• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Downclocking RAM while keeping same timings

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

AgentRev

Registered
Joined
Aug 2, 2011
Hi there,

I just needed to know something, I tried to search a bit on it but it doesn't seem to be a very common question.

So, atm, my computer currently has 4GB of DDR2-800 6-6-6-18 RAM running at 667 Mhz (PC2-5300) and 5-5-5-15 (because of my 780i chipset that acts like a retarded mule when it comes to overclocking the FSB).

I'll have to keep this rig for at least another 6 months, and I am in dire need of more RAM. I wanted to purchase some, but I don't want to get cheap Kingston's, so I was aiming more at Corsair, G-SKILL, or the likes.

However, all the "worthy" sticks from those companies are for the most 800 Mhz timed at 5-5-5-15. So my question is, would I be able to run those with my current ones, everything at 667 Mhz and 5-5-5-15, without negative impacts (besides the slight perf loss involved with downclocking)? Or would it be wiser if I just went for stock 667 and 5-5-5-15 sticks?

Sorry if I don't know much about timings, I'm still relatively new to their concept and what actual effects they have on a system.
 
Unfortunately there is no guarantee that a RAM kit will work in your motherboard unless it appears in the QVL (qualified vendors list).

Guarantee aside, most kits which do not feature in the QVL will work with your board anyway, so your best bet is to buy something that is rated for the speed at which you want to run it. I would imagine 667 CAS5 memory will be harder to find as 800 CAS5 is a much more recent standard for DDR2.

The way timings work is very complicated, and the effect the timings have on system performance depends on the chipset - from the DDR2 era, Intel chipsets tend to prefer higher frequency memory and Nvidia chipsets like the 680i and your 780i prefer tighter timings... but the actual perceptible difference in performance is simply nonexistent. Theoretically, 800MHz DDR2 with 3-3-3-8 timings will yield very high bandwidh, but the only way to verify this would be to run a benchmark which measured hundredths/thousandths of a second, such as Super Pi.

Increasing the quantity of memory often has a greater impact on system performance than improving the memory bandwidth, so you'll be fine using 8GB of 667 C5.
 
What happens when you adjust the DRAM frequency to DDR2-800, and the timings to their rated 6-6-6-18? I assume you also manually adjusted the DRAM voltage to its rated value?
 
What happens when you adjust the DRAM frequency to DDR2-800, and the timings to their rated 6-6-6-18? I assume you also manually adjusted the DRAM voltage to its rated value?

BSoD's at least once a day. If I set all values to auto, including for the CPU, I get one every hour. My board (ASUS P5N-T Deluxe) was new when I got it, but I didn't buy it from an official retailer so it's not under warranty. But then, at 667 and 5-5-5-15, I never had a single BSoD.

It could be related to 4 facts:
1. 2/3rd of what's listed on the QVL is at 667 MHz and like 90% of them are meant to have a CL of 5;
2. My motherboard could be semi-defective in that regard;
3. The RAM I currently have are some cheap Nanya's pulled out from an OEM box I scavenged after getting it half-price during Boxing Day;
4. The 780i is extremely picky when it comes to overclocking. I can't get my 2.50 GHz Q8300 past the 3 GHz mark without getting a BSoD within 30 minutes, and I've spent nights in the BIOS, tweaking all the voltages and clocks in any safe manner, but to no avail.

All of these don't really help, but my system is running stable at the current clocks and I don't really notice much of a performance impairment versus the "stock" ones, so it's not a big deal.

Anyway, thanks for the help.
 
Last edited:
You are running a 45nm quad on the 780i??? Nuff said, LOL!

You simply can't OC on that board with quad core CPUs... I had a Q6600 which remained at stock and I eventually got a 45nm dual core (E8500) which I had at 4.5GHz very easily. The 680i/780i were very poor chipsets despite the great SLI performance.
 
You are running a 45nm quad on the 780i??? Nuff said, LOL!

You simply can't OC on that board with quad core CPUs... I had a Q6600 which remained at stock and I eventually got a 45nm dual core (E8500) which I had at 4.5GHz very easily. The 680i/780i were very poor chipsets despite the great SLI performance.

Yeah I know, I was aware of the downs before purchasing it. I just wanted to get SLI tbh. But yet, my 2 GTX 460s never really reach more than 60% usage, which is kinda frustrating. Anyway, my previous mobo wouldn't hit anything over 3.09 GHz (FSB 411 MHz), otherwise it would stop detecting all SATA drives (the same issue occurs for everyone with that mobo).

I could've gotten a board with an Intel chipset and do the SLI driver unlock trick, but most of the ones I could get were priced just as much or higher than Sandy Bridge mobos (excluding from chinese eBay sellers), which is kinda fail. I got my P5N-T for 85$ off an eBay auction, which is still reasonable. I would've gotten a better board, but sadly Quad-compatible LGA775 mobos with multiple PCIe slots only had a very short production run (2008 and early 2009), so almost everywhere I searched, they were out of stock and discontinued, and all I could find was some mATX crap.
 
Last edited:
Yep very hard to come by. I gave up on my 680i SLI purely because I wanted to overclock quad core CPUs. With the E8500 and blistering Cell Shock memory (950MHz at 4-3-3-9 :rock:) it was actually a beautiful system, but I wanted MOAR!

When you say you're in dire need of more RAM, what is it for? I have 6GB on my system with a 64-bit OS, and the usage rarely approaches 3GB.
 
When you say you're in dire need of more RAM, what is it for? I have 6GB on my system with a 64-bit OS, and the usage rarely approaches 3GB.

Mostly gaming. Win 7 alone eats up 1.5GB, add in background applications, and BF3 & MW3 requiring minimum 1.5GB if not 2GB to run properly. The RAM fills up, Windows starts transferring things back and forth to my HDD's pagefile, while the game's trying to load stuff from at least 10 different files, and you have the antivirus messing with that stuff in the process. It creates a magnificent bottleneck accompanied with nice amounts of microstuttering and frustration. My HDD is a rather standard WD Caviar Blue with transfer peaks of about 120 MB/s. I think only a SSD could keep up with such usage.

So yeah, I think I definitely need more RAM for the time being.
 
Back