I know this subject has been discussed ad nauseum so far since I've been reading all of the threads, and I hate to add another to the pile. However, I'm new to the whole overclocking concept, and I'd like to make sure that I'm understanding what I'm reading.
Suppose that I had an e6300, an adequate motherboard (like a GA-965P-S3), and adequate cooling (like a Ninja), and assuming that I only want to reach 2.8ghz, would any DDR2-800 ram from a respectable manufacturer be okay, since it would only be running at stock speeds (400x7 =2800)? Basically, if I only cared about reaching 2.8, would there be any reason to buy more expensive DDR2-800, since the RAM itself would not need to be overclocked? Obviously better RAM might get me past 2.8, but that's not the issue here.
This is hypothetical, but I just want to make sure I'm understanding things correctly. I assume the answer is that any DDR2-800 can run at 400fsb, so there's no reason to pay for more, again supposing that I'm not interested in going past 2.8ghz.
Am I wrong? Any other factors? Thanks!
Suppose that I had an e6300, an adequate motherboard (like a GA-965P-S3), and adequate cooling (like a Ninja), and assuming that I only want to reach 2.8ghz, would any DDR2-800 ram from a respectable manufacturer be okay, since it would only be running at stock speeds (400x7 =2800)? Basically, if I only cared about reaching 2.8, would there be any reason to buy more expensive DDR2-800, since the RAM itself would not need to be overclocked? Obviously better RAM might get me past 2.8, but that's not the issue here.
This is hypothetical, but I just want to make sure I'm understanding things correctly. I assume the answer is that any DDR2-800 can run at 400fsb, so there's no reason to pay for more, again supposing that I'm not interested in going past 2.8ghz.
Am I wrong? Any other factors? Thanks!