high fsb high latency or low latency low fsb

Hey guys.

I have two Crosair 512Mb stick rated at 2700. Now these are the first 2700 sticks they brought out. They work with 166FSB but as soon as I hit 170FSB they crap out on me straight away. I haven’t tried putting the memory timings up cause they are already at 2.5 3 3 7 I think but would it be better to have high latency like 3 4 4 8 and a 200FSB or better to leave it as it is?
I just really want to try if making my processor and memory 200Mhz fast is better for gaming then 166Mhz. I don’t want to overclock my CPU much just get the FSB higher (ie lower the multiplier of the CPU).

System specs below
PS: A multiplier of 10x doesn’t work on the nf7 mobo does it… some error init

Regards

Some people will swear by good timings, but the truth IMO is that increasing memory speed only accounts for a very small portion of your overclock... And increasing FSB with looser timings is often better in real use. The best bet is to just see what they can do with looser timings then compare... It all depends on how much higher they let you go.

Are you bumping the voltage when you try to go past the rating?

nah... gotta find out whats save first? do you know?

I have never overclocked because of my rubbish ram... cant afford better stuff though

Well basically, bumping up the voltage in small increments and testing higher settings is always safe. Watch temps while you do this.

For a barton specifically, dunno what you are cooling it with but I wouldn't be afraid to run 1.9 on air, but I would try to get there incrementally. Other people might have different opinions on this.

I read somewhere the results of test that showed that they perform almost identically.

Well that would depend on the proportions... higher FSB offers a lot more performance improvements, but if you are a slave to benchmarks then low latency might look better to you.

There probably is a balance point at which they basically appear equal though.