OCing on 8 GB

[Dadofamunky]

On 4 GB of RAM with the Intel system in my sig, I was able to reach a stable 3.71 GHz and pass Prime and OCCT. I throttled back to 3.6 GHz and it was stable as a rock with decent temps.

Then I put two more G.Skill DDR2-1000 sticks in, fully populating the motherboard. Sure enough, the system would post and boot Windows but would not pass any stress tests.

So I throttled it back further to 8x435. It now passes my stress tests so far (I'm starting an overnight Prime test, all my OCCT tests now pass) and plays hi-def content flawlessly.

Here is a cap of the results.

The irony is that with 8 GB of memory, I'm stuck with a 64-bit OS to take advantage of all that hardware. I think Vista 64-bit is actually pretty nice, but it has a lot of subtle incompatibilities with 32-bit software (at first I was unable to output Acrobat PDFs, but SP1 seemed to fix that). I use tons of Adobe stuff, and it's really frustrating to see that they have absolutely no 64-bit support at all.

At least, I've noticed that all my preferred apps really just erupt onto the screen now, even with 120 MHz of clock speed deducted from the system. This didn't happen with 4 GB, under which apps really did not load very quickly, despite this brutally fast system. It seems that SuperFetch, under 64-bit Vista, really really LOVES 8 GB of memory. Adobe Illustrator CS3 now loads in five seconds instead of 30.

Now if I could get IE to stop crashing every five minutes... but I'm doing this on Safari, and so far it looks good and doesn't seem to be too problematic (knock knock). Microsoft's version of IE in 64-bit is really just the worst browser I've ever seen.

So now, in my sig, my final OCing result is noted. I wanted 8 GB, I got it, and had to make some small compromises in performance.

 

[Ratman6161]

I think the issue is probably with your motherboard rather than th the GSkill RAM. I have 8 GB of it in my current system. My experience has been that it will run very well at its rated speed and perhaps just a little faster - but you can't expect any significant overclock out of it. I'm using their DDR2800 CAS5 in a 4 x 2GB configuration. Mine actually does better than I expected since it will reach DDR2 900. To get to 3.71 GHz you must have been running at 463 FSB? Assuming you ran the RAM at 1:1 (you already tried that right?) your RAM would be running at about DDR2 926 which is actually under clocking it a bit. The GSkill Ram should have no trouble at that speed even with 4 sticks.

Than again, 3.48 Ghz is still pretty respectable!

 

[Owls]

Do you have FSX? Can you test out the load time on that? I got 8GB of SuperTalent 800MHz DDR2 I can move from my server into my main rig but I want to make sure I'll see some tangible benefits.

 

[MarcVenice]

Ratman, it's not so much the ram that's limiting the overclock, because the ram should be running just fine. It's the fact that the NB is getting stressed more with 4x2gb then it does as with 2x2gb.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
Ratman, it's not so much the ram that's limiting the overclock, because the ram should be running just fine. It's the fact that the NB is getting stressed more with 4x2gb then it does as with 2x2gb.

This doesn't surprise me at all. On the AMD rigs I've run, those systems never did as well with 4 DIMMs as they did with two; around the forums I'd seen notes from people that you couldn't typically expect the very fastest times on Core 2 Duo systems if you have 4 DIMMs. Now, I suspect that's not true if you lay out cash for the more expensive enthusiast mobos (Striker Extreme, etc.) but I didn't want to build that type of system.

After an overnight run, here's the final results." ">http://s9.photobucket.com/albu...t=final_screen_cap.gif</a>

9 hours of Prime is all I have time for. It's also passed everything I could throw at it in OCCT. This thing is finally getting buttoned up, after four months of tweaking and adding on, until I get a CPU upgrade after 6 months or so.

Ratman is right on target, I've never been able to go beyond DDR2-926, even with 4 GB, which is obviously way short of the RAM's capabilities. I am running the RAM at 1:1 quad-pumped. I'm FSB-limited by this mobo, but I'm really not complaining given it's MicroATX, and I wanted a more flexible SFF. I'm very very happy with this result and it's easily the fastest, cleanest system I've ever built. Yep, I've definitely come over to the dark side. Intel's current CPU generations seriously rock.

Originally posted by: Owls
Do you have FSX? Can you test out the load time on that? I got 8GB of SuperTalent 800MHz DDR2 I can move from my server into my main rig but I want to make sure I'll see some tangible benefits.

Flight Sim 10, right? I actually do but haven't installed it. I'm waiting for Microsoft's next generation, which is supposed to bring some major graphical upgrades to the table. I know one thing: if you're not running Vista 64-bit, 8 GB won't make any difference (I assume you are). My box, even with the slightly lowered clock speed, really does seem zippier. Over the day I'm going to be checking some Registry settings and seeing if I can tweak SuperFetch and other elements to get even more speed out of it.

But DAMN, I love this stuff. In the 50's and 60's men had cars to tinker with. In the 21st century, it's PCs. This is a sweet little hot rod.

 

[Owls]

I went back to XP w/ 2GB cuz of previous issues with SLI. I just want to see if it's worth going back to vista 64

 

[greytautumn]

The next gen of Flight sim (FS11) is not going to arrive until after 2009. They are releasing Train Sim 2 first. NOt the outsouurces Kuju one either, this is a ground up title (www.tsinsider.com)

Try FSX I love it on my Q6600 4gb, XP32 (Vista 64 in May)

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: greytautumn
The next gen of Flight sim (FS11) is not going to arrive until after 2009. They are releasing Train Sim 2 first. NOt the outsouurces Kuju one either, this is a ground up title (www.tsinsider.com)

Try FSX I love it on my Q6600 4gb, XP32 (Vista 64 in May)

Yep, I think it's gonna take about that long for Vista to really become more solid and for the DX 10 titles to really proliferate. Hey, maybe by then games with multicore support will be the norm - ya think?

Yeah, FSX is no slouch, to be sure. I think I'll give it a whirl, since I should be able to run it at max settings. I'll have to run it on both monitors

 

[LittleNemoNES]

I'm doing 3.4 Ghz on an x3350 w/ 8GB ram

425 FSB

 

[Dadofamunky]

Wow, a cutting-edge DFI board with X48! Interesting. Is that as high as it will go? Not that there's anything wrong with that. Is it DDR2? Of course, that board supports DDR3. For a price.

 

[LittleNemoNES]

Originally posted by: Dadofamunky
Wow, a cutting-edge DFI board with X48! Interesting. Is that as high as it will go? Not that there's anything wrong with that. Is it DDR2? Of course, that board supports DDR3. For a price.

well, I could definitely do more but I like where I am now. It's hot in Miami now a days (nights)

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: gersson

Originally posted by: Dadofamunky
Wow, a cutting-edge DFI board with X48! Interesting. Is that as high as it will go? Not that there's anything wrong with that. Is it DDR2? Of course, that board supports DDR3. For a price.

well, I could definitely do more but I like where I am now. It's hot in Miami now a days (nights)

It gets hot in Miami starting about now. I love Miami myself - at least to hang out on the beach! Don't let that precious motherboard corrode in the sea air.

As I recall, I bought my first 1 GB drive in 1993. Now I have eight times that as system memory. In fact, in 1993 I still had a very strong computer running 8 MB of RAM.

When will AT allow images to be laid out directly in a post? C'mon guys, disk space is cheap, what's the problem? Linking to images is so 2003.

I wish the software jocks would just cut over to 64-bit development already. The WINDOWS software jocks, I mean.

I also find that Internet Explorer on Vista 64-bit is absolutely GOD-AWFUL. It is the most crash-prone piece of s*it since Explorer 1.0/2.0 back when the Internet barely existed. I just got desperate and installed Apple Safari (FireFox also is not ready for prime time on 64-bit) and despite its annoying user interface quirks, which Apple seems to specialize in, it seems a lot stabler. The biggest problems for me using a 64-bit Vista environment are: a) really bad browser support; 2) non-existent support from Adobe. FireFox supports 64-bit browsing in Linux; but no credible FireFox version exists in Vista 64-bit.

But for its annoyances, Vista 64-bit is leaps ahead of XP 64-bit. In my rig, Vista 64-bit has worked out very well for driver support and hardware integration into the OS. My hope is that Microsoft will finally start getting its act together, stop their stupid practice of selling multiple SKUs of their OSes, and get more disciplined in their development cycles. Vista 64-bit shows great potential. But the major software vendors aren't on board with it.

So at least for now, 8 GB of RAM still isn't computing nirvana on the PC side. At least for the type of creative and productivity apps I use. I'm sure over time SuperFetch will use the extra RAM mroe effectively even with the 32-bit apps I'm running.

It may be time to at least upgrade to Microsoft Office 2008.

 

[COPOHawk]

Hey Dado...

You are aware that you can use the 32 bit IE in Vista 64, right? I have been using Vista 64 since Aug 07 and also that the IE 64 sucks. That is why I don't use it....

However, the standard IE (32) works great and I use my computer 3-8 hours per day...mostly using IE (32).

HTH.

 

[Acanthus]

64bit IE works great for me, although i dont notice any discernable difference over 32bit.

As for 8GB the DFI P35-T2R kept my OC on my 2160 rig i just built going from 2GB to 8GB.

1.8ghz to 401x8 3.2ghz using a quad core stock cooler (they nerfed the cooler on the 2000 series Allendales recently)

 

[Dadofamunky]

Originally posted by: COPOHawk
Hey Dado...

You are aware that you can use the 32 bit IE in Vista 64, right? I have been using Vista 64 since Aug 07 and also that the IE 64 sucks. That is why I don't use it....

However, the standard IE (32) works great and I use my computer 3-8 hours per day...mostly using IE (32).

HTH.

Yes, that does help! It hink I may have to make the change. 64-bit IE is drivin' me nuts.

Originally posted by: Acanthus
64bit IE works great for me, although i dont notice any discernable difference over 32bit.

As for 8GB the DFI P35-T2R kept my OC on my 2160 rig i just built going from 2GB to 8GB.

1.8ghz to 401x8 3.2ghz using a quad core stock cooler (they nerfed the cooler on the 2000 series Allendales recently)

Yeah, that figures. Why the Hell would IE blow up on me like that when others don't have the same problem? The worst thing is, it got WORSE after the SP1 installation. For a viable 64-bit OS, though, I can cope with it - especially after loading 32-bit IE, assuming that doesn't mung my system up in some bizarre way (you know how Ballmer's Team is).

My guess is some boards like the DFIs have designers who work really hard to minimize or partially cope with the "FSB walls" that many boards have. Now, for me, the FSB wall on my board isn't a terrible thing, and I believe what I've run into is also the limitations of the e6750. Personally, I sure wish they'd gotten the e8400 out a little sooner. Especially since TankGuys has such good prices on them now (at least the OEM chips - and check out their price on the Xeon e3110! I would really like to have had that 9 multiplier instead of an 8.

I have to admit, I hate Anandtech's method of handling links and user posted graphics. Big blog sites let you pretty much do what you want, and I think it's about time AT modernized in this area. So in that frame of mind, the direct link below provides a shot of the final result of this box I've been scribbling about:

http://i9.photobucket.com/albu...a_64_machine_final.jpg

One thing I'm pleased about is that for the microATX form factor I wanted, I not only got the best case but one of the best motherboards in that class. I haven't had to give up much of anything in terms of performance, and a 435 FSB right now suits me fine. Getting it up to 450 on 4 GB was pretty sweet. With any luck, when I do upgrade my CPU in six months or so, I'll be able to get 9x435 on this box. Not quite 4 GHz, but what's 100 MHz between friends?

But I think the best thing of all is being able to run Blu-Ray hi-def. That's the single most delightful thing I've been able to do with this build. I can't recommend this upgrade highly enough. I've got a steady stream of Blu-Ray discs coming to the house from NetFlix now. The difference, even though I can only get 720p on a 1600x1200 monitor, is far higher than I realized, even seeing good hi-def sets on the stores.

So, the next big upgrade, in June, is a good-quality 24" or 26" monitor, mounted on the wall on a swinging arm.