even with VIA there was an noticeable performance increase if both CPU:MEM were running in sync :)

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu...lonxp-166.html

the Quake 4 results mirror the synthetic Sisoft Sandra benchmark where raw memory BANDWIDTH wins over lower LATENCIES :)

you can compare 667 5-5-5-15 vs 533 3-3-3-8 and will see the result difference remains consistent in all benchmarks.

liar! ;)

Greetings!Check this article:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/chi...cketa-400.html
Particularly, the FSB333 tests:
http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/chi...eta-400_7.html
Where you see the KT600-FSB333-DDR400 faster than KT600-FSB333-DDR333.

The nForce2 chipset was built to achieve better performance at 1:1. Will look for the PDF.
Not really. The forum no longer recognized my username and when I tried to re-register, it didnt allowed me to use my e-mail, as it said it was in use. I asked for it to send the username/password to the e-mail and got this new username.

what was your old username?

article I linked seemed to be a bit dated, your link is better, thanks! And for the Core2 the same still applies, as DDR2 800 is faster then DDR2 533 , although DDR2 800 is not running in sync:)

raw bandwith overcomes the lower latencies, but if you check PC4200 with very tight timings (3-3-3-8) you see it's not trailing far behind PC6400.

Greetings!Should have been the usual one, "impar". If you have access to the member database, could you see to which username is my e-mail attributed to?
Yeah... so the comparison to Athlon XP shouldnt be made on the article. As you can see on the XbitLabs article, the nForce2 was what made the Athlon XP work better at 1:1.
Granted, every enthusiast had a nF2, not a KT600 motherboard.
If it had to be compared to any CPU it would be the A64, for its love for tight timings.
Per this article: ;)
http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=325



Found the nForce2 PDF:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/LO_20021105_7263.html
Check at the bottom of page 2.

"No users found matching those criteria." for Impar ... weird can you find your older username in the memberlist? http://www.madshrimps.be/forums/memberlist.php?s=
I could just change your current nickname to the one you want too:)

well.. tight timings AND running in sync, as even with tight timings the 667 does not do better than 533 :)

Greetings!Then, please do change it for "impar".
Ok, then.
I still think that the comparison to Athlon XP shouldnt be made and that the article should have been made using other FSBs than the default (lets face it, Madshrimps readers wont run theirs C2D at default).

Also, and this is a picky one, when I read PC3200 I still think DDR-400, not DDR2-400. PC2-3200 is the acronym I relate to DDR2-400.

I disagree with you here; I run my main system at default speed.

we'll have an overclocking Core 2 / DDR2 article pending, this one is for mainstream and does help people a lot; just today a friend send me his new PC config, he doesnt overclock, he mixxed his E6600 with DDR2-800 which sky rocketted the price (€180 for 512Mb :o) so .. yes this article is for our readers, which (hopefully) doesn't solely include overclockers but PC enthusiasts and mainstream also

Greetings!That would make an interesting poll for the Home page. ;)

If you can, on the upcoming C2D overclocking article, test different RAM speeds/timings. I know its a lot of work...

Regarding username, thanks. :ws:

well, the ram timings/speed have been mostly tested here, what we'll try is to see if a higher FSB on CPU helps performance (in combination with lower multiplier to keep CPU speed the same) with Athlon XP this FSB increase paid of well, it worked good with P4 too, less with Athlon 64 (if not at all) so it'll be interesting to see how the Core 2 will handle this;

here is a test by Hardware France (translated) which looks at timings/DDR2 speed and FSB speed: http://www.behardware.com/articles/6...-duo-test.html

mainstream users would come from other sites, google searches, forums, etc; they won't see the main site, and even if they did, spend time to cast a vote. They want information served fast and clearly; spending time on reading a large page and clicking on links which "polls" is not high on their priority.

If I started a poll and the "mainstream user" got 0 votes, it would actually prove that point :p