Please report all spam threads, posts and suspicious members. We receive spam notifications and will take immediate action!
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: tREAD and CAS Latency?




  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    57

    Default Re: tREAD and CAS Latency?

    [QUOTE=Chucko;309111]these Reapers won't do CL4. All at 2.00B multiplier.Static tRead of 8 didn't work. QUOTE]

    I am able to run 4x2gb @
    4-4-4-12, tRD=7 with FSB=400
    4-5-4-13 , tRD=8 with FSB=422
    4-5-5-15, tRD=8 with FSB=450
    These were on the 2.00D strap,
    vMCH=1.24-1.28, vDRAM= 2.16-2.18

    one thing that I learned,
    is that if you want to try tRD=7,
    tCS MUST be 4. It won't even POST with 5.

    I tried to get tCS=4 @ FSB=450 2.40B strap but it didn't work,
    so I am working on:
    5-5-5-15, tRD=8 DSP=OC-1200
    vMCH=1.16, vDRAM=2.28

    notice the flip-flop of vMCH and vDRAM?
    interesting, eh?
    case: Gigabyte 'Triton 180'
    power: Corsair 'HX-620'
    motherboard: Gigabyte 'GA-EP45-UD3P' (rev.1.1, F9)
    cpu: Intel 'e8500' (E0)
    cooling: Xigmatek 'HDT-S1283'
    memory: OCZ 'Reaper' 4x2gb (OCZ2RPR10664GK)
    storage: Western Digital 'Black' (500gb)
    video: EVGA 'GeForce' GTX-260
    display: Samsung 'SyncMaster' 2333sw

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Romania :(
    Posts
    95

    Default Re: tREAD and CAS Latency?

    Quote Originally Posted by corlay View Post
    one thing that I learned,
    is that if you want to try tRD=7,
    tCS MUST be 4. It won't even POST with 5.
    That is not true. Right now I'm running tRD 7 with CAS 5 at 1066MHz, but I've runned it with as low as tRD 6 with CAS 5 and 1066MHz. It all depends on the FSB you are running, the strap you use and the vMCH.
    Yes, I am using just 2x2Gb sticks, but I thought the same thing some time ago, when I couldn't drop below tRD of 8. But that excelent Anandtech article helped me alot understand how things work on x48/p45 arhitecture.
    Here:
    Last edited by morph; 07-24-2009 at 04:31 AM.
    GA-EP45-UD3R (F12)
    Zalman CNPS-7000C-CU
    E8400@3.6GHz
    2x2GB A-DATA Vitesta 800+ CL4 Extreme Edition @ 1066MHz@2.0V (5-5-5-15)
    Asus EN9800GT Ultimate @ 810/2000/2200
    Seagate 250GB + WD 500GB + WD 640GB
    Asus DRW 1608-P
    BenQ G2010WP
    Thermaltake TR2 500W
    Windows 7 Pro x64

  3. #33

    Default Re: tREAD and CAS Latency?

    The OP is running 450FSB. AFAIK, what he stated is true.
    Last edited by gampamu; 07-24-2009 at 07:42 AM.
    QX9650 batch L739A761/ GA-EP45-UD3P/ Kingston KHX9200 4x1G

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    57

    Default Re: tREAD and CAS Latency?

    well,
    I really should have done this sooner, but...

    last night I benchmarked my most stable (10hrs. p95 blended) 9.0x450@2.40B tRD=8, 5-5-5-15 against my stable (24+hrs. p95 blended) 9.0x450@2.00D tRD=8, 4-5-5-13 config.

    The 2.40B config was not appreciably better than the 2.00D config overall. In fact, the DRAM tested out a little (< 2%) *slower*. Not sure how/why that is possible, but that's what I observed. Maybe there's some merit to the thinking that a 1:1 ratio is the most efficient, and a non-synchronous divider can "clog up the works"?

    Not sure if that's true or not, but what i do now know, is that I'm going to cease wasting time trying to get my 9.0x450@2.40B config stable. What's the point?
    Last edited by corlay; 07-25-2009 at 02:10 AM.
    case: Gigabyte 'Triton 180'
    power: Corsair 'HX-620'
    motherboard: Gigabyte 'GA-EP45-UD3P' (rev.1.1, F9)
    cpu: Intel 'e8500' (E0)
    cooling: Xigmatek 'HDT-S1283'
    memory: OCZ 'Reaper' 4x2gb (OCZ2RPR10664GK)
    storage: Western Digital 'Black' (500gb)
    video: EVGA 'GeForce' GTX-260
    display: Samsung 'SyncMaster' 2333sw

  5. #35
    Chike is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    6,531

    Default Re: tREAD and CAS Latency?

    Quote Originally Posted by corlay View Post
    The 2.40B config was not appreciably better than the 2.00D config overall. In fact, the DRAM tested out a little (< 2%) *slower*.
    Slower by bandwidth latency or both?

    Quote Originally Posted by corlay View Post
    Not sure if that's true or not, but what i do now know, is that I'm going to cease wasting time trying to get my 9.0x450@2.40B config stable. What's the point?
    Realy none. I'd do the benchmark before testing stability, why waste time where there's no benefit?

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    57

    Default Re: tREAD and CAS Latency?

    Quote Originally Posted by Chike View Post
    Slower by bandwidth latency or both?
    In actual performance.
    The benchmark tool I use (Passmark) runs through various tests in Windows and records the results. I don't have software (like Everest) that lists the performance numbers in terms of bandwidth/latency/etc. So I really can't answer your question.

    Realy none. I'd do the benchmark before testing stability, why waste time where there's no benefit?
    I'm new at this, so I guess I need to learn a few lessons the hard way...
    case: Gigabyte 'Triton 180'
    power: Corsair 'HX-620'
    motherboard: Gigabyte 'GA-EP45-UD3P' (rev.1.1, F9)
    cpu: Intel 'e8500' (E0)
    cooling: Xigmatek 'HDT-S1283'
    memory: OCZ 'Reaper' 4x2gb (OCZ2RPR10664GK)
    storage: Western Digital 'Black' (500gb)
    video: EVGA 'GeForce' GTX-260
    display: Samsung 'SyncMaster' 2333sw

  7. #37

    Default Re: tREAD and CAS Latency?

    Running the Everest memory bench on my system, I find 2.4B is superior to the 2D. The tRD was 8 for both.

    QX9650 batch L739A761/ GA-EP45-UD3P/ Kingston KHX9200 4x1G

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •