Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 RAM - Timing vs Clock Speed, Which is more important?

views
     
charge-n-go
post Jan 15 2006, 01:03 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,060 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang / PJ

QUOTE(antonio_zth @ Jan 13 2006, 08:09 PM)
300HTT 1.5-2-2-5 > 400HTT 3-5-4-10

300FSB 2-2-2-5 (tak semestinya) > 400 3-4-4-8

correct me if i'm wrong.... notworthy.gif
*
FSB or HTT has nothing to do with timing. THe timing is for RAM only.

Actually it's easy. the 2 in 2-3-3-7 means 2 clock delay.
The clock here actually means the clock speed of the memory.

If the memory is running at 200MHz, it has a delay of 1/200M. This delay is the same as a delay of 1 clock cycle. So the 2 here means, 1/100M second delay.

That is why when u clock higher, the effective latency actually decreases even u put CL3.0. At 300MHz (DDR600), CL3.0 delay = 3/300M = 1/100M <--- same as CL2 DDR400.
charge-n-go
post Jan 15 2006, 02:34 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,060 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang / PJ

I also forgotten, but if i recalled correctly, CAS is the most important.

You can easily test it: Run Sisoftware Sandra memory benchtest (UN-buffered). Change one of the timing by '1' (either increasing or decreasing) and see the results. wink.gif
charge-n-go
post Jan 15 2006, 02:49 PM

Look at all my stars!!
*******
Senior Member
4,060 posts

Joined: Jan 2003
From: Penang / PJ

heh, i'm outdated. Mine to explain a lil why RAS to CAS followed by RAS precharge/delay? Or do you have any links on that. Really interested to know why isit like tat now biggrin.gif

thanx

 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0179sec    0.73    6 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 29th November 2025 - 03:33 AM