DD2-900

[Miganto]

Hi there, this might seem like an odd question, but i thought that ram ran at 800, 1066, 1200, etc (motherboard limitations?)

I found this 900 module though - http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820231211

I was planning on making a pc that'd OC a little, and i thought that the 800's would only allow a smallish overclock on an e8500 (up to 3.8GHZ?). The 900 would let me go to ~4.3GHZ i think, which i'd prefer to be at.

I'll be using a UD3P board.

Would these be worth getting, or are they not very good? If not, i'll stick to ddr2 800 as i don't want to get the 1066 ones, as i'll never OC that high

 

[Blain]

DDR2-800 will allow an OC of the E8500 up to 3.8GHz running synchronously but you can also run memory asynchronously.

If you need higher than 3.8GHz and want your memory running synchronously, I'd buy the standard volted G.Skill F2-8800CL5D-4GBPI.
It is DDR2-1100 and will allow you to run that E8500 up to 5.22GHz (assuming exotic cooling), synchronously.

 

[Miganto]

Nice, nice. I won't be using exotic cooling, and don't really want to be going above 4.3....4.4GHZ, so i think spending extra to get the option of going higher will be wasted. Even 1066 ram is a little too high for me. Would you say that as it's 900 ram, i can run it at 900 (450) and thus get the e8500 up to (9.5x450 - ~4.3GHZ?) If so, that's about as far as where i wanted to go, and would be the best choice, as it has the same timings as the 800 module.

 

[taltamir]

the only JEDEC standards for DDR2 are 533, 667, and 800... anything else is a warrantied overclock... aka if you can't overclock it to the speed advertised it is considered defective and you can replace it via RMA.

Ram speed has negligible effects on your overall speed, so don't worry about it.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: taltamir
the only JEDEC standards for DDR2 are 533, 667, and 800... anything else is a warrantied overclock...

Oops! :laugh:

 

[taltamir]

interesting blain...

also:

This document defines the Specialty DDR2-1066 SDRAM specification, including features, functionalities, AC and DC characteristics,
packages, and ball/signal assignments. The purpose of this Specification is to define the minimum set of requirements for JEDEC
compliant 256 Mb through 4 Gb for x4, x8, and x16 Specialty DDR2-1066 SDRAM devices. This specification was created based on
the DDR2 specification (JESD79-2) and some aspects of the DDR specification (JESD79). Each aspect of the changes for Specialty
DDR2-1066 SDRAM operation were considered and balloted. The accumulation of these ballots were then incorporated to prepare
this JESD208 specification, replacing whole sections and incorporating the changes into Functional Description and Operation.

The DDR2-1066 "speciality ram specification" is based on the "DDR2 specification"... this leaves me a bit confused, what do they mean by speciality?

 

[18 Is Number 1]

Just so you know, those 900 sticks have reportedly not liked cas5. Don't buy them intending to go much higher.

 

[n7]

1066 was not originally included as a JEDEC approved speed.
It was added later.

 

[imported_wired247]

you almost always want to go with the ram that runs at a lower voltage if you have the choice. there are plenty of DDR2-1066 kits running at 1.8V out there... that's the way to go IMO.

all DDR2 is dirt cheap right now. might as well.

 

[Miganto]

I won't be overclocking the ram at all, i'll be keeping it at a max of 900. I thought cas 4 was better than cas 5, and most of the 1066 modules are cas5, unless they're really expensive. This isn't going to be a huge overclocking machine, i'll barely OC it at all really. Doesn't the lower voltage rams just mean that they're more suitable for OC'ing?

The 1066 ram isn't also 'that cheap' around my area, and i'm nearing the limits of my budget anyway, so i only want to get what i need, not pay extra for something that won't help.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: Miganto
I thought cas 4 was better than cas 5, and most of the 1066 modules are cas5,

The 1066 ram isn't also 'that cheap' around my area, and i'm nearing the limits of my budget anyway, so i only want to get what i need, not pay extra for something that won't help.

Paying any more for CAS4 over CAS5 is exactly what you said you didn't want to do...
"not pay extra for something that won't help"

Buying lower volted (standard voltage), DIMMs is a much better investment in quality memory than paying 1 cent extra for lower CAS modules.
You will NEVER see any difference in lower CAS rated sticks! :roll:
There is only a difference in benchmark tests with some (not all), applications.
In the real world there is no difference.



The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the AnandTech management, Anand or his cousins

 

[Miganto]

OK, but all the ddr800's that i can get are cas 4, and cost ~30% than ddr1066 cas 5's, and i wont be using ddr1066 at that speed, it'll be downrated to ddr800. So i don't quite get the point in paying more for it? I guess i might be able to get it to ddr800 and reduce it to cas 4, and then also be using a lower voltage ram? I am unsure as to why lower voltage rams are 'better' though

Should i stop saying about the Cas rating? I always thought that a lower cas was better, as it meant less cycles for data transfer or something....the FAQ here even says it's best to get lower CAS of the same speed RAM, so i'm a little confused.

The ram you initially suggested is 50% more expensive, and the only difference i can see (that i'll use, as i won't be OC'ing anywhere near 5.22GHz) is lower voltage. Seems like a hefty price tag just for lower voltage...


I found these. They don't seem to be much more expensive, and have lower voltage, and will allow a small OC on the processor, which will do me. http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820231209 Do they seem ok?

 

[aka1nas]

1.8v is the spec voltage for DDR2, if the kit is rated at anything higher, they are basically overvolting it for you to obtain the advertised speed. Some motherboards can only boot at 1.8v and will fail at the advertised RAM speeds. You would then either need to run the RAM at a lower speed or OC it through the BIOS if you can. DDR2 is so cheap now, that it's a waste to get RAM like this, just get fully standards-compliant stock stuff that will definitely work and OC yourself if you feel you need it.

 

[Miganto]

Ah ok, that makes sense to me. Cheers =) They're basically sneakily overvolting it! Rude! I think the ram i linked http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16820231209 is 1.8-1.9v and has nice timings and not too expensive.

 

[Blain]

Originally posted by: aka1nas
1.8v is the spec voltage for DDR2, if the kit is rated at anything higher, they are basically overvolting it for you to obtain the advertised speed. Some motherboards can only boot at 1.8v and will fail at the advertised RAM speeds. You would then either need to run the RAM at a lower speed or OC it through the BIOS if you can. DDR2 is so cheap now, that it's a waste to get RAM like this, just get fully standards-compliant stock stuff that will definitely work and OC yourself if you feel you need it.

Excellent points.
All I would add is that some manufacturers get by with using average quality chips, blasting the voltage to them to help keep them stable (more voltage = stronger signal), and selling the average quality chips at a premium price.

Also, over time, the higher the voltage the shorter the memory life span.
This fact came to light back in the day when people were first blasting video card memory with higher voltages to get them stable when OC'd. The cards did fine for at first, but began producing more and more onscreen artifacts as time went by.

Graphic card memory produced artifacts when degrading.
System memory begins producing errors when degrading.

Shorthand:
High MHz speed @ default voltage standard = Good quality
High MHz speed @ higher voltage than standard = Average quality
Default MHz speed @ higher vltage than standard = Low quality

 

[Miganto]

I kind of think of it in food terms. Increasing the voltage is like eating sugary foods, sure you get a nice boost, but over time, it's not good. Eating carbs gives you less of a boost, but overtime it's much better ;D

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Blain

Originally posted by: Miganto
I thought cas 4 was better than cas 5, and most of the 1066 modules are cas5,

The 1066 ram isn't also 'that cheap' around my area, and i'm nearing the limits of my budget anyway, so i only want to get what i need, not pay extra for something that won't help.

Paying any more for CAS4 over CAS5 is exactly what you said you didn't want to do...
"not pay extra for something that won't help"

Buying lower volted (standard voltage), DIMMs is a much better investment in quality memory than paying 1 cent extra for lower CAS modules.
You will NEVER see any difference in lower CAS rated sticks! :roll:
There is only a difference in benchmark tests with some (not all), applications.
In the real world there is no difference.



The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the AnandTech management, Anand or his cousins

even the benchmark tools only give less than 1% improvement

 

[imported_wired247]

yep... only Captain J.L. Picard or possibly Chuck Norris can notice a difference in device performance of a few nanoseconds. And going from CAS 5-->4 you can literally calculate to be a few nanoseconds' difference per memory operation

 

[taltamir]

for Data (the android) that is a lifetime

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Interesting that you found those G.SKILL 900's, Miganto.

I bought a pair more than six weeks ago. Certainly the price was right, even though the price always seems right for DDR2 at the moment.

Some people had pushed these past 900 Mhz at the low end of the recommended voltage range (2.0 to 2.1V), and I thought I saw where one person had set his voltage notch at 1.975 for speeds in excess of 900. Someone else reported them running at DDR=1000+.

It is pretty certain that the modules run at their spec latencies of 4,4,4,12 at the spec speed.

I'm using them at a DDR speed of 850 -- choosing to set the voltage at 2.0 (reported as 2.02V). They work like the Energizer bunny at latency settings of 4,3,3,8,2T,tRC=12 @ 850 and 2.0V.

But I can't get the tCL/CAS lower than 4.

What's a good Everest Ultimate "Read" score for DDR2 RAM? Mine are showing 11,150 MB/s.