[Intrepid]

I have been doing some research in my spare time on DDR2 and DDR3. I've seen a lot of great reviews, but they all put memory of different speeds against eachother. Is there a review out there that compares these two are the saem speed? It would be nice if they were of a similar brand and quality, taht way two varaibles (speed and quality) would be removed. I'm especially interested in 1600MHz becaseu the system I plan to build will be run at that speed (either native or overclocked). Does anyone have any information?

note: for the purposes of this, cost is a non factor.

[baditude_df]

1600MHz DDR2? Nope, can't say as I've seen that anywhere.

[SuperDave1685]

Wow... 1600Mhz DDR2.... I'd say thats just about impossible because of the cooling and volts needed to reach those speeds..

[OldSkool]

I've never heard of 1600mhz ddr2 either.

[Mr.Guvernment]

i would think the ddr2 would have much faster timings on it.

[3oh6]

comparing them at the same frequency is like comparing a Prius and Ferrari in a race around the block without breaking the speed limit and obeying traffic laws...you would be handicapping the Ferrari heavily. DDR3 is capable of frequencies that are impossible on DDR2 so a straight up comparison is useless.

and to set the record straight...1600MHz with DDR3 is impossible as well. DDR3-1600 or 800MHz isn't however

[Rich'[ard]]

if ddr2 ram could get up to 1600mhz, it would require more voltage and higher timings than the ddr3 ram at the same speed.

[pascalbrown]

As some of the others pointed out, this is like comparing pixie dust with the soil in your back yard. One of them doesn't exist. DDR2 is currently running up to 1250MHz or very slightly over whereas DDR3 is running up over 2000MHz. A direct comparison is pointless because if you have DDR3 you aren't going to run at 1200MHz and if you have DDR2 you won't be able to run faster than 1200MHz.

If you want the fastest stuff money can buy for your new system then buy DDR3. It's simple. If you can't afford it, stick with DDR2. If you want to know which ram is going to give you the best (MB/sec)/($) then do the very simple maths.

[glock19owner]

Originally Posted by pascalbrown

if you have DDR2 you won't be able to run faster than 1200MHz.

This is not true...I run 1300Mhz on the memory stated in my sig.

DDR2 will not run that much faster as stated above...I personally would be all over 1600Mhz DDR2 if it were to ever come out...but in the same sense...if it every does come out it would probably cost more then decent DDR3...in that case you would fine yourself in a major catch 22 .

[Hipcrostino]

i ran my DDR2 set at 1300 once, but it wasn't stable. 1200 worked with a .1 undervolt on my 1066 set. good times. Just got some crappy DDR 1333 atm. it was cheap and i needed ram.

[jason4207]

Are you getting a 1600FSB CPU?

If so you only need DDR2-800 to run 1:1. Many people confuse this.

The bus speed on a 1600FSB CPU is actually only 400MHz. The FSB is quad-pumped so it shows up as 1600MHz effective speed. DDR2-800 runs at 400MHz, but since it is Dual Data Rate it shows up as 800Mhz effective speed.

You need to look at the bus speed before being quad-pumped or Dual data rated to make the right comparisons.

[Intrepid]

Ok, so if I'm understanding this correctly. In terms of thru-put from mem to CPU and back, at 1:1 on a 1600MHz (400 board level) CPU (which I am getting, Q9450). I would use 800MHz DDR speed (400 board level). By getting 1100 (550 board level) RAM with 5-5-5-15 timings and underclocking it to 800 I could drastically lower the timings of said memory or raise the bus speed of my system to come up to that level. some simple benchmarking could determine where the optimal operating point of such a system ends up being.

I've decided on GSkill DDR2 1100, Q9450, ASUS P5Q-E

[jason4207]

The Q9450 runs w/ a 333FSB, so all you need is DDR2-667 to run 1:1 at stock. I'm sure you'll want to OC, though, so getting DDR2-800+ is the way to go.

You'll definitely want to do some benchmarking to tune your system in. Everest is good for tweaking RAM and I use memtest to make changes in real time.

Run it 1:1 at first. The 8x multi will limit you, and the FSB wall on the Q9450 will also limit you. Let's say you want to shoot for 3.6GHz. You are going to pretty much going to have to run 450x8. You probably won't be able to get over 460FSB, so using the 7.5 or less multi isn't going to cut it.

1:1 at 450 is DDR2-900. Hopefully, you'll be able to get the RAM at 4-4-4-x at that speed. I know D9 based RAM will do it, but I'm not sure what chips are in your RAM.

Once you get that stable you can try some memory dividers to tweak out the RAM. I've read that the 4:5 and 2:3 dividers are best. Check out this link.

4:5 will put your RAM at 1125 (this is where I'm at). You should be able to run this at 5-5-5-x.

2:3 is 1350...that ain't happenin'!

Also remember that Performance Level is very important when you start tuning in your RAM/FSB.

***Intel will be releasing a new stepping for the 45nm chips soon. Hopefully we'll see higher speeds w/ less volts, and lower temps. It might be worth waiting for!

[Intrepid]

I've tried to find some info on this new stepping, but I can't find much. It's either called R0 or E0 from what I read on hardforum.