New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mushkin sells, 667 as 533 - Page 2

post #21 of 34
3/8/06 at 1:38am
where can we get the 667 version?
Reply
Reply
post #22 of 34
3/8/06 at 1:49am
Maybe somebody who has this stuff running at 667 could post their latency timings according to CPU-Z and memory bandwidth according to SI Sandra.

I'm just using my old Transcend sticks from my 9300. Timings are 4-4-4-11 at 533MHz, and memory bandwidth is:

RAM Bandwidth Int Buff'd iSSE2 : 3930 MB/s
RAM Bandwidth Float Buff'd iSSE2 : 3932 MB/s
Reply
Reply
post #23 of 34
3/8/06 at 2:14am
Thread Starter 
Here is my mushkin




Reply
Reply
post #24 of 34
3/8/06 at 2:18am
nice stuff!!!

but my cheapo corsair 533 works awesoem for me... its all abt hdd speed now...
Reply
Reply
post #25 of 34
3/8/06 at 3:06am
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyberma007
Here is my mushkin
That's what I was afraid of. Because your RAM is running at the higher clock, it's also running at higher latency. Dell doesn't give us any way to force it to run at the lower latency setting, which should be faster.

Can you run the SI Sandra memory bandwidth benchmark? In theory, your 667 RAM should be a bit slower than my 533....
Reply
Reply
post #26 of 34
3/8/06 at 3:31am
Thread Starter 
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 34
3/8/06 at 3:38am
Thanks. Looks about the same -- we're both running at about 75% bandwidth efficiency. So, it looks like the higher frequency doesn't help, but also the extra wait state doesn't hurt.

I wonder if there's any way to get better than 75% efficiency. The max memory bandwidth for this system should be 5336 MB/s.

Edit: I killed some apps just to see if I could get a little closer to your bandwidth. My 533 is within 0.5% of your 667.

Reply
Reply
post #28 of 34
3/8/06 at 6:49am
OT: Could someone explain why Sandra estimates that my bandwidth efficiency is over 100%? The few times I tried, it get results from 118% to 212%! I'm running the test on Acer Ferrari 3200 with 2 GB of PC3200 memory.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 34
3/8/06 at 7:21am
Dellbert I think he has a higher score because of differnet cpu.. that could be worth 0.5%..
Reply
Reply
post #30 of 34
3/8/06 at 12:04pm
I am not sure to understand everything in the graphic... I just wanna know is 667 worth the price?
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 34
3/8/06 at 4:14pm
No, 667 isn't worth the price unless you plan to only run a single stick. 533 and 667 perform the same when dual channel is enabled.

In fact, I would run 400MHz if I could. It should have the same bandwidth, but it should also have lower wait states, run cooler, and give better battery life.
Reply
Reply
post #32 of 34
3/8/06 at 8:49pm
man thats lame, i ran sisoft memory bandwidth on my 9300 and i only got 3k
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 34
3/8/06 at 9:42pm
I have always been nervous about buying from fry's. Last weekend I returned 2gb 4200 DDR2 memory for my e1705. After 10 days, I started recieving winxp BSOD on startup stating 'memory parity error'. Sure enough, Memtest86 reported bad memory. They were the Crucial 1GB DDR2 4200 Sticks purchased for $99.99ea. x2.

--
woomis
Reply
Reply
post #34 of 34
3/9/06 at 2:57am
Well I got my RAM from Fry's and it is also the 533mhz....I must say however I am VERY happy with the upgrade from 1 to 2GB especially att this price. If any of you have 1G and are considering upgrading I wouldnt hesitate.

I have the T2400 1.86 Mhz Duo
WUXGA
80 HD 7200RPM
2gig Mushkin Ram
Nvidie 7800 go 256mb
etc etc
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home