So much for 1:1 fsb:dram ratio being the best

dipstick · Mar 15, 2008, 08:46 PM

I've been playing around with some bios settings and have noticed something very interesting. Being told that 1:1 is the best way to OC ones fsb and ram I was very surprised. Anyways these are some settings and numbers I got from Everest.

430MHz fsb - 430MHz ram(860) - 3.44GHz cpu clock (1:1)
Memory Read- 7498MB/s
Memory Latency - 70.9ns

430MHz fsb - 516MHz ram(1032) - 3.44GHz cpu clock (5:6)
Memory Read - 8986MB/s
Memory Latency - 54.2ns

While I can somewhat understand the higher bandwidth -its still higher than I thought it would be- I was very surprised by the reduced latency. I honestly thought that 1:1 would provide the absolute lowest latency due to working in harmony but I was very wrong. The above may not seem as much but its a noticeable improvement all around. Anyways, I thought I would share my findings for those with the same mindset as the improvement is worthy

PangingJr · Mar 15, 2008, 09:11 PM

swimtech · Mar 15, 2008, 09:12 PM

I absolutely did too - intriguing. Thanks for the heads up!

The real question though is how does it affect application or gaming perfomance though. Is the processor able to incorporate the memory packets out of sync to the advantage of the application at that particular ratio? Noticed PangingJr has got a 5:4 thing going above - even more out of sync...

Lowfat · Mar 15, 2008, 09:28 PM

1:1 was only better during the DDR1 days and all memory ratios weren't upward ratios. With DDR2 things changed as we could finally have ram that was faster than the FSB of the CPU.

PangingJr · Mar 15, 2008, 09:33 PM

try 4:5 if your BIOS and RAM permits, the letency results should be even more improved.

dipstick · Mar 15, 2008, 09:39 PM

Very nice Panging, I've always loved the P35 the most and it never fails to prove it. That's a wicked oc all around.
I've been playing some CoD4 and Crysis to test stability and while I can't say I notice much of an fps increase they do seem quite a bit smoother. Things just seem more fluent and quicker to respond all around.
I should also have mentioned that maybe the strap has something to do with it. I kept it at 400 but 333 seems better and allows for many more memory clock options. Silly me lol
This is the article I read that led me to test this out, and while I understand little from it, it seems to have pointed me in the right direction.

ChaosMinionX · Mar 15, 2008, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lowfat

1:1 was only better during the DDR1 days and all memory ratios weren't upward ratios. With DDR2 things changed as we could finally have ram that was faster than the FSB of the CPU.

True story, and for those with a Maximus Formula flashed to a Rampage Formula, it gets even better

I will post some more info shortly.. finishing up benchmarking.

Zelig · Mar 15, 2008, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dipstick

This is the article I read that led me to test this out, and while I understand little from it, it seems to have pointed me in the right direction.

Good article there.

On the AMD side, they eliminated the performance hit of not running 1:1 when they moved to the on-die memory controller... not much overclocking happening with their chips at the moment though.

swimtech · Mar 15, 2008, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dipstick

This is the article I read that led me to test this out

That was exactly what I needed to read. I missed it back in January...

Judas · Mar 15, 2008, 10:11 PM

I'm likely to start putting alot of this ocing into more practice soon as my reaper ocz memory arrives.

Neshi · Mar 15, 2008, 11:56 PM

A little free time is all I need before I push my cpu to a 3.6ghz

But as this thread is about memory, I just want to put in a little question.
what is better, pushing latencies as low as possible on, lets say 800mhz sticks, or getting as high Mhz as possible without loosening the latencies too much?

and what about the "secondary" latencies? How do you know how low they can go or is it so negligible (only important for synthetic benchmarks) that it is best left on "auto" and you just mess with the five normal ones. (like the 4-4-4-12-2T)

ChaosMinionX · Mar 16, 2008, 01:06 AM

@ Pangingjr

You could probably get more performance out of your RAM by lowering the FSB and tuning the TRD more.

PangingJr · Mar 16, 2008, 05:26 AM

my P35-DS4 is kinda old now, i have been very hard to it for many things and for a long time already, and this board's chipset is not optimized enough for me for my overclocking anymore. i will get a fresh motherboard soon.
but i will not give away this board just yet, it's a good board.
anyways, i will try to do better on a new board next time.

ChaosMinionX · Mar 16, 2008, 07:26 AM

Get a maximus formula, and flash it to a rampage formula....you will like what you see.

**kris23** · Mar 16, 2008, 07:34 AM

should i flash mine?

PangingJr · Mar 16, 2008, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX

Get a maximus formula, and flash it to a rampage formula....you will like what you see.

well i just changed my mind again i have a good relationship with Gigabyte board for now.
i actually thought about not buying another Gigabyte board around this time, 3 of its BIOS's came out no good in the last few months.

i think i know about the Asus board, its overclockability, and the rest of their good ones, and all. i am not blind, i just don't like to pay too much into something that i won't use it long (i've to pay quite a bit more than you for Asus boards).
i will want to play with a new board again when P45/ICH10R chipset is out. right now Gigabyte is cheaper, the Intel ICH RAID on Gigabyte board never fails me at all, this is another thing that makes me like using Gigabyte's, and the rest still gives what i need and it is a quite exceptional.

ChaosMinionX · Mar 16, 2008, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kris23

should i flash mine?

well....it voids your 3year warranty should you kill your board. So if your feeling daring sure, or if you can afford to replace it.

If none of the above, dont do it

**kris23** · Mar 16, 2008, 03:10 PM

cant i flash it back?

dipstick · Mar 16, 2008, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neshi

A little free time is all I need before I push my cpu to a 3.6ghz

But as this thread is about memory, I just want to put in a little question.
what is better, pushing latencies as low as possible on, lets say 800mhz sticks, or getting as high Mhz as possible without loosening the latencies too much?

and what about the "secondary" latencies? How do you know how low they can go or is it so negligible (only important for synthetic benchmarks) that it is best left on "auto" and you just mess with the five normal ones. (like the 4-4-4-12-2T)

i would go for the faster ram but I would also try to keep them at a 5-5-5 at the most. Out of all the timings I would say that tRD is the most important but that comes down to the board itself and the ram. of course the best is fast and low latency ram but that is the worst for the wallet.

@Kris. I say its worth the flash. There is tons of info here and there is now even a way to go flash back in case you have to rma(though depending on the reason to rma it will be tough if the board is dead lol). You can also find the 0219 bios in there which is very nice and not available from asus yet.

PangingJr · Mar 16, 2008, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX

@ Pangingjr

You could probably get more performance out of your RAM by lowering the FSB and tuning the TRD more.

is this one better? well i think my board is still working okay.

PL7 at 526 FSB

ChaosMinionX · Mar 16, 2008, 07:18 PM

Much better

**kris23** · Mar 16, 2008, 07:36 PM

thats alot of MBs a second.... so CMX, cant i flash the BIOS back to Maximus if i find something isnt right with the board? as long as it isnt completely dead?

PangingJr · Mar 16, 2008, 07:52 PM

i could hardly get a PL8 last week, as you can see the Copy results on the far above one were not so good, and i don't add FSB voltage at all this time, just add MCH +0.3 (1.55V).
this board is like 2 years now i can't remember, lol, but it has been booting with different CPU's and RAM's clock speeds, with 4 or 5 CPU's now, many memory kits, all kind of clock speeds for like 1000's of time booting this board. i guess or i know i just get tired of using it and want a fresh chipset board.

ChaosMinionX · Mar 16, 2008, 09:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kris23

thats alot of MBs a second.... so CMX, cant i flash the BIOS back to Maximus if i find something isnt right with the board? as long as it isnt completely dead?

There is a way to flash back to Maximus, but it causes your windows install to go bad

PangingJr · Mar 17, 2008, 10:09 PM

i found the Everest results (the last pic) a few days ago, the result is from an Intel X48 DDR3 based board and the system is configured using a high memory clock speed, and i just want to compare it. then i thought about this thread.

my system CPU's runs at same clock speed (same CPU FSB and CPU multi. 516x8) with the DDR3 system, and configured with different memory multi/memory ratio.
all of the memory timings were set in BIOS, the Performance levels were auto assigned by motherboard's chipset.

CPU FSB : DRAM
1:1 vs. 5:6 (1:1.20) vs. 4:5 (1:1.25) vs. 1:2.00 (DDR3)

1:1

5:6

4:5

DDR3 - Foxconn X48 BlackOps, DDR3-2000+ CL7,

Mar 15, 2008, 08:46 PM	#1
dipstick HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: USA Posts: 3,609 Rep Power: 71 System Specs	So much for 1:1 fsb:dram ratio being the best I've been playing around with some bios settings and have noticed something very interesting. Being told that 1:1 is the best way to OC ones fsb and ram I was very surprised. Anyways these are some settings and numbers I got from Everest. 430MHz fsb - 430MHz ram(860) - 3.44GHz cpu clock (1:1) Memory Read- 7498MB/s Memory Latency - 70.9ns 430MHz fsb - 516MHz ram(1032) - 3.44GHz cpu clock (5:6) Memory Read - 8986MB/s Memory Latency - 54.2ns While I can somewhat understand the higher bandwidth -its still higher than I thought it would be- I was very surprised by the reduced latency. I honestly thought that 1:1 would provide the absolute lowest latency due to working in harmony but I was very wrong. The above may not seem as much but its a noticeable improvement all around. Anyways, I thought I would share my findings for those with the same mindset as the improvement is worthy

Mar 15, 2008, 09:12 PM	#3
swimtech HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: North Carolina Posts: 4,040 Rep Power: 124 System Specs	I absolutely did too - intriguing. Thanks for the heads up! The real question though is how does it affect application or gaming perfomance though. Is the processor able to incorporate the memory packets out of sync to the advantage of the application at that particular ratio? Noticed PangingJr has got a 5:4 thing going above - even more out of sync... __________________ It's not so much getting your way that matters or not - what matters is how you go about getting it. Last edited by swimtech; Mar 15, 2008 at 09:19 PM.

Mar 15, 2008, 09:28 PM	#4
Lowfat Xtreme Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Grande Prairie, AB, Can Posts: 4,254 Rep Power: 101	1:1 was only better during the DDR1 days and all memory ratios weren't upward ratios. With DDR2 things changed as we could finally have ram that was faster than the FSB of the CPU. __________________

Mar 15, 2008, 11:56 PM	#11
Neshi S.N.A.F.U. Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Wellington, NZ Posts: 3,380 Rep Power: 177 System Specs	A little free time is all I need before I push my cpu to a 3.6ghz But as this thread is about memory, I just want to put in a little question. what is better, pushing latencies as low as possible on, lets say 800mhz sticks, or getting as high Mhz as possible without loosening the latencies too much? and what about the "secondary" latencies? How do you know how low they can go or is it so negligible (only important for synthetic benchmarks) that it is best left on "auto" and you just mess with the five normal ones. (like the 4-4-4-12-2T) __________________ If one does not attach himself to people and desire, never shall his heart be broken. But then, does he ever truly live? Life is just too damn short for if's and maybe's

Mar 16, 2008, 01:06 AM	#12
ChaosMinionX USB 3 dot oh Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,911 Rep Power: 47 System Specs	@ Pangingjr You could probably get more performance out of your RAM by lowering the FSB and tuning the TRD more. __________________ ::Heatware:: How you can help DriverHeaven by using Digg!

Mar 15, 2008, 09:11 PM	#2
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71

Mar 15, 2008, 09:33 PM	#5
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	try 4:5 if your BIOS and RAM permits, the letency results should be even more improved.

Mar 15, 2008, 09:39 PM	Thread Starter #6
dipstick HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: USA Posts: 3,609 Rep Power: 71 System Specs	Very nice Panging, I've always loved the P35 the most and it never fails to prove it. That's a wicked oc all around. I've been playing some CoD4 and Crysis to test stability and while I can't say I notice much of an fps increase they do seem quite a bit smoother. Things just seem more fluent and quicker to respond all around. I should also have mentioned that maybe the strap has something to do with it. I kept it at 400 but 333 seems better and allows for many more memory clock options. Silly me lol This is the article I read that led me to test this out, and while I understand little from it, it seems to have pointed me in the right direction.

Mar 16, 2008, 05:26 AM	#13
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	my P35-DS4 is kinda old now, i have been very hard to it for many things and for a long time already, and this board's chipset is not optimized enough for me for my overclocking anymore. i will get a fresh motherboard soon. but i will not give away this board just yet, it's a good board. anyways, i will try to do better on a new board next time.

Mar 16, 2008, 07:26 AM	#14
ChaosMinionX USB 3 dot oh Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,911 Rep Power: 47 System Specs	Get a maximus formula, and flash it to a rampage formula....you will like what you see. __________________ ::Heatware:: How you can help DriverHeaven by using Digg!

Mar 16, 2008, 07:34 AM	#15
kris23 Going Insane..... Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,019 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	should i flash mine? __________________ Hardwareheaven Super-Moderator Building a new computer system and not sure where to start? Click Here! last updated (5/18/11) Rosewill FUTURE case replaces CM 690 II with its greater interior length. Building a PC: Step by Step Guide Written by Kristopher Pedemonte and Nathan Marks-Forder Edited by Allan Campbell Questions or Comments? feel free to post them in the forums!

Mar 16, 2008, 03:10 PM	#18
kris23 Going Insane..... Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,019 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	cant i flash it back? __________________ Hardwareheaven Super-Moderator Building a new computer system and not sure where to start? Click Here! last updated (5/18/11) Rosewill FUTURE case replaces CM 690 II with its greater interior length. Building a PC: Step by Step Guide Written by Kristopher Pedemonte and Nathan Marks-Forder Edited by Allan Campbell Questions or Comments? feel free to post them in the forums!

Mar 16, 2008, 07:18 PM	#21
ChaosMinionX USB 3 dot oh Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 1,911 Rep Power: 47 System Specs	Much better __________________ ::Heatware:: How you can help DriverHeaven by using Digg!

Mar 16, 2008, 07:36 PM	#22
kris23 Going Insane..... Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 6,019 Rep Power: 131 System Specs	thats alot of MBs a second.... so CMX, cant i flash the BIOS back to Maximus if i find something isnt right with the board? as long as it isnt completely dead? __________________ Hardwareheaven Super-Moderator Building a new computer system and not sure where to start? Click Here! last updated (5/18/11) Rosewill FUTURE case replaces CM 690 II with its greater interior length. Building a PC: Step by Step Guide Written by Kristopher Pedemonte and Nathan Marks-Forder Edited by Allan Campbell Questions or Comments? feel free to post them in the forums!

Mar 16, 2008, 07:52 PM	#23
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	i could hardly get a PL8 last week, as you can see the Copy results on the far above one were not so good, and i don't add FSB voltage at all this time, just add MCH +0.3 (1.55V). this board is like 2 years now i can't remember, lol, but it has been booting with different CPU's and RAM's clock speeds, with 4 or 5 CPU's now, many memory kits, all kind of clock speeds for like 1000's of time booting this board. i guess or i know i just get tired of using it and want a fresh chipset board.

Mar 17, 2008, 10:09 PM	#25
PangingJr Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 5,989 Rep Power: 71	i found the Everest results (the last pic) a few days ago, the result is from an Intel X48 DDR3 based board and the system is configured using a high memory clock speed, and i just want to compare it. then i thought about this thread. my system CPU's runs at same clock speed (same CPU FSB and CPU multi. 516x8) with the DDR3 system, and configured with different memory multi/memory ratio. all of the memory timings were set in BIOS, the Performance levels were auto assigned by motherboard's chipset. CPU FSB : DRAM 1:1 vs. 5:6 (1:1.20) vs. 4:5 (1:1.25) vs. 1:2.00 (DDR3) 1:1 5:6 4:5 DDR3 - Foxconn X48 BlackOps, DDR3-2000+ CL7,