Here is just a little review i found that some of us might like concerning amd' 64's memory bandwidth
http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&number=1&a...rticID=325

interesting i had always suspected that extreme ram wasnt worth it, and this now confirmed it!
thanks

Yep it looks like value ram and a nice cpu are you need when it comes to amd 64 cpu's

I am proud owner of Value RAM


LOL no..actually Athlon 64 MCT likes low latency memories though !

I was just about to kick the OCZ I have me thinks not now, lol.

Good post all the same. Have in said that they are using the FX-55 Series!!!

Yeah it does.But It dont make as big a difference as once thought

Hmmm........so now you think am I missing anything in games??

Its AXP dude !

xp CPU is a difrent world . they have FSB not HTT .

I'm happy now that I didn't spend more money on expensive ram after readin that. I didn't think it made much sense to spend alot of money on RAM that wouldn't make that big fo a difference...

well yes and no. timings still make a difrence. but not a lot of gain going from PC 3200 to PC 4000 .

Heheheh...funny josh.

Ok last night I did some extensive testing of my own. Timing load times on games and applications and start up times. Tested defrag and virus scan times with ram running ddr 434 and ddr 520. All said and done I have to disagree with most of the article. I found that my performance was far better with my ram 520 MHz then 434 MHz. I think its clear to me more expensive ram with better timings did make a defined difference. Enough to justify spending the extra cash.

Well in some games there wasn’t a drastic amount of in game FPS loss in others there was. As for load times and install times as well as system start up. Very definite difference.

So you deside whats best for you. I challenge you to test this your self if you have nice ram. I think you will find that cheap value ram will hurt performance more then help it. There is clearly a difference from the results I saw.

s**t yeah man, that oc'd fx-55 only has me by 600 mb/s

Yes, If I had the money I would get the decent RAM, You do get what you pay for after all. But there are so many factors to havin a really fast PC. Why its like a big electric jigsaw.

pcgeek, i believe you'v basicly confirmed what the article says about an increased clock speed of the ram, but the point of the article was timings and not clock speed, if you do your test again but this time just vary the timings of the ram i doubt you'll notice too much of a difference.

lol the faster the ram or the more you OC your ram the faster your computer really is, its as important if not more important then your cpu clockspeed

How much you paid for PC-4000 dude?...and how much for Kingston Value RAM?.


According to Price/Perforance....... Value RAMs arent bad !

Anyways.....your'e PC GEEK !!

i thought i had it figured out; hwo they get the clock speed off of CPU's but now im confuzzed again. normally my PC3200 runs at 200, now times that by 11 and i get the 2.2GHZ that is my clock speed. now by that stadard if i were to take PC4000 which runns at 266.5 (half of 533) the i would get a clock speed of over 2.9GHz...WTF. could someone please explain this to me since i obviusly have it wrong!

DDR = Double Data Rate,.... DDR reads data on both the "rising and falling" edges of the clock, hence PC-3200 is actually 200Mhz but is 400Mhz "effictive".


PC1600 = 200 Mhz Effective
PC2100 = 266 Mhz Effective
PC2700 = 333 Mhz Effective
PC3200 = 400 Mhz Effective


Dont get confused with PC-1600 & PC-3200

yes supreet i know, but is that 200 times the multiplier (11 in my case), w/ an equivilant FSB how you get the clock speed? Im 99% sure that it is. Jus twondering if i took 266.5 actual speed of 533 effective RAM times that by the multiplier and raised the FSB that high if it would be a clock of 2.9+ on the CPU? it prolly wouldnt be supported without raing the voltage but is that the basic principle behind it.

and yes buying PC1600 on accident would be unfortunate

11 x 200 = 2200Mhz