it in the wrong order by mistake.

So nither one of you seem to of had any point at all.

my point was you're making a big deal out of nothing and i did it in a sarcastic manner, which is my style of humor...

then you said this...

Not that it was a big deal just cause he said 2:3 when he meant 3:2.

which was my point exactly

and to the thread poster, if you want to save as much money as possible, then keep the ram and run in 3:2 (2:3 ) ratio. but if you have the money to do so, then you can upgrade your ram along with everything else

 

[burningrave101]

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=873&page=3

You can see from benchmarks here running with a 3:2 divider (not to be confused with a 2:3 divider) causes small performance drops the slower you run the memory below 200Mhz. They ran the memory at 166MHz with the 3:2 divider because they had the FSB set at 250MHz. With tight timings it does farely well.

Also Lazier_Said saying 2:3 wasn't a big deal at all to me. I realize what he meant and he just said it the wrong order. The reason i responded back again about it was because you tried to say that it doesn't matter if you say 3:2 or 2:3 because they are both the same if you know what motherboard your talking about. Well what if the motherboard can run both speeds or what if its a noob that reads the thread and is already confused about memory dividers as it is. Ither way they are not both the same because its always CPURAM because thats how its quoted for system specs and the memory runs in accordance with the system speed (FSB) and cpu, not the other way around.

 

[PureBooYah]

Originally posted by burningrave101
http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=873&page=3

You can see from benchmarks here running with a 3:2 divider (not to be confused with a 2:3 divider) causes small performance drops the slower you run the memory below 200Mhz. They ran the memory at 166MHz with the 3:2 divider because they had the FSB set at 250MHz. With tight timings it does farely well.

haha, no shit the 3:2 divider gives a small drop in performance, i wonder what would happen if he used the 5:4 divider hmmmmmmmmmm.....

Also Lazier_Said saying 2:3 wasn't a big deal at all to me. I realize what he meant and he just said it the wrong order. The reason i responded back again about it was because you tried to say that it doesn't matter if you say 3:2 or 2:3 because they are both the same if you know what motherboard your talking about. Well what if the motherboard can run both speeds or what if its a noob that reads the thread and is already confused about memory dividers as it is. Ither way they are not both the same because its always CPURAM because thats how its quoted for system specs and the memory runs in accordance with the system speed (FSB) and cpu, not the other way around.

lol, you're taking this way too far. i find it hilarious how much you're trying to convince me on this. but the thing you're forgetting is i dont care what people call it. well i hope you have a nice rest of the day on [h]

 

[burningrave101]

I could care less what uneducated, opinionated people like yourself believe PureBooYah so you have a nice day yourself .

I dont care what you call it or what you think about it cause i wasn't trying to convince you of anything. My only concern is for someone new that might not understand. You've already proven from your ignorant statements that your not smart enough for me to waste my time proving something to you.

Your the one that turned this into a big argument because of your arrogent combacks to each reply i've made. I would of just dropped it and plan to now anyways because argueing with people that dont know what their talking about and think they do is pointless.

Since the thread starter already got the information he needed this thread should be locked.

 

[PureBooYah]

Originally posted by burningrave101
I could care less what uneducated, opinionated people like yourself believe PureBooYah so you have a nice day yourself .

I dont care what you call it or what you think about it cause i wasn't trying to convince you of anything. My only concern is for someone new that might not understand. You've already proven from your ignorant statements that your not smart enough for me to waste my time proving something to you.

Your the one that turned this into a big argument because of your arrogent combacks to each reply i've made. I would of just dropped it and plan to now anyways because argueing with people that dont know what their talking about and think they do is pointless.

Since the thread starter already got the information he needed this thread should be locked.

lol

no hard feelings???

 

[BlindedByScience]

Originally posted by burningrave101
Since the thread starter already got the information he needed this thread should be locked.

....I agree.

You all would do well to refresh your memory about the rules. The first rule in the list is pretty simple:

"Absolutely NO FLAMING OR NAME CALLING, this is grounds for immediate removal of your posting privileges."

Please consider the other members and follow the rules, OK...??

B.B.S.