Which is faster, DDRII 1200MHz or DDRII 800MHz?

From general questions to the harder advanced user topics you will find them here!

Your opinion

Poll ended at Fri Jan 05, 2007 11:19 am

DDRII 1200MHz 5-5-5-15-2t
1
13%
DDRII 800MHz 3-3-3-9-1t
7
88%
 
Total votes : 8

Which is faster, DDRII 1200MHz or DDRII 800MHz?

Postby Bwall » Fri Dec 29, 2006 11:19 am

So which do you think is faster? I know the answer and will be sharing it with you in just a few days. Let us know what you think!

Testing on a BFG 680i SLI motherboard with an E6600 over clocked to 3.6GHz.

Anyone wanna take a guess at Everest memory read bandwidth for the faster of the two? :mrgreen:
Image
Bwall
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 12:22 am
Location: St. Louis

Postby kenc51 » Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:47 pm

800MHz with 3-3-3-9 -1T (I presume you have lowered all the misc timings :))
______________________________________________________________________________________
Rig:
Dell Laptop | 2GB | Core2 1.6GHz | OCZ Vertex 60GB | x1400 | Arch Linux x86-64

______________________________________________________________________________________
The Arch Way
User avatar
kenc51
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 5177
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin, Republic of Ireland

Postby Apoptosis » Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:57 pm

800Mhz was my vote too
User avatar
Apoptosis
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 33648
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2003 8:45 pm
Location: St. Louis, Missouri

Postby Illuminati » Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:17 pm

I voted 800 mhz also... mainly because what would be the point in making a poll if the obvious selection was the winner?... lol.
Justin West
Server Admin & Forum Moderator
Follow me on Twitter | Find us on Facebook
User avatar
Illuminati
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2461
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2003 8:48 am
Location: Wright City, Missouri, USA

Postby Cypher » Fri Dec 29, 2006 1:52 pm

I also voted for the 800MHz RAM.

While the 1200MHz seems like it would be "faster", I think they'd be pretty even as far as speed is concerned with the lower timings on the 800 vs. the higher timings on the 1200.
Facebook | Linux Systems Administrator | Web and Software Developer | Microsoft Certified Professional

"Wielding power untouched by mortal man."
User avatar
Cypher
Legit Fanatic
Legit Fanatic
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 5:21 am
Location: St. Charles, MO

Postby dicecca112 » Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:42 pm

assuming Nvidia fixed the strap issues, I'm gonna say 800
Image
User avatar
dicecca112
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5302
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:40 am
Location: Wakefield, MA

Postby hainer36 » Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:57 am

woulda gone with the lower timings, but i have a feeling that raw speed maybe a lil faster
User avatar
hainer36
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 425
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 1:33 pm
Location: St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada

Postby Bwall » Tue Jan 02, 2007 10:32 am

800MHz wins..........very close though! I'm pretty sure 1300MHz would have taken it but this darned 680i is just not having any part of it. DFI needs to hurry up with their RD600 board.
Image
Bwall
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 698
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2005 12:22 am
Location: St. Louis

Postby zparker » Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:07 am

According to the review of the mem, it seemed to perform better at the lower speed tighter timings. So i agree 800is faster AT THIS POINT IN TIME!
EVGA nForce 680i SLI board, XFX GeForce 7950GT@641/1244, Corsair XMS2 2GB DDR2 800 TWIN2X2048-6400C4 (4-4-4-12) 2.1v, Core 2 Duo E6400 (3.0ghz) at 56c max stock cooling, 2 Seagate Barracuda sata 3.0gb 320gb not raid yet and 550watts

old board at 3.2 stock videocard settings / new board at 3.0 oc video card / 3.2 & oc video card

3dmark 2003 score= 22851 / 25262 / 25767
3dmark 2005 score= 10220 / 11764 / not yet
User avatar
zparker
Legit Fanatic
Legit Fanatic
 
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 1:28 pm
Location: Dubai, United Arab Emirates

Postby SAMSAMHA » Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:44 am

what about when you consider OC?
SAMSAMHA
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 8:59 am

Postby dicecca112 » Sat Jan 06, 2007 12:24 pm

doesn't matter tighter timings will score higher in most benchmarks. I mean to a point. At some point raw mhz will overtake timings
Image
User avatar
dicecca112
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5302
Joined: Mon Mar 01, 2004 10:40 am
Location: Wakefield, MA

Postby SAMSAMHA » Sat Jan 06, 2007 1:37 pm

if that's the case, why would people spend a bundle on the 1000Mhz or higher. What's the real benefit buying a 1000 or 800?
SAMSAMHA
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 317
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2005 8:59 am

Postby kenc51 » Sat Jan 06, 2007 2:02 pm

SAMSAMHA wrote:if that's the case, why would people spend a bundle on the 1000Mhz or higher. What's the real benefit buying a 1000 or 800?


Coz 1GHz RAM sounds better!
Actually, not all ddr2 800 ram will do tight timings....or they require alot of voltage to do it......the ~1000MHz stuff is the same ram as the 800 stuff, just better quality. The chips are screened (binned) for quality, voltage response and max MHz. The better stuff always goes into high end DIMMS.
______________________________________________________________________________________
Rig:
Dell Laptop | 2GB | Core2 1.6GHz | OCZ Vertex 60GB | x1400 | Arch Linux x86-64

______________________________________________________________________________________
The Arch Way
User avatar
kenc51
Legit Extremist
Legit Extremist
 
Posts: 5177
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2005 1:56 pm
Location: Dublin, Republic of Ireland

Postby largon » Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:57 am

Definately DDRII 1200MHz 5-5-5-15-2t.
User avatar
largon
Legit Aficionado
Legit Aficionado
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 2:38 am
Location: Suomi Finland


Return to Memory Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests