Äߧý∩†H♠H䎀
Fully Optimized
- Messages
- 3,629
I'm a little bit confused about this. I know people talk that having ram faster than your FSB is pretty much a bottleneck correct? So i'm going to use the core2duo as a example with PC6400 ram. I just want to know if my math is correct to get the best performance vs clock ratio.
So you have a native FSB of 1066 and Ram @ 400MHz X 2 = 800MHz Do I base the speed off this figure?
But heres the question if intels FSB is quad pumped 1066/4 = 266Mhz is this the true speed? Like the PC6400 without multiplying it X2 would be 400Mhz. Figuring it like that the ram is 134Mhz faster than the true FSB.
So I guess my final question is running ram in anything but 1:1 ratio benificial? I just ask because to go over 3Ghz on my system I need to run in a 1:1 ratio. Also in benching my ram I've noticed the bandwith is higher with a lower clock in 1:1 rather than say a 4:5 ratio. With those figures I'm kind of thinking, say 1333/667 is faster than 1333/800 because the ram is bottlenecked by the FSB.
So you have a native FSB of 1066 and Ram @ 400MHz X 2 = 800MHz Do I base the speed off this figure?
But heres the question if intels FSB is quad pumped 1066/4 = 266Mhz is this the true speed? Like the PC6400 without multiplying it X2 would be 400Mhz. Figuring it like that the ram is 134Mhz faster than the true FSB.
So I guess my final question is running ram in anything but 1:1 ratio benificial? I just ask because to go over 3Ghz on my system I need to run in a 1:1 ratio. Also in benching my ram I've noticed the bandwith is higher with a lower clock in 1:1 rather than say a 4:5 ratio. With those figures I'm kind of thinking, say 1333/667 is faster than 1333/800 because the ram is bottlenecked by the FSB.