The Official Budget-Conscious Dream Machine!

i hope what you said are true.

Oh when you OC the cpu the ram speed will increase too, so what happens if your ram have a limit when oc, does that mean you can only OC you cpu to a certain point.

oh and i dont get the time thing of the ram, is higher better or lower?

 

yes you may hit a limit, but if you get 1066 aka 533MHz ram, you wont havea problem, although 400Mhz ram is fine, it MAY OC to 8500, but you dont want to take the chance with stability, and the timimngs will have to increase.

lower timing are better, but witht he x2s from amd, this made alot of difference, on t he c2d, higher latencies dont translate to real life performance, only benchies.

 

Gigabyte boards use memory multipliers which you can drop so you can keep the memory speed low even with an overclocked CPU.
2T/1T timing isn't worth considering with core 2s I heard, but the timings on the RAM itself you want as low as possible (e.g. 4-4-4-12 is better than 5-5-5-18)

 

oh so lower timing is better, and having a 1066mhz ram will have more OCing room than 800mhz? and yeah i've notices gigabyte does come with ram multipliers

 

Yeah, specificlly Crucial Ballistix PC8500 CAS5 for the highest overclocks.

 

you saying that ram is best for OCers. is it this one:
http://www.landmarkpc.co.za/store/crucial-ballistix-240pin-ddr2-sdram-ddr1066-p-377.html

Why Q9300 can only reach 3.5GHz? i thought 45nm will be able to clock even higher than 65nm? and they say it's the FSB thats in the way.

 

Gigabyte boards are the best for inexperienced overclockers. The RAM speed can be adjusted independent of CPU speed after you OC.

Say you get cheap RAM. Turn your RAM speed down and then turn up your FSB. Then you can run your processor on an OC but have your RAM at stock speeds. Not as fast an OC but I prefer it to keep my timings.

I've had my RAM to DDR2 945 and kept my timings, but my RAM was expensive and uses Micron D9 memory chips(which are the very best).

So with the right motherboard, you can OC with even super cheap RAM.

 

Not necessarily. The 9000 series is a new architecture, it might not turn out to overclock as well as the old one. Bear in mind the later duos overclocked more than the originals, we may just need to give the platform time.

 

Yeah, best for a high OC. But how far past stock speeds can it be pushed? Is your RAM speed limit your OC limit for the higher speed memory?

I suppose both Gigabyte boards I've used never even had this problem due to the ability to adjust RAM speed independently.

GA-965P-DS3
GA-P35-DS3L

They're both essentially the same motherboard with different chipsets. I have yet to notice a difference. Even the connector layout is nearly identical.

 

yeah we do need to give them time, and LONG time.

so ram doesn't matter THAT much when it comes to OC, all you need to do is lower the multiplier and you're good to go

 

Well the lowest RAM multipliers you can have are 2.0x and 2.4x with most boards I believe, so if you use 2x, you can go up to 533(2133) FSB before needing to overclock the RAM which is huge. If 2.4x, you can go up to 444(1777) FSB before the RAM gets overclocked. For CPUs with a 9x multiplier like the E6850, that's 4Ghz and beyond, even at 2.4x. For CPUs with a 7.5x multiplier that's 3.2Ghz on the 2.4x or 3.84Ghz on 2.0x.

Even with PC6400 RAM, if you use 2.0x multipler you can make 1600mhz on the FSB before needing to overclock. As long as you don't have an E6300 or E6320, that still means a big overclock.

 

Exactly. But only certain motherboards have the ability to lower the RAM multiplier. I recommend Gigabyte boards because AFAIK most of them have this feature.

 

I think even the P31-DS3L can do it can't it?

 

Like I said, as far as I know most of them have this feature. The exception probably being OEM boards for mass manufacturers.

 

even my GA-945GCMX-S2 has RAM multipliers. I want to get 8GB of ram, and dual boot XP and Vista. But i need to wait until vista's problems are fixed

 

I'd say that after Service Pack 1, Vista would be a good option.

It's a little more annoying to use at first due to the MS approximation of "security" but it's every bit as solid and stable as XP.

And no guys. That's not a joke. XP is a good OS and so is Vista.

 

if anyone can remember, everyone complained about xp aswell, hell even more than vista, untill sp2 came out, it was a piece of sh!t aswell .

 

yeah Vista is great OS but, it's 64-bit is very annoying, not all program supports it.

 

Also, a friend just asked me why I chose to sell my 8800GTX and keep my X1800XT 512MB.

It allows me to MAX out my settings.

I'm talking 108FPS average CS:S stress test at 1920 x 1200 with 4X AA and 8X AF.

Half Life 2: Lost Coast Stress Test, 60FPS average at 1920 x 1200 w/ 2X AA and 8X AF.

Call of Duty 2 1280 x 960 w/ 4X AA and 8X AF gives me an everage of 40FPS and a minimum of ~30FPS. Maxing out near about 70FPS.

FEAR performance test. 1280 x 960 w/ 2X AA and 8X AF. Average 43FPS, minimum of 27FPS, max at 92FPS.

So while it's not my 8800GTX, it still games well above my comfortable levels for image quality and performance.

 

not fully true. most drivers are there. MS states that and signed drivers (which most companies sign up to) HAVE to have a 64bit alogn side the 32bit.

nearly all companies, esp for stuff you will use have them.