View Single Post
Old 01-08-08, 09:20 PM   #9
ikjadoon
Registered User
 
ikjadoon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 503
Default Re: What's more important, CPU Multiplier or CPU FSB?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madpistol
I have one small question... why don't we want the ram to go over 800mhz?
No reason in particular, but that most memory is rated for 800MHz and higher might be unstable. You could just up the voltage, of course, or loosen the timings.

One thing to note, OP: linked (1:1) FSB has been known to dramatically increase memory bandwidth. My RAM, for example, actually runs below spec at 770MHz but that keeps the 1:1 and is actually faster than if I was running it at some weird divider, but over 800MHz. Any real-world increase? I have no freaking idea. Unlinked, however, will make your life much easier at a slight performance loss because it should automatically set a ratio to best suit your RAM.

Weird thing in computers, especially Intel's. Other weird quirks: 2 sticks run fine at 800MHz, but will only run at 750MHz with four sticks; quad-cores hit lower FSBs (and not for cooling issues); FSB holes/strap where the FSB just will not work at a certain speed: like 450-455MHz will never work, but 449MHz and 456MHz will work perfectly. FSB strap is where it jumps to the next standard: 266MHz to about 350MHz is the standard 1066MHz strap, i.e. will be very unstable at 350MHz. 351MHz-425MHz is the standard 1333MHz strap, i.e. 351MHz will be perfectly stable. I pulled those numbers out of my a$$, but they should be pretty close.

I hate to go off-topic, but I've had a question nagging me for MONTHS:

Which actually increases the heat of the processor? Voltage or speed??

~Ibrahim~
__________________
Overdrive PC Core2.SLI:

Core 2 Duo E6600 @ ~3.5GHz,4GB of DDR2-770, 8800GTS 640MB @ 621/1836, Western Digital 640GB, LITE-ON 20X, CM Stacker 830, Enermax 620W, Vista Ultimate 64-bit

3DMark '06: 10,302
SuperPI 1M: 15.194s
WEI: 5.8

ikjadoon is offline   Reply With Quote