# y have ddr2 when u can have ddr1 lol



## curt (Sep 23, 2008)

i had no idea where to put this so i just made a new one 

this is just basikly to show what ddr1 can still do i have a system with ddr2 but my ddr1 gamer is faster 
i have the trile so i dont know the middel numbers [copy an write] i could guess but i wont so we have read mb.s and latincy

an
ddr2 first 666mh @ 625mh cus of cpu oc.ing had to drop ram divider

6327 mb.s read  [dual channel ddr2 5.5.5.15 cr2<- not tweaked yeat] an
latency of 65.6 n.s not bad 

now for my ddr1 [ocz platnum] 2 sticks 1 gig each

8828 mb.s read  dual channel ddr 2.5 3 3.2 cr1  @ ddr580 they ar ddr 400 sticks lol an 
latency of 32.3 ns

this comp has owned many systems lol [did till the quads came along lol]


----------



## NinkobEi (Sep 23, 2008)

you're able to run your ddr that fast at such tight timings? thats impressive- are you sure its stable? I have the same RAM and I have to loosen timings.

of course my proc isnt quite as fast...


----------



## sneekypeet (Sep 23, 2008)

curt your test is a bit flawed as well, most sticks that I would buy in 667MHz can do so with 3-3-3-9 timings not 5-5-5-15.


----------



## curt (Sep 23, 2008)

yeah this dfi expert board can relly beat kick the ram 

only used 2.8v from 2.5 

i drop as many setting as i can did take me for ever to get it stable thow that was a top end mark 

but i run them at 507mh at thows timeings 24/7 i duno if shed do 290fsb/ddr580 24/7 the ishews i was haveing was my cpu cus my lil opty165 was trying to do 3.3gh 

its at 3024mh rite now of a fsb of 338 lol

i havent tweaked the ddr 2 yeah but i out benchen evin ddr stock 800 on everest


----------



## Pinchy (Sep 23, 2008)

We have DDR2 because it allows us to overclock more and is cheaper 


Also if your CPU clock is higher, you get a better mb/s RAM speed.


----------



## hat (Sep 23, 2008)

2x1GB DDR2 from a Dell. Stock latencies 6-6-6-18 @ DDR800
stock volts 1.8, running at 1.9


----------



## curt (Sep 23, 2008)

thats more of what i was exspecting for dd2 but not much better then mine

lol never seen that screen before lol but i found it now ill put mine up


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 23, 2008)

@ Hat:
You mention heavily tweaked subtimings in your specs, 
I'd like to know how much faster your ram is with tweaked sub timings.

Would you have a screenshot from everest cache mem bench, with normal and 1 screenshot with your tweaked sub timings?

I never changed the sub memory timings but I want to give it a try if there is a noticable difference in performance.

My current settings:


----------



## Dia01 (Sep 23, 2008)

Pinchy said:


> We have DDR2 because it allows us to overclock more and is cheaper
> 
> 
> Then why do we have DDR3?


----------



## curt (Sep 23, 2008)

hell yeah they do ill get a pic but i duno how to put them up like u did 

id just change them one by one oc the comp to where u like it find out what the auto picks an go down from there worst case u gots clear the cmos an re over clock 

gota love this dfi.s oc save thing bios comes with 4 save slots saves fsb speed an all that its awsome never see one like it


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 23, 2008)

Dia01 said:


> Pinchy said:
> 
> 
> > We have DDR2 because it allows us to overclock more and is cheaper
> ...




For the people who like to spend more money


----------



## mrw1986 (Sep 23, 2008)

Just so you know, latency isn't everything. DDR3 proved this.


----------



## imperialreign (Sep 23, 2008)

mrw1986 said:


> Just so you know, latency isn't everything. DDR3 proved this.



exactly, here's an example:








compare the DDR3 read/write amounts to those of DDR2/DDR - at similar latencies


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 23, 2008)

imperialreign said:


> exactly, here's an example:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Maybe a bit off-topic but
I noticed there is not much difference in a core2duo 3.6GHz vs a core2quad 3.6GHz L1 cache benchmark results and also the latency is equal.


----------



## imperialreign (Sep 23, 2008)

P4-630 said:


> Maybe a bit off-topic but
> I noticed there is not much difference in a core2duo 3.6GHz vs a core2quad 3.6GHz L1 cache benchmark results and also the latency is equal.



for L1 - the Quads tend to excell with the L2 cahce, though - but that's all FSB related.  If you could bump your BUS speed up to 450, I'd wager good money your L1 and L2 would be dead-nutz the same as mine, if not better.


but, back OT - DDR3, IMO, slaughters DDR2/DDR just in how much information it can move, and I think I've done a decent job of proving mid-range DDR3 with a very mild OC is more effective than DDR2/DDR with high-OC.

Once I get around to liquid cooling, where my CPU can support sustained 4GHz clocks, and once I improve the DRAM cooling a bit more - we'll see just how much more kick-ass DDR3 can go.  I'd like to hit 2GHz DRAM clocks


----------



## sneekypeet (Sep 23, 2008)

Also curt the biggest reason for DDR2 as far as benching is concerned, when was the last time your DDR went below 25 seconds in Super Pi?


----------



## hat (Sep 23, 2008)

P4-630 said:


> @ Hat:
> You mention heavily tweaked subtimings in your specs,
> I'd like to know how much faster your ram is with tweaked sub timings.


Do you consider command rate and tRC to be subtimings?


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 23, 2008)

hat said:


> Do you consider command rate and tRC to be subtimings?




"2x1gb DDR2 800 @ 817 4-5-5-5 with hevily tweaked subtimings"

I'm interested to know the differences in performance/stability from before and after the tweaked timings.


----------



## curt (Sep 23, 2008)

im not saying ddr1 is better just saying that pritty damn fast for ddr1

yeah if tweaked the hell outa the ddr1

the ddr2 is stock for now but i will put up the difernce

tryed to get a sick mark not to night thow made it to the desk top at 3312 with the ram at 27?mh 

i was close on that superpi an my ram was at 250


----------



## curt (Sep 23, 2008)

an heres my 24/7 everst speeds

ill get top speed bench soon i know it can do 3.3gh so im hopen to get 3.2gh stable 

lol oc % 69


----------



## Melvis (Sep 23, 2008)

Hey, i have downloaded and installed Everest Ultimate Edition, and i want to run the same test as you guys are doing ^ just to see how my DDR 1 RAM goes etc, but i dont know how to get that test up ^ can you help me to run that test? thanks


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 23, 2008)

Just ran the test 1more time, with the first benchmark test I was running a HD dreamscene movie on my desktop, in this benchmark I paused the movie.


----------



## Pinchy (Sep 23, 2008)

Dia01 said:


> Then why do we have DDR3?



Because it can overclock more than DDR2, lol...only at a higher price point.


----------



## Melvis (Sep 23, 2008)

well i did this test, even tho i have no idea how you all got that blue window up ^  but anyway this is what i got for the four tests,

Memory read > 6975 MB/s

Memory Write > 3432 MB/s

Memory Copy > 4654 MB/s

Memory Latency > 49.4 ns


----------



## sneekypeet (Sep 23, 2008)

Melvis said:


> well i did this test, even tho i have no idea how you all got that blue window up ^  but anyway this is what i got for the four tests,
> 
> Memory read > 6975 MB/s
> 
> ...



use printscreen to save the image, then go to mspaint and point in the box....hit control+V....then crop the image and save it!

Then go to http://www.techpowerup.org/ and host the image. When its done copy the 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 link and add it to the post!


----------



## Melvis (Sep 23, 2008)

sneekypeet said:


> use printscreen to save the image, then go to mspaint and point in the box....hit control+V....then crop the image and save it!
> 
> Then go to http://www.techpowerup.org/ and host the image. When its done copy the
> 
> ...



LOL yea i know how to do that, i mean i dont even get that blue window up at all were it says save/ start benchmark / etc, i have no idea how to get that up, so i can press start benchmark?


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 23, 2008)

I just installed MemSet 3.5 and decided to give it a try...
After some reading and testing + 1 blue screen I came to these stable settings and benchmark results below:






pc6400 @ 1000MHz 2.1V
I'm sure I can tweak it more, but then I need to notch up the voltage.


----------



## Wile E (Sep 23, 2008)

These are my everyday settings. Haven't tweaked any sub timings at all. Just set it to 4-4-4-12 and left it at that.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 23, 2008)

Wile E said:


> These are my everyday settings. Haven't tweaked any sub timings at all. Just set it to 4-4-4-12 and left it at that.



E7200 @ 3.6GHz almost the same benchmark results as an QX9650 @ 3.6GHz 
As long as the speeds and fsb are equal the results are quite the same.


----------



## yogurt_21 (Sep 23, 2008)

P4-630 said:


> "2x1gb DDR2 800 @ 817 4-5-5-5 with hevily tweaked subtimings"
> 
> I'm interested to know the differences in performance/stability from before and after the tweaked timings.



I'd imagine quite a bit better, amd's memory performance is always higher than the c2duo's for the same memory clock. my gskill on my fx-62 rig at stock would outperform the same set of memory at 1066 on my q6700. gonna hve to dig a bit for the screenies, but yeah intels memory performance is absolutely ridiculous in comparison. the onchip memory controller makes all the difference. perhaps i7 will fix the issue.


----------



## Wile E (Sep 24, 2008)

P4-630 said:


> E7200 @ 3.6GHz almost the same benchmark results as an QX9650 @ 3.6GHz
> As long as the speeds and fsb are equal the results are quite the same.



CPU doesn't have much to do with memory scores on an Intel.

Anyway, here's 960Mhz tweaked with MemSet






Here's 1200Mhz 5-5-5-15 everything else on auto. Same fsb and cpu speeds as the 960MHz tests.






And here it is at 1200Mhz tweaked with memset. I was able to lower the Performance level to 6 (was at 7 on auto), and it made a HUGE difference. Won't boot at 6 tho. 






FYI: 960 untweaked runs faster than 1200 untweaked in 3DMark and other benches.


----------



## P4-630 (Sep 25, 2008)

Wile E said:


> CPU doesn't have much to do with memory scores on an Intel.
> 
> Anyway, here's 960Mhz tweaked with MemSet
> 
> ...



I also tried 4-4-4-12 1000MHz 2.3V but suprisingly the benchmarking results were quite the same as with 5-5-5-15 1000MHz 2.1V, only the memory Latency went down 1 ns or so.

My ram is 800MHz 4-4-4-12 stock (2.1~2.3V)
Is yours stock 1200MHz?

At the moment I boot with Performance Level 6 and startup Vista with these settings:





Since the voltage is still at 2.1V I don't these settings will decrease the ram lifespan?

Its prime stable with these settings.
My system hangs if I try to use Performance Level 5 so 6 is the absolute limit here.
I got a blue screen when I tried to set the Refresh Period (tREF) from 6656T to 8704T, before I used memset it was on 3900T.
When I lower the Write Precharge Delayed to 10, I get an error when running prime, at 12 it seems to work fine.

However I did not yet try to lower the:
- Refresh Cycle Time (tRFC)
- Write to Read Delayed (tRRD)
- Act. to Act. Delayed (tRRD)
- Read to Write Delay (tRD_WR)
- Read to Precharge (tRTP)

^Did you change these timings?
I don't think that the above timings lowered would give another great performance boost.

I also set the Command Rate once from 2T to 1T but the system hangs.


----------



## sneekypeet (Sep 25, 2008)

Melvis said:


> LOL yea i know how to do that, i mean i dont even get that blue window up at all were it says save/ start benchmark / etc, i have no idea how to get that up, so i can press start benchmark?








That what you are after?


----------



## DaMulta (Sep 25, 2008)

Why have DDR2 or DDR when you can have DDR3 at 2Ghz?


----------



## oli_ramsay (Sep 25, 2008)

Why have cotton when you can have silk?


----------



## DaMulta (Sep 25, 2008)

oli_ramsay said:


> Why have cotton when you can have silk?



SO SO SO fing true


----------



## infrared (Sep 25, 2008)

Some good DDR2 ram for comparison:









^Just 8mb/s more on the copy and i'll be happy!


----------



## imperialreign (Sep 25, 2008)

infrared said:


> Some good DDR2 ram for comparison:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




that's some nicely clocked DDR2, man 

awesome FSB, as well!





P4-630 said:


> However I did not yet try to lower the:
> - Refresh Cycle Time (tRFC)
> - Write to Read Delayed (tRRD)
> - Act. to Act. Delayed (tRRD)
> ...





TBH, on my system - I haven't farted around with the advanced timing settings all too much - but, I did pull those timing numbers and manually set them in BIOS.

As for the 2T/1T thing - 1T typically won't run, or won't run properly on OCed systems.  Although 1T will give you better performance, 2T is much more stable.  IIRC, 1T tends to not work out, either, when in dual-channel mode.

Why my system has been so willing to run at that command rate, I simply couldn't tell you, I have no clue.  Plus at those timings and clock settings, as well as also running AI Booster (within BIOS), and a couple other of the 'boost' settings . . . by all accounts, my DRAM should be as flaky as a politician's viewpoint on the war in Iraq.


----------



## Jmatt110 (Sep 25, 2008)

imperialreign said:


> exactly, here's an example:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I see your DDR3 and raise you some DDR2 

Man I love AMD's memory controller. And this is on K8.


----------



## imperialreign (Sep 25, 2008)

Jmatt110 said:


> I see your DDR3 and raise you some DDR2
> 
> Man I love AMD's memory controller. And this is on K8.





AMD has always had a good memory controller - but the biggest flaw, though, is the cache sizes.  it move the info quickly, but not as much as intel setups can per clock cycle.

still, superb latencies there, man!  I'd have to go to some extreme DRAM cooling to hit timings to allow me those kinds of latencies.


We'll still see what I've got up my sleeve - looking at the books, I _should_ be able to go HOH within the next month or so, and I intend to pick up a DRAM air cooler as well.  I should be able to run a constant 4G+ at that point, and might be able to bump the FSB to 475-500 . . . we'll see on that, though.


----------



## Wile E (Sep 25, 2008)

P4-630 said:


> I also tried 4-4-4-12 1000MHz 2.3V but suprisingly the benchmarking results were quite the same as with 5-5-5-15 1000MHz 2.1V, only the memory Latency went down 1 ns or so.
> 
> My ram is 800MHz 4-4-4-12 stock (2.1~2.3V)
> Is yours stock 1200MHz?
> ...


Trfc makes for some improvements. I was able to lower mine to 20 at 960Mhz, and 22 at 1200MHz. It seems it's way looser than it needs to be by default. Nothing else really made much of a difference.

And nice bench Infrared. That 500fsb is really working to your advantage for the ram. I was trying 480fsb 1:1 to see what effect it had on the ram, but it won't boot above 465 on this quad. Need to get the chip cold and see if I can get past this fsb wall. I somehow doubt that's the limits of this board.


----------

