DDR 2 800 vs 1066

'Ivan' wrote:
| any tangible benefit from upgrading to 1066 from 800 Mhz DDR 2?
_____

Depends on what speed you run it at, doesn't it? And the latencies. If you
give specific examples, then an answer could be specific. Otherwise, the
answer is ... 42.

DDR2-1066 has no standard specifications. The latencies are likely to be
higher than for DDR2-800 and the memory voltage is likely to be higher than
standard also. The standard settings for DDR2 memory with an Intel CPU uses
a CPU clock : Memory clock ratio of 2:1, so DDR2-800 memory would run in
spec with a FSB of 1600 MHz. Using a CPU clock : Memory clock ratio of 1:1
give some memory bandwidth increase, but then run in spec, DDR2-1066 memory
would require a 1066 MHz FSB.

For example, I use Patriot DDR2-1066 memory, memory voltage at 2.30 v, on an
EVGA 680i SLI motherboard with an E4300 @ 2.7 GHz. The FSB is 1200 MHz and
the memory clock is set at 1200 MHz so the CPU clock : Memory clock ratio is
1:1. The latencies are set at 5-5-4-9. This gives slightly better memory
bandwidth performance than a 2:1 CPU clock : Memory clock ratio of 2:1
giving a memory clock of 600 MHz and with latencies set at 4-3-3-8.

The large the L2 cache, the less performance increase given by increased
memory bandwidth. The performance difference likewise depends on the
application mix.

Different motherboard manufacturers use different terminology for the memory
speed settings. There have been several threads in this newsgroup since
March 2007 thrashing out what it all means.

If your question is "Should I replace my DDR2-800 memory with DDR2-1066
memory?" then my answer would be no, not unless you need a higher FSB speed
than you can get with the DDR-800 memory OR if a probable 2% performance
increase is worth the money to you.

Phil Weldon

"Ivan" <yeke.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:fien87$smq$1@ss408.t-com.hr...
| any tangible benefit from upgrading to 1066 from 800 Mhz DDR 2?
|
|