Talk about milking a dry cow, beating a dead horse, repeating yourself, etc, etc, etc

In other words 800Mhz dram frequency has reach maturity and is on the preverbal downslope. It shouldn't be too long before we start seeing more and more higher frequencies, then DDR3.

EastCoasthandleTalk about milking a dry cow, beating a dead horse, repeating yourself, etc, etc, etc

lol....thats what we call the ROFLcoptar

Oh come on now, you love these Press Releases... :>))

I wonder if the tighter memory timings increase PC system performance by more than .000000000000000000000000000000000001 percent ?????????

Nope, but they are an overclockers wet dream.

i want some they should be able to reach 1200-1600 mhz with high timings

cdawalli want some they should be able to reach 1200-1600 mhz with high timings

Only stable for few test benchmarks. Waste of money if you ask me.
Right now (Corsair PC8500) I am stable 24/7 @ 1225 @ PC8500. Yes, it's not a high OC but the added performance of PC8500 is noticeable from XP boot up to in game. It open my eyes to the fact that PC6400 has come full circle and moving on to better (be it Pc8500+ or no) is more important then timing (unless K8L turns out to be the fanboy's wet dream).

In other words there is performance gain found going from PC6400 to PC8500 but the current chipsets limit it's full potential (I am hopping that bearlake takes care of this). But only if you can OC your computer at the rated speed of the ram. Anything less then that is a waste of time, IMO. Why? Simple, what Super PI, Cinebench, Aquakmart, etc show as a gain; games like BF2, Fear, Quake 4, etc shows as a waste of time. Running your ram at PC4800 or PC5400 undermines the full potential of your ram. Once we have a chipset that allows you the full benefit of the CPU OC with the full benefit of maintaining the rated speed of the ram then you will see the full benefit of the bandwidth IMO.

So they dropped down like 1 cycle each? Pshaw hit me up when you get DDR timings od 2223 or 1221 or something.

-The Eagle.

PS Im still not impressed with DDR2

Forget trying to squeeze an extra "1" from DDR or DDR2. Why dont the chipset makers just move over to QUAD channel. That would DOUBLE the memory bandwidth, rather than these silly little %ages that require ever more upgrading of memory modules.

ITS A MEMORY MANUFACTURER CARTEL I TELL YOU. WE ARE GETTING RIPPED OFF AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN

WarEagleAUPS Im still not impressed with DDR2

That is probably because you don't understand that 4-4-3-5 on DDR2-800 is the same latency as 2-2-1.5-2.5 on DDR-400. Which is damn good timings.

lol i was running 3-3-3 1T timings @ ddr800 2.2v when i was testing some mushkin stuff a few months back :D

pfft i say, pfft g.skill.

Doing that at 2.2v and G.skill being stock at their rated speeds at 2.0v is very different. I wouldn't be surprised at all if these did 3-3-3 or better at 2.2v.

the point is they were also running 1T. f the gskill stuff defaults 1t fine, but i still had clocking headroom @ 2.2v 3-3-3 1T to around DDR900 i think it was. :D plus .2v difference aint nuttin lol

Yeah, corsair XMS2-8500C5D running with 2.3v w/ great airflow @ 1030Mhz 4-4-3. These guys can just line up and wish they were somthing new. 3-4-3 @ 832Mhz.

Ketxxxthe point is they were also running 1T. f the gskill stuff defaults 1t fine, but i still had clocking headroom @ 2.2v 3-3-3 1T to around DDR900 i think it was. :D plus .2v difference aint nuttin lol

In the world of RAM .2v is more than "nuttin". Again I wouldn't be surprised one bit if these do over DDR1000 with 3-3-3-1T on 2.2v. Though the thing that is really nice is that usually G.Skill ram is on the cheaper side of the RAM spectrum, which is great for someone like me who doesn't want to spend more money on 2GB of RAM than I spend on my processor.

...lawl this new stuff makes my RAM (Which i havent got yet :p) look crap :p!

Team Xtreme ram is the shiznat. Hands down.