1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

OC easier with less MEM - why?

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by VulkanBros, Apr 3, 2012.

  1. VulkanBros

    VulkanBros

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,295 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Location:
    The Pico Mundo Grill
    I have done som initial/basic OCing ..... and a thing is jumping in my eyes....
    I can get a higher OC with 2 x 2 GB mem than with 4 x 4 or 8 x 8 GB .... why is that so?

    Or is it alone a question Corsair vs. Kingston?

    I have tried various configurations (multiplier, voltages, timings and so on.....) and everytime the low mem config wins..........



    Specs:
    FX 4100 BE (AMD)
    KÜHLER H2O 920 (Antec)
    Crosshair IV Formula (BIOS 3027 BETA)(ASUS)
    4x4 GB DDR3 1600 MHz Venegance (Corsair)
    2x2 GB DDR3 1600 MHz HyperX Genesis (Kingston)
    Vertex3 120 GB (OCZ)
    GTX580 GV-N580UD-15I (Gigabyte)
    TruePower Quattro 1000 W (Antec)

    With 2x2 GB HyperX I can reach 4.45 GHz (19 x 235 @ 1.49v) MEM (1567MHz)

    With 2x4 GB Venegance I only can 4 GHz (18.5 x 221 @ 1.52v) MEM (1473 MHz)
    Crunching for Team TPU
  2. EarthDog

    EarthDog

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2009
    Messages:
    3,131 (1.89/day)
    Thanks Received:
    620
    Thats an easy one :). Less stress on the IMC (Integrated Memory Controller).
    VulkanBros says thanks.
  3. VulkanBros

    VulkanBros

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,295 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Location:
    The Pico Mundo Grill
    That would mean 2x1 GB would be the best config for OCing the CPU......hmmmm a shame I dont have 2x1 GB mem

    The IMC is integrated in the CPU - so the CPU is the weak point in my config.....
    Crunching for Team TPU
  4. Paulieg

    Paulieg The Mad Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    11,912 (4.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,978
    Location:
    Wherever I can find the iron.
    This. However, I was impressed with Sandy Bridge in this aspect. There was less disparity between 8GB and 16GB overclocks than I expected.
    VulkanBros says thanks.
  5. VulkanBros

    VulkanBros

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,295 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Location:
    The Pico Mundo Grill
    Well.......the next processor will have to be Intel I think......
    And for the record - Sandy and Ivy they also have the memory controller integrated?
    Crunching for Team TPU
  6. BarbaricSoul

    BarbaricSoul

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,039 (2.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,940
    Of course, it's a bulldozer








    *runs away laughing I'm sorry, couldn't resist.:laugh::roll::laugh::roll:
    Crunching for Team TPU 1 Million points folded for TPU
  7. BarbaricSoul

    BarbaricSoul

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,039 (2.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,940
    Honestly, unless you really need the extra power of SB or IB, keep what you have. You have already spent the money, it not like your 4100 is really a bad CPU, it just not as good as SB or IB.
    VulkanBros says thanks.
    Crunching for Team TPU 1 Million points folded for TPU
  8. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,746 (4.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,774
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    Both AMD and Intel have intergrated memory controllers on all current products. Intel also has integrated PCIe controllers on the CPU. It's not just about memory control however, cache plays it's role as well, and very few apps out there actually test CPU cache, so few have explored this. However, this is much more evident with SB-E chips, where how a SB-E clocks memory is also related in a large way to how the CPU core clocks, too.

    AMD memory controllers, really, are only meant to run 1600 MHz. 1866 MHz with 2 DIMMs only(which, technically, is an overclock when using 4 sticks).
    VulkanBros says thanks.
  9. VulkanBros

    VulkanBros

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,295 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Location:
    The Pico Mundo Grill
    In everyday work and gaming it runs just fine......it´s only when I tease it
    with a little juice and squeeze it a little that it becomes a pain.....

    It would be cheap´er just to stop playing around with these things......

    then again...that would be boring :roll:
    Crunching for Team TPU
  10. BarbaricSoul

    BarbaricSoul

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,039 (2.16/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,940
    well like I said in my "serious" post, it's not a bad CPU, it's just not as good as Intel's new generation quads. Persoanlly, if I already had all that, I'd look for a 8 core if I was to replace that quad.
    Crunching for Team TPU 1 Million points folded for TPU
  11. VulkanBros

    VulkanBros

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,295 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Location:
    The Pico Mundo Grill
    I got it ;) - but seriously - the 8 core AMD (also Bulldozer I would assume) are as bad as the quads ..... so I would have to go the Intel way.....and that kind of money I dont have.....

    Maybe I should go for Opetron´s ......
    Crunching for Team TPU
  12. erocker

    erocker Super Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2006
    Messages:
    39,489 (13.55/day)
    Thanks Received:
    13,900
    Why not just bump up the CPU/NB voltage (which is the memory controller) and get things more stable at higher clocks?
  13. VulkanBros

    VulkanBros

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,295 (0.38/day)
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Location:
    The Pico Mundo Grill
    Have tried bumping up both CPU and NB voltage, by 0.05 steps.....but when I reach 1.24v on the NB the system will not start up.....then I go back to 1.15v ......

    On CPU side - 1.38v to 1.45v - but that does not make much of a difference......

    OC takes a serious amount of time.....

    I have been testing since 07:00 AM this morning till now (that´s 17 hours....shit.....should get me a life instead ... hehe)
    Crunching for Team TPU
  14. Jeffredo

    Jeffredo

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2006
    Messages:
    769 (0.28/day)
    Thanks Received:
    103
    Say if you had all four DIMM slots populated and on an AMD motherboard (with a 2000 Mhz CPU/NB) would OCing the CPU/NB make up for the extra RAM being there? In other words, if I was intending to OC only using the CPU multiplier would bumping the CPU/NB 200-400 Mhz help compensate for all four DIMMs being filled?

    Reason I ask is I upgraded to Win 7 last fall and filled all four slots (4x2GB) before I heard that having more than two filled would hurt OCing.
  15. cadaveca

    cadaveca My name is Dave

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2006
    Messages:
    13,746 (4.56/day)
    Thanks Received:
    6,774
    Location:
    Edmonton, Alberta
    It doesn't really affect clocking THAT much. Maybe a couple hundred MHz at most, and that's a big maybe.

    Clocking up the NB will help in performance, as the CPU_NB speed also kinda dictates the speed the memory controller runs at too., but the effects are similar to moving from say 1333 MHz ram up to 1866 MHz. Phenom chips seem to be good up to about 2800 MHz at the CPU_NB on average, with some chips going higher. FX chips don't seem to like much over 2600 MHz for 24/7 clocking(going subzero is a different story).


    If you haven't clocked up the CPU_NB, you really should give it a try.
    Jeffredo says thanks.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page