DDR PC3200 (DDR 400) was roughly at CL3 better ram could be had at CL2
DDR2 PC6400 (DDR2 800)was roughly at CL4 average CL5 (remember this is double PC3200)
DDR3 PC12800 (DDR3 1600) hasn't reached CL6 yet let alone CL5. I'll wait

Remember PC12800 is double PC6400...see the coalition? Yet we are finding timings in the CL7s and CL8s and they want to call that extreme performance? You gotta be kidding me? No way am I buying into that! I remember when people complained about DDR2 when it 1st came out with timing at CL5 and CL6 (very expensive back then) and they tried to sell the idea "that's the way it was" low and behold they didn't sell well and other companies started to compete by using lower timing at CL4. This looks to me like the start of DDR2 all over again. Which makes me wonder what they plan on charging for DDR3 when it does reach CL5/CL6?

the higher the speed the higher the lat, no way will it get to cas 5.

candle_86the higher the speed the higher the lat, no way will it get to cas 5.

That's what some random poster said about DDR2 at CL4 back then :rolleyes:

Do you even know what those timings mean? Or how the amount of time they actually take is dynamic based on the clock speed of the chip?

edit- sorry i sound kinda rude here, long day, the actual delay in time is decreases based on the mhz the chip is running at.

edit2- basically what i was getting at is that considering the clock speed that those chips are running at they should give really excellent performance because of their high bandwidth, and the delay in ns actually isn't that high when you factor in the frequency its running at.

+1 ^ besides thats at stock voltage and speeds thats what they can run at...1.9v? for the 4gb kit? id say you can run them at 2.1 2.2v if your ballzy and i bet you could tighten those.

if you want refrance look at this

xtreview.com/review198.htm

and remember thats overclocked DDR2 vs DDR3, as DDR2 specifications state DDR2 400-800, DDR3 is 800-2200 i belive

candle_86if you want refrance look at this

xtreview.com/review198.htm

and remember thats overclocked DDR2 vs DDR3, as DDR2 specifications state DDR2 400-800, DDR3 is 800-2200 i belive

For example, signal latency CAS # (tCL) for memory module DDR 3-800 with latency 6-6-6 -15 ns, is certainly bigger in comparison with typical DDR 2-800 latency 5-5-5, for which tCL is 12.5 ns. At the same time, DDR 3-1600 with latency 9 9-9 has already been characterized by tCL 11.25 ns, which is located on DDR 2-533 level , this is sufficiently low delays (as latency 3- 3-3). Moreover, we note that further latency reduction will be added in proportion to technology development as in case of DDR2 .

As in the case of DDR2 which only reinforces what I've said before. From DDR2 CL5 to DDR2 CL4, for example. So in all we will see a lower CL from DDR3 but we just have to wait.

Thanks

1600 CL7 is actually a little tighter than 800 CL4.

i still like DDR1 @3-4-4-8 667mhz

thats pretty good i remember on my nanya sticks i got like 475mhz or something....ddr1 200....at 2.5-2-2-3 1T that was a slick system.

Solaris17thats pretty good i remember on my nanya sticks i got like 475mhz or something....ddr1 200....at 2.5-2-2-3 1T that was a slick system.

my CT-5 sticks do 550@2-3-3-5(2.75v) im going to pop them in my new s939 rig and pumps some volts to see if i can do 600+ @2.0-x-x-x timings