CL2 or CL3?

[fsstrike]

I am getting new RAM but im not sure what the diference is between Corsair Value Select 512mb PC3200 DDR400Mhz CL2 or Corsair Value Select 512mb PC3200 DDR400Mhz CL3. Which one is better? The CL3 costs more, but is it better for gaming? And why?

 

[myocardia]

With any memory timings, lower is always better (faster).

 

[thelanx]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
I am getting new RAM but im not sure what the diference is between Corsair Value Select 512mb PC3200 DDR400Mhz CL2 or Corsair Value Select 512mb PC3200 DDR400Mhz CL3. Which one is better? The CL3 costs more, but is it better for gaming? And why?

I'm surprised the CL3 costs more.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: fsstrike
I am getting new RAM but im not sure what the diference is between Corsair Value Select 512mb PC3200 DDR400Mhz CL2 or Corsair Value Select 512mb PC3200 DDR400Mhz CL3. Which one is better? The CL3 costs more, but is it better for gaming? And why?

Links? I have never seen cas2 VS only 2.5 I believe CAS2 is reserved for their XMS brand.

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: myocardia
With any memory timings, lower is always better (faster).

* except for the last value on nforce2 boards, that should always be set to 10-11, no matter what the RAM is rated for.

 

[Gamingphreek]

Ive noticed that last value also. What is it and why do we have to keep it there.

-Kevin

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Gamingphreek
Ive noticed that last value also. What is it and why do we have to keep it there.

-Kevin

Here you go brudda.

 

[BlackMountainCow]

To my experience it doesn't really matter anymore which CAS u get. Be it 2 or 2.5 or 3., the differences will only be marginal and the used FB will much outweigh the CAS settings. I benched my own PC with 1GB TwinMOS DualChan DDR PC3200 RAM (=400FSB) with both CAS2 and CAS3 and I only lost a about 100 points in 3Dmark2003 and about 1.2 points in Auamark.

 

[VisableAssassin]

I just run cas3 anymore.
even tho my XMS 4000 PRO will do cas2 at 220fsb (highest ive tested)
and the thing is still plenty fast at cas3

 

[wicktron]

tRP & tRCD > CAS

 

[PhlashFoto]

im happy with my Crucial PC3200 ECC @ 3-3-3-8 timings



ECC feature is more important to me than 5 extra fps; 100MB/s on Sandra mem scores, etc etc @ 2-2-2 timings.

 

[joe2004]

ECC feature is more important to me than 5 extra fps; 100MB/s on Sandra mem scores, etc etc @ 2-2-2 timings.

5 extra fps? It is going to be a hell of a lot more than that. 2-2-2 beats the hell out of 3-3-3 any way you take it.

 

[charloscarlies]

5 extra fps? It is going to be a hell of a lot more than that. 2-2-2 beats the hell out of 3-3-3 any way you take it.

Not to mention how useless ECC is for the majority of home users.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: joe2004

ECC feature is more important to me than 5 extra fps; 100MB/s on Sandra mem scores, etc etc @ 2-2-2 timings.

5 extra fps? It is going to be a hell of a lot more than that. 2-2-2 beats the hell out of 3-3-3 any way you take it.

Depends on the platform and use.

 

[Zebo]

I've never seen a good review, but to be safe, I always run 2-2-2 at what ever MAX FSB I can achieve at this latency. Another thing I don't "get" is how useful having 2 memory sticks are. Some people have reported this lowers FSB. Also I'm not sure which platforms benefit from it or by how much? A64? NforceII? Canterwood? hmmm..

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Zebo
I've never seen a good review, but to be safe, I always run 2-2-2 at what ever MAX FSB I can achieve at this latency. Another thing I don't "get" is how useful having 2 memory sticks are. Some people have reported this lowers FSB. Also I'm not sure which platforms benefit from it or by how much? A64? NforceII? Canterwood? hmmm..

P4 is the platform that benefits the most from 2 sticks in dual channel, the performance increase for AXP/A64 are far less impressive. The argument against buying high priced ram with LL timings is the same one you use when comparing overclocked barton mobiles against A64 Zebo, the price-to-performance ratio sucks by comparison. The performance is faster yes, but the percentage in most situations isn't translated into an equitable price for it. Then the counter-argument is that you can relax the timings and push a higher frequency than the CAS3 can. Again true, but often you can find higher frequency ram with relaxed timings for less money than the LL that is guaranteed to run that speed so there's no gamble and it's less expensive too.

IMO, if you look at how little difference timings make to A64 gaming performance, which is the only really good reason to pick an A64 over P4c right this moment, then the A-DATA 4000DDR 3-4-4-8 for $108 a 512mb stick is a better value than Corsair XMS Extreme Memory Speed Series, Low Latency 512MB DDR PC-3200 2-3-2-6 for $177. You get no guarantee how high the Corsair will run so like overclocking you have to gamble that it'll hit the 4000DDR speed with 3-4-4-8 timings like the A-DATA does and then if it does you still have $70 more invested. Even if it can hit that speed with slightly faster timings the performance difference won't be nearly enough to justify the price difference.


Now if it's a P4 setup and you get a couple sticks of LL and run with a divider to pump the CPU speed beyond what even 4000DDR synch will allow then there's equity because of the performance the LL timings offer on that platform combined with the higher CPU speed that way.


Of course high frequency and tight timings together are the best but considering what a premium is attached, I'd say once again from that price-to-performance ratio you didn't get the bang for buck again.

Some users occassionally find ram that can exceed both it's timings and frequency significantly and then you have a situation similar to the Mobile Barton= price-to-performance winner.

Timings will play even less of a role with DDR2 from what I've read so it is becoming clear timings aren't the end all be all of performance that they were a couple years ago. DDR2 makes it very clear that it has been decided bandwidth is greater than timings to performance, and hence it's ratings due to the high frequencies will be 4-4-4-12 or even higher! I think the lingering mentality that pushes tight timings will slowly go by the wayside just as the 50c temperature reporting being too high for an AMD system did with the adoption of more accurate, on-die temp reading. The future is bandwidth, not timings.

 

[Zebo]

I'm still digesting your very informative post Dapunisher but leaving for home now will thank you more later, You mentioned P/P which has me excited hehe

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: myocardia
With any memory timings, lower is always better (faster).

* except for the last value on nforce2 boards, that should always be set to 10-11, no matter what the RAM is rated for.

Wrong, even with an nForce2 motherboard, if your fsb is less than ~195, then 2-2-2-5 is still faster than 2-2-2-11.

 

[Noid]

I think you made a TYPO ...

the Cas 3.0 is PC3500 or more ,,, isnt it?



I did some testing awhile back ...

Cas 2.0 provides more bandwidth to 227 or so (if I remember right)

Cas 3.0 provides more bandwidth from 230 and beyond ...

This is because Cas 2.0 is rarely error free above 230.
(the older BH5 chips go to 230 ~ 245 sometimes, but they arent made anymore)

So,,,, if you know for a FACT that you will exceed 220fsb ,,, get Cas 2.5 or 3.0
IMO

 

[Noid]

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: myocardia
With any memory timings, lower is always better (faster).

* except for the last value on nforce2 boards, that should always be set to 10-11, no matter what the RAM is rated for.

Wrong, even with an nForce2 motherboard, if your fsb is less than ~195, then 2-2-2-5 is still faster than 2-2-2-11.

The Nforce 2 has a quirk with timings...

the 2-2-11 will give you better bandwidth (faster)
There are PLENTY of threads that prove this ... do some search in some NF2 forums.

 

[jhurst]

Originally posted by: Noid
I think you made a TYPO ...

the Cas 3.0 is PC3500 or more ,,, isnt it?



I did some testing awhile back ...

Cas 2.0 provides more bandwidth to 227 or so (if I remember right)

Cas 3.0 provides more bandwidth from 230 and beyond ...

This is because Cas 2.0 is rarely error free above 230.
(the older BH5 chips go to 230 ~ 245 sometimes, but they arent made anymore)

So,,,, if you know for a FACT that you will exceed 220fsb ,,, get Cas 2.5 or 3.0
IMO

You can get basically any CAS for any speed RAM. You are more likely to see CAS2 for PC3200 and less.....and CAS3 for PC4000+, but not always. But you can also buy CAS3 PC2100......so timings and speed dont have that strong of a corrolation.

 

[myocardia]

Originally posted by: Noid

Originally posted by: myocardia

Originally posted by: jagec

Originally posted by: myocardia
With any memory timings, lower is always better (faster).

* except for the last value on nforce2 boards, that should always be set to 10-11, no matter what the RAM is rated for.

Wrong, even with an nForce2 motherboard, if your fsb is less than ~195, then 2-2-2-5 is still faster than 2-2-2-11.

The Nforce 2 has a quirk with timings...

the 2-2-11 will give you better bandwidth (faster)
There are PLENTY of threads that prove this ... do some search in some NF2 forums.

I suppose you've tested what you are saying, like I have? BTW, I've bought nothing but nForce2 boards since they became available, starting with the Epox 8RDA+.

edit: I'm also the one who told you guys on this forum about the nForce2's quirk with memory timings at 200 mhz fsb and above, about 8 or 9 months ago.

 

[Noid]

yes ,, I have

 

[Noid]

http://forums.pcper.com/showthread.php?t=237991&page=3

Even though the results are not as smooth as previous tests, you can see the same trend repeating itself. At higher FSB speeds, with the tRAS value set at 10 or 11, the score actually surpasses a tRAS value of 5 or 6.


raising the tRAS timing of your nForce2 RAM to a high 11 will give better memory performance

You can draw your own conclusions from that muddled mess, but I'm gonna stick my tRAS at 11, which seems to be the overall winner on balance. It doesn't win everything, but it does the best overall in the tests.

 

[Noid]

Originally posted by: myocardia
edit: I'm also the one who told you guys on this forum about the nForce2's quirk with memory timings at 200 mhz fsb and above, about 8 or 9 months ago.

I wish I could find the 'offical' explaination for you ,,, I will keep looking ...
(there's a article explaining the 'closing of pages' and the Nforce2 chip)


This info has been around LONGER than 9mo. ago....

I been running Tras 11 since I got my v1.2 (around 2yrs ago now?)